Are we alone?

[kerrensimmonds]

When I was at school, in Hertford, 1957-1966, much of the cleaning 'in house' was done by us. We were responsible for the polishing of our own lockers and the tidiness of our beds, and on some sort of rota basis for doing the basic cleaning and polishing within the house including bathrooms, loos, etc. We all remember polishing brass door handles, window catches, etc. etc. etc.!
I guess that such expectations would contravene the Childrens' Act today.. but it would save a penny or two!

[lonelymom]

Could you imagine the faces of the parents who were paying £24,000 for little Jonny's education, when they found out he would be cleaning toilets! Or was only getting one choice for lunch! Poor Jonny!

[kerrensimmonds]

I guess that therein lies the rub between the past and the present.....

[LJG]

In the houses they still have 'trades' that involve basic tidying and cleaning, so some of the old ethos lives on.

[englishangel]

I don't think we had to clean the toilets, baths and basins yes, but not toilets. However I may be wrong

[HowardH]

The hiding behind a "get a quick fix of dough" to paper over the temporary cracks does little to hide the desire of a few to admit day children to C.H. As the former Head of a school which had boarders and day pupils I can tell you it is very difficult indeed to keep away dis/mistrust and envy.
There have been discussions on and off for 12 years or so about the desirability of admitting day pupils to C.H. It remains my belief that it would be a grave error of judgement if this were to come into being. The very nature of the school and its all embracing ethos is geared to boarding. Long may it continue to do so.
I must add that it is NOT a present topic of conversation.

[icomefromalanddownunder]

The days when we could cut back on cleaning, reduce the food bill by only doing one meal for all etc are gone. Social services would close us down and parents simply would not want to send their children to us. That is not an option.

I realise that, and guess that what I have been trying to convey is that, IMO, one gets what one pays for. To provide the facilities and services that other schools offer requires, from somewhere, a similar income.

Caroline

[lonelymom]

The hiding behind a "get a quick fix of dough" to paper over the temporary cracks does little to hide the desire of a few to admit day children to C.H. As the former Head of a school which had boarders and day pupils I can tell you it is very difficult indeed to keep away dis/mistrust and envy.
There have been discussions on and off for 12 years or so about the desirability of admitting day pupils to C.H. It remains my belief that it would be a grave error of judgement if this were to come into being. The very nature of the school and its all embracing ethos is geared to boarding. Long may it continue to do so.
I must add that it is NOT a present topic of conversation.

Well I, for one, am very glad to hear that

[ailurophile]

Onewestguncopse wrote:

I know staff are sympathetic and certainly feel that to withdraw a pupil for financial reasons must be painful and stressful for all concerned. Sadly this is not uncommon now - indeed we are often now getting enquiries from parents at other fee paying schools who have lost jobs or hit hard times. Unfortunately for some reason our fees seem oddly high in the 'middle order'.

With respect, I must point out that the fees are not 'oddly' high through simple misfortune! The reason for this anomaly is, presumably, that it is the result of deliberate and informed calculation on the part of the Foundation.

It strikes me that in the struggle against economic downturn CH are following the WW1 model: the Generals are making decisions from the comfort of their HQ far behind the lines, the officers are doing their best to follow orders at the Front, and the troops are down in the trenches hoping it will all be over by Christmas! But many middle-income parents must feel as though they have already been sent over the top, and they’re cowering in no-mans land not knowing which way to turn or what’s going to hit them next. And casualty numbers are rising.

I ran into another CH parent yesterday who mentioned that several pupils in her child’s year are having to leave the school because their parents can no longer afford the fees. I know I've said this before, but I just cannot understand how this situation benefits anyone! It is certainly likely to be painful for the children affected; but can anyone explain what advantage there is to the school in pricing middle-income families out of the market? What happens with the vacated places? Reason (and Onewestguncopse!) would suggest that these are most likely to be sought by the lower income families who we are told the Foundation can no longer afford to support! Makes no sense to me at all… But what do I know? I’m out here in my shell-hole, waving a white flag and still hoping someone might notice me!

[Dusty]

At what point does CH bcome an uncompetitive choice for parents who want/need a boarding school education for their children? The full CH fees are not competitive except by comparison to the most expensive schools - Ardingly, for example, would work out cheaper for someone paying full fees. Critically, CH fee contributions rise very sharply at particular points. Hence an income of £60,000 gives (on the CH examples) a fee contribution of £15,563 per annum. Presumably that rises very sharply indeed to paying the maximum contribution of £24,000 per annum at £72,000 or thereabout. Anyone earning over say, £65,000, is likely to be better off choosing more competitively priced schools like Monmouth School (full boarding fees £6,665 per term) or Christs College, Brecon (full boarding fees of £5,435 a term for years 7 and 8 and £6945 for years 9 to 13).

If CH is hoping that fee revenue will help the endowment then its pricing and fee policy seems like an own goal. Why stretch too much those who can afford to pay something and make it uncompetitve for those who could pay most or all? That doesn't make sense.

[J.R.]

I ran into another CH parent yesterday who mentioned that several pupils in her child’s year are having to leave the school because their parents can no longer afford the fees. I know I've said this before, but I just cannot understand how this situation benefits anyone!

This is extremely worrying to me.

Parents cannot afford fees = Pupils withdrawn.

Pupils withdrawn = Less Revenue.

Less Revenue = Attracting pupils whose parents CAN afford the fees.

Attracting pupils whose parents CAN afford the fees =................

The whole ethos and purpose of the School is destroyed !

Q.E.D.

[Dusty]

I don't think it's as bad as that. CH has a huge endowment in comparison with any other school. OK, it's not big enough to pay all the fees for everyone but there are sensible things that can be done so that the charitable purpose of the school remains mainly intact. The thing at the moment is that rather than a plan there seems to be a bit of a dog's dinner. We, for example, were applying as full fee payers till I saw what the new fees are and and that it worked out over the odds compared to many other boarding schools. So that's £160,000 or so that won't be coming to CH.

But children leaving the school for money reasons is shameful and CH has got enough money to sort that out so that they don't suffer whilst CH is working on its master plan.

[LJG]

I really hoped this thread had died a death - I am somewhat sick of the continued moaning and whinging from what appears to be 'middle income' families, aka middleclass families, who appear somewhat annoyed they can no longer get their child educated at a first class school for a song, and whose little darlings , heaven forbid, may have to go to the local state school!
There are few children at CH I would argue have a genuine 'need to board', and many of the so called 'single parents' have in fact got live in partners. Thats not to say the children don't have 'issues', but not such they need to be at a subsidised boarding school .
I feel very sorry for the few pupils who have/will be withdrawn, particularly if they are mid point. Every year some children leave for a variety of reasons - not just finacial, and I am not aware of empty beds in my child's house. They get filled.
I too am one of those single low/middle income families who had a big hike in fees last year because of changes in the way they calculated the fees, and yes they have taken another big hike this year - but this was not a surprise as we were warned it would happen, and yes, yet more economies had to be made. It is my choice to keep my child at CH, as it is for every parent whose child/children attend, and in my opinion it is worth every penny. A view that is shared by most of the parents I have come into contact with at school over the last 6 years.

[kerrensimmonds]

Well said.

[lonelymom]

in my opinion it is worth every penny.

Exactly what I have said many times on this forum! We scrimp, we struggle, we go without, we eat cheap food (am now going to start making my own bread - see the 'Non CH' thread), but it is my choice to do so in order for my children to be educated at CH! And it really is worth every penny!