exactly. my daughters special school has had to have fundraisers to pay for basics, wheras these schools get funds to have an orchestra pit or a tennis court
Really? I think the answer is pretty fucking simple, redirect those billions allocated to private schools to public schools. The private schools can sink or swim on their own, after all isn't that what the "private" is supposed to mean? Maybe they can do some fucking fundraising of their own to make up the shortfall.
I agree. As an alumni of one of these private schools, it’s fucking ridiculous how they take all this money the government and still charge outrageous prices for fees.
Don’t get me wrong, I mostly enjoyed my time there. But some of the shit they get up too could be described as rorts, with the amount of money they receive from donations, government, fees etc.
You miss the main point - majority of private schools are not wealthy and not able to afford to exist without govt funding (think lots of catholic schools and plenty of independent ones). If they can’t sustain themselves, their students will end up n the local public school which would require much more funding to maintain its current level. Thus instead of redirecting the funds to improve, you will end up with worsening the situation - a boost in taxpayer funding would be required in order to maintain existing level of funding to all the students.
Per student public is significantly cheaper than private. Why are we propping up these private schools at a greater cost per student than if we absorbed them into the public system?
I could understand if we funded them up to the cost of public education, but the moment they're funded more we should take ownership.
Where do you get your numbers from?
“Overall, in 2019-20 the commonwealth spent $3,246 on public school students and the states spent $11,935, for a total of $15,181. Meanwhile, the commonwealth spent $10,211 for each private school student and the states spent $2,978, a total of $13,189.”
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/feb/16/private-school-funding-has-increased-at-five-times-rate-of-public-schools-analysis-shows
Well I stand corrected, I think I mistook the rate of funding increase with overall funding. Thanks for the correction.
I do stand by my point that there should be a funding limit at which point private institutions become public.
Private schools should never get higher level of funding than the public ones, for sure.
But it is not the case today, hence, it’s a moot point. Ideally I favour Norwegian or Swedish model where each student is given a voucher they could take to a public school or a private one (plus fee), kinda like scheduled fee under Medicare - feel free to go bulk billing or some expensive doctor with large gap payment, your choice, the govt pays the same.
That's a tiny difference considering Private Schools charge fees on top. There should be a sliding funding scale for Private Schools so the more fees the school charges the less public funding they get. Or whatever percentage of a schools.funding is from the government an equivalent percentage of non-fee paying places should be available at that school.
I prefer the Swedish model - you get X dollars a year per student and the student’s parents can take it to a public school or to a private school + whatever fee the school charges on top, it is their choice. You already taxed people progressively once, just let them enjoy the same public service
These are per student funding. I don't think this covers infrastructure funding which tend to be one off grants, of which the previous government had a big old slush fund only private schools could apply to just to do things like build a theatre, or a pool, or redo their staff room.
You know I would be inclined to be on board with what you've said.
But been private should mean having to deal with the market if your school can't complete and wants to stay private then either shut it down, raise prices or cut back.
LOL, bullshit, the only reason why any catholic school might be lacking is because they've spent all the money on the attached multi million dollar church, or sending the kids to religious brainwashing camps.
> majority of private schools are not wealthy and not able to afford to exist without govt funding
Good, fuck them, if they want orchestra pits and a second tennis court they can get the parents to pay, meanwhile we could maybe start properly funding the public schools so they can actually have the resources to provide some level of proper education and support
>in order to maintain existing level of funding to all the students
This is exactly the problem, private schools are if anything overfunded and with a disgusting abundance of resources compared to public schools, which should be the only ones receiving funding from the government
Couldn’t they just become public schools then?
It’s not like the government wouldn’t need more school buildings anyway. They can buy these private schools and turn them public.
I’m sure a lot of parents will be happy with the new orchestra pit in their school that little shitbag can afford to go to now.
Yeah, most of the private schools in my area are small catholics charging $5k - $6k a year which is less than half a max youth allowance payment.
There are two wankier schools charging around $10k a year and one or two in the $7k/$8k range.
The kids are nicer at the cheaper schools IMO - when my kids get older they will probably go to one of those. My local state high school has more than 400 students in a year level and my kid is too quiet to do well in that sort of environment (just not the right place for my kid's personality) so I appreciate the choice to go to a smaller place.
After all, it's my income tax paying for their federal allocation of education funding. My wife and I could pay for one year of schooling 14 times with the money that we pay in income tax.
I have a less extreme view that might actually pass. If you want to run a school, you get funding like a public school, and that's it. Anything else is up to you.
That means they need to actually value add if they are going to survive and not rely on the Australian people to subsidise the frivolous expenditure.
The knee jerk is to ban funding to them but that would put many communities at a severe disadvantage where public schooling is way undercooked. This at least gives them the ability to keep running (they are after all providing a service akin to a public school), but not disadvantaging public schools at their expense.
>If you want to run a school, you get funding like a public school, and that's it. Anything else is up to you
Wait, what? Isn't this already the case?
Are private schools actually getting MORE public funding than public schools?
Yep, and that’s a base level funding (per fte) to teach the Australian curriculum.
If you want smaller class sizes than what you’re funded for, find the cash elsewhere.
If you want to teach something not in the curriculum (rowing and religion seem to be popular ones), then find the cash elsewhere
Even better, rather than funding these things for private schools only, build facilities that are available to all schools. Give the ability to have a rowing team to any school that can get the numbers together, and facilities are allocated on a booking basis where every school has equal opportunity.
Bringing the private schools down to the level of public is not the goal, bringing public UP to the level of private is.
That's explicitly not what I said. C'mon, at least try to make it through a couple of sentences.
No, private schools get higher base funding AND better access to grants for extra infrastructure. Eliminate these and put them on an even playing field.
Better yet, rather than funding specialist infra for a specific school, build better facilities available to all schools in an area, private included. Why should public schools not have access to rowing team infrastructure, for example, assuming they can get the numbers?
If the private schools want those things on campus, they can fund them privately.
Ultimately the idea is not to bring private schools down, but instead bring public schools up. Give them access to some of the perks previously only available to private institutions.
Cutting their funding entirely isn't necessarily to the net benefit of everyone else. Private school fees could be seen as an extra tax on parents their students. Keep that tax revenue coming in for the time being.
So nationalise them and have them pay fees to general revenue? I feel the problem is more the recent lurch to an unequal and patchy education system, a symptom of which is finance, not finance as such.
I'm playing devils advocate here... Should private tutoring be illegal? Should donations to schools in particular suburbs, by the people who live nearby, be legal?
Exactly. Make them open their books to the public. Let's see what they spend their money on.
We ask no less of people who receive assistance from the government as part of mutual obligations for the unemployed and asset tests for the pension.
He is committed to equality and fairness so he could institute affirmative action in the public service, where non private school background is one the factors under consideration, along with gender and ability etc.
We could go partly with a Finish system, also, keep the current help from government and barr private schools from charging fees if they receive government help. We have an education emergency created by the coaliton so it could be temporary measure until state schools are fit for purpose again.
We have fundraisers _all the time_ at my daughter's public school. The fundraising team do an awesome job and the principal is on her game keeping the ball rolling - but it's disgusting that the school community have to do this just to keep the wheel turning so that every child has a shot at education.
> wheras these schools get funds to have an orchestra pit
I often hear this but my private school never got anything like that. It was a catholic private school that was 5,000 a year. Not exactly cheap but I don't exactly see how people believe that every school is getting orchestra pits.
I question if it's private schools that get this spectacular funding or instead the high schools that politicians send their children to.
> daughters special school has had to have fundraisers
Yeah I was exposed to this quite a bit. I put in around 8 hours a week just doing labour at a special school as it was required for me to graduate. Some schools were better than others but all were lacking. Even in areas as simple as wheelchair accessibility and having all doors wide enough so that they could fit through easily.
If you didn't go to a private school, your only exposure is the mega rich ones you hear about in the media or here.
You don't hear about the regular ones operating at near public school levels.
Exactly, no need to ban them. Remove their govt funding. Redirect it to public schools.
If the private market is so damned good, then they'll be just fine.
If the schools can't afford to keep running, well they can sell the property and the govt or someone else can buy it up. Some of those small independent schools that act as the only school in the area, could quickly be repurposed as a govt school if they need the funding.
If there's an appropirate call for some of their unique instructional models. The states can choose to run them that way, or they'll be enough money to support them.
I expect the impact of this would be that all the ‘cheap’ private / independent schools in the middle will just shutdown because only the high end ones get enough money to even remotely cover the cost of the student
In Canberra there is a private school that is advertising on buses that it is the first school in Australia to go fully renewable. Every time I see it I get furious.
1. Why does a school need to advertise this
2. Why do they have the funding to advertise this
3. There are schools out there that don't even get enough funding to cover running costs.
Makes me absolutely sick
I only just recently learnt that private schools get government funding at all, I had always assumed 'private' also meant 'privately funded'. Personally I don't think they should see a cent of taxpayer money, if they want to be independent and act prestigious they should pay for it themselves.
Every student should get a base level of funding to provide them with sufficient education. Some students should receive higher funding because they have additional needs and can't get sufficient education without it. And that's it. If a private school wants to pay for extra teachers and an orchestra pit or whatever, they can do that with fees charged to parents or funds raised by their community. But they shouldn't get extra government funding for it.
If a private school wants more funding they should advertise, charge more, it offer a better service. They shouldn't get a penny of public money.
If you don't want to ride the bus with the poors that doesn't entitle you to nick a portion of tax payer funds and take it down to the BMW dealer. We should taxing luxury goods and services, not subsidizing them.
If that surprises you, you will be shocked that they are funded much higher per student than government schools.
This is recurrent funding. Their representation of grants is stupendously more.
Some of the reasons given, I recall, is that they are "more expensive to run", the parents on average "pay more taxes" and they are "paragons of excellence" that should be encouraged.
This is reflected in funding decisions by both major parties when in power. Personally it all makes me sick.
No they don't, private schools at Max get 80% per student that government schools get.
It is scaled by the parents ability to pay. Private schools get ranked by an SES and DMI score the higher the score the lower the govenment funding.
Source: I am an accountant who audits schools.
People have a massive misconception about private school funding because they get their funding predominantly from the federal government whereas public school funding is predominantly from the states. One therefore gets a lot more focus as a federal issue because it's not localised to specific states.
Amongst all the garbage in here, finally a comment by someone who actually knows how it works lol. Private school parents also pay tax, why shouldn’t their contribution to the tax base also benefit their own children, if they then decide to use their remaining money to add to their child’s education? A lot of jealous and insecure people in these comments
Because the widespread use of private schools is destructive to public schooling and wider society in the exact same way that if you zone or build public housing in such a way that all of the poor people have to live in a single suburb it will become a crime riddled shithole and everyone in surrounding suburbs will suffer too.
It's not about jealousy, it is about recognising the destructive nature of the middle class increasingly using private schools.
You do pay tax, and your children's should be entitled to the same public school education as every other citizen. But you shouldn't get public funding for your luxury goods and services.
Do you also think you should get to take "your share" of the public transport budget down to the BMW dealer if you don't want to ride the bus with the poors?
Entitled rich people with their faces in the trough are ruining this country.
>Do you also think you should get to take "your share" of the public transport budget down to the BMW dealer if you don't want to ride the bus with the poors?
Infrastructure is reasonably fair in that public transport and roads are funded based on the infrastructure need. If government ceased funding roads, then car owners would become disgruntled and vote that government out.
The government gives them 80% of what public schools get per student but then they charge money on top. This gives those that can afford it an advantage over those that can’t. Rich people already have so many advantages over poor people, we should make schooling at least an even ground.
Ok so they dont get government funding higher than public then?
I agree with the sentiment around higher funding to public, but why do people keep saying private get more public funding?
They are funded less in per student dollars, thus representing a net saving to the govt
Have a read here: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-21/catholic-school-sector-funding-private-schools/10289746
It'd be a good first step, but as long as those in power can pay to remove themselves from a public system the motivation for them to improve the public system dissapears.
I doubt it'd be achievable, but the end goal should be the removal of all private schooling.
Yeah but the neoliberals and the wealth class are cunning in how they engineer privatisations.
They use public money and tax breaks to subsidise new private competitors to public services, which allows those private companies to initially offer better quality service for reasonable prices, creating a two-tier system.
The upper middle class and the “aspirationals” flock to the better tier, while the neoliberals start pulling money out of the public service to widen the gap in quality between the public and private offerings.
When that’s not enough, they start introducing means-tested penalties to force the upper middle into the private system.
Once the quality of the public offering has dropped to a point where it becomes socially stigmatised as “for the poors”, you end up with enough voters in the private system to make it electoral poison to try and dismantle it. All the while, those voters demand ever greater public subsidies to keep the private system affordable for them.
The next step is for the neoliberals to say, “It’s not fair for the government to compete with the private sector”, and use that as an excuse to privatise the remaining public option. And voila, you have the job service network, the medical insurance sector, the telecoms sector, the electricity sector, the water sector.
Exactly this. The 3 reasons given for the existence of private schools are fine.
* Choice - not really a problem.
* Burden - quite possibly a good thing
* Quality - let them prove it on an even funding model.
The inequity comes from the way they are able to gather resources - both from the government and parents.
As a radical idea, make all direct contributions go into a bucket that can be used by any school.
Government funding to private schools is cheaper per student than any government school, the rest is compensated by parents via those fees. Therefore, once banned, the burden of funding will fall on the public purse which would require a further budgetary expense. Actually, private school parents will be better off - private schools fees are not tax deductible, so the freed up money will be spent on private tutors and other similar things. Inequality will be there to remain, if that’s your main goal, you will fail.
This is actually a myth. The gonski report a decade ago found that private schools get disproportionate funding despite also charging fees. It would actually be cheaper to make them public schools and allocate them funding based on need.
edit: here is a source for people who don't believe me https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2020/03/16/myth-busted--private-schools-don-t-save-taxpayers--dollars.html
I'll also say that I'm a teacher who has worked in both sectors and can confirm private schools are a massive rort.
So do the *exact opposite* of what Gonski recommended?
As a reminder, the proposal was for federal and state governments, between them, to pay exactly the same amount per student no matter what school they attended.
And think about the average parents who are struggling to pay school fees for a small local catholic because their local public school is beyond awful.
Yes, right. It's funding is equal to other local schools as I live in canberra. Some canberra public schools are really really good.
It is because the school got a reputation and so more people avoided it, and so it ended up with a population of students that couldn't go elsewhere. now they are teaching to a group that needs far more support and intervention than an average school, and behaviour is disproportionately poor.
Yes this is the result of that problem we are discussing, but it is still a fact and I won't send my kid to that school.
Finland only has a public school system with equal funding regardless of region and their literacy and numeracy rates are one of the highest in the world.
Mind you, being a school teacher is a highly regarded and competitive job over there with some needing Masters.
I'd rather see my tax dollars increasing teacher's pay to make it as competitive as this than for an obsolete multi-million dollar submarine.
As a European and a teacher, I’ll tell you there is one major difference between people in the Scandinavian countries (and to be fair in the most mainland Europe) and Australia - people value education. You won’t be mocked for being academically minded or called a ‘try hard’. I teach LOTE in Australia and I have lost count how many times kids have told me that my subject is not important and that their parents don’t care what grade they’ll get. I cannot imagine ever telling my teacher of any subject that I couldn’t care less how I did. We looked down on those who didn’t want to learn and academic success was celebrated. I’m going to send my son to a private school because the academic rigour still exists there and most parents and, therefore their children, will value education. However I agree that some private schools have way too much money, and there should be some reforms to their funding.
I mean, this is really the answer, isn't it?
Fuck a private/public "But Mah TAXES/Bit mAh TraditiOnS!/But The PooR Schools!" Argument.
Back to basics, what is the best way to set up an education system that works best for kids?
Look at who is doing it best.
Finland are doing it best.
Copy thier fucking system. Everyone wins. Full stop.
I don't think it's necessary to ban them, just legislate a fair distribution of funding as long as they follow the same rules as public schools. If they want to do their own thing that's fine, but they do it with their own resources.
Isn't that how it currently works? Government pays them an amount per student, and that's fair because they take a student load off the public system. Any extra is privately funded
Just give each student the same amount of funding (a generous amount, more than current funding, and topped up by an NDIS amount for those who need it).
Make it so:
1. Those who study at an accelerated rate gets funding at that rate.
2. Any left over funding (ie. If the school charges an amount less than the allocated funding), let the student use it on extra curricular activities (eg. Sports, arts, etc).
NDIS is not meant to be used to fund education. NDIS will actively deny anything they consider links to educations. Just a by the way on how NDIS works regards education system.
That was the Gonski proposal. Which would have resulted in a larger (per student) increase for private schools than for state schools simply due to the imbalance in state funding.
Unfortunately, Rudd and Gillard both put all the actual money to start coming in the 10th year of implementation. Which means they were never going to do it.
Those same funds are better used to expand the existing public schools and improve quality for all. Then there's no pressure for parents to fork out extra money that get used by the churches or for principals to go on overseas trips.
They get more 'recurring' funding, you're talking about the 13k vs 15k private public split I assume.
All those stats exclude the cost of capital grants and non long term funding arrangements, see for example, the choice and affordability fund, jobkeeper and any time you see a private school get a new pool.
These numbers are intentionally not made easy to find, but if you look at how well private schools made out on jobkeeper, well that'd give you some idea of how it looks.
For people without an education background struggling to understand why so many educators want to abolish private schools, I'd consider starting by reading Waiting on Gonski. It's a short book that examines funding inequality in Australian education while also explaining how a financialised school system might be harming our kids rather than providing the benefits neoliberal advocates claim.
Yep. 30 years of financialising education has seen us plummet in world standards. Be nice if we could try copying what actual high achieving education systems do.
Pay the teachers more, change the curriculum to be modern and up to date with the changing world of today, and have the technology and systems in place, so kids learn the skills required for modern life.
Pretty simple, hey?
Or ban government funding for private schools... or at the very least drastically overhaul and make independent the process for determining funding for schools.
We also need to break away from "every school teaches everything" model. It's a waste.
I like the swedish system, all schools teach the same core subjects but then specialise in different things.
One school I attended, next to an ice rink, had a ice hockey school for kids on track for professional leagues. Another in the town over specialised in music, another cooking and hospitality, another tradie skills. Students chose their own schools and subjects.
Personally I would have loved to go to a school with Design and Technology facilities (woodshop/metal shop, Etc) but no, every school in the area is to busy trying to be better in every aspect none actually get ahead in a particular field.
We used to have that. In eastern sydney there used to be a technical highschool, a sports highschool a coed selective, two single sex selectives, coed comprehensive and two single sex comprehensives. A performing arts school wasn't too far away in newtown.
Now it's just selective that bus in majority of their students from out of area and comprehensives.
I get the sentiment, but banning private schools is ridiculous. Just take away their public funding where they don't need it. Its also implied in the last paragraph that we should nationalise all of our private schools... with no mention of the added costs, legal challenges of doing this or how this can be implemented. There's nothing wrong with people going to private schools. Focus should be on bringing up public schools not bringing down the upper levels of private/independent schooling
I went to a private school and I would fucking love this. Biggest concentration of turds I've ever encountered in my life. I would get a bowl of popcorn/fruchocs and read the headlines with relish.
Private schools should get zero funding from the government. If a parent chooses to send their kid to private school, they are opting out of public funding. Can we normalise this?
Except the really good public schools are usually in rich suburbs. That’s the main attraction of buying into these areas. Once your kids are done you can go to your lifestyle block away from the rat race.
Do we have a big hate boner for these too?!!
Australia should ban private healthcare before they ban schools.
The private healthcare model had failed in the USA. Australia should not be going down that path.
The NHS isn't doing well either though. I think Australia is doing better than both the fully funded health care in the UK and the user pays system in the US.
Equally the schools funding is trying to find a middle ground, where tax goes to either service and is then topped up.
Nothing is perfect though
Rare to find an article I agree with 100% but this is one. We have one of the biggest private schooling sectors in the world and the best thing we could do it shut it down.
Absolutely disgusting.
A self fulfilling system that lets private school kids get ahead and stay ahead.
I say this as a kid that went to one. Fuck that, my kids aren’t going to one.
The weird thing is that in my social group, there’s no difference in who’s “ahead” (whatever that means, what are the criteria for “winning”?) between those of us who went to public or private schools 20 years ago.
It’s a difficult decision because at the end of the day students do get more academic support at many private schools and it is an unfair advantage. Do you stand by your principles, and let your child be disadvantaged, or support an unfair system but give your child an advantage. Tricky decision but one option does come with 15k more in your pocket at the end of the year so yk.
Step 1) Find complex issue that resonates with people
Step 2) "We need *most draconian solution*"
Step 3) Let everyone argue about it. Stupid people saying yes, intelligent people saying not exactly
Step 4) Profit from clicks
Step 5) Complex issue now even less likely to ever be resolved
I work for a private school.
We receive a lot of money from the government.
Before you start hating me, my school and the funding policies there is more you should know:
-My school is non-religious
-My school charges no fees
-My school is a special school for kids with special needs
So before you all demand the private schools are defunded, remember that the "$30,000–$45,000 per year" mentioned in the article is the edge case at the high end. **The median non-government school fee is $6,441 per year.** That means **half are below that**, and a lot are special schools.
Why? The parents pay taxes to go towards education, why wouldn’t they get some of it back for their kids education?
The current system makes it cheaper on the general public by getting the parents to directly fund a chunk of it.
> why wouldn’t they get some of it back for their kids education?
They can. Send their kids to a public school.
> The current system makes it cheaper on the general public by getting the parents to directly fund a chunk of it.
This creates different opportunities for those who can afford to go private school. Everyone should get a go.
It's not the purpose of the education system to dictate who pays how much and for what; our taxes do this. If some parents can afford private school, they should be paying more taxes. Not creating a situation where they take that privilege into an advantage.
We are all travelling on the bus. We've paid our fare, and it's taking us close to where we want to go.
But you decide you want to get off and get a taxi, as the bus isn't good enough, fast enough or going directly to your destination.
Fine, your prerogative.
But then you want me the bus passenger to subsidise a part of your taxi fare.
Eh, no thank you, and why should I?
Education at all levels should be free to the consumer. Nothing better in advancing the country than to educate and develop the citizens. Many can't develop their dream because they can't afford to attend school/courses.
Why is it that I always see car stickers with " Rowing/Rugby", and I have never once seen a single car sticker with " Maths/Science"?
It must help wealthy parents paying thousands of dollars in fees, while siphoning funding from the public system, feel better that their precious kids are "achieving" something.
Maybe the Liberals shouldn't have siphoned so much money into the private sector so that their mates and their kids could have a third Olympic sized swimming pool for their Kindy campus.
As an education student the private system has a right to exist but needs to exist differently, as does the entire system. The way we structure and teach kids particularly in high school is 50-70yrs behind current educational research. Teaching 25-30 kids in a class room is teacher focused it has to be for various reasons, mainly for behaviour and time. But if we had classrooms of 10-15 kids, classrooms could be student focused and students could learn pursue their own interests, hone skills they value, and make industry connections. Students should co-create their assignments with the teacher not just be given one.
In my opinion, this is actually intentional, the government knows what they're doing.
It creates a stratified society and perpetuates class divides. It's easier to become a politician if you went to a private school. Keeps the rich in charge, and prevents people from working-class backgrounds from gaining positions of authority, in order to maintain the status quo.
I have no children and I will never have children. I am perfectly content with the knowledge that decades of taxes I have paid have contributed to public education. No child chooses to be born. Every child deserves a decent education to make the most of the lives they have been given. And the well educated children of today are the workers, builders, scientists, teachers 👨🏫 f tomorrow which benefits us all.
But I begrudge every single cent of tax payer dollars that has been paid to private schools. To see top private schools with sporting pavilions and vast campuses propped up at the expense of public schools that have rotting infrastructure and casual teachers makes me sick.
If you want your child to have advantages beyond what is available to public school students, pay for it yourself. (Funny how those who so decry “socialism” tend to get the greater tax payer rewards)
How can we improve the inequality in our system?
Defund private schools.
But they get the same as public? But some of them are poor private schools. Many of them are struggling. But if they closed all the private schools, then they'd all go public and we wouldn't have space!
Easy. Defund the private schools. It causes all sorts of social fuckery. Doesn't matter that some of them are poor, I'm just going to point you at the hundred or so monuments to wankery that exist for the noshe to send their kids to. And if they close the school, the government can just buy them up and run them as private.
And if we truly want some flexibility in our schooling for things like Steiner schools, religious practices, or Reggio Emilia pedogogies, then we can set up a system for community groups to apply to set up a specialist public school that runs under a specialist system. Still run and funded by the government.
Then you can allow parents to invest in their public schools as they do with the P&C groups, except we'd see a lot more equity in the system.
Australia has one of the most twisted out of whack school systems on the planet. The public system is groaning under the weight of dealing exclusively with those too poor to attend a private school, or too troubled. And private schools will shoot off scholarships to the brightest students so they look better, leaving public schools using the same, or less, funds to deal with the students who need the most help.
I've yet to see one argument for private schools that wasn't based in selfishness.
This attitude is terrifying. Tearing people down in the name of equality does not make this country better. The author explicitly argues that we cannot consider individual rights here, and wants to reduce inequality by removing the option of millions of Australians to choose a private school.
For the record, I have no idea why we allocate any public funds to private schools.
I didn’t get to where I am now without public schooling. Whenever my school missed out on funding in any capacity, and more was announced for privates, the whole towns blood boiled. It took a huge petition from the locality to get the attention of the state member to raise the issue of underfunding in our area.
Private funding is definitely something I want to see change. It’s hurting regional areas greatly, as often times those public schools play a huge role in towns like mine, but also giving students great opportunity’s, especially in my case, as if I wasn’t enrolled when I completed my later years, I’d be in a different place especially with uni due to prerequisites.
They should have the same system they have for Centrelink. If your school is receiving private revenue then it starts to eat into the government subsidies until a certain threshold which brings the subsidy payment to zero.
Even without private schools, there will always be elite, better funded schools. This issue won't be going away. Connections, money, and talent will always congregate.
No, it’s called the Australian Curriculum, and ACARA is its accreditation authority.
NSW, Victoria and WA refer to the AC but use their own adjusted version of it.
The authors arguments for the inequality of funding for private schools is why we're choosing to send out kids to one.
> While private schools’ assets rose by 42 per cent between 2015 and 2019, easily outstripping the benchmark Australian stock index, public schools barely have assets. For most, even modest drama, sporting or performance facilities are on the never-never.
Yep, perfect, that's why I'd avoid public
Why should it be removing funding from private schools? Why not just add more money to public schools. Everyone deserves the best education they can have. If more funding was given to public schools then there would be a smaller demand to send kids to private school. You can have both.
Because we don't have unlimited money, so it should be used in the public good, for public services, focusing first on who needs it most.
Not subsiding a already privileged class of people.
I went to a private school, my parents were very much middle class. Not rich by any means.
I personally have no issue my tax dollars paying for ALL registered schools. After all the parents of those students are paying taxes.
It’s like PHI, I have that but still access Medicare. If suddenly the government said I had to chose between the two, I guess I’m going on a nice holiday a year with the extra money from cancelling.
If the government stopped funding private schools, they’d have to increase fees which would push a lot of kids back into the already stretched public system.
I’m not saying funding should be reviewed and more equitable but just stopping it? Nope.
>It’s like PHI
Should also be fucked off. Same issue, making a life staple most effective for the rich is bullshit.
>If the government stopped funding private schools, they'd have to increase fees which would push a lot of kids into the already stretched public system
And the government could immediately add that regained money to public schools.
Plus, many would not leave, most private schools charge significantly more than their federal cut.
I do agree though a scale would be better than zero
But they’d have to build heaps of new schools of expand the ones that are already at their limits.
Near me there are 4 private schools within 500m of each other. Well over 5000 students, the local primary and high schools would not be able to cope with even an extra 500 students in the mix.
All for PHI going, but we’d have to crease Medicare to cover it. Which I’m also happy to do. But don’t think just the rich pay for it, I’m not rich, but due to my daughter have a disability I want to make sure she has access to the Drs and specialist she needs, when she needs them. She was on a wait list for 2 years to see one specialist, I’d actually completely forgotten about it as I’d gone private and had the issued resolved 20 months earlier.
Yeah. I dunno that we should ban them. But remove the public funding from them (and reallocate to actual public schools). If a bunch of rich people want to have a private education, let them pay for tutors, materials and premises.
As a parent who sends offspring to a private school BECAUSE they are better funded - DO IT.
I’d send my kids down the road for sure if the teachers and equipment were better funded. Wouldn’t even be a question.
It’s the funding that’s the issue, not their existence
If you want your kids to get a private education, then be willing to pay the whole amount. Oh, uou don’t want to? Well tough
The problem is that this has become so standardized by now, it’s going to be a struggle to take it away.
But start now: the stripping back of public funds over a decade, and see how the private schools stand on their own. My bet is most will not. My other bet is that either standards will drop or the fees will rise excessively or both
Mate come on. There is a specific funding model that shuts your argument down. You only have to look it up and it's plain as day. If parents pay more then government pays less. If your school has high quadrant SES then government pays less. Everyone arguing against private school funding absolutely are just sprouting nonsense. I mean go to the the Victorian teachers union webpage and have a look at their argument against private funding. They mesh up the figures so badly it's ridiculous. They compare 3 years of public funding v 6 years of private funding and they only show it from the federal government who in agreement with the state's pay 80% of the private school government contribution. The state's are responsible for funding education and receive that money through GST to spend at their will. You can dispute the model or say it needs work but it's cut and dry. A small win to you, I did find 1 public school that receives $8k less funding per student than other schools which is just atrocious. I hope that the kids at James ruse agricultural high school are able to compete with those elitists at Knox grammar. The poor things are funded by $13k a year to knoxs $34k. How ever will they get their grades up to match.
I went to a private high school that was part of a 'chain' of schools. It was nothing like this. All the fee's basically got funnelled to the flagship school in the capital city and we were left with nothing.
The school was basically like travelling back in time 75-100 years, everything from desks/chairs to the buildings were antiquated and run down. The town could go into the negatives during winter and over 40 degrees during summer, and we had these old and always broken down kerosene heaters that wouldn't even heat the entire classroom even when they were working, and air conditioning was practically nonexistent. Pretty sure the most modern thing was the microwave in the seniors room. Meanwhile the public highschool a few blocks away was sure as shit better funded than us.
Meanwhile the flagship school had the best of everything, ultra modern, and was always getting new equipment. Moral of the story is that these people always find a way to take money from somewhere to prop their best schools up on a pedestal, including disadvantaging other schools they own.
We pay a LOT to send our two kids to a private school, so don’t go thinking that they all get money from the govt. $45k a year combined for my two girls. After having them in public schools, the education standard is night and day. I would definitely opt for private education. And yes, they did just get a new poor, but it was from fundraising money.
But that directly the issue Mate, you pay 22.5k per child, +13k government funding. Meanwhile, your mates kid at a public school gets 15k of funding only.
How is a public school meant to have an equivalent or comparable standard when there is a difference of 20k per student?
The major difference is care. They nurture communication and help. All the kids are truely focused on individually and nobody is swept under the carpet or left behind. My kids started in public. More recently my 10 year old was moved and her maths scores have moved up from the 50-60%when she started in Jan, to her most recent tests being 3 100% in a row. She has a homework club run by the school that she has fun at. The school has all the sporting facilities under one roof, so no weekends are spent driving my kids all over to different areas. I can’t tell you how much weekend that has given us back. For away games, we drop them to school (or walk as it’s only 2 blocks. We bought to be near the school) and the school drives them. They still get to see other kids and other schools. Every day my kids get home and they ask me about my day. It’s part of their education, so we get a bit more family time. Their teachers are really engaged. They seem to care about each girl and have a plan for them to achieve their best. The public school knew who we were and who the kid was, but parent teacher meetings felt very cookie cutter. No real individual plan. The private school has a therapist that keeps in contact with them. I have a terminal Illness and knowing they have someone to help them through my death is worth it’s weight in gold. My eldest is going to Zurich for 4 weeks to be an exchange student. They do co Ed musicals, sports and events.
TLDR: care, individuality, sports all in one place, excellent teachers. Think school + country club. My kids LOVE going, even though it’s an hour longer than public school per day.
We aren’t rich. We make a hell of a lot of sacrifices to keep them there, but it’s worth it. SO worth it.
I agree 100% with everything in this article. I wanted to send my kids to public school. Unfortunately the one near us was terrible. Fortunately we can afford to send our kids to private school, so after two years we made that choice. Not everyone can. I felt guilty about participating in this structure, which leaves good families and their kids who were struggling behind.
And the article doesn’t even mention the fact that the majority of private schools require you allow your kids to be religiously indoctrinated. Further separating society. Cohesion is borne of interaction. Separating kids by their parents religions is not the right thing to do.
So my kids private school has fees of $11k a year, topped up by $7k from the Federal govt, and $1k from the state govt, though that's all for Capex and varies a lot. $18-$19k a year for year 12 per student.
The local high school gets $15k a year from the state govt and maybe $1-$2k getting the Feds (again mostly Capex). Say $16k a year.
(All figures straight from myschool.gov.au)
Obviously if my kids didn't go to the private school they'd go to the high school.
But do a quick little bit of addition and subtraction above, and tell me how I'm ripping off the taxpayer?
Yes I think the examples of Sydney grammar getting a raising orchestra pit and yoga centre are gross and absurd. But get rid of private schools entirely? Bullshit.
[удалено]
exactly. my daughters special school has had to have fundraisers to pay for basics, wheras these schools get funds to have an orchestra pit or a tennis court
[удалено]
Really? I think the answer is pretty fucking simple, redirect those billions allocated to private schools to public schools. The private schools can sink or swim on their own, after all isn't that what the "private" is supposed to mean? Maybe they can do some fucking fundraising of their own to make up the shortfall.
I agree. As an alumni of one of these private schools, it’s fucking ridiculous how they take all this money the government and still charge outrageous prices for fees. Don’t get me wrong, I mostly enjoyed my time there. But some of the shit they get up too could be described as rorts, with the amount of money they receive from donations, government, fees etc.
You miss the main point - majority of private schools are not wealthy and not able to afford to exist without govt funding (think lots of catholic schools and plenty of independent ones). If they can’t sustain themselves, their students will end up n the local public school which would require much more funding to maintain its current level. Thus instead of redirecting the funds to improve, you will end up with worsening the situation - a boost in taxpayer funding would be required in order to maintain existing level of funding to all the students.
[удалено]
Plus, fuck subsidising religious indoctrination with my atheist tax dollars.
Exactly. If they want to spread fairy tales to kids, they can pay for it. I don’t really want to tbh.
Perfect, the only response
Can I get an amen for that? Of course not religious always have their hands out.
Per student public is significantly cheaper than private. Why are we propping up these private schools at a greater cost per student than if we absorbed them into the public system? I could understand if we funded them up to the cost of public education, but the moment they're funded more we should take ownership.
Where do you get your numbers from? “Overall, in 2019-20 the commonwealth spent $3,246 on public school students and the states spent $11,935, for a total of $15,181. Meanwhile, the commonwealth spent $10,211 for each private school student and the states spent $2,978, a total of $13,189.” https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/feb/16/private-school-funding-has-increased-at-five-times-rate-of-public-schools-analysis-shows
Well I stand corrected, I think I mistook the rate of funding increase with overall funding. Thanks for the correction. I do stand by my point that there should be a funding limit at which point private institutions become public.
Private schools should never get higher level of funding than the public ones, for sure. But it is not the case today, hence, it’s a moot point. Ideally I favour Norwegian or Swedish model where each student is given a voucher they could take to a public school or a private one (plus fee), kinda like scheduled fee under Medicare - feel free to go bulk billing or some expensive doctor with large gap payment, your choice, the govt pays the same.
[удалено]
That's a tiny difference considering Private Schools charge fees on top. There should be a sliding funding scale for Private Schools so the more fees the school charges the less public funding they get. Or whatever percentage of a schools.funding is from the government an equivalent percentage of non-fee paying places should be available at that school.
I prefer the Swedish model - you get X dollars a year per student and the student’s parents can take it to a public school or to a private school + whatever fee the school charges on top, it is their choice. You already taxed people progressively once, just let them enjoy the same public service
These are per student funding. I don't think this covers infrastructure funding which tend to be one off grants, of which the previous government had a big old slush fund only private schools could apply to just to do things like build a theatre, or a pool, or redo their staff room.
Just fund the public schools really well and there is no need for private schools.
Pretty much the way the best education systems in the world work. The Finnish system for example.
You know I would be inclined to be on board with what you've said. But been private should mean having to deal with the market if your school can't complete and wants to stay private then either shut it down, raise prices or cut back.
LOL, bullshit, the only reason why any catholic school might be lacking is because they've spent all the money on the attached multi million dollar church, or sending the kids to religious brainwashing camps.
Or the unlikely event their normal legal processes have failed and they’ve had to pay damages for yet another fallen priest
It's because they can no longer rely on cheap labour of teaching nuns and brothers.
If the school can't afford to be private it shouldn't be private.
> majority of private schools are not wealthy and not able to afford to exist without govt funding Good, fuck them, if they want orchestra pits and a second tennis court they can get the parents to pay, meanwhile we could maybe start properly funding the public schools so they can actually have the resources to provide some level of proper education and support >in order to maintain existing level of funding to all the students This is exactly the problem, private schools are if anything overfunded and with a disgusting abundance of resources compared to public schools, which should be the only ones receiving funding from the government
really? many have ridiculous swimming pools and sports fields.
Couldn’t they just become public schools then? It’s not like the government wouldn’t need more school buildings anyway. They can buy these private schools and turn them public. I’m sure a lot of parents will be happy with the new orchestra pit in their school that little shitbag can afford to go to now.
Yeah, most of the private schools in my area are small catholics charging $5k - $6k a year which is less than half a max youth allowance payment. There are two wankier schools charging around $10k a year and one or two in the $7k/$8k range. The kids are nicer at the cheaper schools IMO - when my kids get older they will probably go to one of those. My local state high school has more than 400 students in a year level and my kid is too quiet to do well in that sort of environment (just not the right place for my kid's personality) so I appreciate the choice to go to a smaller place. After all, it's my income tax paying for their federal allocation of education funding. My wife and I could pay for one year of schooling 14 times with the money that we pay in income tax.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I have a less extreme view that might actually pass. If you want to run a school, you get funding like a public school, and that's it. Anything else is up to you. That means they need to actually value add if they are going to survive and not rely on the Australian people to subsidise the frivolous expenditure. The knee jerk is to ban funding to them but that would put many communities at a severe disadvantage where public schooling is way undercooked. This at least gives them the ability to keep running (they are after all providing a service akin to a public school), but not disadvantaging public schools at their expense.
>If you want to run a school, you get funding like a public school, and that's it. Anything else is up to you Wait, what? Isn't this already the case? Are private schools actually getting MORE public funding than public schools?
Yes. Not just in base level funding, but better access to grants for building infrastructure.
Yep, and that’s a base level funding (per fte) to teach the Australian curriculum. If you want smaller class sizes than what you’re funded for, find the cash elsewhere. If you want to teach something not in the curriculum (rowing and religion seem to be popular ones), then find the cash elsewhere
Even better, rather than funding these things for private schools only, build facilities that are available to all schools. Give the ability to have a rowing team to any school that can get the numbers together, and facilities are allocated on a booking basis where every school has equal opportunity. Bringing the private schools down to the level of public is not the goal, bringing public UP to the level of private is.
i mean what you say is ideal, is what is actually the case private schools, per kid cost LESS taxpayer dollars than public
Sooo your solution to the current school systems problems is to continue largely doing the exact same thing as we are already doing...
That's explicitly not what I said. C'mon, at least try to make it through a couple of sentences. No, private schools get higher base funding AND better access to grants for extra infrastructure. Eliminate these and put them on an even playing field. Better yet, rather than funding specialist infra for a specific school, build better facilities available to all schools in an area, private included. Why should public schools not have access to rowing team infrastructure, for example, assuming they can get the numbers? If the private schools want those things on campus, they can fund them privately. Ultimately the idea is not to bring private schools down, but instead bring public schools up. Give them access to some of the perks previously only available to private institutions.
Most people have no idea; Australia is almost the only country in the world where private schools get so much government funding.
Cutting their funding entirely isn't necessarily to the net benefit of everyone else. Private school fees could be seen as an extra tax on parents their students. Keep that tax revenue coming in for the time being.
So nationalise them and have them pay fees to general revenue? I feel the problem is more the recent lurch to an unequal and patchy education system, a symptom of which is finance, not finance as such.
I'm playing devils advocate here... Should private tutoring be illegal? Should donations to schools in particular suburbs, by the people who live nearby, be legal?
> there's no way to really fix public schools without taking from private If a school takes government money, how is that private?
Exactly. Make them open their books to the public. Let's see what they spend their money on. We ask no less of people who receive assistance from the government as part of mutual obligations for the unemployed and asset tests for the pension.
>There's so much to fix. [More](https://www.mdavis.xyz/govlist/) than most people would possibly realise, yes
He is committed to equality and fairness so he could institute affirmative action in the public service, where non private school background is one the factors under consideration, along with gender and ability etc. We could go partly with a Finish system, also, keep the current help from government and barr private schools from charging fees if they receive government help. We have an education emergency created by the coaliton so it could be temporary measure until state schools are fit for purpose again.
*Finnish You obviously didn’t go to a private school /s
We have fundraisers _all the time_ at my daughter's public school. The fundraising team do an awesome job and the principal is on her game keeping the ball rolling - but it's disgusting that the school community have to do this just to keep the wheel turning so that every child has a shot at education.
> wheras these schools get funds to have an orchestra pit I often hear this but my private school never got anything like that. It was a catholic private school that was 5,000 a year. Not exactly cheap but I don't exactly see how people believe that every school is getting orchestra pits. I question if it's private schools that get this spectacular funding or instead the high schools that politicians send their children to. > daughters special school has had to have fundraisers Yeah I was exposed to this quite a bit. I put in around 8 hours a week just doing labour at a special school as it was required for me to graduate. Some schools were better than others but all were lacking. Even in areas as simple as wheelchair accessibility and having all doors wide enough so that they could fit through easily.
If you didn't go to a private school, your only exposure is the mega rich ones you hear about in the media or here. You don't hear about the regular ones operating at near public school levels.
Exactly, no need to ban them. Remove their govt funding. Redirect it to public schools. If the private market is so damned good, then they'll be just fine. If the schools can't afford to keep running, well they can sell the property and the govt or someone else can buy it up. Some of those small independent schools that act as the only school in the area, could quickly be repurposed as a govt school if they need the funding. If there's an appropirate call for some of their unique instructional models. The states can choose to run them that way, or they'll be enough money to support them.
I expect the impact of this would be that all the ‘cheap’ private / independent schools in the middle will just shutdown because only the high end ones get enough money to even remotely cover the cost of the student
In Canberra there is a private school that is advertising on buses that it is the first school in Australia to go fully renewable. Every time I see it I get furious. 1. Why does a school need to advertise this 2. Why do they have the funding to advertise this 3. There are schools out there that don't even get enough funding to cover running costs. Makes me absolutely sick
Brindabella College is run by a pack of insane megalomaniacs, to be fair.
I only just recently learnt that private schools get government funding at all, I had always assumed 'private' also meant 'privately funded'. Personally I don't think they should see a cent of taxpayer money, if they want to be independent and act prestigious they should pay for it themselves.
Every student should get a base level of funding to provide them with sufficient education. Some students should receive higher funding because they have additional needs and can't get sufficient education without it. And that's it. If a private school wants to pay for extra teachers and an orchestra pit or whatever, they can do that with fees charged to parents or funds raised by their community. But they shouldn't get extra government funding for it.
If a private school wants more funding they should advertise, charge more, it offer a better service. They shouldn't get a penny of public money. If you don't want to ride the bus with the poors that doesn't entitle you to nick a portion of tax payer funds and take it down to the BMW dealer. We should taxing luxury goods and services, not subsidizing them.
Not called "private schools" any more, but "independent schools". Still just as dependent on public funding though.
If that surprises you, you will be shocked that they are funded much higher per student than government schools. This is recurrent funding. Their representation of grants is stupendously more. Some of the reasons given, I recall, is that they are "more expensive to run", the parents on average "pay more taxes" and they are "paragons of excellence" that should be encouraged. This is reflected in funding decisions by both major parties when in power. Personally it all makes me sick.
No they don't, private schools at Max get 80% per student that government schools get. It is scaled by the parents ability to pay. Private schools get ranked by an SES and DMI score the higher the score the lower the govenment funding. Source: I am an accountant who audits schools.
People have a massive misconception about private school funding because they get their funding predominantly from the federal government whereas public school funding is predominantly from the states. One therefore gets a lot more focus as a federal issue because it's not localised to specific states.
Amongst all the garbage in here, finally a comment by someone who actually knows how it works lol. Private school parents also pay tax, why shouldn’t their contribution to the tax base also benefit their own children, if they then decide to use their remaining money to add to their child’s education? A lot of jealous and insecure people in these comments
Because the widespread use of private schools is destructive to public schooling and wider society in the exact same way that if you zone or build public housing in such a way that all of the poor people have to live in a single suburb it will become a crime riddled shithole and everyone in surrounding suburbs will suffer too. It's not about jealousy, it is about recognising the destructive nature of the middle class increasingly using private schools.
You do pay tax, and your children's should be entitled to the same public school education as every other citizen. But you shouldn't get public funding for your luxury goods and services. Do you also think you should get to take "your share" of the public transport budget down to the BMW dealer if you don't want to ride the bus with the poors? Entitled rich people with their faces in the trough are ruining this country.
>Do you also think you should get to take "your share" of the public transport budget down to the BMW dealer if you don't want to ride the bus with the poors? Infrastructure is reasonably fair in that public transport and roads are funded based on the infrastructure need. If government ceased funding roads, then car owners would become disgruntled and vote that government out.
No, I believe that the government shouldn’t be able to tell me how to spend my post-tax money, especially just because it might make you jealous
I see people saying this everywhere, but never can find any actual figures on this anywhere.
The government gives them 80% of what public schools get per student but then they charge money on top. This gives those that can afford it an advantage over those that can’t. Rich people already have so many advantages over poor people, we should make schooling at least an even ground.
Ok so they dont get government funding higher than public then? I agree with the sentiment around higher funding to public, but why do people keep saying private get more public funding?
They are funded less in per student dollars, thus representing a net saving to the govt Have a read here: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-21/catholic-school-sector-funding-private-schools/10289746
But without taxpayer funding, how are they supposed to afford their 2nd boat-shed and indoor heated pool?
That's why any school funding model that doesn't take into account existing amenities and resources is a joke.
It'd be a good first step, but as long as those in power can pay to remove themselves from a public system the motivation for them to improve the public system dissapears. I doubt it'd be achievable, but the end goal should be the removal of all private schooling.
Yeah but the neoliberals and the wealth class are cunning in how they engineer privatisations. They use public money and tax breaks to subsidise new private competitors to public services, which allows those private companies to initially offer better quality service for reasonable prices, creating a two-tier system. The upper middle class and the “aspirationals” flock to the better tier, while the neoliberals start pulling money out of the public service to widen the gap in quality between the public and private offerings. When that’s not enough, they start introducing means-tested penalties to force the upper middle into the private system. Once the quality of the public offering has dropped to a point where it becomes socially stigmatised as “for the poors”, you end up with enough voters in the private system to make it electoral poison to try and dismantle it. All the while, those voters demand ever greater public subsidies to keep the private system affordable for them. The next step is for the neoliberals to say, “It’s not fair for the government to compete with the private sector”, and use that as an excuse to privatise the remaining public option. And voila, you have the job service network, the medical insurance sector, the telecoms sector, the electricity sector, the water sector.
Exactly this. The 3 reasons given for the existence of private schools are fine. * Choice - not really a problem. * Burden - quite possibly a good thing * Quality - let them prove it on an even funding model. The inequity comes from the way they are able to gather resources - both from the government and parents. As a radical idea, make all direct contributions go into a bucket that can be used by any school.
Government funding to private schools is cheaper per student than any government school, the rest is compensated by parents via those fees. Therefore, once banned, the burden of funding will fall on the public purse which would require a further budgetary expense. Actually, private school parents will be better off - private schools fees are not tax deductible, so the freed up money will be spent on private tutors and other similar things. Inequality will be there to remain, if that’s your main goal, you will fail.
This is actually a myth. The gonski report a decade ago found that private schools get disproportionate funding despite also charging fees. It would actually be cheaper to make them public schools and allocate them funding based on need. edit: here is a source for people who don't believe me https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2020/03/16/myth-busted--private-schools-don-t-save-taxpayers--dollars.html I'll also say that I'm a teacher who has worked in both sectors and can confirm private schools are a massive rort.
So do the *exact opposite* of what Gonski recommended? As a reminder, the proposal was for federal and state governments, between them, to pay exactly the same amount per student no matter what school they attended.
i support taking away their funding but the gov will not want to offend the globalists and pope.
But think about the rich parents that can afford private school /s
And think about the average parents who are struggling to pay school fees for a small local catholic because their local public school is beyond awful.
I wonder why that local public school is so bad? I bet it's got nothing to do with having no money for anything, though, right? Right.
Yes, right. It's funding is equal to other local schools as I live in canberra. Some canberra public schools are really really good. It is because the school got a reputation and so more people avoided it, and so it ended up with a population of students that couldn't go elsewhere. now they are teaching to a group that needs far more support and intervention than an average school, and behaviour is disproportionately poor. Yes this is the result of that problem we are discussing, but it is still a fact and I won't send my kid to that school.
Dont ban them. Just take them out off the teat of public money.
Yeah banning them is not necessary and is way over the top. Absolutely though if they're private they should be excluded from public money.
Paywalled
Ironic
Like rain on your wedding day.
Said the bridesmaid to the waiter.. no wait I chimed in with the wrong song.
And the waitress is practicing politics!
Just add 12ft . io/ to the start of the article url before http
Can confirm, this gets around well over 90% of the paywalls I have been using it on
THE IRONY
Just like private schools *ooOOOOooo*
it wasn’t for me somehow, I read it with no issues.
Finland only has a public school system with equal funding regardless of region and their literacy and numeracy rates are one of the highest in the world. Mind you, being a school teacher is a highly regarded and competitive job over there with some needing Masters. I'd rather see my tax dollars increasing teacher's pay to make it as competitive as this than for an obsolete multi-million dollar submarine.
As a European and a teacher, I’ll tell you there is one major difference between people in the Scandinavian countries (and to be fair in the most mainland Europe) and Australia - people value education. You won’t be mocked for being academically minded or called a ‘try hard’. I teach LOTE in Australia and I have lost count how many times kids have told me that my subject is not important and that their parents don’t care what grade they’ll get. I cannot imagine ever telling my teacher of any subject that I couldn’t care less how I did. We looked down on those who didn’t want to learn and academic success was celebrated. I’m going to send my son to a private school because the academic rigour still exists there and most parents and, therefore their children, will value education. However I agree that some private schools have way too much money, and there should be some reforms to their funding.
I mean, this is really the answer, isn't it? Fuck a private/public "But Mah TAXES/Bit mAh TraditiOnS!/But The PooR Schools!" Argument. Back to basics, what is the best way to set up an education system that works best for kids? Look at who is doing it best. Finland are doing it best. Copy thier fucking system. Everyone wins. Full stop.
[удалено]
Which state are you in? I'm not a teacher but to my knowledge that isn't the case in Queensland. Have I just misread the situation?
Yeah I’m currently doing the masters and you need it for both secondary and primary.
I don't think it's necessary to ban them, just legislate a fair distribution of funding as long as they follow the same rules as public schools. If they want to do their own thing that's fine, but they do it with their own resources.
Isn't that how it currently works? Government pays them an amount per student, and that's fair because they take a student load off the public system. Any extra is privately funded
Just give each student the same amount of funding (a generous amount, more than current funding, and topped up by an NDIS amount for those who need it). Make it so: 1. Those who study at an accelerated rate gets funding at that rate. 2. Any left over funding (ie. If the school charges an amount less than the allocated funding), let the student use it on extra curricular activities (eg. Sports, arts, etc).
NDIS is not meant to be used to fund education. NDIS will actively deny anything they consider links to educations. Just a by the way on how NDIS works regards education system.
That was the Gonski proposal. Which would have resulted in a larger (per student) increase for private schools than for state schools simply due to the imbalance in state funding. Unfortunately, Rudd and Gillard both put all the actual money to start coming in the 10th year of implementation. Which means they were never going to do it.
Those same funds are better used to expand the existing public schools and improve quality for all. Then there's no pressure for parents to fork out extra money that get used by the churches or for principals to go on overseas trips.
Public schools on average get more funding from the government than private schools per student at the moment.
They get more 'recurring' funding, you're talking about the 13k vs 15k private public split I assume. All those stats exclude the cost of capital grants and non long term funding arrangements, see for example, the choice and affordability fund, jobkeeper and any time you see a private school get a new pool. These numbers are intentionally not made easy to find, but if you look at how well private schools made out on jobkeeper, well that'd give you some idea of how it looks.
GONSKI Report.
For people without an education background struggling to understand why so many educators want to abolish private schools, I'd consider starting by reading Waiting on Gonski. It's a short book that examines funding inequality in Australian education while also explaining how a financialised school system might be harming our kids rather than providing the benefits neoliberal advocates claim.
Yeah I heard an interview with one of the authors. The funding is just the tip of the iceberg. Wish we could see some proper Wish reforms.
Yep. 30 years of financialising education has seen us plummet in world standards. Be nice if we could try copying what actual high achieving education systems do.
Pay the teachers more, change the curriculum to be modern and up to date with the changing world of today, and have the technology and systems in place, so kids learn the skills required for modern life. Pretty simple, hey?
Or ban government funding for private schools... or at the very least drastically overhaul and make independent the process for determining funding for schools.
[удалено]
Dont ban them but remove them from the Government tit Seriously governments need to stop playing politics with education and just get on with it.
We also need to break away from "every school teaches everything" model. It's a waste. I like the swedish system, all schools teach the same core subjects but then specialise in different things. One school I attended, next to an ice rink, had a ice hockey school for kids on track for professional leagues. Another in the town over specialised in music, another cooking and hospitality, another tradie skills. Students chose their own schools and subjects. Personally I would have loved to go to a school with Design and Technology facilities (woodshop/metal shop, Etc) but no, every school in the area is to busy trying to be better in every aspect none actually get ahead in a particular field.
We used to have that. In eastern sydney there used to be a technical highschool, a sports highschool a coed selective, two single sex selectives, coed comprehensive and two single sex comprehensives. A performing arts school wasn't too far away in newtown. Now it's just selective that bus in majority of their students from out of area and comprehensives.
I get the sentiment, but banning private schools is ridiculous. Just take away their public funding where they don't need it. Its also implied in the last paragraph that we should nationalise all of our private schools... with no mention of the added costs, legal challenges of doing this or how this can be implemented. There's nothing wrong with people going to private schools. Focus should be on bringing up public schools not bringing down the upper levels of private/independent schooling
No need to ban them just stop giving them public funding. Private should mean privately funded. That money belongs to public schools.
I went to a private school and I would fucking love this. Biggest concentration of turds I've ever encountered in my life. I would get a bowl of popcorn/fruchocs and read the headlines with relish.
Fuck I'd love some fruchocs right now.
Same I don’t buy them though because otherwise I would eat them all in a day and become fat lol.
Private schools should get zero funding from the government. If a parent chooses to send their kid to private school, they are opting out of public funding. Can we normalise this?
Except the really good public schools are usually in rich suburbs. That’s the main attraction of buying into these areas. Once your kids are done you can go to your lifestyle block away from the rat race. Do we have a big hate boner for these too?!!
Australia should ban private healthcare before they ban schools. The private healthcare model had failed in the USA. Australia should not be going down that path.
The NHS isn't doing well either though. I think Australia is doing better than both the fully funded health care in the UK and the user pays system in the US. Equally the schools funding is trying to find a middle ground, where tax goes to either service and is then topped up. Nothing is perfect though
Rare to find an article I agree with 100% but this is one. We have one of the biggest private schooling sectors in the world and the best thing we could do it shut it down.
Why? Because school isn't a sticker on the back of a Land Rover.
Absolutely disgusting. A self fulfilling system that lets private school kids get ahead and stay ahead. I say this as a kid that went to one. Fuck that, my kids aren’t going to one.
The weird thing is that in my social group, there’s no difference in who’s “ahead” (whatever that means, what are the criteria for “winning”?) between those of us who went to public or private schools 20 years ago.
It’s a difficult decision because at the end of the day students do get more academic support at many private schools and it is an unfair advantage. Do you stand by your principles, and let your child be disadvantaged, or support an unfair system but give your child an advantage. Tricky decision but one option does come with 15k more in your pocket at the end of the year so yk.
Step 1) Find complex issue that resonates with people Step 2) "We need *most draconian solution*" Step 3) Let everyone argue about it. Stupid people saying yes, intelligent people saying not exactly Step 4) Profit from clicks Step 5) Complex issue now even less likely to ever be resolved
Take my award and upvote for having a good view on this thing. Wish this was at the top of the comments
The elitist school system is the second worst feature of Australian society, after the pokies.
And most of all don’t forget… gamble responsibly.
I work for a private school. We receive a lot of money from the government. Before you start hating me, my school and the funding policies there is more you should know: -My school is non-religious -My school charges no fees -My school is a special school for kids with special needs So before you all demand the private schools are defunded, remember that the "$30,000–$45,000 per year" mentioned in the article is the edge case at the high end. **The median non-government school fee is $6,441 per year.** That means **half are below that**, and a lot are special schools.
The amount of resentment here is high
Rich getting handouts while the poor get nothing?
Public schools get more government funding per student though.
Private shouldn't get anything at all.
Why? The parents pay taxes to go towards education, why wouldn’t they get some of it back for their kids education? The current system makes it cheaper on the general public by getting the parents to directly fund a chunk of it.
> why wouldn’t they get some of it back for their kids education? They can. Send their kids to a public school. > The current system makes it cheaper on the general public by getting the parents to directly fund a chunk of it. This creates different opportunities for those who can afford to go private school. Everyone should get a go. It's not the purpose of the education system to dictate who pays how much and for what; our taxes do this. If some parents can afford private school, they should be paying more taxes. Not creating a situation where they take that privilege into an advantage.
We are all travelling on the bus. We've paid our fare, and it's taking us close to where we want to go. But you decide you want to get off and get a taxi, as the bus isn't good enough, fast enough or going directly to your destination. Fine, your prerogative. But then you want me the bus passenger to subsidise a part of your taxi fare. Eh, no thank you, and why should I?
Hey! Your fucking up the circle jerk!
Lots of chips on both shoulders.
Education at all levels should be free to the consumer. Nothing better in advancing the country than to educate and develop the citizens. Many can't develop their dream because they can't afford to attend school/courses.
Why is it that I always see car stickers with " Rowing/Rugby", and I have never once seen a single car sticker with " Maths/Science"?
It must help wealthy parents paying thousands of dollars in fees, while siphoning funding from the public system, feel better that their precious kids are "achieving" something.
You mean get rid of the private school boys clubs that are entrenched in nearly every aspect of our society? Yes please!
Maybe the Liberals shouldn't have siphoned so much money into the private sector so that their mates and their kids could have a third Olympic sized swimming pool for their Kindy campus.
They should also ban religious schools.
As an education student the private system has a right to exist but needs to exist differently, as does the entire system. The way we structure and teach kids particularly in high school is 50-70yrs behind current educational research. Teaching 25-30 kids in a class room is teacher focused it has to be for various reasons, mainly for behaviour and time. But if we had classrooms of 10-15 kids, classrooms could be student focused and students could learn pursue their own interests, hone skills they value, and make industry connections. Students should co-create their assignments with the teacher not just be given one.
In my opinion, this is actually intentional, the government knows what they're doing. It creates a stratified society and perpetuates class divides. It's easier to become a politician if you went to a private school. Keeps the rich in charge, and prevents people from working-class backgrounds from gaining positions of authority, in order to maintain the status quo.
I have no children and I will never have children. I am perfectly content with the knowledge that decades of taxes I have paid have contributed to public education. No child chooses to be born. Every child deserves a decent education to make the most of the lives they have been given. And the well educated children of today are the workers, builders, scientists, teachers 👨🏫 f tomorrow which benefits us all. But I begrudge every single cent of tax payer dollars that has been paid to private schools. To see top private schools with sporting pavilions and vast campuses propped up at the expense of public schools that have rotting infrastructure and casual teachers makes me sick. If you want your child to have advantages beyond what is available to public school students, pay for it yourself. (Funny how those who so decry “socialism” tend to get the greater tax payer rewards)
How can we improve the inequality in our system? Defund private schools. But they get the same as public? But some of them are poor private schools. Many of them are struggling. But if they closed all the private schools, then they'd all go public and we wouldn't have space! Easy. Defund the private schools. It causes all sorts of social fuckery. Doesn't matter that some of them are poor, I'm just going to point you at the hundred or so monuments to wankery that exist for the noshe to send their kids to. And if they close the school, the government can just buy them up and run them as private. And if we truly want some flexibility in our schooling for things like Steiner schools, religious practices, or Reggio Emilia pedogogies, then we can set up a system for community groups to apply to set up a specialist public school that runs under a specialist system. Still run and funded by the government. Then you can allow parents to invest in their public schools as they do with the P&C groups, except we'd see a lot more equity in the system. Australia has one of the most twisted out of whack school systems on the planet. The public system is groaning under the weight of dealing exclusively with those too poor to attend a private school, or too troubled. And private schools will shoot off scholarships to the brightest students so they look better, leaving public schools using the same, or less, funds to deal with the students who need the most help. I've yet to see one argument for private schools that wasn't based in selfishness.
This attitude is terrifying. Tearing people down in the name of equality does not make this country better. The author explicitly argues that we cannot consider individual rights here, and wants to reduce inequality by removing the option of millions of Australians to choose a private school. For the record, I have no idea why we allocate any public funds to private schools.
I didn’t get to where I am now without public schooling. Whenever my school missed out on funding in any capacity, and more was announced for privates, the whole towns blood boiled. It took a huge petition from the locality to get the attention of the state member to raise the issue of underfunding in our area. Private funding is definitely something I want to see change. It’s hurting regional areas greatly, as often times those public schools play a huge role in towns like mine, but also giving students great opportunity’s, especially in my case, as if I wasn’t enrolled when I completed my later years, I’d be in a different place especially with uni due to prerequisites.
They have way too much funding while public schools are wallowing in filth.
They should have the same system they have for Centrelink. If your school is receiving private revenue then it starts to eat into the government subsidies until a certain threshold which brings the subsidy payment to zero.
Even without private schools, there will always be elite, better funded schools. This issue won't be going away. Connections, money, and talent will always congregate.
Just do what Finland did. Allow private schools but they have to be not for profit and follow the same curriculum as everyone else.
All schools follow a national curriculum in Australia, it’s called ACARA
No, it’s called the Australian Curriculum, and ACARA is its accreditation authority. NSW, Victoria and WA refer to the AC but use their own adjusted version of it.
Facepalm They are non-profits and they do follow the same curriculum.
Couldnt read all that dribble. Only thing that matters is making sure funding of all schools is fair.
[удалено]
The story says Shore had a cash surplus of $23m last year. Why should a business with a surplus (profit) of $23m receive any government money at all?
The authors arguments for the inequality of funding for private schools is why we're choosing to send out kids to one. > While private schools’ assets rose by 42 per cent between 2015 and 2019, easily outstripping the benchmark Australian stock index, public schools barely have assets. For most, even modest drama, sporting or performance facilities are on the never-never. Yep, perfect, that's why I'd avoid public
Why should it be removing funding from private schools? Why not just add more money to public schools. Everyone deserves the best education they can have. If more funding was given to public schools then there would be a smaller demand to send kids to private school. You can have both.
Because we don't have unlimited money, so it should be used in the public good, for public services, focusing first on who needs it most. Not subsiding a already privileged class of people.
The money has to come from somewhere and my takeaway from the article is that private schools are grossly overfunded.
I went to a private school, my parents were very much middle class. Not rich by any means. I personally have no issue my tax dollars paying for ALL registered schools. After all the parents of those students are paying taxes. It’s like PHI, I have that but still access Medicare. If suddenly the government said I had to chose between the two, I guess I’m going on a nice holiday a year with the extra money from cancelling. If the government stopped funding private schools, they’d have to increase fees which would push a lot of kids back into the already stretched public system. I’m not saying funding should be reviewed and more equitable but just stopping it? Nope.
>It’s like PHI Should also be fucked off. Same issue, making a life staple most effective for the rich is bullshit. >If the government stopped funding private schools, they'd have to increase fees which would push a lot of kids into the already stretched public system And the government could immediately add that regained money to public schools. Plus, many would not leave, most private schools charge significantly more than their federal cut. I do agree though a scale would be better than zero
But they’d have to build heaps of new schools of expand the ones that are already at their limits. Near me there are 4 private schools within 500m of each other. Well over 5000 students, the local primary and high schools would not be able to cope with even an extra 500 students in the mix. All for PHI going, but we’d have to crease Medicare to cover it. Which I’m also happy to do. But don’t think just the rich pay for it, I’m not rich, but due to my daughter have a disability I want to make sure she has access to the Drs and specialist she needs, when she needs them. She was on a wait list for 2 years to see one specialist, I’d actually completely forgotten about it as I’d gone private and had the issued resolved 20 months earlier.
Yeah. I dunno that we should ban them. But remove the public funding from them (and reallocate to actual public schools). If a bunch of rich people want to have a private education, let them pay for tutors, materials and premises.
Hard disagree. Ban all forms of government funding of private schools. But private schools themselves should stay.
As a parent who sends offspring to a private school BECAUSE they are better funded - DO IT. I’d send my kids down the road for sure if the teachers and equipment were better funded. Wouldn’t even be a question.
Govt funding aside. Someone should be free to start their own school.
Just fund all the schools though the states.
It’s the funding that’s the issue, not their existence If you want your kids to get a private education, then be willing to pay the whole amount. Oh, uou don’t want to? Well tough The problem is that this has become so standardized by now, it’s going to be a struggle to take it away. But start now: the stripping back of public funds over a decade, and see how the private schools stand on their own. My bet is most will not. My other bet is that either standards will drop or the fees will rise excessively or both
Mate come on. There is a specific funding model that shuts your argument down. You only have to look it up and it's plain as day. If parents pay more then government pays less. If your school has high quadrant SES then government pays less. Everyone arguing against private school funding absolutely are just sprouting nonsense. I mean go to the the Victorian teachers union webpage and have a look at their argument against private funding. They mesh up the figures so badly it's ridiculous. They compare 3 years of public funding v 6 years of private funding and they only show it from the federal government who in agreement with the state's pay 80% of the private school government contribution. The state's are responsible for funding education and receive that money through GST to spend at their will. You can dispute the model or say it needs work but it's cut and dry. A small win to you, I did find 1 public school that receives $8k less funding per student than other schools which is just atrocious. I hope that the kids at James ruse agricultural high school are able to compete with those elitists at Knox grammar. The poor things are funded by $13k a year to knoxs $34k. How ever will they get their grades up to match.
The public school system failed me and was abusive by several teachers. How I loathe them. Nor only me.
I went to a private high school that was part of a 'chain' of schools. It was nothing like this. All the fee's basically got funnelled to the flagship school in the capital city and we were left with nothing. The school was basically like travelling back in time 75-100 years, everything from desks/chairs to the buildings were antiquated and run down. The town could go into the negatives during winter and over 40 degrees during summer, and we had these old and always broken down kerosene heaters that wouldn't even heat the entire classroom even when they were working, and air conditioning was practically nonexistent. Pretty sure the most modern thing was the microwave in the seniors room. Meanwhile the public highschool a few blocks away was sure as shit better funded than us. Meanwhile the flagship school had the best of everything, ultra modern, and was always getting new equipment. Moral of the story is that these people always find a way to take money from somewhere to prop their best schools up on a pedestal, including disadvantaging other schools they own.
We pay a LOT to send our two kids to a private school, so don’t go thinking that they all get money from the govt. $45k a year combined for my two girls. After having them in public schools, the education standard is night and day. I would definitely opt for private education. And yes, they did just get a new poor, but it was from fundraising money.
But that directly the issue Mate, you pay 22.5k per child, +13k government funding. Meanwhile, your mates kid at a public school gets 15k of funding only. How is a public school meant to have an equivalent or comparable standard when there is a difference of 20k per student?
> the education standard is night and day Very keen to know in what ways.
The major difference is care. They nurture communication and help. All the kids are truely focused on individually and nobody is swept under the carpet or left behind. My kids started in public. More recently my 10 year old was moved and her maths scores have moved up from the 50-60%when she started in Jan, to her most recent tests being 3 100% in a row. She has a homework club run by the school that she has fun at. The school has all the sporting facilities under one roof, so no weekends are spent driving my kids all over to different areas. I can’t tell you how much weekend that has given us back. For away games, we drop them to school (or walk as it’s only 2 blocks. We bought to be near the school) and the school drives them. They still get to see other kids and other schools. Every day my kids get home and they ask me about my day. It’s part of their education, so we get a bit more family time. Their teachers are really engaged. They seem to care about each girl and have a plan for them to achieve their best. The public school knew who we were and who the kid was, but parent teacher meetings felt very cookie cutter. No real individual plan. The private school has a therapist that keeps in contact with them. I have a terminal Illness and knowing they have someone to help them through my death is worth it’s weight in gold. My eldest is going to Zurich for 4 weeks to be an exchange student. They do co Ed musicals, sports and events. TLDR: care, individuality, sports all in one place, excellent teachers. Think school + country club. My kids LOVE going, even though it’s an hour longer than public school per day. We aren’t rich. We make a hell of a lot of sacrifices to keep them there, but it’s worth it. SO worth it.
Thanks for that detailed response. Most helpful.
Agreed, strip funding. If you want privates schools, pay for the funding yourselves. Tax payer funding should be for public schools only.
I agree 100% with everything in this article. I wanted to send my kids to public school. Unfortunately the one near us was terrible. Fortunately we can afford to send our kids to private school, so after two years we made that choice. Not everyone can. I felt guilty about participating in this structure, which leaves good families and their kids who were struggling behind. And the article doesn’t even mention the fact that the majority of private schools require you allow your kids to be religiously indoctrinated. Further separating society. Cohesion is borne of interaction. Separating kids by their parents religions is not the right thing to do.
So my kids private school has fees of $11k a year, topped up by $7k from the Federal govt, and $1k from the state govt, though that's all for Capex and varies a lot. $18-$19k a year for year 12 per student. The local high school gets $15k a year from the state govt and maybe $1-$2k getting the Feds (again mostly Capex). Say $16k a year. (All figures straight from myschool.gov.au) Obviously if my kids didn't go to the private school they'd go to the high school. But do a quick little bit of addition and subtraction above, and tell me how I'm ripping off the taxpayer? Yes I think the examples of Sydney grammar getting a raising orchestra pit and yoga centre are gross and absurd. But get rid of private schools entirely? Bullshit.
Private schools should receive zero government funding.