I think the biggest shock in all that though is that once you factor out all the other variables, it actually isn't worth the money - as Toby Young points out in that article. I never thought I would find myself agreeing with that man, but I can't argue with this
There's also some evidence that removing the brightest children from state schools has a negative effect on their peers who would otherwise be educated alongside them (particularly girls) – the so-called "peer effect".
But the solution is not to cream skim the most gifted children from the bottom 40 per cent of household incomes and pack them off to private schools. Rather, it's to improve state schools.
So it's official. Educating your child at a private school is a waste of money – a colossal waste of money if you send them to a boarding school.
I have always suspected that there could be 'loose' evidence that its not worth the money, in terms of the parameters he sets, or the research sets, which is all about future achievement. Of course, what else could they reliably measure? But my point stands (politely and not in messenger shooting mode!), this is a disappointment to those who strive to give their children a financial advantage in the workplace, or even an academic one, it does NOT in anyway measure (because how could they?) the difference in the experience of school those children have, whether they would have reached whatever levels they did, in the state sector, and most importantly, whether they are rounded and happy individuals because they had a school picked for them that was perfect. This of course is not necessarily private school! But speaking as a parent who has chosen an indie PURELY on its whole and holistic approach to educating our son, in MANY different ways, not just academic, this article has no effect on me whatsoever, except to think 'more fool them' about people who DO think you can buy academic advantage purely by sending a child to an indie.