We have pooled thoughts on the NHS, how about education?

It is about choice in a democracy.

Fleurpepper

NOT expect to be tax exempt

Agreed. Spend as one wishes legally, pay taxes.

FO
But it has NOTHING to do with this thread
You are right. It has nothing to do with this thread. When I mentioned it I explained why and pointed out that you had said
Someone said that no-one should have the right to dictate how people spend their money. Well, I was always taught that freedom should be limited at the point it hurts others.
A good education has nothing to do with second homes except some people think paying twice for something means they will get something better, whether it hurts others or not.

The only link I wanted to make with education was exactly that.
I only raised the point because of your quote above.

Did you know that Academies are Exempt Charities and are therefore treated the same as Independent schools with regard to tax? This is 80% of secondary schools and 40% of primaries that are still funded via the public purse. I know the LP has pledged to remove charitable status from private schools but I wonder how this would affect Academies, Free schools and voluntary aided schools that are all funded via ESFA. I can't help thinking this could lead to prolonged and expensive action in the courts. Anyone got any thoughts?

foxie48

Did you know that Academies are Exempt Charities and are therefore treated the same as Independent schools with regard to tax? This is 80% of secondary schools and 40% of primaries that are still funded via the public purse. I know the LP has pledged to remove charitable status from private schools but I wonder how this would affect Academies, Free schools and voluntary aided schools that are all funded via ESFA. I can't help thinking this could lead to prolonged and expensive action in the courts. Anyone got any thoughts?

You are right. It would be interesting to know if the Labour Party plan to change this.

I don't know if this helps to get a handle on how this works:

Academies, sixth form colleges, voluntary aided, voluntary controlled and foundation trust schools are exempt charities. Such institutions are not registered or directly regulated by the Charity Commission (“the Commission”); they are instead regulated by a Principal Regulator. Exempt charities must have charitable purposes and apply them for the public benefit and they must comply with charity and company law. [1]

So they are not registered or regulated by the Charity Commission but by a person called the Principal Regulator. This tells you who fulfils this post:

Principal regulators have a duty to promote compliance with charity law by the charities they regulate. They are appointed by the Minister for the Cabinet Office. Usually, a principal regulator is already the charities' main regulator under another legal framework. [2]

My question would be, does this mean that what the government/country pays to these schools for the pupils education is treated as a charitable donation?

[1] assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/294996/Academies_as_exempt_charities_FINAL3.pdf

[2] assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/303090/cc23text.pdf

My question would be, does this mean that what the government/country pays to these schools for the pupils education is treated as a charitable donation?

The government doesn't pay tax so what benefit at all would there be in treating state funding as a charitable donation?

My understanding (glad to be corrected if I am wrong) is that these schools, state funded, are treated exactly the same as the fee paying schools with charity status with regard to business rates, VAT etc. Perhaps when people think of fee paying schools the "posh" expensive schools come to mind but actually if you look through the list of schools that are fee paying it's extremely varied. Just to clarify, neither the direct grant or schools fees attract any tax advantage as state schools and schools registered as a charity and "not for profit" there should not be any tax payable anyway.

MaizieD

^My question would be, does this mean that what the government/country pays to these schools for the pupils education is treated as a charitable donation?^

The government doesn't pay tax so what benefit at all would there be in treating state funding as a charitable donation?

I think you misunderstood me. I should have been clearer; my apologies. I wasn't talking about tax - I don't think I mentioned it. I was talking about the government funding for the pupils.

foxie48

My understanding (glad to be corrected if I am wrong) is that these schools, state funded, are treated exactly the same as the fee paying schools with charity status with regard to business rates, VAT etc. Perhaps when people think of fee paying schools the "posh" expensive schools come to mind but actually if you look through the list of schools that are fee paying it's extremely varied. Just to clarify, neither the direct grant or schools fees attract any tax advantage as state schools and schools registered as a charity and "not for profit" there should not be any tax payable anyway.

I am so stunned by this although I imagine others knew.

So basically the government is paying the fees at a private school - called an Academy - and that is a Charity but doesn't have to be registered or regulated by the Charity Commission.

Is this the same for Direct Grant Schools, for instance? I have to admit I didn't think any still existed.

Yes, their accounts are available on the Charities Commission website, but where do they account for the charitable nature of their spending? I've looked at some of them in the past and they're extremely woolly about how their tax savings actually benefit the public.
Oops sorry, I missed this question a few days back. Yes, to an extent they are just paying lip service to it as they are not obliged to give a blow by blow account of how their tax savings benefit the public. They just cite bursaries, community involvements and links with local state schools.

DaisyAnne I may have confused you. Academies are not private schools, we went through the LA system for allocating school places, took our share of priority children like "Looked after" children, accepted children with SEND exactly as the maintained schools. We received funding direct whereas maintained schools receive their funding via their local authority, The LA tops slices a maintained schools before allocating it to the school, this £ pays for the support services it supplies eg payroll, HR etc. With Academies the funding comes directly to the trust, it is still top sliced because there are still costs associated with running the school and employing staff but we could pay the LA or find another provider. I can only speak for the MAT that I have experience of but we discussed what the top slice would be and what it would be used for. We were a small MAT (4 schools) and other MATs may do things differently. There seems to be a huge misunderstanding with regard to Academies. We employed staff on exactly the same conditions and pay of those in the maintained sector, we accepted the same children that would have come to the school and we didn't have lots more money but we had lots more support and although staff were initially wary, I doubt any would go back to being maintained.

Education and health should be taken out of politics. The countries around the world where education is valued are generally those where these important areas are funded properly but are not subject to change every few years because of political whim and fancy.
I have taught cross-phase across my career and have visited many countries to observe their education systems. Countries such as Finland, New Zealand and Singapore respect and value teaching as a profession, whereas here everyone thinks they know best. The other issue is the constant maelstrom of changing policy, procedures and practices which schools and settings are expected to encompass, sometimes with very little research or funding for training behind it. Ofsted used to be a reasonable measure of school quality but its parameters change virtually every year and thus their judgements are fairly meaningless. All children should have the right to a good education and that starts with quality schools, early years provision and staffing. Buildings, resources and access to quality environments indoors and outside is critical too.

Chardy, I removed my son and put him into private education because of the behaviour in the class room, including chair throwing, the teacher being assaulted, etc. I had 5 children who went through the State System before but the degradation of behaviour was noticeable over the years. The fifth child stayed in the "best school" in the area because we couldn't afford to do anything different but he regularly saw bad behaviour because the rules had changed on entry requirements and the most challenging pupils were now admitted; the school had no idea how to handle them because they weren't used to such problems.
We also looked at private tutoring to make up for the hours my 6th child missed waiting for the children to settle so work could be set or the lesson to begin. However, when we thought about it, we felt that it was unfair to cut into his recreational time just because the schools could not get their act together or take control. As a teacher I don't blame fellow teachers, I blame the system but didn't see why a conscientious, intelligent child should sit watching chaos take over his lessons. I also didn't just take his word for it, I got him to capture the audio in several lessons. It was shocking.

Not much mention here of state Grammar schools. Or am I being elitist? We have girls and boys grammar school in this area and the results they achieve are outstanding which is to be expected. Why can’t other schools strive to reach theses standards too? After all, many bright and talented children just miss out on a place and are frequently let down by the schools they do attend. What about more vocational qualifications in schools rather than aspiring to every child attending university ( or even as Blair did 50%) for which many are unsuited, not to mention the Mickey Mouse degrees run, purely (in my opinion) for profit and which are in no way useful for life and jobs in the real world? We need more skilled workers! More apprenticeships please! Training to re skill older workers who may find a change in career paths is needed! International Baccalaureate to be offered in more schools rather than the much more narrowly focused ‘A’ levels! So many HUGE questions about schools and education at ALL levels! I don’t think any party or government has the answers at the moment. Like the beleaguered NHS it’s a political hot potato that no one wants to tackle. And the teachers Unions don’t help much it appears. We need a country fit for purpose in the modern world and we don’t have it right now. Would it be too much to ask these clever, privately educated people in power (and out of it) to examine other systems in other countries that actually work well and see if they are to be emulated? Unfortunately demands for all these improvements may well mean higher taxes which would be unpopular as I guess that a majority would not be willing to pay. While of course still expecting the best!

Speaking as a retired school-teacher, it would help us to educate children better if parents would take more responsibility for bringing up their children.

Children are often no longer sent to school washed, dressed decently and having had breakfast. Nor have they been taught to obey reasonable requests.

Attempts to discuss a child's disruptive behaviour, apparent learning disabilities, need for glasses etc. are frequently dismissed with comments like, "I was the same at his age." "She is only seven" said by the parents.

These are extreme situations, but unless parents realise that they do have a reponsibility in these matters, it will continue to be hard to maintain a reasonable amount of calm and quiet in the classroom, and without these not even the most gifted teacher can get through a year's curriculum in the course of the school year.

Obviously, better funding might solve some problems, but only if it enabled schools to employ twice as many teachers to reduce the amount of children in each class.

On their part, teachers need to realise that the most important thing they can do is to teach children how to learn things, and make learning an exciting adventure.

After all most children start school tired of being a kindergarten "baby" and wanting to learn. This attitude if kept alive makes an astounding difference to the class as a whole.

So teachers' training colleges need to teach how to combine a sound education with the exciting adventure mastering skills and amassing knowledge should be.

Schools also must return to teaching subjects like woodworking, art, sewing and music properly to give children who are not "bookish" a chance to be top of the class in subjects that are not predominantly learned from books.

Although skills and talents may be widespread, I have heard art teachers say that it is often the cleverest children who do well at art. I suspect the same is true of music.

Get rid of didactic academies.

You're not a lone wolf Joseanne. Couldn't agree more!

Commented on a similar post on education. My GS was bitterly let down, ignored in his primary school. Constantly bullied, parents ignored whenever an issue raised and accused that behaviour was all down to whatever was going on at home! which was nothing apart from constant concern about GS. It seems in schools nowadays the very bright or those that create chaos are the ones who get attention, those in the middle are ignored. Family members all agreed only solution was to remove GS from state school and enroll him in an Independent with various members contributing to costs. It's not only the rich who choose this option, but a lot of lowly paid but desperate parents. If schools were actually allowed to challenge behaviour instead of having their hands tied eg latest trend of kids selling vaping machines in playgrounds, staff seeing this yet not allowed to search bags for evidence and this is in primary schools. Of course not all schools have similar issues but when one does arise there seems very little authority to address issues. My GS lives in an area and attended a primary school where there is little deprivation. He is thriving in his new school, worth evety penny the family is contributing.

Just a few of my thoughts and not replies to any particular post.
1. A friend worked abroad and had to send children to a "boarding school"
2. I do not like the Eatonomics foisted on to us by Boris at al.
3. We need specialist teachers but a teacher should teach children how to learn
4. I have heard of misbehaving children having to take their parent/s to sit in class with them. Poor teacher! but it did apparently help

The LA tops slices a maintained schools before allocating it to the school, this £ pays for the support services it supplies eg payroll, HR etc.

I am not sure that this is the case. Our maintained school receives its allocation, and if it wants these support services, we have to pay the LA for that via "Service Level Agreements". In other words the LA gives us all our per capita and other money, and we then choose which of their services we want and give them money for that. So we get the money, and then we have to hand some of it back if we want these services.

Same here Luckygirl13.

Education and health should be taken out of politics. The countries around the world where education is valued are generally those where these important areas are funded properly but are not subject to change every few years because of political whim and fancy.

Indeed so! The micromanagement of schools, particularly in terms of curriculum, is a dead hand. And the fluctuations of policy make forward planning impossible - for example, does this government want every school to be in a MAT? Or doesn't it? There is no way of knowing. It was policy until recently, but seems to have been dropped, although no definite statement to work on, just a dropping of the Schools Bill - and who knows if they might pick it up again? Or if a possible future government might decree something different.

How are governing bodies supposed to plan long term under these circumstances?

Roddi3363

Education and health should be taken out of politics. The countries around the world where education is valued are generally those where these important areas are funded properly but are not subject to change every few years because of political whim and fancy.
I have taught cross-phase across my career and have visited many countries to observe their education systems. Countries such as Finland, New Zealand and Singapore respect and value teaching as a profession, whereas here everyone thinks they know best. The other issue is the constant maelstrom of changing policy, procedures and practices which schools and settings are expected to encompass, sometimes with very little research or funding for training behind it. Ofsted used to be a reasonable measure of school quality but its parameters change virtually every year and thus their judgements are fairly meaningless. All children should have the right to a good education and that starts with quality schools, early years provision and staffing. Buildings, resources and access to quality environments indoors and outside is critical too.

Couldn't agree MORE!!!! I've always thought that NHS education and social care should be a cross/all party responsibility and not be allowed to be used as vote winning political footballs!. They're far far too important to be left to the incompetent vagaries of unqualified greedy politicians.its a shame that we the people have no say or control over this process.

If our stuffy narrow minded thickos of policiticians lived I the real world instead of trying to be all trendy and down with the techies they'd know that different types of education and attainment in all walks of life basically cover all bases when it comes to available workforce! Not everyone needs to be getting a degree and aspiring to work in high tech/finance/politics/AI !!! we will always need joiners plumbers builders car mechanics engineers dinner ladies nurses auxiliaries dustmen counci.l workers telephone engineers road layers etc etc etc! And good PAID mums dad's grandparents who release parents to work for a small fee!! We need to start a revolution of ordinary people making extraordinary decisions