English Chess Forum

Many promising English juniors originate from the private / independent (rather then state) schools sector.

Labour have a manifesto promise to add standard 20% rate of VAT to school fees and use funds raised to pay for more state teachers.

Anyone care to speculate on the impact of this policy on schools chess?

See https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ar ... te-schools

John, I would suggest it will have very little impact, as I feel most parents will stand the V.A.T. rather than move their kids. Mind you, it's pretty unfair on the parents, who are, in effect, saving the state money and may be making sacrifices already to give their offspring a better education.

As for the funding of additional teachers, I got the impression those funded in this way would be very thinly spread around the country, so, again, making little difference to the chess teams.

This assumes that the schools have been caught completely off guard, made zero contingency plans for cost-cutting and opted to pass on the entire vat rise onto parents - I would seriously question the leadership of any school which does that and be looking to move fast.

In terms of chess it is possible that a few less schools will enter team competitions but for the most part it is a small enough expense that I don't expect it will see that much cutting - especially since most of the kids do all their learning online these days

I went to Reigate Grammar School when it was a state school, but it went independent and fee-paying when it was threatened with closure. Later, Keir Starmer was a pupil - he won a scholarship, so his parents did not have to find large amounts of money. RGS is always fund-raising to improve school facilities and to provide more scholarships. Their target is to have enough scholarships to get every talented pupil there, whatever their background so I assume they are hoping for similar generosity from former pupils with loads of money, to fund the increased tax burden. I imagine the same will apply to other independent schools.

I think Starmer is being somewhat ungrateful attacking his old school. but the Government has to get money somehow.

There's no short answer to this. Anyone really wanting to know should read a legal summary, for example at https://www.farrer.co.uk/news-and-insig ... l-fees-qa/. Although I describe it as a "summary", don't expect an answer in a few sentences.

The mindset that its only parents who send their kids to private schools who "make sacrifices" is one that needs binning pronto.

The vast majority of British schoolchildren go to non-fee paying educational establishments. Maybe encourage chess there a bit more?

Just a thought.

Matt Mackenzie wrote: "The mindset that its only parents who send their kids to private schools who "make sacrifices" is one that needs binning pronto."

No-one has suggested that other parents don't make sacrifices. It is not at all what I said.

John Upham wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 05, 2024 10:50 am

Many promising English juniors originate from the private / independent (rather then state) schools sector.

Labour have a manifesto promise to add standard 20% rate of VAT to school fees and use funds raised to pay for more state teachers.

Anyone care to speculate on the impact of this policy on schools chess?

See https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ar ... te-schools

Since less than 10% of pupils are expected to leave independent schools the effect on their chess teams will be slight. However, the arrival of a strong player could encourage the state school they move to.

Not directly relevant to the subject under discussion, but thought I'd add this little sociological note. When Ah wor nobbut a lad in the 1960s, it was the grammar schools - state-funded, but academically selective - which dominated the junior scene. Examine the list of National schools' knockout tournament (a.k.a. the "Sunday Times") winners from 1958 to 1972, and you'll find the majority were from the state sector. This gradually ceased to be the case as comprehensive schools became the norm, and academic prowess (and thus - usually- chess talent) was spread throughout the system instead of being concentrated in relatively few pockets. And that I guess is why it's now the private sector which has many of the good chess-players. That's where you tend to find both the native talent plus the sort of environment where it can be effectively nurtured.

Often the most significant boost for chess in a school is to have a member of staff who happens to be a club player willing to organise a chess club. This trumps a weekly visiting coach, particularly if the teacher's classroom is available for chess every day and they are constantly approachable in corridors and the playground. It is also much easier for the serving teacher to liaise with colleagues and parents over so many issues, e.g. availability of pupils for matches, use of a minibus, early lunches.....

As for the state/private divide, I taught at at direct grant school which went independent. When Sandy Cordon, BCF President 1978, was deputy head at a local state 9-13 school he had 100 pupils in his daily lunchtime chess club and their team would often beat ours in the area's Middle Schools League. In years of perusal of the jobs advertised in the Times Educational Supplement I often saw phrases added to the academic subject post such as 'an interest in rugby (or cricket, rowing, etc.) would be advantageous...') but never chess. It was remarkable when Oakham and subsequently Millfield appointed a full time chess teacher.

My school just happened to have at least one club player on the staff from 1946-2006, enabling that other huge benefit: participation of a staff/pupil team in the local adult league.

Another problem nowadays is the reduction in lunch break time to minimise disruptive behaviour. Even during my career lunchtimes were gradually reduced from 75 to 55 minutes. We also benefited from pupils not being required to play outside at lunchtimes. When I took a team to St Paul's in the Mortazavi/Cavendish days I gathered that they had a two-hour lunch break (hope I'm getting this right), time not only for chess but also for visiting speakers and all kinds of cultural and sporting activity.