An interesting take on the state versus "concertado" choice, but I see two main faults in your argument.
One is the cost-benefit analysis, the opportunity cost calculations you go into when weighing up the investment in a private/concertado eduction. I don't think most parents are thinking in those terms at all - they want what they perceive to be best for their children at any cost (that they can manage). The outcomes you describe - having more money after x years as opposed to a certain types of eduction for your child - are not directly comprable.
The other fault is the notion that mixing it up in state schools will lead to better outcomes. While that may be true in the most general sense, for some of the reasons you describe, when individual middle class parents are weighing their choices, there is no non-monetary incentive for them to be pioneers on that front. From their individual point of view, they are taking a risk with their child's education that they can afford to avoid.
I am admittedly not an expert on this. But anecdotally, seeing how they are taking schooling decisions in my partner's extended family, they are moving the kids from state to concertados whenever possible. The most recent is a teenager, who seems to be more motivated and engaged than before. But this isn't your middle class sample group. This is a struggling immigrant family that is looking to give to the children something the parents don't have - a first-rate formal education.
Hi Peter. I agree that the choice makes much more sense for working-class / immigrant parents who want their kids to be the first in their families to go to university.
Hi Rupert! Perhaps not as controversial a take as you predicted, I didn’t find anything particularly enraging, in fact we agree on most of it. You’re right that English instruction is hopeless everywhere and even concertadas that make a big thing of their English are hardly ever any better. I’ve lost count of the many worksheets my daughter has brought home which have actual errors in them, and the teachers themselves have a very poor level in most cases. And the Catalan indoctrination thing is, as you say, not such a big deal these days.
On the rest, I would make a few observations. Firstly those numbers…680-860 per year? I’m not sure where that comes from. I’d estimate concertada fees as usually roughly between 150-400 per month depending on the school (plus food and other things on top). That probably strengthens your argument about how much can be saved by not going though!
But I don’t think most families make the choice based on a rational economic calculation about future value in the job market, or university funds, etc. My daughter has just made the jump from primary to secondary, so I spent all last year talking with other families at the school about the various pros and cons of our options. What families talk about is the educational philosophy and style of a school - old-skool homework/testing/pressure versus student-led/relaxed. Some like one style and some like another, and there was also a bit of peer-pressure (at least where I live) to support free public education in principle and not appear elitist.
However I still picked up the vibe that what really mattered to families was choosing their kids’ peers, even though this was rarely stated outright. It’s not so much about joining the elite as avoiding the really problematic kids who come from chaotic homes and can be very disruptive to learning and the school environment. Those kids are predominantly in public schools, because that’s the default option. Families who can afford a concertada might figure that it’s worth it to avoid those kids, even though they justify their choice by talking about educational standards. I think that you’re right that the middle-class kids will probably be fine in the end wherever they go to school, but families are not only thinking of the long-term outcome, they’re taking into account the actual experience at school.
Most concertadas aren’t particularly elite anyway, most are pretty diverse, as you say, there are lots of immigrant families who have big aspirations for their first-generation kids. For those who really do want to join the elite there are the fully private and international schools, with their Range Rover families, ski trips and eye-watering fees which make concertadas look very cheap by comparison!
There is also the question of values and culture. Concertadas get some public funding but they’re privately run so they have a bit more scope to develop an individual school culture, and of course many are religious. Public schools are far more similar to each other and adhere more closely to whatever the current cultural fad coming out of the Department de Educació is. The Catalan independence stuff has waned in the last few years but has been replaced by some extreme gender policies that I (and many feminist organisations) find pretty alarming. That’s one reason that I (a lifelong atheist with Richard Dawkins first editions on the bookshelf) ended up choosing a Catholic concertada for my daughter. Something I thought I would never do but here we are!
Hi Anette. Interesting points! The numbers I gave are country-wide averages. Some families pay nothing, which means that many will pay more. Also, schools in central Madrid or Barcelona are always going to be much more expensive than ones in Cadiz or Albacete.
I shared your article with a young British friend who has just completed two years as a teaching assistant through the British Council in two Spanish schools (one a concertado, one public) in different autonomous communities. You may be interested in her comments, copied here with her permission ... 'This was interesting. [Name of school] is a concertado school and the kids are definitely more privileged and less diverse, bit I wouldn't say their behaviour or English is much better. In fact, I taught a [private] class this week with six concertado kids and one from a public school. Granted the public school kid is a year older but his understanding and command was notably much better. Another thing with concertado and private schools in Spain is that a job is a job for life usually, employed directly by the school, without having to go through the really long and difficult exams that teachers (or any civil servants) in the public sector have to get a government job. So the quality of teaching I wouldn't say is determined by the type of school.' It's just one perception obviously, but clearly something she's thought about.
Thought provoking article, but it think framing the analysis on just the cost / benefit analysis is a gross oversimplification, particularly given the risks of getting it wrong. Other considerations such us religious tradition, post code demographics, the parents' own education experience and even the politicisation of the school's syllabus prevailing in some regions, may have a much bigger influence on Spanish parents when making a decision on what type of education is best for their little darlings
An interesting take on the state versus "concertado" choice, but I see two main faults in your argument.
One is the cost-benefit analysis, the opportunity cost calculations you go into when weighing up the investment in a private/concertado eduction. I don't think most parents are thinking in those terms at all - they want what they perceive to be best for their children at any cost (that they can manage). The outcomes you describe - having more money after x years as opposed to a certain types of eduction for your child - are not directly comprable.
The other fault is the notion that mixing it up in state schools will lead to better outcomes. While that may be true in the most general sense, for some of the reasons you describe, when individual middle class parents are weighing their choices, there is no non-monetary incentive for them to be pioneers on that front. From their individual point of view, they are taking a risk with their child's education that they can afford to avoid.
I am admittedly not an expert on this. But anecdotally, seeing how they are taking schooling decisions in my partner's extended family, they are moving the kids from state to concertados whenever possible. The most recent is a teenager, who seems to be more motivated and engaged than before. But this isn't your middle class sample group. This is a struggling immigrant family that is looking to give to the children something the parents don't have - a first-rate formal education.
Hi Peter. I agree that the choice makes much more sense for working-class / immigrant parents who want their kids to be the first in their families to go to university.
Hi Rupert! Perhaps not as controversial a take as you predicted, I didn’t find anything particularly enraging, in fact we agree on most of it. You’re right that English instruction is hopeless everywhere and even concertadas that make a big thing of their English are hardly ever any better. I’ve lost count of the many worksheets my daughter has brought home which have actual errors in them, and the teachers themselves have a very poor level in most cases. And the Catalan indoctrination thing is, as you say, not such a big deal these days.
On the rest, I would make a few observations. Firstly those numbers…680-860 per year? I’m not sure where that comes from. I’d estimate concertada fees as usually roughly between 150-400 per month depending on the school (plus food and other things on top). That probably strengthens your argument about how much can be saved by not going though!
But I don’t think most families make the choice based on a rational economic calculation about future value in the job market, or university funds, etc. My daughter has just made the jump from primary to secondary, so I spent all last year talking with other families at the school about the various pros and cons of our options. What families talk about is the educational philosophy and style of a school - old-skool homework/testing/pressure versus student-led/relaxed. Some like one style and some like another, and there was also a bit of peer-pressure (at least where I live) to support free public education in principle and not appear elitist.
However I still picked up the vibe that what really mattered to families was choosing their kids’ peers, even though this was rarely stated outright. It’s not so much about joining the elite as avoiding the really problematic kids who come from chaotic homes and can be very disruptive to learning and the school environment. Those kids are predominantly in public schools, because that’s the default option. Families who can afford a concertada might figure that it’s worth it to avoid those kids, even though they justify their choice by talking about educational standards. I think that you’re right that the middle-class kids will probably be fine in the end wherever they go to school, but families are not only thinking of the long-term outcome, they’re taking into account the actual experience at school.
Most concertadas aren’t particularly elite anyway, most are pretty diverse, as you say, there are lots of immigrant families who have big aspirations for their first-generation kids. For those who really do want to join the elite there are the fully private and international schools, with their Range Rover families, ski trips and eye-watering fees which make concertadas look very cheap by comparison!
There is also the question of values and culture. Concertadas get some public funding but they’re privately run so they have a bit more scope to develop an individual school culture, and of course many are religious. Public schools are far more similar to each other and adhere more closely to whatever the current cultural fad coming out of the Department de Educació is. The Catalan independence stuff has waned in the last few years but has been replaced by some extreme gender policies that I (and many feminist organisations) find pretty alarming. That’s one reason that I (a lifelong atheist with Richard Dawkins first editions on the bookshelf) ended up choosing a Catholic concertada for my daughter. Something I thought I would never do but here we are!
Hi Anette. Interesting points! The numbers I gave are country-wide averages. Some families pay nothing, which means that many will pay more. Also, schools in central Madrid or Barcelona are always going to be much more expensive than ones in Cadiz or Albacete.
I shared your article with a young British friend who has just completed two years as a teaching assistant through the British Council in two Spanish schools (one a concertado, one public) in different autonomous communities. You may be interested in her comments, copied here with her permission ... 'This was interesting. [Name of school] is a concertado school and the kids are definitely more privileged and less diverse, bit I wouldn't say their behaviour or English is much better. In fact, I taught a [private] class this week with six concertado kids and one from a public school. Granted the public school kid is a year older but his understanding and command was notably much better. Another thing with concertado and private schools in Spain is that a job is a job for life usually, employed directly by the school, without having to go through the really long and difficult exams that teachers (or any civil servants) in the public sector have to get a government job. So the quality of teaching I wouldn't say is determined by the type of school.' It's just one perception obviously, but clearly something she's thought about.
Interesting! Thanks for sharing.
Thought provoking article, but it think framing the analysis on just the cost / benefit analysis is a gross oversimplification, particularly given the risks of getting it wrong. Other considerations such us religious tradition, post code demographics, the parents' own education experience and even the politicisation of the school's syllabus prevailing in some regions, may have a much bigger influence on Spanish parents when making a decision on what type of education is best for their little darlings
Thanks for the comment!