Companies running private schools for a profit are trying to shake up a market that has traditionally been dominated by schools run as charities. Feelings between the two sides can get quite heated, as shown by this FT e-mail exchange between Jonathan Shephard, general secretary of the Independent Schools Council, and Chris Woodhead, former chief inspector of schools and chairman of the Cognita group of schools.
You can have your say on this issue in our online discussion forum that opens here on Friday September 15th.
Dear Jonathan,
Pay peanuts and employ monkeys and you could, no doubt, charge fees of less than £5,000 a year. Fees at Cognita schools range from £6,000-10,000. We know that what matters most in a school is the excellence of its teachers, and we are not prepared to cut corners.
This is not, therefore, a debate about cut price education, but value for money. Our parents are our customers. The one question that matters to me is: “Are they getting value for money?”
Some private schools compete to provide five-star facilities. We do not. Some spend time dancing to the Government’s tune, dedicating staff time and resources to the education of state school children. We do not.
Schools are businesses. They would be more efficient businesses if those responsible for them spent less time worrying about preserving their charitable status and more meeting the expectations of their customers.
Chris
Dear Chris,
Your little hymn of praise for Cognita skates over the prime duty it owes, to its shareholders. Since these include venture capitalists, they will be looking for a steep return on their money. This will need to come from fees – at a cost to the fee-payers – or from selling assets, for example land.
But let’s not get side-tracked from the important issue, which is educating children. UK independent schools deliver probably the best education in the world. Many of the Independent Schools Council’s member schools are trying to spread the benefits of this education to children whose parents cannot afford fees; and to children in state schools.
This is part of the social purpose of our – mainly charitable – schools. It is also essential for the future economic health of the UK: the UK is simply not training enough scientists or mathematicians for the future. Technology now allows the expertise of the independent sector to be made widely available, so that more qualified students from all backgrounds can reach leading universities. This is a social and economic necessity. Do you want to be part of society or not? We do.
Jonathan
Dear Jonathan,
What twaddle! Of course investors in private schools expect a return on their money. What is wrong with that? Fees at schools which are run for a profit do not, as you well know, rise any more steeply than fees at trust schools. And Cognita, unlike some trusts I could mention, has not sold off assets to make a quick buck.
What is wrong either with making a profit, or with focusing heart and soul on the needs and aspirations of the parent as the customer?
Everything you say – you, the general secretary of the organisation which purports to represent the interests of independent schools – ignores the parents who pay the fees. You prefer to waffle about social and economic responsibilities.
I would respect your position more if you knew something about state education and if you were honest enough to admit that what worries you is the possibility that the Government might strip trust schools of their charitable status.
Does anyone really believe that top private schools that are charging fees which can be afforded only by the wealthiest members of society are in any meaningful sense charities? Of course they are not. They are successful businesses educating the children of that tiny minority of parents who can afford their £20,000-plus a year fees.
I’m driven by a concern for the parents who can’t afford such fees. I want to offer them an alternative to the local state school. What is wrong with that, or with an approach to education driven by educational wisdom and business efficiency?
You might not like it, Jonathan, but I can tell you now: it is the future for private education. It is a future you as the general secretary of the ISC should be trumpeting.
Chris
Dear Chris,
Please can we have slightly less rhetoric and a little more logic? Charitable schools bear the costs of educating children; Cognita schools bear the same costs, plus the cost of paying their shareholders. As night follows day, it follows that schools backed by venture capital firms need to fund – from fees or other means – the payback for investors. That simply doesn’t square with low fees, or with concern for parents who can’t afford fees. Indeed, you yourself rightly say that Cognita is not a low-fee enterprise. In contrast, nearly a third of children at charitable ISC schools receive help with fees. In some cases this is 100 per cent of fees. This year alone, the amount of assistance given by charitable ISC schools approached £300m.
The single most effective change for children would be open access to independent education, regardless of means. Obviously, that would require a change of policy at national level but already many charitable independent schools have done a fantastic job, going into local primary schools and encouraging children from all backgrounds to apply. Extending open access schemes would improve social mobility and give life-changing opportunities to children to develop their talents.
That is a positive agenda for the future. It is a pity that you prefer to take a narrow, mechanistic approach, with schools as businesses, parents as consumers, and shareholders turning their back on the state system. If your ungenerous approach really were to prevail, that would be tragic.
Jonathan
Dear Jonathan,
Parents who send their children to independent schools have by definition ‘turned their back on the state system’. They have chosen to pay fees because they do not want their children to attend state schools, and they expect their fees to be used to educate their children – not to prop up the failing schools they have fled!
You might think this is illogical and immoral, I don’t. To me it is common sense. Thirty years in the public sector have taught me that the state isn’t very good at running anything. The private sector is – if, and it is a big if, it concentrates on its customers. That is what I want the independent sector to do.
I would love an incoming Conservative government to issue parents with a voucher which equates to the cost of educating a child in a state school, and which could be used as payment or part payment of private school fees. That would open the sector up. The only solution to the ills of state education is for the state to stop pretending that it can run, even with your help, 24,000 schools from Whitehall.
Chris
Dear Chris,
Thousands of children – including my own – move between the state and independent sectors in either direction. Both sectors have their strengths, and each can learn from the other. Cross-sector groupings – the Mercers’ Company and the United Learning Trust – are examples of the two sectors working in tandem.
I agree that genuine parental choice should include the opportunity to send children to either sector, but I firmly believe that the two should co-operate for the benefit of the children they educate. For this to happen to the fullest extent, some barriers to perception need to be removed.
The independent sector has changed out of recognition in the past 20 years. The old “public school” social cachet is way out of date and is fading to the point of non-existence. Independent schools nowadays concentrate on providing a good, workmanlike, rounded education. That should be available to all children. It is children who are the real customers in either sector.
Jonathan
