Public schools and the future. At what point does it stop being worth it?

[Teacher18]

Been thinking a lot about secondary schools for my sons recently. My husband and I both went to public school and boarded and my daughter finished at her boarding school last summer and is now at uni.

We’ve always taken for granted that our two sons would also go to my DH old school but recently we’ve started to think more seriously about it. By the time they start we’ve worked out with annual increases it will be about £50k a year for one, rising each year. So basically well over £500k to get both through. Financially we.can do it but not comfortably. We’re far from super wealthy. Is any education worth that amount of money? The days are gone when fees were a reasonable proportion of a decent salary (I think my fees were about £15-20k a year and are double that today, the grandparents paying are also nearly gone so what demographic is going to be at the schools?

I know many are already taking higher numbers of foreign rich kids and whilst I think being at school with people from different cultures is healthy I’m not sure I want them to be in the minority.

Has anyone had the same thoughts or anyone currently paying public school fees have a mental cap of what they would be willing to pay?

It's a difficult question. My feeling is that education at this level of expense can only justify itself if it is constantly evolving to meet an actual need - thereby fulfilling its original remit.

At the moment I'd say the children who benefit most are those on large or full bursaries - in particular those children whose parents really couldn't, alternatively, have waltzed into a 'super' state school. Because they couldn't buy the 5 million pound house that would put them in the right catchment. And, of course, that wonderful environment/education wouldn't be possible if there weren't oligarchs paying full fees.

So ... If you can afford it - it might possibly not be a vital, life changing investment for your child. But if a thousand of you stop paying then the repucussions will be felt by all sorts of people - some of whom I know ...

It all depends on what your alternatives are. DH and I and all of our families went to 'top' boarding schools but our DC go state.

We are lucky enough to have an amazing amazing state school near us that DC got into.

Like you I reckoned it would cost us half a million quid and although we could have just about done it, it wasn't worth it to me as we had a brilliant alternative. Lucky us.

(I don't mean to sound smug. What I mean is not everyone has a vg alternative.)

There are alternatives. £50k per year is very high. Most are about a third of that.

I think it depends on the child, the area, the state options etc.

Public school for that sake of it is probably not the useful leg-up in life it used to be.

Went to public school and enjoyed it but think the cost is too much now. I home ed but if kids wanted to go to school, they’d go to state.

But kids are different. I guess music schools may be a reason to board. Or if they had a particular reason they really wanted to.

If my kids really wanted to go to a fee paying school I would like to find out why and see if we can accommodate them. Although some people don’t think kids should be burdened with financial matters (which might give them a guilt complex), I think it is important they understand the cost and opportunity cost (eg ability to contribute to house deposit). If they did still want to go, I hope the understanding would help them make the most of their time (though not add extra pressure).

Would your sons feels bad that your daughter got to go but not them? Perhaps a compromise could be 6th form if they wished?

My son goes to a state boarding school and seems to have the best of both worlds at the moment. The school is academic with lots of extra curricular activities and the fees are around £1200pa as you only pay for the boarding aspect.

I meant to say that that might be an option if you want the boys to have the same 'experience' as their sister.

I meant to say that that might be an option if you want the boys to have the same 'experience' as their sister.

My three DC all went to different fee-paying secondary school for different reasons and all benefitted from those schools in different ways.
Three DGC started in private schools but changed to state primaries as it didn't seem worth the money and they've done well in state schools.
School fees are incredibly expensive these days. We weren't particularly well off but didn't struggle to pay the fees though we would now.

My dd went state all the way and had a great education and got to socialise/rub along with with people from a range of backgrounds.. She got AAA at A level and is now at a top university.
Personally I think private education is a waste of money in the vast majority of circumstances.

No. But presumably non boarding would be much cheaper

I went to a day private school and we have sent all 5 of our children to the same - they often get better examresults than the boarding schools and you have the added bonus of your children home every night so surely that might be your answer?
Day school fees in the N can be about £10k a year and in London until my youngest left recently I paid £18k per child.

I always feel with boarding you pay to ensure they get worse exam results and to risk their own emotional damage and to reduce the influence of parent over child so always felt a pretty awful deal really.

We've decided against public school. £12k a Yr. DD was granted a bursary place but have to pay 60% of fees. Affordable, but only if we make a lot of heavy sacrifices. We've involved DD in the decision making so we talked as a family about what we'd have to sacrifice to pay and she would prefer to have a holiday once a year etc rather than go to said school, despite all of the benefits. If she's happy, we're happy.

I wouldn't board just for the sake of it. We have ours in private day schools, and are super happy. A nice mix of social and financial backgrounds.

Look at all the options - dd2 loves boarding, but we only pay 1/4 of the fees which works out at £5600 a year, not all cost £50k!

But she only boarded for 6th form, I would not have been comfortable younger. Look at what's available, look at day schools and give your dc's a say too

I agree it’s a difficult question. One significant point no one has mentioned is the lack of money in the state sector. If you go over to the staff room section on MN or read another thread on here then you will quickly see that money is very tight in state ed. Ive work with children for a number of years and have been more or less involved with schools over that time and increasingly I often think that many parents have no idea what is actually going on, e.g. children right up to yr 11 being taught by unqualified teachers who have no specialist knowledge of that subject (and who often get it wrong) is becoming very common, and is only likely to get worse as the staffing crisis in education worsen. I genuinely believe that if the government has any spare money or perhaps I should rephrase that decides it wants to give money to the public sector then it inevitably firstly will go our collapsed NHS/social care. Secondly progress 8 in my view means that increasingly many schools are going to focus on the more academic subjects thus narrowing the curriculum.
Both mine went to prep (both now at uni) and then one moved to the state sector at yr 9; “a high achieving academy” with results on a par with many of our local independent day schools, the other one went to a super selective top boys full boarding school with better results than most day schools in either sector. In our extensive experience of both sectors we felt that the one who went to a state school would not get a better education in the independent sector. We also believed that the other one would not get a comparable education in our local days schools in either sector, I don’t mean exam result I’m talking about talking depth and breadth of the curriculum including extra curricular stuff.
So I guess you have to look at your individual circumstances, for example we’re rural with excellent state schools but limited opportunities for other stuff without driving miles, look at your DC’s what you think would benefit them the most I personally believe that super bright children get most out of education in super selective environments you may disagree, look at you're financial situation if you can as you say stump up 50k a year per child but not comfortably you may not be super wealthy but you are pretty wealthy and you need to decide what else you could do with that money, also what you believe education should be about I personally like a broad intellectual education which is not totally focused on exam results. If you live in an affluent rural area (like we do) can easily get a place at high achieving academy/comp, can easily access stuff that might interest your DC’s and/or believe results are more I important than a broad curriculum (there nothing wrong with this we’re all entitled to have our own views) then there’s a strong case for saying why pay? Although it has to be said the very big names with matching fees are providing an education that is in a totally different league to anything that state sector can ever offer.

My sister and I went to private school. I boarded and she started boarding but then was bullied so badly she became a day pupil. Day pupils back then at that school were a bit alienated. The boarding experience for me has affected me deeply for my whole life, not in a positive way.

My DC go to local superselective and "normal" grammar schools, as we live in a grammar area. I couldn't be happier with either school and believe both are receiving an exceptional education. Both schools ask for a lot of donations from parents, which nearly all can give and are pleased to.

We are "lucky" that we have these state options nearby. The inverted commas are because I believe the grammar school system is deeply flawed and should be abolished. I think it would be if there were the funds to convert.

There is a huge difference between most state schools and top boarding. You do get something for your money. Boarding school results are good but obviously it depends on the school, just like the state sector.,

The education is stimulating and broad with better facilities. If I could afford it for DC, I wouldn’t turn down Eton or Harrow! It really depends how you see your family within your society. If all your friends DC board, then you are more likely to want your DC to board. You have to think of education in the broader sense. There are many great day schools and you could look at these. At least they cost less than half the amount of money but for 7 years presumably.

The vast majority of British middle class families are now unable to finance a boarding, public school education for more than one child. It has traditionally been those middle class children who are intelligent, hard working and aspirational who have ended up in top universities. Progress to Oxbridge/RG has always been one of the big selling points for the public schools so they need to retain that demographic.
Some are already becoming finishing schools for an international elite - many of whom are not aspirational or hard working as they have no need to be- and they are going to have to change their business model if they want to compete on the same ground. That is why so many of them are investing in schools in China/Middle East and using that money to finance bursaries for families who could otherwise not afford to go.
But I think many British families who want their DC to progress to top universities are also realising that they can get the same result a lot cheaper- so day students at top boarding schools, good state schools plus tuition/enrichment, private 13-16 and then state sixth form etc.
So public schools are going to have to fight harder to recruit them - especially as pressure mounts on top universities to take fewer students from the private sector.
For what it is worth we had DC at first choice boarding schools and at state schools. The outcomes for all were very similar. I believe this is because they had the same genetic inheritance intelligence wise and the same support from home. The ones in state schools were also keen to out perform those who had been privately educated. Top boarding schools can offer more sport, music, etc but they cannot change how clever your DC are.
Interestingly at University our DC have commented that outside the international contingent almost all of their peers are from aspirational homes with clever, supportive parents. That - rather than income - is what determines how well young people do.

My dd is at Private School, I would never ever consider boarding.
I know it’s a controversial topic but I’m pretty anti boarding apart from in a small minority of cases. I went to boardschool as a day pupil and I’m still in touch with people who boarded, many of them have issues that I think ( so do they) were caused by being sent away . I also have family members in their 70’s who were sent away at 7 and it still affects them
For me it’s totally unnatural to send your children to live apart from you unless there’s a really really good reason ( and to be honest I can’t really think of any) and as for people who say their DC ask to go - I would be devastated if my child asked to leave home at an early age.
As for people who send their dc to boarding school just because it’s what their parents did to them without considering if it’s the best option for THAT particular child are especially awful IMHO

Ah, Hoppinggreen ... I also boarded in the 70s - and never once, ever considered myself 'sent away' from home. And I had a perfectly normal and happy home life.

It's generally accepted nowadays that 7 is unnecessarily young to board. But I'm happy to assure you that boarding right now is immensely different to how it was when you and I were at school. (Though my experience was fine even then.) So unless you are very close to a child currently boarding your impression will be massively outdated.

The family teen is currently at an actual traditional public school, (so therefore boarding) having a whale of a time.

I’m pretty close to a child who calls me regularly and begs me to come and get her at weekends
I appreciate that not all experiences are negative but I just really struggle to get my head around wanting your child to not live with you or them asking to not live with you. It just seems unnatural and in most cases unnecessary. However, it’s an opinion and other people have theirs too

I have one child at boarding and I see him more than I do the others who go to day schools. They all get home late, have a lot less holidays and loads of homework on top, plus activities through the weekend and a social life.

Ds1 is totally chilled when he comes home, gets to go and watch all their siblings at their school plays/concerts etc and is very much present in our lives. They come home pretty frequently a d have lots of holidays so it's not what you describe.

Having said that if a school isn't right for a dc they will detest it. Dd not a boarder but loathed her school and begged me daily to move her - I sis of course.. I would move DS in a shot if he wasn't happy and we have a very open relationship. For a teenage boy I think I am lucky that he is so involved with family life and so talkative!!!!

Ps I don't doubt that I hated the idea of him boarding but decided to give it a go.. I think for the right reasons and the right child it can be very positive.

Each parent and child needs to decide if boarding would work for them. My view is even inf oly 1 child in 100 is damaged by boarding it is not worth the risk - and no i tis not a simple question of asking them if they are happy there as large numbers of children will say yes for loads of reasons when it is no that they mean/feel.

How parents and children are keen on boarding from 13 nad others aren't so just make the choice. I am happy the UK allows parents to educate at home, pay fees, pick religious or any other kind of school and that that variety exists.