Another 8% fee increase at Hornsby House school Post Reply

[DavidGest]

Very valid point made by Kit123 about recruitment. Are we preparing our children for the workscape as we found it or for the one they are likely to encounter when they start work?

Recruitment used to be heavily biased towards university hierarchy, so parents aimed for Oxbridge or similar, pushing their children through the channels that led their most easily, ie private education. As Kit123 says, employers have changed tack and broadened their horizons to try to identify candidates with the best brains, character and experience rather than just an expensive education.

Maybe the best we can do for our children is not to cocoon them in the private sector, particularly primary schools. Completely agree with SW1890, Starr and others about saving hundreds of thousands of pounds that we could otherwise use to support our children when they really need it, and, frankly, to support ourselves for decades after all the schooling is done.

[NVHusband]

If your local state primary school is excellent, I don’t understand why you’d go private, especially if it’s owned by private equity.

Private Equity use debt and tax havens to maximise profits. With interest rates rising, more and more of your school fees is paying off their debt.

I recall a good comment a long time ago on NVN; Private school parents fit into 3 categories:
1). Local state school not good
2). Branding- families have the house, holiday home, car and important for their own status
3). Don’t trust the state sector

Coming back to Hornsby, I think they are a charity trust and less expensive than the others around here, so all profits are reinvested in the school. The fees don’t pay for debt interest (private equity) nor DB9 of the owners.

[Starr]

Hornsby House, Finton House the Girls Day School Trust schools should not be increasing fees just because the others are so expensive and unscrupulous about profit. They will end up outpricing families under financial strain. Luckily in Wandsworth we have good state options with spaces. ReadySteadyCook is one of many families who may end up dropping out. Younger parents with younger children probably have much higher mortgages than those of us who bought in the area some years ago.
Those trust schools should be careful and cut back on expensive building works or whatever it is they are spending on to justify their rises in fees.

[Brokebird]

‘IF the local primary is excellent…’.

But most state primaries are not ‘outstanding’ but ‘good’, to use the clunky Ofsted terminology, and there is a belief that by going private you boost this to ‘outstanding’. A fair assumption, but not always the reality, often very little difference with a nicer uniform.

If parents could accept a ‘good’ rating as good enough a lot of us wouldn’t be in this place. The children pick up on it, too and it creates stress and tension in the family. My child has just got into fee-paying secondary school and has said several times how sorry they are not to have got a scholarship to help with the fees. Aged ten. Really really wish we had read a thread like this a few years ago and not blown all that money on good but not outstanding primary education.

[SP06]

Fascinating thread. In my view (major public schoolboy, 2 kids at primary school) within the next 10 years - and likely sooner - the kids who have been through private education will have had genuine disadvantage purchased for them, rather than any upside. The reality is the kid who grows up in Nappy Valley has already won a very significant lottery in life, not of the sort you need to pay to supplement. Parental engagement, books in the house, and support for your local state school are the things that actually make a life-defining difference.

If your child drops a few grades at A-level Oxbridge will remain more interested in them if they apply from a state school. Just look how entry demographics are shifting in recent years for the big feeder schools (KCS et al). And employers - increasingly aware that diversity is a fundamental metric - will do the same. You may get your straight A* sweep at , but to what end?

And if results aren’t what you’re interested in, what’s left? Other than snobbery? Some nice playing fields, a few pianos and a stage with curtains? Learning Latin? Silent auctions for the internship at Great Uncle Gimpy’s law firm? Little white boys all lined up with their school caps on, and competitive picnicking at sports day?

Is any of that worth me spending the next decade sweating a boring but lucrative job I don’t enjoy, worrying about the cost of holidays, mortgages, my house in the country (and a property ladder leg up for my two), my own social life etc? Nope.

My suspicion is the deeply average St Custard’s minor public schools will vanish, and do so sooner than anyone expects. And the rest will get even more exclusive, even more sadly narrow, even more overseas dominated. And far less reflective of the world we inhabit.

[Brokebird]

Entertaining post from SP06, albeit an unwitting advertisement for public school education - major, natch!
I doubt my child will be able to express himself thus when leaving St Custard’s, and I am doomed to join their 3rd XV parents’ picnic team. Vol au vents at dawn. Or is that vols au vent? Stupid school fees. I’m living on potatoes and own-label All Bran.

[dudette]

If as seems likely Labour win the next election, they will add VAT to school fees so if you can’t afford them now you certainly won’t then. It’s undoubtedly the case that it’s getting harder for private school kids to get into the top universities. That may change in the future as the demographic changes but right now the private schools are seeing a lot fewer Oxbridge offers and places like Edinburgh don’t seem to offer anything at all unless you are doing languages.

I’m not sure that matters because at the same time the top employers are ironically trying to steer themselves away from being Oxbridge dominated. I heard recently that a major City firm which recruits heavily on the milk round only took two Oxbridge graduates last year.

I think you have to look at school not just as a means to an end but an end in itself. We spend about a quarter of our lives at school/Uni and it’s important those years are enjoyed. Also I think private schools do give kids a sense of self worth and confidence. Certainly among the kids I know who are in the sixth form or have just left private schools, they are all extremely personable. They will also have a great network of contacts from their rich friends which will help them, despite the lack of Oxbridge places. In fact you should ask yourselves - with the huge advantages they have do they really need to go to the top universities? An Oxbridge place could make so much more of a difference to the life of someone from an underprivileged background than someone who is already vastly privileged.

[Janet6]

Dudette - I think you make some valid points but having been to private school myself and sent my kids too I think the overall feeling is that those advantages eg contacts, nice and personable, happy etc are just not enough to justify the exorbitant fees.
The country is levelling up not just in the workplace, schools and uni but in sports clubs. My friend runs a cricket club where a large number of county placement went to state school pupils as they presumed they got less practice at school hence thought they must be “more” talented than those at private school. It’s become infiltrated into society that those achieving well at state schools are harder working, less spoon fed, more resilient & ambitious. The confidence factor - the gift I thought I was giving my kids is no longer relevant. It’s outweighed by the other stronger attributes above that are more desirable . Same with “contacts” - this is not a thing in finance, law - it’s not permitted and no such thing as work placements etc. yes some industries maybe still more lenient but the direction of travel is set. Not only are you setting yourselves back a small fortune you might not be doing the best all round.
Interesting times all round…

[Janet6]

Dudette - I think you make some valid points but having been to private school myself and sent my kids too I think the overall feeling is that those advantages eg contacts, nice and personable, happy etc are just not enough to justify the exorbitant fees.
The country is levelling up not just in the workplace, schools and uni but in sports clubs. My friend runs a cricket club where a large number of county placement went to state school pupils as they presumed they got less practice at school hence thought they must be “more” talented than those at private school. It’s become infiltrated into society that those achieving well at state schools are harder working, less spoon fed, more resilient & ambitious. The confidence factor - the gift I thought I was giving my kids is no longer relevant. It’s outweighed by the other stronger attributes above that are more desirable . Same with “contacts” - this is not a thing in finance, law - it’s not permitted and no such thing as work placements etc. yes some industries maybe still more lenient but the direction of travel is set. Not only are you setting yourselves back a small fortune you might not be doing the best all round.
Interesting times all round…

[Rubysmum2013]

I think that this thread misses the point.  The issue is not with Private schools but rather the fact there is so much inequality within the state sector.  Some state schools are amazing - some are not. I went to an absolutely terrible state school in the 80s.  My sibling was predicted 1 CSE at 16 and at this point, we moved house and I was able to get a place at an old school Grammar school (through school report rather than 11+ which I would have failed) where I was able to catch up.  

When the posters here talk about the advantages of state education, they are talking about the 'Ofsted outstanding' type of schools rather than the failing schools.  If private schools become demonized then the pressure on state schools perceived to be 'outstanding' will increase leading to more inequality.  Middle-class parents (of which I am definitely one) are super-anxious and over worry about everything.  We are also over-involved in our children's education.  The kids I know who attend state secondary schools are all tutored in areas that they are struggling in, parents spend hours and hours on homework and they all have numerous extracurricular activities.  The parents are also pretty punchy about approaching the school is they are not happy with a teaching approach/homework etc.... Having sent my kids to a local state primary , it was the middle class parents who always had a very important issue which they had to discuss urgently with the teacher or who would demand that the teacher focus on their child's issue.  If at least some of these children go to a fee-paying school then there is more time for teachers to help those who don't necessarily have parents advocating for them.





 

[Starr]

Which schools are failing though? I don't think there are any failing in our area....

[Karen5]

Rubysmum is right. The differentiation between state schools and private schools in this borough is bigger than other boroughs /counties where some state schools have facilities and academics to rival private schools. We don’t have multiple outstanding state schools in this borough and hence people go private which in turn impacts the academic success of these schools. It will change but this thread highlights an issue which is less prevalent in other areas like Surrey & Hertfordshire as examples - where similar middle class families wouldn’t even consider a private education because the state education is comparable. It’s one of the reasons why families move out.

[Great fields]

Just my 2 cents worth :

From a parent who moved their kids from an outstanding state school into a selective private.

1) Those playing fields and fixtures and whatnot and the common, normalised interest in sport is something you can't buy on weekends. My daughter hates sport, but has to play and exercise because everyone is into it in her private school and it's just normal to go for a run every morning. The little concrete patch in my state school didn't cut it, no matter how lovely the teachers and parents were.

Going for sport once a week on the weekends does not work - it has to be a daily thing.

2) I'm sorry to say, but those disruptive kids (because of bad parenting) that cause the evacuation of the playgrounds for every tantrum and the cancellation of school trips because of their emotions just do not pass the exams to get into the good private schools. I would like my kids to have the opportunity to do some learning without daily drama.

3) On a macro level, high achieving kids should be with low achieving kids and they will teach those who need help and help the entire population progress in reading and writing. On a family level, I found my kids spending all their time helping out the other kids and they were so bored with school. Moving them made them shine.

4) Going to a good school is important to get a good education. An education develops the mind. I cannot believe how nobody mentions this in the discussion. They are only speaking about Oxbridge and jobs. The confidence, the Latin (!!) the ability to read original biblical texts - the normalisation of working hard, studying, and performing under pressure, not to mention just MORE knowledge and learning given the different objectives of schools (private school prep for 11+ exams, state schools do not have such targets). This matters. They can chose to be graffiti artists and homemakers and it will still be worth it.

4) Private schools provide education and parents pay for them. Can you imagine if all the private school kids moved back to the state schools? Imagine the 10000 kids looking for places. The borough will be bankrupt and we will pay the equivalent in increased council tax - and council tax hits EVERYONE, including the low income families. Maybe we are doing a service being the suckers who pay for our kids' education.

[LHL]

While I find some of the points from @Great fields interesting (i.e. sports, education value being measurable beyond jobs and Oxbridge places) I find some very troubling / quite limited to possibly having a bad experience in previous school which happened to be a State school.

I am not from the UK and didn't have access to what qualifies here as elite education. I think the "macro" implications of different levels of ability a bit short sided, kids benefit immensely from learning how to teach others. While I didnt go to Oxbridge I find my ability to connect and communicate with people from all audiences a real asset to my career.

While I hear the point on the ability of private schools to select their pupils I am pretty sure that as businesses, if they need more pupils they will accept whoever can meet their price points. I also disagree you need to go to a private school to learn the value of hard work. My kids learn that at home.

Earlier in the thread an excellent point was made about the existing inequalities in the state system and I wholeheartedly agree. That to me is the bigger issue. I am not even talking about fancy sport grounds. My kids go to an outstanding state school, the amount of involvement from the parents and community to make that work is also outstanding. We are so very lucky we are able to mobilise so much of our time and resources to fundraise for the school and ensure we are equipping them with the best chances of success. That for what is already an oversubscribed and well funded school that is part of a trust. It's simply not fair for schools in more deprived areas that have simply less access to resources.

[Roundandaround]

Great fields, you have had a good experience moving your children from state to private, but there is private and private, and state and state, ignoring the Ofsted ratings.

Fully agree about non-sporty kids getting active and doing sport. Daily sport sound utopic and it is great that your children's school does this, but that is not what happens at every private school. For example Finton has a tiny playground, as does HornsbyHouse, and the kids deffo don't go for a run every morning!

Completely agree about drama and clowning around in the classroom. My child wants to give up a subject because the teacher of that subject is too soft to keep two disruptive kids in order and they ruin it for all the others. Able children also have needs. Bad parenting also means that when teachers in state sector try to clamp down on bad behaviour in a class of 30 pupils there is a risk that parents come into school and accuse the teacher of picking on their child.

But I still believe that we should have more and better state primaries as LHL describes with lots of involved parents. Wandsworth has sold off more than a couple of school buildings to private schools or developers so where would these would be based? We could have had one on Burntwood Lane, but guess what, that land has been sold to developers for a modern living experience (flats).

On a more philosophical level you raise a good point about whether parents and society want education to be a route to university entrance, or a process to expose developing minds to multiple stimuli and different ways of thinking, rigour of learning, expansion of perspective, the opportunity to explore in depth subjects that grip and motivate. We all want the second when we pay school fees, but we actually demand and measure success against the first.