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.

Pardon me for not checking my teenage ds's bag every single day.

One of the reasons I like ds's school and chose it is that there is an automatic detention for not having the right equipment, every time, from day 1 of school. Some local parents think this is too strict but I think it gives a clear message right from the start. Ds checks his own equipment.

The main problem is in navigating it all and finding the best school and activities for your particular child

Just adding to my own post to say "... your particular child and your particular community."

Many of our choices have been made to benefit our community rather than just ourselves and I think everyone has a responsibility to contribute to their local community (and I don't just mean their faith community, or the local private school community, but the wider community).

Talkin no not welborne, both Parishes are villages that have almost merged with a town, though bizarrely my village is postally yet another town, but we are in the South East. My village used to be the most run down part of the local area after the Americans pulled out 20 years ago.

Lonecat
Ah, fair enough.
S106 deals are great if well written - facilities and infrastructure are provided.
Sadly some of the most critical school place problems are in big cities (London in particular) where the additional housing has been piecemeal infilling so many more people live in areas with no space to expand schools
and banning LEAs from providing places has exacerbated it

OP
Well you should get rid of the State Grammar schools for a start! As you know, State primaries are not allowed to prepare for the 11+ beyond doing 1 practice paper per term (I think), so the DC most likely to get in to Grammar schools are those from affluent backgrounds who are at private Prep schools or who have tutors.

Also, get rid of religious schools. It is ridiculous that parents have to pretend to be religious and get 2-7 years church attendance signed off just to get a good education. (For entry to Reception)

If church and grammar schools did not exist the standard of Primaries & Comps would improve dramatically.

OP there is one Private school I know of where the fees are about half the amount they are elsewhere. Maybe there are other schools like this around the country that do cater for the "can hardly afford private" market?

It's called a school voucher system, and it pretty much does what blackadder says...

www.google.co.uk/amp/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/education-39479034

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

you're whole assumption here is totally wrong, it is NOT cheaper to have a TA doing a job rather than a teacher - TAs are paid by the hour, teachers by the month, typically a TA works less than half the hours a teacher works, but is paid more than half what a teacher earns, therefore far more economical to employ teachers rather than TAs

The issue is, of course, people want TAs jobs, not teachers jobs (including many qualified teachers) TA posts can be swamped with over a hundred applicants, whereas a teaching post can be advertised three of four times before anyone applies at all.

Class sizes are growing, because the number of teaching staff in schools is shrinking, not only because of budget cuts, but also because of difficulties recruiting.

I would just appreciate it if all students, every day, had a bloody pen!

absolutely!

The main issue in schools is behaviour. if children behaved, time, staff and resources wouldn't be constantly wasted in responding to poor behaviour, and the amount of money available to spend on education would be well over double.

Schools cannot discipline children if parents don't support them, you have only to look at the thread on here to see how how many parents do not support the school in discipline.

That is where your issue lies.

Copperbeech
The behaviour and discipline at my school was dire
The only reason a load of us were not expelled was because they needed our fees.
A friend of mine was expelled from four schools but as Daddy was an MP, others kept taking her in.
Assaulting teachers was a game
But parents paid fees so accepted no issue

sadly State schools have to pick up the 93% that private will not touch

Assaulting teachers was a game

sounds like many of the schools that I know

Yup, probably the same schools
not that many selective gels schools in the 70's after all

We don't live in a 11+ area. I have 3 children in 3 different state schools and I am currently a sahm. Our income according to your proposal op would put us in a position where we would have to pay a great deal to supplement their education. There is no mention of funding for SEN in your op, as I have two children with ASD I would love to know how that additional support would be covered.

I am actually happy with the schools in my area. As we are semi rural and there are no grammar schools in the county the nearest high school is rated outstanding. Ds will start there tomorrow and hopefully will thrive. I am far more concerned about pastoral care and obviously smaller class sizes are better for learning and discipline (and teachers stress levels).

Anyway nothing in the part funded proposal convinces me that it would provide 'the answers' - just another idea that would squeeze middle earners and top earners would stay in the entirely private sector and the poor would be just as fucked as they are now. Housing developments already provide funding for local infrastructure and that is great for areas that are economically active with a buoyant property market, jobs etc. However that won't help the areas of the country with high levels of deprivation and no access to jobs or decent public transport and that is why we need education funding from taxes to be redistributed.

in my opinion the biggest influence on educational outcomes is the education level and income of your parents not which school you go to.

About half of our my dd's Yr 2 class parents offered to pay a full time salary of a new primary school teacher to bring down the numbers from 31 to less than 16 each. We offered to pay up front as well and commit to 5 years since we worked out it would be cheaper than private school education for 16 kids!! I realise not everyone can do this but it's ludicrous that such an offer legally needs to be turned down.

" I realise not everyone can do this but it's ludicrous that such an offer legally needs to be turned down."

Of course it needs to be turned down! As anyone who thinks for more than 30 seconds could see,

Practically I can't see how this would work. Who decides how much parents can afford? Every case would like bursaries in the independent sector have to be looked at individually. It's not about what you earn it's about your outgoing. You could earn £90k a year and have a massive mortgage, four kids,, two at uni and elderly parents your assisting financially, live in a house with needs a new roof (ours would cost in excess of £40k to replace) etc . Or be on £35k a year, have no mortgage 1 child and few out goings and no leaking roof. So it would mean every year parents would have to complete some sort means test , who could crunch the numbers, check parents are being honest (in the independent sector home visits for those applying for bursaries are not uncommon), without a doubt there would have to be an appeals process, and what happens if a families situation changes? Administrative costs would be considerable. What happens if parents don't pay? In the independent sector parents can be asked to remove their children how would that work under this scheme? Do you take parents to court for not paying?
Like the NHS a high quality education regardless of your ability to pay and free at the point of delivery should be available for all. If we really want this then we'll all have to pay for it by paying more taxes, and by prioritising (long term) the money from the taxes we pay for health and education rather than things like pointless wars.

I do agree it wouldn't work in the state sector and be massively difficult to administer. But I do think there is a gap here for middle class parents willing to commit £10k a year to support an enriched education.

Completely agree with the poster though. This country is extremely polarising. It's getting worse. When new comp schools being created are creating dumbed down curriculum not fit for today's workforce. Spending more time on yoga mindfulness and 'coaching' than maths. There needs to be different kinds of schools for different kids. Rather than shoe horn everyone into the same curriculum. I now have to move fortunately I have the financial power to do that.

"This country is extremely polarising. It's getting worse."

And your middle class parents paying 10k to separate their children from the hoi polloi is going to help with this exactly how?

Ah yes, the good old school voucher system being resurrected yet again. Must have some means for the middle classes to separate themselves from the riff raff.

I think you will find the original plans are in the same filing cabinet as tax breaks for school fees (individual tax breaks that is as opposed to the sodding great tax breaks obtained via 'charitable' status).

I know what to do.

Next election make education a priority, every debate, someone on your doorstep, or meeting ask about education.

If education is at the top of the agenda it will be better funded.

Give teachers some trust and same respect.

As a society we should all value the education children receive, it is a cliche but they are the future.

No. I didn't suggest separating children. I said enriched curriculum that can cater for spectrum of abilities. If middle class parents like myself are offering money. In our primary class that is best part of £150,000 which we seriously offered to our state school primary, how can that not be positive for all that attend the school ? It's not for me to decide how to spend it.

So instead we fund the pta which raises a huge amount of money (£10k at our last evening charity aunction for example). What I'm saying is there is money to tap into and there are some parents willing to provide it. Gladly.

"So instead we fund the pta which raises a huge amount of money (£10k at our last evening charity aunction for example)"

Hmm. Well, that doesn't happen at the schools poor children go to...........

Cookie - so you would pay into the school for the few years that your dc attend, or until your circumstances change, you move house, lose a job, have another child, any number of things can change... A school needs to plan budgets and have stability they cannot work with parents injecting money for additional staff on an ad hoc basis. How would that change your relationship with the school? Would you be a customer? A shareholder? What about the teacher bought with parental funds would they be able to do their job knowing it was at the whim of a few parents?

If you want private school experience/ ethos you pay for it at a private school.

State schools need to be managed by the school Head and board of Governors and funded through Taxes to ensure fairness and proper redistribution, ad hoc groups of Parents can't wade in with cheque books flapping it is unworkable and unfair. Some Schools are very fortunate to have additional support from PTA that fund enrichment activities and supplement schools budget for equipment. Be glad if your dc attend such a school and that you are in a position to support and encourage your dc in their academic achievements.

Excellent idea. But brits are such an entitled bunch they would never voluntarily pay for this stuff (unless they are in the nice, socially responsible minority like you). You'd gave to introduce a mandatory means tested system. Another alternative would be to adopt the American system where council taxes are raised and part of this goes to schools (although in the poorest areas this would be ineffective). Unfortunately no matter what you do, while people who cannot afford children keep having them there will always be this kind of inequality unless you standardise the system and make it shit for everyone.