Low income and zero bursary award

[feefe]

Got offers for senior schools but have received zero bursary awards despite being on very low income, living in housing association home and not being able to accept a place without a bursary. I know VAT has a big impact but to be awarded zero help just seems very strange as I would have thought there would be some consideration at least...

Any advice as my child is really distraught at working so hard and passing the assessments but the zero bursary awards look like we will need to reject these places...

But those parents are paying for a service. Same way you pay VAT to a tradesman, for most goods etc.

If they passed the assessment, it means they are worthy of a place. If they have enough money for say, 6 bursaries, your child must have been 7th or lower of those applicants applying for bursaries. Schools will make a LOT of offers but not many bursaries, so it's generally a lot more competitive to get a bursary than a place.

Any advice as my child is really distraught at working so hard and passing the assessments but the zero bursary awards look like we will need to reject these places

this is really sad, why didn’t your child know this was a very long shot indeed? It always is. Particularly if you need a large or full bursary.

there is a tone of entitlement to your posts. Which is concerning you’ve passed a message to your child of the same expectation?

Yes, you need to be quite strategic and apply for schools where your DC won't just pass the assessments but will ace them- i.e. be top decile of the DC at that school, so e.g. a DC who will likely get 10x 9 @ GCSE when the schools average is, say 80% 9-7, and ideally have other strings in your bow (sport or music). Plus as other posters have said, it's still a competitive process- there may be 10 candidates and only 2 bursaries.

I never quite understand why some people who could never afford private school fees get their children to sit the exams, and then think they should get the place for free, just because the child can pass the entrance exam. If you can't afford the expensive option in other areas of life (house, car, holiday, clothing etc.) you make do with what your budget allows.
Surely it's only in the interest of the school to fully fund children who are exceptional and bring something to the school that most children wouldn't e.g. sporting or musical ability, and let people who can afford the fees take most of the places?

No that's not what it means.
Indy schools pay all tax and they already pay VAT on all purchases.
Parents paying fees already pay their taxes. This is a tax on parents not schools. It is parents who are being charged VAT, not the schools.

So respectfully, it isn't me being pedantic, it is you purposely misunderstanding the policy + how VAT works.

I think it’s good to apply and try if you like the school,I don’t understand the ops expectation she’d be offered a bursary and finding it strange and odd she didn’t; it shows a fundamental lack of understanding. It isn’t like benefits or a council house, no one is entitled.

Except education is exempt as a point if principle across Europe and most of the world, no matter how, or where, it is delivered.
Anyway it will be decided in court but do not think this will raise any money. It also isn't hypothecated so isn't ring fenced for education.

There no real reason that bursaries should be given at all I guess. I'm sorry for your child, but it would have never crossed my mind that my child would go to a private school as I couldn't afford it. I imagine the only incentives for schools to provide bursaries is it they really feel the school would benefit from attracting a particular type of child who couldn't afford to come without the bursary.

It was worth a try but at the end of the day nobody is entitled to private education. Have you tried Christ’s Hospital School.

I really do understand the policy.

Previous posters blamed Labour's VAT policy for reducing burseries and threatening social mobility.

My point is two fold.

1. Why should VAT not be applied on this goods and service? We pay VAT on most other services not in the public sector.

1. Social mobility is not about cherry picking individuals but rather about creating systemic change.

So far, pedants have challenged the VAT point but no one has actually dealt with my substantive second point.

I would imagine bursaries are being used to help current students remain in school post 20% VAT,

I would say liking the school isn't enough reason, unless you genuinely believe your child is going to score higher than almost all of the other bright children that will pass the test.

Unfortunately the amount available for bursaries isn't an unlimited pot, and bursary provision is under increasing pressure. Many schools are diverting bursary funding to existing students who now find themselves in a position of being unable to afford fees because of VAT. In addition, schools this year are facing huge increased costs due to increased business rates, and staffing costs because of NIC/minimum wage changes, which means that bursary provision won't stretch as far.

Your child may well have been offered a bursary a year or two ago. Hopefully you can find a suitable school for them.

The #1 indicator of inequality and therefore social mobility is; coming from a 2 parent family (or not).
Education is around #8.
Therefore tinkering with things like VAT makes no difference, irrespective of the fact it will bring in £0.
If you want to tackle social mobility you have to tackle the issue of single parent families, fuel poverty etc. Blaming independent schools is smoke and mirrors.

FYI the Director of Sutton Trust has criticised the VAT policy + Starmer/Labour

@GoneGirl12345
Harming private schools or even abolishing them would do nothing to improve equality. There is huge inequality in the state system. Some schools are excellent, others fail our children. Families with more money will always be able to give their children an advantage; be that tutoring, extra curriculars, lots of travel, expensive houses in good catchments. If we want to improve social mobility, start with addressing the inequalities in the system which 93% of children use.

As for the VAT point, the taxpayer never was subsidising private schools. Children at private school are costing the taxpayer £0. They are, however, subsidising every child at state school at around £8k a year (including children of the very wealthy).

@GoneGirl12345 There never was a VAT ‘exemption’.

VAT has never been charged on Education.

The fact that Labour has added VAT to education is spectacularly mind boggling.

This isn’t a thing in any other European country. Greece attempted it a few years ago, then withdrew it because it didn’t work very well. Sadly Labour are too wealth envious, and they forged ahead anyway. Terribly embarrassing for them, only makes them look like the fools they are. And penalises thousands of children and adults from both sectors of all abilities.

But yes wrt the idealistic part of your post, creating equality in opportunity and education for all by making systemic changes to the education sector, sure.
Obviously that halcyon image is ideal.

Sadly it’s never going to happen. I went to a shite state school myself. Bottom of the barrel. Where was my opportunity? Labour closed all the grammars in my area. State education is even more atrocious now I’m happy I don’t need to send my children to a school like the one I attended. The fact Labour suggested the vat money would improve state schools, is an insulting plaster on a gaping wound. They are actually disgusting.

It’s sad. I know most teachers are fantastic and do a good job, the best they can in a tough environment. Labour have done fck all to help them. Worse - they pretended they wanted to and would do. Yeah right.

I didn't say this policy would. But a PP said Labour were harming social mobility and I just explained that social mobility is more than cherry picking individuals.

Do you mean the CEO of the Sutton Trust? I'd be interested to see his comments, thanks.

Why did you apply if you could not afford it and risk your child being disappointed or distressed about changes

You re not entitled to a bursary

@GoneGirl12345

www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-sutton-trust-vat-government-prime-minister-b1208502.html

@feefe did you only apply to one school?
if you read any of the 11+ SW threads people appear to apply to 4-5 schools.
can you apply to more at 13+?
you mentioned feedback was very positive, in my limited experience independent schools are excellent on that front.

Why?

Ever the case, so not just Labour, or everyone with bright children and low income would apply for a bursary and be given it.

In that case private schools would be huge.( and not so selective…).

As I said above, Labour abolished the assisted places scheme. Huge numbers of low income families with bright children benefited from that.

Ok, thanks. The former Chair then rather than the current leadership.

I didn't think the ST had adopted that position and I was right.

In any case, I wasn't the one claiming the VAT policy would tackle social mobility. Just counter arguing the point that it reduces it.

Clearly the Op feels that her child deserves a 100% bursary. Op is low income and lives in a housing association house and wants a free ride whilst the rest of parents bust their arses to earn welI and provide their child with good opportunities. Now is the time to teach your dc that life doesn’t work that way. They can work hard at state school (like 93% of schoolchildren in the UK) and hope to be successful and provide opportunities for their own children that they weren’t given.