any studies on private education value for money?

[beforesunrise]

I know there's all the statistics about the % of people in power etc coming from private schools (actually btw can anyone like some actual studies, as I keep seeing references but I'd like to read the source material). But i was wondering if there are any studies showing the return on schooling investment, ie the salary differential of private school educated people vs state educated. I know such studies exist in America, anything here in the UK?

thanks in advance

tbh i would be more likely to put pressure on the school, i think, since I would be their customer...

Sorry, but I'm just finding your attitude increasingly distasteful beforesunrise. I just find it horrid to think about your children's education purely or mainly in terms of future financial reward. Where does happiness come into the debate? Yes, of course, most of us would like our children to make a living and this might be part of what makes them happy but I find the idea of holding a school accountable for a child's future earnings quite odd. I'm beginning to feel sorry for your kids.

BeforeSunrise - I don't normally post in this sort of discussion as it can get very......um, intense but I can't help poking in because iirc you are based in a part of NW London I know very well and really, the private schools situation there is imo quite insane, in fact the whole schools/pre-school/nursery thing is just crazy where you are. Having moved out of London and having just gone through the state/private dilemma ourselves but in Surrey it really hasn't been half as difficult as it was where (I think) you are. For that reason, I don't think any amount of research is going to help you.
(If you are not in NW London then just ignore me!!)

Sorry, maybe that's not very helpful but I think you need to focus on your actual options, not hypothetical data.

I have chosen a private school for my kids but I never think about this in terms of hoping to see a financial return on my 'investment'. What I think about is are my kids happy and supported and challenged at their school?

esher- i know exactly what you mean about this forum getting intense (nicely put!). just witness what is happening on this thread... nowhere i state that i am going to choose a school for my kids based solely on their salary expectations, i kept my op as neutral and factual as possible, and in subsequent posts i have repeatedly pointed out that i am literally leaving no stone unturned, no argument unargued, no aspect of the question unconsidered... i am talking to parents. visiting schools. reading ofsted and ISC reports. subscribed to the good school guide (big mistake, that one!). observing my children, and thinking about what's best for them and for us as a family.

but I am also looking at the big picture- about what private education means for my children's future prospects, and trying to gauge how it can help them in the future. neither my dh nor myself are british and we have both been educated in completely different ways- we are outsiders. so perhaps for british born people the perception of private schooling advantages is ingrained and understood. it isn't for me.

i just don't understand why some of you feel so incensed and so offended by my curiosity and desire to understand. i suspect it grates on many people to think that the headteachers in their schools, while obvioulsy having the children interests at heart, are also accountable to owners and shareholders- but to me that's normal and if i go for a private school it'll be under that understanding.

in my ideal society, there would be no private schools- the concept is alien and distasteful to me, to be able to "buy" a happier life (however you define it)- it's immoral. but there you go. we live here and are building our life here and i want the best for my children. I am not going to let my prejudices stand in the way of their future happiness.

btw... ehm yes, i am in NW London

Beforesunrise - I do sympathise with you, when people talk about choosing a pre-prep that fits their dc's 3 year old "personality" I am also a bit . I have also tended to find that most dc's defining characteristic at 3 years old (as defined by their parents) is that they are "very bright" .

But, I agree with 5candles - to equate quality of education with salary is wrong. There are many worthwhile careers that earn a lot less than city type money - as someone who had a very lucrative but hideously unfulfilling, nay life-sappingly gruesome, career in finance in a previous life - I would never wish that on my girls, money really is only a measure of success if you truly love your job, not the payslip.

beforesunrise, it's the fact that in your OP you bring up the idea of return on your investment and salaries and don't mention any other aspect of private or any other schooling or your kids which has suggested that this is the priority for you when choosing a school for your children. I find this distasteful.

Schools are not like businesses. They do not make products. They educate people.

If you want to judge their success you need to do that while the children are actually in the school - buildings, exam results, value added, the curriculum, extra curricular activities, the teachers and so on are all valid ways of judging how valuable or not a school is going to be for your children. Looking at progression rates and where students progress to is also useful but in my view a school cannot be held accountable for what happens after the children have left.

Here's details of one study which tries to answer the OP's question, it's a 2002 study and my link is to an article about it rather than the research report:

www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/oct/18/education.schools

That study compared GCSE (and other) exam results for children at comps and at independent schools once they'd taken into account family background etc.

There's another similar study which came out last year, I'll find a link to that.

BS - Sorry I am a slow typer .
I do sympathise because I know from your previous posts you feel as a foreigner unable to get a handle on what seems to be an unfathomable system. I was just trying to point out that the particular fishbowl you are in really is a bit of an odd one - if it's any consolation it was just as maddening and infuriating and impenetrable to me as a native (British state school grammar educated).
Ultimately though, 99% of city types where you are send their dc to private schools. There are a couple of good/outstanding state options - unless you live very near one of these forget it. If people can pay then they generally do, a lot move out of London (as we did).
Unfortunately I think that the idea you can call the shots re a private schools' performance (in NW3, 6, 8) laughable. Crunch or no crunch they'll be telling you how it'll be.....

Here's an article about the 2008 research which has similar results.

www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/feb/21/schools.uk

This one looked at children from middle class educated families in London whose parents could have afforded private education, or moved to a more desirable catchment, but opted instead for the local comp. Like the first, it takes account of family background in considering achievement levels.

I think both have links to the actual research details.

Message withdrawn

My feeling exactly Bloss. It's odd to say that this isn't the main consideration for beforesunrise's school choice and yet this is the ONLY thing mentioned in the OP (stats to do with the 'return on the investment' specifically salary diferential. If it's not the only or main consideration why is it the only and main consideration in the OP?

Surely the best measure of value in education is the variety, breadth and depth of skills that children acquire in a given environment?

So if you "just" learn to read, write and count (though this does seem to be beyond the grasp of some state schools) you aren't getting much value; if, on the other hand, you leave school with a great grasp of your mother tongue, advanced mathematical skills, a deep understanding of other cultures (gained through the learning of several languages and the study of history, geography and religions), a firm grasp of the basics of pure science, a good understanding of market economics plus musical, theatrical, debating, artistic and sporting skills, that might be good value even if the £ were pretty steep>

i am sorry fivecandles, but the fact that in the OP i ask about return on investment and not mention anything else doesn't mean i don't think about anything else. that's just your assumption, and i really don't think i have to defend myself on this.

and I am sorry to have to tell you that private schools are businesses. the fact that their business is education, doesn't mean they are not businesses. private hospitals are still hospitals and cure people, but they also turn in a profit. it doesn't mean that their cures are any worse or less effective for it.

And Esher- i have also had a similar experience of a career in finance, so i know all about money not equating to happiness. but we are talking a lot of money vs good enough money- when i realised i was going to crash and burn if I stayed in inv banking I still had the option of falling back on an easier, comparatively less lucrative but still well paid job. i personally don't give a flying monkey if my dcs become millionaires- i'd rather they find a cure for malaria or invent some miraculous green energy. hell, i'd rather they do a nondescript office job (like mine!) if that's what they choose to, but i want them to have a similar standard of living to the one i have, which is not stellar by any means but is secure and 100% dependent on my earned income. perhaps i should move to surrey if that's going to ease my mind!

I'm inclined to agree Anna and if any child who had experienced all of that at school then chose to be a struggling pig farmer or a layabout or a juggler then that's hardly the school's fault.

Well, I'm glad you've clarified that beforesunrise, but you must see how, given this is the only concern ('return on investment') that you outlined in your OP, that one might naturally make that assumption?

We don't have access to your thoughts only your posts!!

thanks fennel. very interesting, and very reassuring- or depressing depending on your point of view/ i think on the whole, more depressing for what it says about social mobility in Britain...

you know what, i have tried really hard to keep my good humour about this thread and not get upset but it's quite hard. I am happy to argue, but I don't feel I should defend myself. I wasn't aware that I have to post a short bio, complete with educational philosophy and political leanings, at the foot of every post in order to make sure no one assumed i was the "wrong" sort.

Esher- see you in Surrey then

No, sorry, still not getting how the school is responsible for how much your child earns (especially if you actually don't care as long as they can support themselves)!

If my dcs choose to be unemployed after school I can't deny that I'd be disappointed but I would not blame the school.

And if you're choosing the school in part to try to guarantee a certain level of income I can't help thinking that's the wrong reason to choose a school.

the individual school is not responsible for the outcome on the individual child, but, statistically speaking, it is an undeniable fact that, on average, private education affords certain advantages- one of which, is, undeniably, the likelihood of an increased social and economic standard. Which can contribute to future happiness.

really, it's not that hard or that horrible. but it's ok, even if it is horrible to you, because you have chosen your dcs schools for different reasons, so any material manifestations of their happiness will just be a bonus.

Actually you'll find that most private schools don't 'turn a profit' and are not run as businesses in the sense that any money they make is ploughed back into the school (in buildings, staffing and bursaries) but what I meant was you can't hold a school accountable for its pupils future earnings or even qualifications in the same way that you can hold a car manufacturer responsible for the cars it produces. You are talking about human beings. There are huge numbers of variables involved. Children are not 'products'.

I think OP is getting an unfair pasting here. OP has posted before and at length on her deliberations between state and private in a particular area and I don't think for one minute she has suggested that the type of research she has requested in the OP is now going to be the deciding factor even if it existed (which I am not sure it does).
However I am not sure private eduction is a "product" (like toothpaste ).

thanks Esher.

going to go check on my dcs now to see if they meet their sleep specifications or if I need to send for a refund [JOKE!]

It's not that simple at all. As is confirmed by fennel's link the children who go to private schools are already privileged and have parents who have demonstrated themselves to be supportive of education. Those children already have certain advantages which means they are likely to earn more and get better exam results than other kids whatever school they go to. So it's very difficult to see what if anything a school has added to their earning potential.

Children aren't a terribly good investment generally, I find.