Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Private schools - more poor pupils than top grammars and comps

71 replies

Judy1234 · 03/06/2009 07:03

So if you want an inclusive mixed education for your child in terms of race and mixing with the poor you pay fees now...... all those santimonious left wingers who choose the "good" state schools are ensuring less social mixing than those of us who honestly stump up the cost of school fees....

FT yesterday:

"Private schools' poor pupil claim

By David Turner, Education Correspondent

Published: June 2 2009 03:00 | Last updated: June 2 2009 03:00

The proportion of pupils at private schools from economically deprived backgrounds is nearly double the figure for the top grammars and comprehensives, the Independent Schools Council will assert this week as it tries to counter its reputation for social exclusivity.

The ISC's conclusions tally with anecdotal evidence that selective schools and the most oversubscribed comprehensives include relatively small numbers of poor children.

But the claim is nevertheless striking because it

suggests the academically best-performing schools that do not charge fees have fewer deprived pupils than private schools charging thousands of pounds a term.

The declaration comes at a time when private schools are under huge pressure to do their bit for social deprivation because of new Charity Commission rules demanding they help low-income families.

It raises the perennial question of how "comprehensive" the top comprehensives really are, measured by social intake.

David Lyscom, chief executive of the ISC, will make the point in a speech to the council's annual conference in London today, although the ISC declined to give details of the research ahead of its full publication later this week.

His calculations refer to the ISC's 1,265 members, which educate the majority of British private school pupils, including those at the most famous schools, such as Eton and Harrow.

His speech also cites recent findings that the number of children at private schools with special educational needs, such as dyslexia, has almost trebled to more than 70,000 in the past 10 years, while declining slightly at state schools.

Several independent schools, such as Milton Abbey in Dorset, have developed a strong reputation for educating special needs children.

Mr Lyscom counters private schools' reputation for being "stuffed full of posh white kids" by pointing to the finding from its recent census that 23 per cent of its pupils in England and Wales were from an ethnic minority, just above the state school average.

Critics might argue that many are instead "posh non-white kids" from abroad. For example, Harrow has a tradition of educating members of the Jordanian royal family, who would qualify for ethnic-minority status.

Mr Lyscom will say: "Even where parents are being squeezed, evidence suggests that school fees are one of the last areas where parents will cut expenditure.

"Unlike holidays, cars and flat-screen TVs, educating one's children is not seen as discretionary expenditure."

He adds: "The greatest threat is probably not economic, but legislative."

The "burden" of regulation "needs to be simplified and, where risks are low, reduced"."

OP posts:
Kathyis6incheshigh · 06/06/2009 08:21

I agree Fivecandles.
I am very angry about how grammar schools have changed - when my parents went there (as kids from working class backgrounds in the 1950s) it took absolutely no parental input to get a place so it genuinely did mean that they were engines of social mobility. Now for some reason they seem to find it impossible to devise a means of entry that isn't exploitable by middle class parents who can pay for coaching. Whereas some private schools (eg Manchester Grammar - certainly not all) seem to manage it at least to some extent and actually end up more mixed.

MANATEEequineOHARA · 06/06/2009 08:21

I didn't say it didn't involve thinking about ethics!? And I do agree that it is totally maddening that tax payers pay for systems of outright educational exclusion in the form of faith schools. That is the historically powerful in the country continuing their reign by stealth, kind of...

seeker · 06/06/2009 08:23

"As atheists we are EXCLUDED from our nearest state schools which are religious."

No you're not. State schools are only allowed to select a % of children on faith alone. Check the admissions criteria.

seeker · 06/06/2009 08:27

And there is "Beaten up old Volvo, can't afford to go to Tuscany this year so we're just going to take the tent down to Cornwall" poor and "No you can't go swimming, I haven't got £2.00 until Friday" poor. I will eat my hat if there are any of the second type in private education.

fivecandles · 06/06/2009 08:29

Man, I agree with much of what you've said but it was this comment of yours 'But the OP's argument that it is 'honest fee paying' as opposed to going to state school is quite disgusting!' and comments of others esp zanzi implying that my and others' choice had nothing to do with principles that I picked up on. My point was simply that for me the fee paying is the most 'honest' and least hypocritical thing to do for me to do. I do accept, however, that it's not without its own ethical problems. But to suggest that if you go state you are necessariyl ethically superior and in a position to pour scorn on people who opt for private given the situation at the moment is wrong.

MANATEEequineOHARA · 06/06/2009 08:33

Oh ok, I meant it in terms of the way it implied NOT fee paying was somehow DIShonest!

fivecandles · 06/06/2009 08:34

Seeker, if you take a % of people who don't have a faith you are still excluding the majority of faithless!! But, regardless of whether we could get into the faith schools (and, who knows, they are as is typical for faith schools over-subscribed and they can take into account factors other than proximity or siblings such as how active you are in the church!) we ARE in effect excluded anyway. St Paul's RC school or St Mary's C of E school might just as well be x school for juggling unicyclists or x school for speakers of Hungarian. We are NOT RC and we are not C of E. We are therefore excluded.

fivecandles · 06/06/2009 08:39

Oh, right Man, I think Xenia's issue (and on this at least she's right) that those people who move to leafy catchments or get tutors to get their kids into grammar schools or who play the faith card (when they haven't one) could be considered dishonest to themselves and to the taxpayers who then go on to fund their 1st rate education from which the less fortunate are excluded. Those parents who opt for private school (whatever you think of their choice) are at least being honest about opting out of the state system rather than playing it and in no way are depriving less fortunate childrena and families of valuable school places.

fivecandles · 06/06/2009 08:44

You're wrong seeker about poor people in private education. As I posted earlier up to 30% are in receipt of some sort of bursary. It's about 15% at my kids' school who get full bursaries. I think this means they are living on a joint income of about 20,000. As the OP says there will be very few parents who can say this in the top performing state grammars etc. There's also cases where grandparents pay etc. So yes I personally know parents who are on very low or no incomes whose kids go to my kids' school. One in my dd1's class is a student.

fivecandles · 06/06/2009 08:47

less than £20,000

Over 200 kids at Manchester Grammar get busaries. Look here www.mgs.org/view_page.asp?page_id=300

And here's the info

'Assistance awarded is based on the total gross income of the household in which the boy
lives and will be on a sliding scale such that parents in receipt of assessable income in
excess of £36,250 (2008/09 cut off point: 2009/10 level yet to be approved but is likely to
increase in line with inflation) will receive no assistance, whilst those with income of
£16,250 (2008/09 cut off point: 2009/10 level yet to be approved but is likely to increase
in line with inflation) or below will receive full remission of fees.'

sarah293 · 06/06/2009 08:55

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Litchick · 06/06/2009 09:51

There will always be a few children whose parents are on benefits in private school, I know a couple, but you are right, there will not be many.
That said our local 'oustanding' faith school is described as being situated in the most expensive town outside of London. The proportion of children on FSM is 'very low' and the number of SEN statements is 'very low indeed.'
I volunteer in a local primary in a very disadvantaged place, that is technically in catchment for the 'outstanding' secondary...not one child has got in for over five years.

When I said posters lecture on here about private schools being unfair etc, I wasn't refering to this thread in particular, more generally. And there are posters who do this and then I'll see another thread where they join in discussing paying for tutors for GS etc. I feel that is very hypocritical.

sarah293 · 06/06/2009 09:52

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Litchick · 06/06/2009 09:54

I mean hypocritical to lecture, not use GS schools. For while I do think a state education should be available to all, I think each parent must do whatever they can to access the best education for their own child iyswim

BonsoirAnna · 06/06/2009 09:58

I don't know why people like to boast of the schools their children attend being "socially inclusive". It's hardly ever true. Human beings are tribal animals and people always group together with like-minded people in the end. It's almost impossible to execute any decent project in life unless you do it with people on a similar wavelength...

Litchick · 06/06/2009 09:59

Riven - the school is hugely selective. It is a faith school and the church with which it has closest links is in the centre of a wealthy commutor town. Most of the parents of the pupils I work with are not religious and even if they were would not be able to get to the church in question cos the buses don't run on Sundays.
And although our pupils are technnically in catchment, first didbs goes to those nearest which are mostly houses well in excess of a million quid.
Then there's the sibling rule. And it's chicken and egg isn't it? If we can't get any kids in, their siblings can't go.
The majority of our pupils are offered a failing secondary with a knives policy and the parents ofetn just accept it through a mixture of apathy but also helplessness iyswim as they are uneducated and disadvantaged myself.
The whole issue works me up into a frenzy to be honest.

sarah293 · 06/06/2009 11:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

oneofakind · 06/06/2009 12:01

this is also my bugbear - i have several friends (all very high earning households £100,000 plus) who have moved a few streets to get into the local outstanding state primary where houses (and rents) are double the normal area average. the catchment is now down to 250 yards!! the nearby council estate is about 320 yards away and therefore none of the children who applied this year got in (unless siblings in from a previous year - I know this from a friend who works in admin at the school). This makes me so mad! I have refused to move and will be sending my ds private as our local primary is poor. However, I wish that things were more equitable in our area - it is definitely selection by wealth and I can only think that a lottery system is the way to go.

MrsMattie · 06/06/2009 12:03

What a hideous OP.

Xenia, you really are a sanctimonious twit.

LovelyBertha · 06/06/2009 12:28

'the poor'

advice to the op- sshhhh! You really are exposing yourself as being, lets say, not quite the sharpest tool in the box.

1dilemma · 06/06/2009 14:45

Def. selection by wealth round here small London terraces patio garden only well in excess of 1,000,000 (even at credit crunched prices) to get into 'best' primaries here, catchment less than 500m this year.
However the religious schools are generally very ethnically mixed in contrast to where 5 candles is.

However just feel the need to point out benefits (providing you include tax credits which I know a lot don't) and bursaries don't nec = poor.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page