Private schools, times a changing?

[Dynion Araf Uchaf]

okgo said:

Dynion Araf Uchaf said:

Cleared I’ve touched a nerve of yours.

Not at all, I just think it’s amusing how worked up you’ve got about this and how you’ve had to call the blokes life embarrassing to get your message over. Bizarre.

I’d suggest that there’s some recognition there are to your situation.

So tell me, are your kids in private school and are you funding that entirely by yourself using only net income?

[richhead]

Dynion Araf Uchaf said:

I did say that some would transfer not all.

I have been to both Abingdon Boys and Pangbourne.
They looked quite impressive

Private school is more than the results, it’s the confidence, it’ll give a child. Essentially the message is ‘it is out there for you go and get it’ as opposed to a state school message of ‘ conform and don’t rock the boat ‘

You pro private education wallahs really do live in cloud cuckoo land with your privately uneducated utterly naisve tropes about feral kids impacting Tabitha’s chances.

It’s just lazy and ignorant, but mostly selfish.

And here’s why.

For those funding a private education out of post tax income you have my sympathy’s. Not cheap and you’ve got to be very determined to make that happen..

But they are the rarest form of parent

Most are having their kids funded by grand parents or trust funds or assets or second homes, or being the MD of Daddy’s business.

If VAT isn’t added then that wealth you are sitting on stays in your family. You won’t need to dip deeper into the trust fund, But if it’s taxed everyone gets a slice as you have to spend it to pay for the privilege of a private education.

Your force to give back to society. That’s a good thing.

never heard such rubbish, as to giving to society, how about the saving the country makes by you not sending your kids to a state school, and funding it yourself,

[okgo]

Dynion Araf Uchaf said:

I’d suggest that there’s some recognition there are to your situation.

So tell me, are your kids in private school and are you funding that entirely by yourself using only net income?

They have been in private nursery and will be entering private school this year at reception. And yes.

So no, no nerve hit, just think it’s a bizarre way to try and make your point.

[Dynion Araf Uchaf]

richhead said:

never heard such rubbish, as to giving to society, how about the saving the country makes by you not sending your kids to a state school, and funding it yourself,

There’s absolutely no chance that you have chosen to privately educate your children as a service to society by saving the tax payer some money. That thought never entered your head until you needed to justify your decisons.

And as for state schools being stretched to crises point with the influx of private kids, no chance.

Motivated kids don’t cause problems (their parents midgut however) and equally as likely the parents might fund pta events more…. Enthusiastically.
Also more motivated kids dilutes the problem ones and the current staff vacancies for teacher will be filled by the mass exodus from private education of teachers

You could also argue that increasing the funding to state schools when there are more bright and motivated kids attending is actually a sensible investment. It can be funded from taxing those trust funds you are all addicted to.

[Talksteer]

okgo said:

It’ll just make the problem worse. More kids to find space for and an even more elite system than the one that existed already.

It’s just going to become even more ‘pay to play’ - the school my son is heading to gives out £5m a year to help with fees for smart children that can’t afford it, and pays for the entirety of over 100 kids fees - it would be fairly unlikely that will continue at the same scale.

1: It won't result in that many people going back into the state system as the average private secondary school gets 9k more than the average state school. Ergo they don't have to raise fees very much or at all to still have substantially better facilities and services than a state school. Given that the primary advantage of private school is keeping the riff raff out the offer is basically the same.

2: At industry level 7% of students get a bursary, of which 1% get full fees. However this isn't exactly altruistic, they aren't taking SENs children or thieving Vinny. Instead they take the most gifted sportsmen and academics from the local state sector, having clever class mates being part of the offer to the fee payers. It also lets parents feel a bit less selfish.

[richhead]

Dynion Araf Uchaf said:

richhead said:

never heard such rubbish, as to giving to society, how about the saving the country makes by you not sending your kids to a state school, and funding it yourself,

There’s absolutely no chance that you have chosen to privately educate your children as a service to society by saving the tax payer some money. That thought never entered your head until you needed to justify your decisons.

And as for state schools being stretched to crises point with the influx of private kids, no chance.

Motivated kids don’t cause problems (their parents midgut however) and equally as likely the parents might fund pta events more…. Enthusiastically.
Also more motivated kids dilutes the problem ones and the current staff vacancies for teacher will be filled by the mass exodus from private education of teachers

You could also argue that increasing the funding to state schools when there are more bright and motivated kids attending is actually a sensible investment. It can be funded from taxing those trust funds you are all addicted to.

what makes you think i have a trust fund, ive made my own money. and i loath to give more of it to a feckless government to waste. they get plenty already, they just have a very short term way of looking at things, so it inevitably gets wasted, dont blame wealthy people, blame the idiots in charge. How much was wasted on hs2 for example, maybe that could have gone to education.
and yes the motivation for sending kids to private schools isnt saving the state system money, it is however a benefit to others. that cant be denied.
yes state schools should have more money, so should alot of things, but blaming parents who opt out and go private is abit like blaming those that use private healthcare for the state of the nhs. loony thinking.
anywhere you live in the world having money helps, thats life,

[PhilkSVR]

Having money simply creates choice and in my view that should be respected.

[richhead]

PhilkSVR said:

Having money simply creates choice and in my view that should be respected.

absolutely

[Benny Saltstein]

With the very likely Labour win in July I foresee legal challenges as the policy proposals unravel over the changes to the definition of those eligible institutions which currently receive the exemption from VAT.

How will the policy determine the difference between establishments, those with pre-school provision, those specialising in SEN provision, private technical colleges, universities? There will be plenty of unintended consequences.

Both my sons now attend private schools and if there’s an extra line on the invoice for the autumn term we’ll take the pain and suck it up because I want the best for them. It just leaves a bad taste in the mouth because you know the extra money for the state schools won’t make much difference.

In the case of my younger son, he fell between the cracks in a state primary where he didn’t qualify for an ECHP, needed additional learning support that they couldn’t deliver and was thoroughly miserable. We were able to move him to a small private school which specialises in provision for kids like him and he’s infinitely happier for it. So it’s important to stress that it’s not just about Oxbridge or access to an elite group of peers.

[AlvinSultana]

I pay for my children’s education, from money I earn.

I pay higher rate tax on those earnings so the cost is considerable.

So my efforts are contributing to the states coffers and my choices reduce the drain on said coffers.

Naughty me I must be punished.

Sometimes I even pay to see a doctor. After I have paid higher rate tax on the money my efforts have earned me. Those coffers really are looking better from my choices.

I really do need a thrashing.

[richhead]

AlvinSultana said:

I pay for my children’s education, from money I earn.

I pay higher rate tax on those earnings so the cost is considerable.

So my efforts are contributing to the states coffers and my choices reduce the drain on said coffers.

Naughty me I must be punished.

Sometimes I even pay to see a doctor. After I have paid higher rate tax on the money my efforts have earned me. Those coffers really are looking better from my choices.

I really do need a thrashing.

how dare you work hard to better your and your loved ones life, you evil person.
give everything you earn to the government immediately and live in a shed.

[numtumfutunch]

AlvinSultana said:

I pay for my children’s education, from money I earn.

I pay higher rate tax on those earnings so the cost is considerable.

So my efforts are contributing to the states coffers and my choices reduce the drain on said coffers.

Naughty me I must be punished.

Sometimes I even pay to see a doctor. After I have paid higher rate tax on the money my efforts have earned me. Those coffers really are looking better from my choices.

I really do need a thrashing.

Private schools are VAT exempt because they are registered as charities and must show a public benefit

Our local private school has a couple of token scholarships funded by alumni but does little else for the greater good

Id be really interested to hear what the school you send your kids does for the local community to justify its charitable status

Thanks in advance

PS private healthcare is currently VAT exempt - no idea why.....

[essayer]

Quite depressed about this, given everything to get the best education I can for my children, who will likely be uprooted from their friends and a place they’ve been happy at for a long time. I have no chance of affording higher fees, and I’ve sacrificed a lot to keep them where they are.

I don’t blame Labour, I blame the absolutely useless Tories.

[turbobloke]

In general the charitable element of independent schools' activities can be less visible or more visible e.g. joint CPD for teachers at no cost to local schjools = less visible, free use of facilities / resources for other schools = middle visibility, free use of facilities / resources for the community = more visible. It's not just bursaries which tend to be most visible.

[numtumfutunch]

turbobloke said:

In general the charitable element of independent schools' activities can be less visible or more visible e.g. joint CPD for teachers at no cost to local schjools = less visible, free use of facilities / resources for other schools = middle visibility, free use of facilities / resources for the community = more visible. It's not just bursaries which tend to be most visible.

Good point. As far as I know there is no cross pollination with CPD. Our neighbour teaches in the state school next door and would know

The local private school is also unusual in not having a swimming pool or fantastic sports facilities to loan out either

Yet its still a "charity"

Thanks for engaging

[turbobloke]

numtumfutunch said:

turbobloke said:

In general the charitable element of independent schools' activities can be less visible or more visible e.g. joint CPD for teachers at no cost to local schjools = less visible, free use of facilities / resources for other schools = middle visibility, free use of facilities / resources for the community = more visible. It's not just bursaries which tend to be most visible.

Good point. As far as I know there is no cross pollination with CPD. Our neighbour teaches in the state school next door and would know

The local private school is also unusual in not having a swimming pool or fantastic sports facilities to loan out either

Yet its still a "charity"

Thanks for engaging

Independent schools vary in the degree to which they embrace the charitable works expectations placed on them, true enough.

[numtumfutunch]

turbobloke said:

numtumfutunch said:

turbobloke said:

In general the charitable element of independent schools' activities can be less visible or more visible e.g. joint CPD for teachers at no cost to local schjools = less visible, free use of facilities / resources for other schools = middle visibility, free use of facilities / resources for the community = more visible. It's not just bursaries which tend to be most visible.

Good point. As far as I know there is no cross pollination with CPD. Our neighbour teaches in the state school next door and would know

The local private school is also unusual in not having a swimming pool or fantastic sports facilities to loan out either

Yet its still a "charity"

Thanks for engaging

Independent schools vary in the degree to which they embrace the charitable works expectations placed on them, true enough.

Thank you!

I thought I was PHs only bleeding heart liberal but may have now found a soul mate

Having said that my liberal affiliation died a little while ago after Nick sold us out......

Cheers

[turbobloke]

As approx 30% of independent schools don't have charitable status, they may either work with local schools and communities anyway, or not, and it would be tough on them if they were criticised for not doing so or doing more when they don't actually have to do anything.

The gov't has been placing pressure on those with charitable status to do more to justify it, and rightly so.

[Ken_Code]

richhead said:

, it is however a benefit to others. that cant be denied.

That depends. To posit something that would deny it, if it were the case that privately schooled people gave each other a leg-up in employment then hypothetically the net benefit to others could be minimal or zero.

Similarly,IIf it turned out that admissions tutors at university and employers were swayed by a veneer of confidence and a nice way of speaking then that too could reduce the net benefit to others to, or beyond, by giving less able but better-schooled candidates places that others were better suited for.

If that were the case then we’d see evidence of course. One piece of evidence would be that we’d see privately schooled pupils performing worse than state school pupils at university when looked at on a matched-grades basis.

While much more research would be welcomed, it is something that’s been looked at.

State pupils do better at university, study shows https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-26773830

[CLK-GTR]

Have to say this is feeling like another kick in teeth for 30 something year olds.

Went to University just as they jacked up tuition fees snd saddled us with huge debt, entered the job market as the economy tanked, forced to buy houses at record price multiples, now for those of us trying to give our own kids an easier ride they want to make that tougher too.

Managing to muddle through it so far but it would be nice to experience a government that wasn't always trying to give everything we have to the retired, the offshore or the bone idle.

Edited by CLK-GTR on Sunday 26th May 23:34