Funding: Private versus Public

[BradK]

At present, the Federal Government is reviewing school funding models through its Gonski review.

http://www.news.com.au/national/private-school-funding-boosting-profits/story-e6frfkvr-1226123590121


Stories like this are a bit skewered, because these elite private schools are in no way related to non-government independent schools who serve low SES students - many of whom KEEP THEIR FEES LOW to maintain their enrolements of students (I know this from first hand experience).

An example of the tone of the debate is to be found in the comments here:

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2823364.html


So, in round figures, most private schools charge about $6,000 per student in fees, and the Federal taxpayer chips in about $5,000 per student ($11,000)
State school students get $12,000 of funding (mostly state).

Where is the scandal? Can ASFers comment on this?

The real scandal is teacher/parent/ student low expectations and rates of illiteracy that many students leave high school with.

I tell my students that if I accept a low standard of work from them, that is more of a comment on what I think about them. If their friends, parents and themselves will not have high expectations of them, then I bloody well will. And it truly makes all the difference. The high level of work I have recieved in return since I began my thinking in this area has been rewarding. I know what my students are capable of, and that is what I want from them. They feel better, I feel better. And they get a great education.




This clip is seriously worth 11 minutes and 41 seconds of your life.

Cheers
Brad

 

[sails]

Brad, I don't have first hand knowledge, however, I have always understood that private schools actually save the government money as the amount of funding given per private school student is less than those in a publically funded school.

For that reason, I have never understood those on their soap boxes calling for no funding for private schools as it would result in fees being raised in the private schools to levels that many could not afford and then those students would flock back into the public system.

That would then cause a huge problem with new buildings being required, etc, etc. The only thing I can think of is that under the public system, MPs like Garrett can authorise political brainwashing such as the nonsense of AGW being taught as fact in our primary schools. I doubt they can force that in private schools, and if they could, teachers would be in a position to explain it is not fact.

However, I think it would be as stupid as axing medical insurance which would severely strain resources of the public system as people are forced to go public. And similar to removing negative gearing to property investors. How else is the government going to find sufficient rental properties at affordable prices?

I do agree with your thoughts with my limited knowledge on this subject...

 

[tothemax6]

Private schooling will always been public schooling because it is subject to competition. Teachers, school administrators etc do not have to compete in public schooling. They can be as useless as they want, and supply as bad a quality of education as they wish - and the school is still guaranteed to exist and they are still guaranteed their jobs.

Not so in private schooling, where at least there is financial competition for students. How do you get more students and thus more profits? You provide higher quality education. How do people know you provide higher quality education? Your students beat other students on standardized exams, concerts, competitions etc, which can only be achieved by educating them to that level.

The purpose of public schooling is charity - guaranteeing that every child is educated to some extent, and doesn't spend all day on the street. I say that if this is going to be done by stealing money from other people, at least do it in the form of credits to attend private schools (say "this ticket entitles you to $x,000 annual schooling").

 

[Julia]

I tell my students that if I accept a low standard of work from them, that is more of a comment on what I think about them. If their friends, parents and themselves will not have high expectations of them, then I bloody well will. And it truly makes all the difference. The high level of work I have recieved in return since I began my thinking in this area has been rewarding. I know what my students are capable of, and that is what I want from them. They feel better, I feel better. And they get a great education.

Great approach, Brad. Good for you. A saying I like is:

"Most people will behave pretty much as we expect them to"

So if you have high expectations and instill in students a belief that they are capable of considerable achievement they're way more likely to act accordingly.

 

[Struzball]

For that reason, I have never understood those on their soap boxes calling for no funding for private schools as it would result in fees being raised in the private schools to levels that many could not afford and then those students would flock back into the public system.

I completely agree with that, there aren't enough private schools as it is.

I live 10km NW as the crow flies from Brisbane city. If I'm still living here when I have high school aged kids, unfortunately they will be going to a public school becuase there is a public school 1km down the road, but no private school, let alone a good one.

All the good private schools are nearer to the city and on the south side.

It would be terrible if funding was cut from private schools, I hope in the next decade there will be more private schools popping up in the suburbs, not less.

 

[NewOrder]

At present, the Federal Government is reviewing school funding models through its Gonski review.

http://www.news.com.au/national/private-school-funding-boosting-profits/story-e6frfkvr-1226123590121


Stories like this are a bit skewered, because these elite private schools are in no way related to non-government independent schools who serve low SES students - many of whom KEEP THEIR FEES LOW to maintain their enrolements of students (I know this from first hand experience).

An example of the tone of the debate is to be found in the comments here:

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2823364.html


So, in round figures, most private schools charge about $6,000 per student in fees, and the Federal taxpayer chips in about $5,000 per student ($11,000)
State school students get $12,000 of funding (mostly state).
Where is the scandal? Can ASFers comment on this?

The real scandal is teacher/parent/ student low expectations and rates of illiteracy that many students leave high school with.

I tell my students that if I accept a low standard of work from them, that is more of a comment on what I think about them. If their friends, parents and themselves will not have high expectations of them, then I bloody well will. And it truly makes all the difference. The high level of work I have recieved in return since I began my thinking in this area has been rewarding. I know what my students are capable of, and that is what I want from them. They feel better, I feel better. And they get a great education.




This clip is seriously worth 11 minutes and 41 seconds of your life.

Cheers
Brad

Hi

I am not sure where your figures have come from but apart from Catholic schools (which I don't put under the private system label) none of the Private schools I know of in Melbourne charge $6k.
We pay $20k and $14k for the Highschooler and Primary kid respectively.

That said I am all for Private education but only because the alternative is not what I want for my kids. We looked at the supposedly top public high schools in Melbourne and even though my son was offered 3 out of zone placements we still went with the private option.

The whole funding debate has been DTD. The Govt funds both systems to a degree, those of us that want more pay the extra. It is simple.

 

[Starcraftmazter]

All I have to say is, RSA continues to impress.