Part-pay schools

[treadmilldad]

My son is due to sit 11+ in a week and I'm so sick of what he and we have gone through to give him the best chance that I feel that I just have to say something. The 11+ pass bar is ludicrously high which means the usual story of paying for private tuition, while facing the postcode lottery but ultimately it's way too much pressure especially on the child and a lost summer holiday. How can this madness persist? There's got to be another way.

As a parent with children at state primary school, it drives me crazy that the education system in the UK has always been so polarised. On the one hand you have very expensive private schools and on the other hand free, but struggling state schools. As a result UK society reflects the polarisation in the education system. There are one or two state funded grammar schools, which many parents aspire to for their children because they just want their children to have the best opportunities in life, but these are the exception.

The gap between rich and poor just widens, and the education system continues to reinforce the divide, as continuously reported in the media. The UK lacks social mobility so much.

The new Free Schools although free appear to have got off to a stuttering start and academies have their own issues. What is for sure is that class sizes of 30 or more children (34 in my child's case) in state schools is a major reason for state school poor performance. If rather than having 1 teacher + 1 or more teaching assistants in a class, 2 teachers could be paid for (i.e. 15 children per teacher) then no doubt state school education would improve. This obviously requires more money hence the following part-pay idea.

The part-pay formula

My wife and I cannot afford to pay for private education for our kids but we could afford to pay a supplement for better education - say half the cost of private fees.

Parents would sign up to paying the amount of fees that they could afford at the start of the school year. There would be allowances however, so that parents who could not afford to pay the fees would not have to pay anything. Parents would commit to paying the amount they wish to from 0-100%, or more, and the state would provide the balance of the fees. Also large housing developers would have to directly support the building, renovation and maintenance of local school buildings, and local communities would be able to freely donate funds to the school to the benefit of that school.

If for any reason the level of funding committed at the start of the year fell below an economically viable level (class size >15 per teacher) then the overall funding gap would be broadcast to parents, the local community and the government who would be asked to commit to paying a certain amount more.

In general the system would be very transparent, but the system would ensure that schools in poorer areas would not suffer v schools in richer areas due to subsidisation, and indeed schools in poorer areas would have more funds available than local authority schools currently do.

There could be additional benefits too. For example rather than the ludicrous necessity of affording extra tuition fees and time for your child to sit 11+, the tuition could be delivered as part of normal schooling as it should already be. Also I can see from my own kids' local authority schools that if only the head governor's role in the school was a well paid one then it would attract a strong leader and the whole school would benefit as a result.

It would be great if one day the state schools could outmatch the private schools and reduce the inequality across the UK.

So you want the benefits of private education without paying for it? Don't be ridiculous. Private education is a luxury and if you can't afford it, you can't have it. Practically all the parents I know (myself included) work their socks off to fund their child's education.

In addition to which, a part payment system would be an absolute nightmare to deal with, logistically.

Doesn't sound like sustainable business model to me. Just how would you manage the inevitable shortfall and parents undercommitting their fees

Mine got to an academy that used to be private. Once we got our free place they gave a presentation showing how they rely on supplementary donations from parents. They suggested anything upwards of £30 a year so not mega money. But rather than be annoyed by this I thought it was a really good idea and also made me thing a middle ground instead of state or mega expensive would be ideal.

We don't live in a grammar school area and whilst we applied to state secondary for this coming term we initially recieved none of our choices and were allocated a under performing large academy with a legacy of bullying.
We decided to go down the bursary route for independent and my daughter was also awarded a reasonable sized scholarship. We still have fees to pay but they are just about in the realms of affordable. However we also have to find money for expensive uniform and 'extras'.
Once we visited the school we were sold, it doesn't sit comfortably with me that I have to pay for this but we couldn't accept the only school we were offered and had to find a solution.

More funding is already widely accepted as necessary. And parents with the income already pay for better, either by private or more commonly by where they choose to live.

Personally I'd do it differently, and attach funding to dc based on loose income banding. So eg household under £20k would be £6k per pupil, over £70k only £1k per pupil, with a sliding scale between. Wouldn't matter that it would be a very blunt tool because the funding would be for the general school pot, rather than specifically for that child.

So the school with a mainly mc intake, and therefore less problems would need parental contributions. And could still properly meet the needs of deprived dc because they would be a minority. Ditto at a school with a mainly deprived intake, they'd have the money to properly provide.

Long term it would incentivise mixing, there's no benefit to buying or praying your way into a school full of nice mc dc if it's poorly funded. And no reason to avoid schools with deprived dc because you fear your child's needs will be overlooked in the face of bigger problems for the majority. Of course you'll still get snobs who think their precious dc might catch poverty, but they'd pay a lot of top up fees for that privilege rather than just spending it on the right postcode.

If I recall correctly, schools need to run classes of 22 in order to break even after costs. So if the school ran classes of 15, you'd need a lot of kids paying fees to make it viable. You're really not going to get that level of support everywhere.

I think that parents are going to have to start paying more educational costs. For example, in other countries, parents pay for all stationery. I have no idea how much stationery costs per student but Ive seen social media posts where there's notebooks, textbooks....

The local community etc are going to resent fundraising for a part-private school. Private schooling is a privilege and doesn't even guarantee a good school. I think that people will resent paying for others. It will end up with people feeling that their child only gets the financial benefit of 1/15 of the parental contribution so resentment towards paying for another 14 kids iyswim.

People who opt for grammar are after a school where other families have the same educational attitude. The rest of the state sector takes everyone so you don't get that "advantage".

I was in a grammar area and admit that I moved to the catchment of an excellent comp so I've bought my kids an advantage. If you have the ability to pay 50% of private fees that means you have about £7k per year per child spare so could do the same to spare your child doing the 11+

Don't forget the infrastructure problem. You'd need twice as many classrooms for the same number of children needing educating. Schools would be admitting half the number of kids (you can't magic up space and classrooms) so if the school follows the standard medical/looked after kids/sibling route then you have the problem of only children and first borns getting places.

This is a fantastic idea. Any parent who wants their children to get a good education should to pay what they can afford, in order to make sure that they get excellent schooling.

Two little adjustments I'd make though:

The first problem is that you'd need some way of making sure that people really are paying what they can afford. In fact, it'd be simplest to take the fees straight from people's income, at variable levels depending on how much you earn. Logistically, that would probably have to be done centrally, and then distributed to schools across the country.

The second problem is that all parents want their children to get a good education, and certainly all children deserve one. So this scheme would have to be universal, and compulsory, so that everyone can properly benefit from it.

Oh, and I agree that the 11-plus is a terrible system. Far better to have all children in the same kind of school, with flexible streaming to make sure children are learning at their level.

Not sure what we could call this system. Maybe 'income tax funded comprehensive state schooling?'

I can sort of see your point but not everyone with dc at Private School are mega rich so I don't see the huge divide you are talking about
At my DD school there are a lot of children with teacher parents, a lot own businesses and work incredibly hard and there are quite a few who's parents have good but not amazing jobs ( prob earn £30/40 k) but both work full time and only have 1 child. The school fees aren't ridiculously high though as we are in Yorkshire where a year costs around the same as a term in London as I understand it.
I've always argued similar to your point with regard to Medical care. For example if you need an operation you could get a voucher and you can use that to part pay for a Private procedure if you can or want to top it up

Is an interesting idea. I know of a few grammar schools that write to parents to suggest that they pay an extra contribution to the school - actually I think my secondary used to.

There are schools like this outside England. Academically selective fee paying state school, ,y Dc goes to one.

Not sure what we could call this system. Maybe 'income tax funded comprehensive state schooling?'
Tee hee

Selective schools are divisive
and damage the education of far more children than they help

get rid of all selection in state schools (god, gonads, non verbal reasoning) and much of the stress would go away

that and get rid of the political concept of austerity and fund education properly

On the one hand you have very expensive private schools and on the other hand free, but struggling state schools
There is, actually, a middle road - state boarding schools, if you want to consider them....

mineofuseless
DCs state 6th form has boarding - it is NOT the solution
nor are state boarding schools like Vintners

proper funding of state schools and binning selection is a much simpler route

Large housing developers already have to contribute to schools. My parish and the neighbouring place between 2012 and 2022 will have gained 5000 new homes we will gain a new primary in each parish, my existing parish primary has been able double in size due to the wonderful new building the developer has built. This primary used to be in special measures with support from LEA and developers money it is now outstanding. Additionally our secondary in the neighbouring parish will shortly be having refurbishment and large extension funded by developers.
The local private school and the secondary have an award winning partnership and several A-levels are provided at the private schools sixth form centre ( notably classics and Latin) and the partnership is to be extended to one of the new primaries. The private school runs language, maths, sports and various other events for the existing primaries.
Where schools are open to unconventional models things are changing.

lurked that is a great way to approach this.

Agree we need income tax funded comprehensive state schooling

Honestly, people in 11+ areas don't know how badly off they are compared with the parts of the country that have well run comprehensives. (NB I accept that some parts of the country have badly run comps.)

It's hard enough getting parents to pay £20 for a school trip voluntarily. There would need to be an element of compulsion and means testing to get many parents to pay. Costs such as housing would be impacted as parents suddenly need more money for education.

Lonecat
Not Wellborne by any chance ......

"This is a fantastic idea. Any parent who wants their children to get a good education should to pay what they can afford, in order to make sure that they get excellent schoolin"

Yep. To paraphrase Blackadder "The devil farts in the face of the poor again"

Any parent who wants their children to get a good education should to pay what they can afford, in order to make sure that they get excellent schoolin
So the families earning below median wage (households on £26,000 per year) with no savings
get 50p per year worth of education

No point giving the poor an education. They'll only keep coal in it.

Treadmilldad I partly agree with your description of the problem, but not your suggested solution, because:
a) A formalised "part-pay" would just introduce another tier - one which you could access and others couldn't.
b) An informalised "part-pay" already exists, in the form of voluntary donations (financial and in-kind), and extra-curricular activities.

My DC goes to a comp. It's a relatively leafy area but lots go private or tutor for super-selectives in a neighbouring borough, or move into the catchment of leafier comps. Our comp has FSM stats at the upper-end for the area, but not as high as some.

We donate £30 per month out of DH's pre-tax income (he's a higher rate taxpayer, so that's less than £20 in real terms). His employer has a matched giving scheme, so that is doubled to £60 by the time it reaches the school.

Many of us parents also donate our time to PTA and governance activities, or volunteer to help with clubs, talks etc.

The school encourages voluntary donations of both kinds but doesn't make people feel obliged - many don't contribute. The money is only used for extra-curricular rather than core-curricular activities. Some of the leafier schools in the area do part-fund core-curricular activities through voluntary donations, but I think that's a slippery slope - the government will only reduce school funding further if it sees some schools able to muddle through. (I would like our school, and others, to have more money, but I want the Government to provide that, and I would be happy to pay higher tax to enable it to be so).

In addition, we spend a lot on our own extra-curricular activities - music lessons, sports clubs, summer coding camps, educational day trips etc. Some families who use private schools cut back on that sort of thing because all of their money goes in school fees, or else they expect the school to provide it all.

So when I said I only "partly" agree with your description of the problem, it's because actually these days there's a huge range of choices out there, not just the polarised "grammar versus bog-standard comp" that you present. The main problem is in navigating it all and finding the best school and activities for your particular child, and having the flexibility to move house if needed - some people are better at doing that than others, and that is where the real disparity lies in the modern system.

Also I can see from my own kids' local authority schools that if only the head governor's role in the school was a well paid one then it would attract a strong leader and the whole school would benefit as a result.

Who do you suggest pays for this? Many schools are having to get rid of highly valued teaching staff, yet you think money should be allocated to another pen pusher?

Just in case my previous post was unclear or people haven't read all of it - I'm taking the piss, this is a fucking horrible idea and we already have the mechanism for people paying what they can afford to ensure an excellent education for all: taxation.

I would just appreciate it if all My students, every day, had a bloody pen! If parents cant be arsed checking their child has at least a pen, theyre not going to fund or part fund education.

As a school we have had to buy in fully equiped pencil cases for maths and science exams as so many students did not bring basic equipment TO THE EXAM!

The problem with the education system in the uk is so many parents view it as childcare and no more.