Private school fees (merged)

posh*spice

Spendless wrote: »

I have worked with several 'hooray henry' sons of local businessman, all educated privately/at grammar schools. A few of them have managed to close down the business their dad built up from scratch, the others from what I saw are likely to do same, once their old man actually retires. A good dose of starting at the bottom in a chippy or cleaning buses might have actually done them some good.

Hi
I've had people say that this is why they privately educate their kids :- contacts -not academic qualifications. I suppose it only works if you totally fit it in.:rolleyes: Not sure if you have considerably less wealth whether it works. I'll never know:p

alm721

In reply to above I do think this goes on to some extent but not for the majority of people. My daughter is at private school and whilst there are some very rich people who do the whole 'know knows who' thing. Most are just normal parents like you'd get at any school. My daughters best friends parents consist of a midwife, shop manager, nurse, policeman and accounts clerk. I don't think any of them send their kids there for the contact!

melbury

alm721 wrote: »

In reply to above I do think this goes on to some extent but not for the majority of people. My daughter is at private school and whilst there are some very rich people who do the whole 'know knows who' thing. Most are just normal parents like you'd get at any school. My daughters best friends parents consist of a midwife, shop manager, nurse, policeman and accounts clerk. I don't think any of them send their kids there for the contact!

Totally agree with you. My husband works in maintenance dept at a private school and he says that the majority of the parents are just ordinary people prepared to make sacrifices and struggle to send their kids to private school because basically so many state schools are just total crap (not all I stress). I think the days of private schools being purely for upper classes have long gone. People just want to do the best they can for their kids and who can blame them looking at the way state education has gone over the past few decades:eek: IMHO a good education is far more important for a child nowadays than having three holidays a year and being totally spoilt with material things.

meester

mdean wrote: »

Oh dear - this thread is full of ill-informed educational ignorance and rotten snobbery. The OPs kid is 2. The childs future will be settled in the next 3 years.
Spend time with them now developing basic skills- reading, numbers, writing, and drawing.
Send them to nursery so they learn to get on with people
Then send them to the local state school where they will do just fine.

This is nonsense BTW. My son was at state school for Reception/Nursery. He was a long way behind when I withdrew him and entered him into private school. He has made massive progress in the last 9 months since he started. The private school has much much higher standards than the state school did and they are helping him reach those standards, which, btw, he is doing very well. He has gone up about four levels in reading, his standard of maths, which wasn't up-to-scratch when he joined, is now at a good level relative to his peers.

The state school was official 'good', but the level of expectation was very low, certainly parents weren't expected to have any interest in their children's progress (at best you'd get bland feedback once a year at parent's evening), and they did not take any individual interest in my son in the way the private school has done.

The private school certainly does not think that the state school was 'fine' at all.

meester

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

Private schools get too much money from the state in tax breaks because of their "charitable" status. Yes I would get rid of this too.

They get virtually nothing.

The tax break is worth £225/year/student, 2.5% of turnover.

Do you really think £225 would have any effect whatsoever on the viability of private schools, which charge £9-£15k/year?

My son's fees went up 5% this year. This is fairly standard. A 7.5% increase would not be noticed.

meester

cells wrote: »

a charity gets tax back. so if you give them £8 the gov will give them £2.

in the case of a private school, if you give them £8k for the year the gov gives them £2k.

Absolutely wrong. The government GIVES private schools nothing. School fees are not classed as a charitable donation, hence there is no tax reclaimable on it.

What happens in fact is that charities are eligible for certain tax relief.

For instance, the business rates for a school might be £100k/year. A charity gets 80% relief on this. This is the lion's share of the tax relief, amounting to about £70m/year.

The remaining relief is mainly tax on interest on their money in the bank, on actual DONATIONS.

i wouldnt class them as a charity becuase the workers are well paid and the overall school aims for a profit afaik.

Wrong, private schools are run as trusts, nobody makes a profit. No dividends, nothing.

And do you think the top managers for Oxfam are on £20k/year? It's safe to say the average private school directs its funds to its goals far better than most charities do.

FWIW, the total charitable activities, in the form of fee relief (at many schools anyone earing less than £25k gets 100% relief) and other activities, is three times higher than the tax relief paid. And the cost saving in terms of state school places is at least 20 times higher than the tax relief (which strictly speaking does not 'cost' the country anything, it is tax not paid, n ot government spending).

Private schools would save huge amounts by just educating the rich and kicking out all the people on fee assistance and getting rid of the tax relief.

meester

Mado wrote: »

Well, I disagree.
Point me to a time in history where more children were educated, and all was well...

In the mid 19th Century education was not free. The working classes valued it because it was a route out of poverty (no longer wanted, thanks to the welfare state). 95% of children were in education, which the parents paid for.

The state took over and destroyed the private system.

20% of Britons are functionally illiterate. 9% of black boys in Hackney state schools (where Diane Abbott chose not to send her child) get 5 GCSEs.

The standard of education for the working class has been destroyed in stages by the state.

Dick_here

meester wrote: »

This is nonsense BTW. My son was at state school for Reception/Nursery. He was a long way behind when I withdrew him and entered him into private school. He has made massive progress in the last 9 months since he started. The private school has much much higher standards than the state school did and they are helping him reach those standards, which, btw, he is doing very well. He has gone up about four levels in reading, his standard of maths, which wasn't up-to-scratch when he joined, is now at a good level relative to his peers.

The state school was official 'good', but the level of expectation was very low, certainly parents weren't expected to have any interest in their children's progress (at best you'd get bland feedback once a year at parent's evening), and they did not take any individual interest in my son in the way the private school has done.

The private school certainly does not think that the state school was 'fine' at all.

And isn't it ironic, bearing the above in mind, that this government is desperate to increase the proportion of state - as against private - school kids going to university ! Parents who are struggling to pay for private school fees may find their offspring being discriminated against for getting a better education when they attempt to get into a high quality university...

melbury

!!!!!!_here wrote: »

And isn't it ironic, bearing the above in mind, that this government is desperate to increase the proportion of state - as against private - school kids going to university ! Parents who are struggling to pay for private school fees may find their offspring being discriminated against for getting a better education when they attempt to get into a high quality university...

Definitely, the top universities are pressurized by government to take higher and higher numbers from state schools and many bright kids at private schools don't get a look in. It is now the private school kids that are often being discriminated against. Seems they have to request lower A level grades and make the interview process easier for state school kids. That cannot be fair, surely you should get in on merit whatever type of school you have attended and the government should have no right to interfere in the process.

Nenen

meester wrote: »

Wrong, private schools are run as trusts, nobody makes a profit. No dividends, nothing.

Actually, without wishing to sound rude, you're wrong (at least partly) too! Many private schools are run as non-profit making trusts as you said, but many are not! There are a lot of private schools in this country owned by individuals who run them for their own profit, e.g: in the inspection findings for this school (http://www.isi.net/reports/2005/1119_05.htm) it clearly states:
"Governance and Management
7.1The proprietor of St Margaret’s is also the principal, acting as the managing director of a limited company."

---

And on the following website you can see that this is a huge multi-national company (with many schools in th UK as well as abroad), run for profit:
http://www.gemseducation.com/server.php?show=nav.001006005

"Education leads to highly attractive returns on equity and significant value added to real estate developments in communities around the world. For details and examples of GEMS education investments in various markets ranging from mid-market to premium plus schools, please contact the Business Development

---

Finally, if you do a google search for 'schools for sale' you'll get a number of websites (e.g. http://www.nationalschooltransfer.com/ ) that specialise in selling schools that are run for profit! That site states:
"Since the early 1990s NST has sold nearly 80 schools and there are usually up to 6 schools in current negotiations for completion at any one time.The market for schools has recently been boosted by the entry of a number of large national and international companies who have calculated that investing their resources in education in the United Kingdom will prove to be a shrewd move. This upsurge in investment has made a considerable impact..."

---

Any private individual can buy a school in the UK, s/he doesn't even have to be a qualified teacher! :eek: IMHO private schools that are run as non-profit making trusts are far better as all staff (including the Head) have to be appointed and then accountable to someone (i.e. the trustees/governors) and decisions are taken for the good of the school and children not on what will make the best profit!