Why would anyone consider going to Rugby school better than the mixed local comp?

[Charis2]

I read this article in the standard earleir, and just thought what is this headmaster on? Why is this scholarship presented as such a huge honour for the boy, when in fact it is a way of the school paying to improve its results by taking in some of the best sixth form students without fees.

What "lifechanging" opportunities does he expect he can offer, which Hassenbrook acadamy can't?

www.standard.co.uk/news/london/needs-pic-teenage-footballer-wins-70000-scholarship-to-boarding-school-that-invented-rugby-a2953791.html

Headmaster Peter Green said he hoped Michael and other Arnold Foundation scholars would have a “ripple effect” on their communities when they return home.

He said: “We might be able to be transformative and transform their lives. Then when they go to university, and after, they can start to transform their own local communities. It’s not about parachuting someone out of that. We want to keep their association with where they are from.”

What a snob. Does he think the staff at Hassenbrook only teach poor peoples maths and physics, and the maths at Rugby is somehow a better class of maths? perhaps he thinks the laws of physics perform better there too?

I hope this lad has fun, but I don't think for a moment his life is going to be in any way better because he spent two years mixing with rich snobs rather than normal people.

Good point Bertrand.

Also, I'm not sure they would stop offering scholarships, so few are available anyway.

Again, going back to the "on a plate" analogy, the subsidy of private schools in this way is often not thought about by those who tell others to pull them selves up by the boot straps and that they had no help. Irks me a bit that.

I think everyone who gets a scholarship must post about it on here then.
people are always posting about applying.
i've read they can vary so much, is this true?

You miss my point. If fees go up to cover the increased tax, all that state funding for each childs education, which currently isn't being used for them, will no longer be spare because private school numbers will drop. More overcrowded schools and stretched resources.

You also miss the point you can't just take charity status away, so independents with charity status would have to close and sell all the assets, resulting in a huge strain on state schools nearby.

Although it would be amusing to watch the holier than thou I bought my way to a decent catchment school realise how shit it is not to have the option when the ex private parents price them out. And the flip side would be all those parents used to privates provision for academically able kids might boost numbers enough to actually get the state system to accommodate it as standard.

Yeah, some scholarships will actually only cover part of the fee, some will cover all. A lot more of the former are given out more than the latter.

"Scholarships" are one of those things that people like to say when their children go to private school.Lots will be getting the "part fee" but lots will also say that their DC got scholarships because, well it kind of eliviates the stigma a bit, or the appearance of being grabby, there are more people on MN with scholarships at elite schools than probably there are real scholarship kids in the country.

My kids went to QPCS, one is still there. Its nice.

Do scholarships vary?

Yes. Any school can offer whatever selection of scholarships it chooses. Or just one. Or none.

The better independent schools are directing a greater proportion of their funds towards means tested bursaries however.

Currently the "standard" model seems to be the award of a scholarship worth a token amount - 10 or 15% off fees - with the possibility of this being topped up via a bursary. But you can find any combination or arrangement of awards including 100% bursaries with no scholarship prerequisite.

1. Private school parents will always pay- even if the fees go up.
2. If there was a will to remove charitable status, a way would be found.
3. A very small % of state school parents buy their way into desirable state schools-the vast majority go to the school they are given.
4. Mumsnet notwithstanding, education should not be geared to the needs of the top 2% academically.

Woo Bert, love that last comment.

This country is FAR to snobby about education, the lip curling sneers on here about anything less than an A or Russell Group being a waste of time are awful.

There is value in all education and all the stuff about the "classics" etc is really just very old fashioned. I'd say media is as valuable, depending on what you do with it.

new Dds school offers scholarships like gruach explains. I've heard that generally one reason schools do it is to encourage parents to pick their school over another if it's a fee paying child they particularly want. Although no school has told me that, nor have I read it on any schools website, just what I've heard.
On top of Dds small scholarship the rest is topped up with a bursary, which is means tested. At Dds you don't have to have a scholarship to get a bursary. But because bursaries are so hotly contested round here, they'd need to be at that standard, even if the school decided to use the scholarship pot for fee payers so they weren't awarded one, rather than a full bursary meaning they aren't good enough for a scholarship iyswim.

bertrand

1. Not all private parents can just suck up a large fee increase 2)I didn't argue for or against charity status, I'm just pointing out the practicalities.
2. No, near me a no frills private is usually cheaper than moving.
3. I've yet to read a post from anyone asking the entire education system to be geared towards the top 2%. Just the right for their childs needs not to be ignored on the basis they'll do ok in GCSEs anyway.

If wanting my academic child to have an academic range of subjects to study, rather than the dross on offer at my catchment state makes me a snob so be it.

tough

I'm probably what you would consider old fashioned: I don't want classics - the basics would be nice!

The basics should, by definition be on offer everywhere.

Basics for me in 21st century include strong maths, science and MFL. Local state school (with well off catchment) only really competes in science.

The statement that bright children do well in any school is patently not true.

The state sector is well behind the curve providing for the most able cohort. This is why many universities are forced to make contextualised offers, spend oodles of cash and time on widening participation schemes.

I don't know any academics or any studies that refute this!

Yes, Bretrand is right. If 20% VAT were added to school fees I would still pay (and most private schools and all the goods ones by the way have no shareholders taking profits - every penny goes back into the school - 80% goes on teacher wages in many private schools so it is partcularly unfair that they are regarded as charities). In fact I was happy to pay boarding fees £30k not £15k day fees had the children wanted to board although I am not a great fan of boarding anyway.

If we lost charitable status then the schools would no longer have to offer substantial bursaries to the poor and let outsiders use the fields etc we have paid for so it would certainly not be lose lose by any means. It could have some advantages. I'm fairly neutral ont he issue although logically and from a legal point of view the charitable status for bodies which educate 500,000 children (which is a social good) and which make no profits and plough all them oney back into education and children looks and feels like a charity to me.

In the old days scholarships were very valuable. Now because of Labour's changes in charity law more bursaries to the less well off are given insteadl. 3 of my sons won music scholarships and they are a relatively small discount and more an honour which is recognition of the hours of practice you have to put in to get your 2 or3 grade 8s etc and the hundreds of hours you then put in at school to the school's music whether you like it or not and whether it's 8am on a Saturday and you have to get up. Again I don't mind that although of course I would prefer it if instead I only paid half the fees due to the scholarship.

I never understand how anyone could possibly think that school (major drivers being quality of curriculum, quality of teachers, quality of peer group, quality of facilities) would make no difference to the educational outcome of bright DC.

However, I think small class sizes are proportionately more beneficial to the less bright than the very bright in quite a few (not all) areas of learning. A big group of bright DC with lots of ideas can be extremely stimulating.

School fee exemption from VAT is based on EU law, not charitable status, and is the same exemption on which university fees rely to be VAT-free.

No government is going to open negotiations with the EU on that.

Also, there is no mechanism in current law by which charitable assets can be turned into privately held ones

So when removing charitable status, all assets (real estate, buildings, equipment) must be sold for the best possible price and the proceeds donated to another (similarly aimed) charity.

It means the school's would close, and be sold off to developers (some other development permitted in their planning permission category anyhow, but sites would be attractive to landbank until change of use was forthcoming).

Now, what to do with the pupils?

Only those private schools which are businesses remain. So the pupils from the rest will have to be accommodated in the state sector. The government doesn't really have much money to spare, and this will be an expensive choice.

I think parents like to say that school doesn't matter because no one wants to accede that other DC are getting something better than theirs.

As a parent, especially a middle class one, that stings.

However, having visited many many state schools, I have less and less tolerance with this premise, as it allows too many schools to make decisions which impact negatively on their most able cohort.

Parents need to stop peddling this sop and demand changes!

"Now because of Labour's changes in charity law"

They didn't change the law, btw. And their interpretation of it (and assumed political directions to the Charity Commission) was overturned in tribunal.

Education is by law a charitable aim. The attempt to change that is pretty unpopular, because then all charities would have to fund their education activities from non-charitable funds (which they have not got, so would have to scale back).

It is a bit of a bugger's muddle, but it's only since the late 90s that school fees rocketed (in both business and charity schools) and those who are ideologically opposed to private schools attempted a different line of attack.

scaevola - I am very interested in that point on VAT exemption for school fees being based on EU law. Do you have a link?

You mean it's an ego-protection mechanism. Indeed.

As one of those parents who demands changes whenever I am not 100% satisfied, I have some sympathy with parents who don't bother - it requires a hide of steel, huge data collection and analytical capacity and a powerful network. Lobbying is a career for lots of people!

I think they primarily do it to get their own ruby school results up. Being monied doesn't equate with being brainy. Monied mediocre achieving kids can be tutored endlessly to pass exams. At the end of the day they will still not have the true ability that naturally bright children have.

Reputation is everything. They want to be know as a high achieving school and stealing high archiving comp kids is a quick fix. It also might help bring up less brighter fee paying students

In the process they also get marks for looking like they are doing something charitable by making their education available to people who can't afford it. Also the child will move in different social circles which could promote future careers

The ripple effect they are talking about is really within the rugby college, less outside it

Although saying that, it could really effect a deprived child's family/community as it might mean that children start to attend uni and see it as achievable - where normally they wouldn't have

VAT notice 701/30

here

(Charitable exemptions to VAT are applied to other aspects of the the running of a school. Estimated to be worth about £200 per pupil per year)