Charitable status and private schools

Funny you mention "posh" in relation to private school, Michael Palin said only yesterday, "I think probably the main misconception is that it turns everybody into snobs".

I don't know what coffee Palin drinks, but I remember he once said that his mugs had to have memorable artwork on them. Is that posh?

My convent senior school, was ostensibly a private school which took a mix of fee payers mainly protestant and non fee paying catholic pupils from the feeder junior school. The parish had some tacit agreement where funds went into the school to subsidise our education in case we were tempted to go to a non denominational heathen educational establishment, but boy did the nuns let us know (us the non fee payers) were there under sufferance. Although quite why anyone would pay for what was to all intents and purposes a "naice" uniform, complete with straw boater hat in the summer and not a lot of substance educationally I don't know At least at my children's comprehensive senior school they were encouraged to have some independent thought, I particularly remember an essay they had to to on "the difference between a fact and an opinion" which really hit home to me at the time we were imbued only with opinions that were set in stone and debate was out of the question.

Discussions that come up within the family when reminiscing about schools, we all had different experiences, me with my woeful private convent school, husband with his excellent grammar school which he looks back on as a fine establishment equal to any public school and all four children going through the state comprehensive system which they would say in retrospect had pluses and minuses. Pluses being a leveller they mixed with everyone from the very well off, yes they don't all choose private to children from impoverished back -grounds and they think that did them a lot of good. One of my son's girlfriend went to a very expensive public school and as with the daughter of a close friend their experience of mixing with other social classes, for want of a better description is limited. The minuses they, our children would all say is the amount of low level disruption that went on that ate into the lesson time, the lack of specialised teachers, the lack of male teachers which my sons really lamented on but that improved when they went to six form college. The teaching of maths, mine went to quite a good performing state comprehensive, four into Oxbridge from one son's year, nevertheless everyone but everyone, except the most able, had private tuition for maths to get them through GCSE from around year 10, bearing in mind that a pass in that subject was a minimum requirement for university.

My husband's eldest child, buggered about at school got kicked out during A levels, went off labouring for three weeks realised he didn't like it, grovelled to go back into school, knuckled down got into university, qualified as a lawyer, when he was at the College of Law, after university taking the requisite exams he often amused us by saying "I'm the only one here who went through the state system and they've all got trust funds" Another one of my husband's grown up grand children is now a barrister said the same thing about peer group when taking bar exams, hardly anyone from state school.

I don't know how I feel about private schools, in an ideal world they wouldn't exist but we all know that "some" state schools are awful, I think there should be a choice but it is a bitter pill to swallow knowing that the private sector represents only 7% I think, and will go on to take some of the most lucrative top positions in the working world. I remember having a conversation with one of the mums I knew from school, her son got into Cambridge and she was saying, initially how unprepared he felt when he was rubbing shoulders with those who were possibly 3rd or 4th generation under graduates at that university, but further down the line, it did occur that so many had been hot housed through school, there is an element of sometimes "they're now on their own" which can pay dividends having gone through the state system when you suffer from no such illusions. Going back a few years now early noughties I know the balance has evened out somewhat between the state and private intake, it is far harder to get into a top university from the state sector.

Further to your post Grany, Yanas Varoufakis is always someone I find worth listening to, agree with his comments re. not a lot to choose from between Keir Starmer and Rishi Sunak. Only the US has a worse choice imo between Trump and Biden !

Not for profit seems reasonable, Lizzie. My source quotes 3% by the way, for what it's worth.

There are many myths about the Finish system, good though it appears to be. One I have never heard is that it is better "because private education is banned". The biggest difference is their attitude to the individual child and the amount of money poured into it.

As I said, not for profit seems reasonable, no choice does not.

maddyone

Drinking instant coffee doesn’t appear to me to be a sign of people not being posh, whatever posh is! All kinds of people drink instant coffee. It’s not a status symbol to drink coffee that’s not instant.

The point is that two women were drinking cafetiere coffee and my DH was offered instant - a sign that in some way they thought he was inferior to them. That's not saying that instant coffee is inferior (although I happen to think it is, saying it now)

MaizieD

^To abolish the private sector because not all can afford it is like saying close Fortnum & Masons, Harvey Nichols etc as not all of the population can afford to shop there.^

I can't help feeling that if the private and the state sector were on the same financial footing with regard to expenditure per pupil, the private sector might well wither away.

As it is, while there are many very good state schools, one cannot blame parents who feel that, if the local state provision is poor, if they can afford it, it is in their child's interest to pay for private education.

However, I can't help feeling that there is more to state v. private education than just the quality of education offered. There is an elitist element to private education which goes back perhaps for centuries, where the long established private schools provide more than just an education, they offer a network of privilege and easy access to the 'top' jobs by being part of a certain social grouping to recipients who may be no more meretricious than state educated individuals.

Britain’s most influential people are over 5 times more likely to have been to a fee-paying school than the general population. Just 7% of British people are privately educated, compared to two-fifths (39%) of those in top positions.

www.gov.uk/government/news/elitism-in-britain-2019

I'm sorry. 'meretricious' was entirely the wrong word (I was suspicious as I wrote it..) I meant 'no more merit than'

I know you think it’s inferior Dinahmo.
I just think you can’t judge a person by the coffee they drink.

There was a time when I drank instant, and remember offering someone or other a cup of coffee in the office, and met with a "I never drink instant" I suppressed a splutter and a shocked face! Now that's me I'm afraid I just don't like instant anymore, haven't for a few years. I subscribe to "have a couple of coffees a day and make sure they're good ones!" just a preference really not a judgement on anyone else.

As soon as the word “posh” is used, I lose interest.

I admit to enjoying instant coffee.

I still don't understand how people who's children go to private schools are somehow subsidised by those who don't. Surely it's the other way around. Private school parents pay their taxes which cover public sector schools yet their children don't take up spaces in them. Hence they pay twice.

Seems so to me too Aveline.

Sago

As soon as the word “posh” is used, I lose interest.

That makes two of us Sago.
Sigh

GrannyGravy13

Not all fee paying schools are elite some are just have fewer pupils than state schools with smaller classes.

With five children we used both state and fee paying schools along with tutors when necessary.

To abolish the private sector because not all can afford it is like saying close Fortnum & Masons, Harvey Nichols etc as not all of the population can afford to shop there.

While some people can afford to pay for a better education for their children there is no chance of every child in this country having an equal opportunity education wise. People will make sure that every school is a good school because they’ll have to.

So what will be done with the perpetually disruptive children and those who don’t have the ability to keep up, thereby holding back the brightest?

1. You don't pay 'twice' for private education, because you pay taxes in order to educate all of the children in the society you live in. I want to live in a well educated society.
2. Some private schools offer an excellent eduction in some fields. They are not necessarily 'better' in many respects in the long run.
3. I actually don't care what sacrifices anyone made to send their kids to a private school - their choice.
4. Parents in the state sector make 'sacrifices' to spend time and money supporting their schools and communities (and I don't expect anyone to sympathise!)
5. Many parts of Britain are broken, including some parts of state education. We should mend it.

Is it a matter of voting Tory to keep your kids ahead of those of poorer parents?

PS: My son was passed over for a place in a representative (regional) sports team. OK, it happens. We did as always, we congratulated the boy who got in (it was a particular position) and who happened to go to a local private school, His mum said 'It's what we pay for'.
We agreed that they obviously didn't buy sportmanship!
She then had the cheek to approach me (at work) to buy raffle tickets for her son's school sports tour. Honestly, I have bought tickets and sponsored things for all sorts of causes not dear to my heart - as have we all. That was the only one I refused and she went off in a huff!

Oh, and of course, most private school parents aren't like that!

Germanshepherdsmum

So what will be done with the perpetually disruptive children and those who don’t have the ability to keep up, thereby holding back the brightest?

In a properly run education system, they are educated properly, according to their needs. And believe me, I know it's not properly run at the moment!

It didn’t happen in my day, nor did it happen in my son’s. Has this utopian system ever existed in state schools?

Nannarose parents of children at private schools get no reduction as their children are not taking up places they could as their parents pays taxes and school fees. They are actually helping the public sector schools by reducing potential numbers.

Whitewavemark2

At the moment you have the ridiculous situation where parents are having in some cases to do 3 jobs just to get food on the table or resorting to food banks to feed their children.

Their tax is subsidising parents who can afford to pay fees of on average £15000 for each child to attend school.

That isn’t morally right or fair.

The taxes paid by wealthier parents whose children attend fee-paying schools are helping to fund state schools for those children and offset the savings in VAT.

The private schools also fund places for pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds.

I think Starmer has probably done his calculations and realise this is not something worth pursuing.

Germanshepherdsmum

It didn’t happen in my day, nor did it happen in my son’s. Has this utopian system ever existed in state schools?

Not that I have noticed.

One of my GC has just been removed from school permanently by their parents due to constant bullying and the attitude of the headteacher and their inaction towards the bullies.

Police have been involved, unfortunately the little shits committing these offences several of which were criminal come from a violent criminal family so are treated with kid gloves 🤬🤬🤬

Callistemon21

Whitewavemark2

At the moment you have the ridiculous situation where parents are having in some cases to do 3 jobs just to get food on the table or resorting to food banks to feed their children.

Their tax is subsidising parents who can afford to pay fees of on average £15000 for each child to attend school.

That isn’t morally right or fair.

The taxes paid by wealthier parents whose children attend fee-paying schools are helping to fund state schools for those children and offset the savings in VAT.

The private schools also fund places for pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds.

I think Starmer has probably done his calculations and realise this is not something worth pursuing.

I doubt that, if someone is struggling and having to go to food bank to feed their children, they would be paying very much tax at all.

I'd be more concerned about the rising costs of school uniforms for state school pupils.

I'm sure someone has said this before, but I doubt very much if the taxes paid by parents with children in private education, pay anywhere near enough to significantly contribute to the cost of the 93% of children who are state educated.

Callistemon21 the cost of school uniforms is something I have consistently moaned about.

The two primary schools and attached pre-schools that my four youngest GC attend have uniforms with logos only available from one supplier.

This supplier also provides uniforms for many other primary and senior schools in the area. Blazers, Ties, Jumpers etc., along with all PE Kits for both senior and primary.

I added up that for the primary school GC it was approx £100 excluding shoes, socks, trainers. For the pre-schoolers it was £50, senior schools are over £100.

There should be a uniform fund available for those on low incomes and benefits.