Private Schools

[HirdsTheWord]

The thing is, what I'm saying is not an opinion. It's backed up by academic research. So unless you've researched in the field, you can't disagree with it in good conscience.

I'm just looking at the HSC results.

Kind of sounds like you just think people who go to Private School are just inherently Smarter than Kids who go to Public Schools? I'm not sure how you test or find data for that.

IMO the clear difference between them is Money, which is why Private schools are so much better off. To say Quality of Teaching, Facilities and Technology does not play a part is misleading IMO. They clearly do.

 

[Deliverance]

I'm just looking at the HSC results.

Kind of sounds like you just think people who go to Private School are just inherently Smarter than Kids who go to Public Schools? I'm not sure how you test or find data for that.

IMO the clear difference between them is Money, which is why Private schools are so much better off. To say Quality of Teaching, Facilities and Technology does not play a part is misleading IMO. They clearly do.

Yeah, you don't get it. Im obviously not explaining myself well. Read this and it might clear it up for you.

Public schools actually outperform private schools, and with less money

New analysis shows public schools have similar, or even better, results than private schools with similar rankings of socioeconomic status.

theconversation.com

 

[Caesar]

Kind of sounds like you just think people who go to Private School are just inherently Smarter than Kids who go to Public Schools?

define 'inherently smarter'

Compared to a public school child your average private school kid grows up in a more stable home, with better educated parents, and more financial resources to devote to their education. At a private school they are put in a smaller, better-behaved and better-resourced class with other similarly-advantaged kids.

Teaching ability matters but only up to a point - the environment a child grows and learns in makes the biggest difference to overall outcomes

 

[HirdsTheWord]

define 'inherently smarter'

Compared to a public school child your average private school kid grows up in a more stable home, with better educated parents, and more financial resources to devote to their education.

at a private school they are put in a smaller, better-behaved and better-resourced class with other similarly-advantaged kids

teaching ability matters but only up to a point - the environment a child grows and learns in makes the biggest difference

umm

this is exactly my point?

 

[Sphynx]

Yeah, you don't get it. Im obviously not explaining myself well. Read this and it might clear it up for you.

Public schools actually outperform private schools, and with less money

New analysis shows public schools have similar, or even better, results than private schools with similar rankings of socioeconomic status.

theconversation.com

I think that's a quite selective article.

For starters, I don't think anyone disputes that an average outer ring private school might not outperform a run of the mill public secondary school. In reality, the turnover difference of those type of schools would probably be marginal.

IF you look at the elite private schools, who are they comparing them to "of similar socioeconomic rankings"?

Are they comparing Wesley Grammar with MacRobertson Girls or Melbourne Grammar with Melbourne High? Obviously those results will be decent.

There's very few other public schools in a lot of these elite areas, they are mostly covered by multiple private elite schools.

Also, that article never mentioned Catholic Schools. Are these bundled into the private basket? As there's a huge difference in quality between some of the elite private schools and some of those Catholic schools providing subsidised school fee's for an "almost" private school experience for students.

 

[Caesar]

umm

this is exactly my point?

Your original claim was that the better results achieved by private schools were evidence that private schools employ the best teachers

I was merely pointing out that the relative quality of the teachers is one of the least important factors in the differing results

 

[Deliverance]

I think that's a quite selective article.

For starters, I don't think anyone disputes that an overage outer ring private school might not outperform a run of the mill public secondary school. In reality, the turnover difference of those type of schools would probably be marginal.

IF you look at the elite private schools, who are they comparing them to "of similar socioeconomic rankings"?

Are they comparing Wesley Grammar with MacRobertson Girls or Melbourne Grammar with Melbourne High? Obviously those results will be decent.

There's very few other public schools in a lot of these elite areas, they are mostly covered by multiple private elite schools.

Also, that article never mentioned Catholic Schools. Are these bundled into the private basket? As there's a huge difference in quality between some of the elite private schools and some of those Catholic schools providing subsidised school fee's for an "almost" private school experience for students.

It's just the simplest article to explain the concept. It's not hard to find similar research across the globe that backs it up, if people are genuinely interested.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Your original claim was that the better results achieved by private schools were evidence that private schools employ the best teachers

I was merely pointing out that the relative quality of the teachers is one of the least important factors in the differing results

No............It wasn't just teachers.......

See below.......

Many Public Schools provide a Good Education, It just that many private schools provide a Great education.

More money will always attract better teachers.

More money will always attract better facilities.

More money will always attract better technology.

No matter what you do there always be a divide against Public Schools to Private Schools, that's just the economic way of life. The government cant compete with that level of funding.

Its much like a poor team trying to compete with a rich team in an un salary capped sport.

 

[Caesar]

No............It wasn't just teachers.......

See below.......

The specific claim about teachers has been the point of contention for the last two pages, and is the one I was addressing

 

[Sphynx]

It's just the simplest article to explain the concept. It's not hard to find similar research across the globe that backs it up, if people are genuinely interested.

I think there's holes in it regarding this argument, particularly in the Australian/Melbourne school system.

Kew High is comparable to Xavier?

Fantastic, you only need to own a $5m property or rent a $2500/week home in the school zone to experience parity of education levels in the public system.

Is it a coincidence that a vast majority of the best public schools in Melbourne are also in some of the most affluent suburbs? No.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

The specific claim about teachers has been the point of contention for the last two pages, and is the one I was addressing

well than i dont agree its just teachers then?

my point has always been about money/resourcing as a whole.

 

[Caesar]

well than i dont agree its just teachers then?

my point has always been about money/resourcing as a whole.

It’s mostly about quality of the students

Resourcing is just icing

 

[Sphynx]

It’s mostly about quality of the students

Resourcing is just icing

Correct.

Money breeds Money.

This is a cynical way of looking at it, but most of the best professionals live in the affluent zones of the best performing public schools. They are more likely to impart knowledge in their children's upbringing, more than likely they are tertiary educated and the average kid coming out of these household are more than likely more academic than a truck drivers son (on average! before people bite my head off).

Kids are a product of their environment/parents.

 

[Deliverance]

I think there's holes in it regarding this argument, particularly in the Australian/Melbourne school system.

Kew High is comparable to Xavier?

Fantastic, you only need to own a $5m property or rent a $2500/week home in the school zone to experience parity of education levels in the public system.

Is it a coincidence that a vast majority of the best public schools in Melbourne are also in some of the most affluent suburbs? No.

This

It’s mostly about quality of the students

Resourcing is just icing

 

[Chief]

The Government cant afford to run ALL the schools

Yes it can. The schools are being run. The money is already there. It just needs to be directed into a more efficient system instead of wasteful private schooling.

 

[Caesar]

The money is already there.

$5.5b of it comes from private sources

Cannot see the value in spending many billions of dollars of taxpayer money to eliminate most of the best performing schools in the country and provide parents with fewer educational options for their children

 

[Chief]

$5.5b of it comes from private sources

This is what taxation is for.

 

[Chief]

Cannot see the value in spending many billions of dollars of taxpayer money to eliminate most of the best performing schools in the country and provide parents with fewer educational options for their children

This is not what would happen. You'd eliminate waste and level the playing field by ensuring all kids have access to educational resources that fit their aptitude and needs. Primary and secondary education would no longer be a marketable commodity.

 

[Sphynx]

This is not what would happen. You'd eliminate waste and level the playing field by ensuring all kids have access to educational resources that fit their aptitude and needs. Primary and secondary education would no longer be a marketable commodity.

It's precisely what would happen.

There'd be $5bn less to go around in the total grand scheme of things.

I'm not sure you can just say the funding portions of private school turnover are "waste".

The government theoretically provide the funding to reach a similar standard as the public schools and the private funding takes them to another level.

 

[Chief]

There'd be $5bn less to go around in the total grand scheme of things.

This is what taxation is for.

 

[Sphynx]

This is what taxation is for.

So increase taxation to cover for a figure that is currently being donated from the private sector?

I imagine you are proposing to tax the same bracket of people that are currently donating it?

 

[burge13]

I bet this doesn't happen next to private schools

Shock photos reveal drug horror outside school

Parents who have encountered drug users unconscious, dealing, defecating and urinating next to a Melbourne school are holding crisis talks about the “escalating situation”.

www.news.com.au

 

[Deliverance]

So increase taxation to cover for a figure that is currently being donated from the private sector?

I imagine you are proposing to tax the same bracket of people that are currently donating it?

No. We just stop spending billions on pools, rowing sheds and massive sports complexes that add nothing to education.

 

[Caesar]

You'd eliminate waste and level the playing field by ensuring all kids have access to educational resources that fit their aptitude and needs.

I don't know how you can suggest such a thing with a straight face given the dismal track record the public system has at levelling the playing field between their own schools

There is a far bigger difference between the education received by a public school student in Brewarrina and one in Potts Point than there is between Rose Bay High School and Cranbrook School

Forcing kids into the public system holus-bolus is just perpetuating geographic disadvantage, at the cost of any kind of choice for parents and billions of dollars to the taxpayer

 

[Chief]

So increase taxation to cover for a figure that is currently being donated from the private sector?

I imagine you are proposing to tax the same bracket of people that are currently donating it?

Yes. If you believe that private schools give a superior education, and people have to pay to get access, then the obvious solution is to take it out of private hands and implement a system that is fairer and allocates educational resources to kids on an aptitude basis.

As it is you have some kids needing extra resources not getting them, and others who don't need them getting more than their fair share.

There are options. Tax the population progressively. Take all of these schools over and run schools from selective through to technical colleges.

Or leave schools private, but fully fund them and make them selective entry only.

Wastage on marketing like expensive landscaping, over-specced classrooms and so on would be a thing of the past. Parents would STILL put money in as they do now, via P&C's and so on, but a wide range of kids would benefit.