Public vs Private School funding

[Gethelred]

Your "positives of private education" are precisely what private education was established for. Taxpayer funds going to private schools State Aid, ensure that the children of those who have already paid for education, through their taxes, share the benefits of those payments with the rest of society. Basic fairness. Your "prop up of religious values" is cost to the parents, not the community, otherwise there would be no school fees. The reality is that the grossly underappreciated Catholic education system, particularly through its unpaid religious order teachers, massively subsidised Colonial and State governments' Education obligations before 1963.

It might've, but it's not 1963 anymore.

 

[O Grobbecker]

It might've, but it's not 1963 anymore.

The State Aid debate is long settled. There's no harm in reminding those who now seek to re introduce long abandoned arguments of history.

 

[Chief]

the children of those who have already paid for education, through their taxes

There's no "education levy" in your taxes. You pay your taxes and vote for the MP you think will represent your wishes to parliament.

 

[Evolved1]

So the majority of reasons you've suggested are not positives of private education. And then there's the question of whether taxpayer funds should be going to prop up religious values systems (given that public schools also value helping others, charity, kindness etc).

I'd question whether taxpayer funds are propping up religious values at all.

Last time I looked, the basic education funding per capita was approx 12k. If our governments are paying that same rate for private education (which they're not), private tuition can be considered a privilege that's privately funded.

I don't care if that money goes towards religion or other bullshit. The fact is that someone is personally paying for it.

Why do lefties whinge so much over something they're not even funding? It makes no sense to me.

 

[Crankyhawk]

I'm assuming you went to a public school? I went private, I have nothing to compare to obviously but not sure how true this is. Maybe there's more resource at a private school to help students but you still have to do the work of course, and everyone does the same exams.

I may nearly prove your point of course, I didn't apply myself at uni, ****ed around, nearly got kicked out but got on track and got my degree. I think there are a few reasons for this, not sure how high on the list being privately educated was though.

As a math geek we got opportunity to do “uni maths” in the private school I went to. Part of this was some questions that you solved in class. These questions later appeared in specialist maths common assessment tasks - which we already basically had completed in “uni math”

 

[Chief]

Why do lefties whinge so much over something they're not even funding? It makes no sense to me.

We all pay taxes.

 

[Chief]

As a math geek we got opportunity to do “uni maths” in the private school I went to.

This is what they did at my son's public school. Lots have links to Universities.

For instance, there's a new public school in Brisbane that is next door to some state science facilities and a short walk to UQ. The students get regular time in top science facilities.

 

[Evolved1]

We all pay taxes.

Fair enough.

Private education receives less funding per capita than public education. IOW, it's cheaper for the taxpayer. If you love paying more tax, support the abolishment of private education.

 

[ElectricG]

We all pay taxes.

There’s no education levy Chief

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Fair enough.

Private education receives less funding per capita than public education. IOW, it's cheaper for the taxpayer. If you love paying more tax, support the abolishment of private education.

If they are subsidised by the taxpayer, then shouldn't all taxpayers have access to the facilities?

 

[Evolved1]

If they are subsidised by the taxpayer, then shouldn't all taxpayers have access to the facilities?

The facilities aren't subsidised by taxpayers. Your taxes fund teachers salaries.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

The facilities aren't subsidised by taxpayers. Your taxes fund teachers salaries.

They are paid a subsidy per student, not per teacher.

 

[Evolved1]

They are paid a subsidy per student, not per teacher.

That doesn't refute my point. Private schooling benefits the bottom line for government spending.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

That doesn't refute my point. Private schooling benefits the bottom line for government spending.

View attachment 1547314

Nah. Most private schools are corporate dole bludgers.

This one is interesting. Seems they don't need the money after all.

Sought-after private school to swap government money for profit status

Sydney school Reddam House will give up $5 million a year in government money to join a privately-owned international group of schools

www.smh.com.au

 

[Evolved1]

Nah. Most private schools are corporate dole bludgers.

Do you have stats to support that claim?

This one is interesting. Seems they don't need the money after all.

Sought-after private school to swap government money for profit status

Sydney school Reddam House will give up $5 million a year in government money to join a privately-owned international group of schools

www.smh.com.au

"Reddam's popularity has soared because of its strong results; last year, it was the only non-academically selective school to finish in the top 10 on the HSC honour roll.

It charges between $20,000 for kindergarten students and $32,000 for year 12 students."

 

[ElectricG]

I was at work, and having attended a private school and had placement at a private and public school, I agree with Chief.

Private schools do a number of things to try and extort work from recalcitrent students, and a number of those things are compliance rather than educative in nature and rely on improved facilities/resources (ie, throwing bodies or technology at a problem rather than addressing it) rather than improved teaching or lesson planning focussed on student difference or self motivation.

Public schools have to make do with less, and as with all things better tools does not a craftsman make.

Well, Geth. It’s interesting in this thread at least that there appears to be some pattern of people favouring the type of school they didn’t go to.

Again, you’re selling me the virtues of private schools when you describe their “shape up or ship out” approach.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Do you have stats to support that claim?

"Reddam's popularity has soared because of its strong results; last year, it was the only non-academically selective school to finish in the top 10 on the HSC honour roll.

It charges between $20,000 for kindergarten students and $32,000 for year 12 students."

Well yeah, if you're paying that then your mates would certainly be impressed when you measure up each year.

 

[Chief]

Private schooling benefits the bottom line for government spending.

This begs the question of what we want to spend our money on.

 

[Evolved1]

This begs the question of what we want to spend our money on.

I'm generally in favor if the initiative reduces government spending. Are you happy to pay an extra 10-20% tax to fund public schooling for everyone?

 

[Gethelred]

Well, Geth. It’s interesting in this thread at least that there appears to be some pattern of people favouring the type of school they didn’t go to.

Again, you’re selling me the virtues of private schools when you describe their “shape up or ship out” approach.

But that's just the thing: it's not a shape up or ship out approach. It's handholding.

There's a dramatic difference between a teacher who leads you from where you are to where you could be and from there lets you walk unaided, and a teacher who never stops leading you, never takes the scaffolding away to see if you can do it without the net. That's what I meant by the wealthier schools just throwing technology or manpower at a problem; it's not manpower or technology that is required. Students need to have a class catered to them, to their level and differentiated across the myriad needs and abilities within a classroom, instead of simply changing the means of information conveyance; just getting told something directly and supervised throughout is not differentiated instruction!

A public school's year 8's and 10's are thoroughly more capable, more able to learn and more willing to stick with it if they don't get it - and more likely to seek out help if they don't understand - than private school students at the same level.

 

[ElectricG]

But that's just the thing: it's not a shape up or ship out approach. It's handholding.

There's a dramatic difference between a teacher who leads you from where you are to where you could be and from there lets you walk unaided, and a teacher who never stops leading you, never takes the scaffolding away to see if you can do it without the net. That's what I meant by the wealthier schools just throwing technology or manpower at a problem; it's not manpower or technology that is required. Students need to have a class catered to them, to their level and differentiated across the myriad needs and abilities within a classroom, instead of simply changing the means of information conveyance; just getting told something directly and supervised throughout is not differentiated instruction!

A public school's year 8's and 10's are thoroughly more capable, more able to learn and more willing to stick with it if they don't get it - and more likely to seek out help if they don't understand - than private school students at the same level.

A few people have been putting forward stats about public school kids doing better in university. My hunch would be that this is due to what you’re describing. A kid in a less resourced school will definitely learn to work more independently.
But isn’t that only well and good for the kids who don’t get left behind? It seems like there are plenty in the public system need their hand held to stop them giving up altogether. Are we taking the precocious public school kids who make the best of a sub-optimal situation and selling that as a benefit?

I’m still trying to find those drop-out rates by the way. Might you have them? This seems to be an area of interest for you.

Disclaimer: open to the idea that I’m wrong on this.

 

[the_interloper]

As a math geek we got opportunity to do “uni maths” in the private school I went to. Part of this was some questions that you solved in class. These questions later appeared in specialist maths common assessment tasks - which we already basically had completed in “uni math”

MUPHAS? I did that too, helped me a lot in specialist I must admit.

My maths teacher was a heckhead, he used to love doing the hardest problem of the lesson at the end and leave it on the whiteboard. Just so the students the next day would be all impressed and s**t (we did MUPHAS 3:30-6 on a Tuesday).

 

[Gethelred]

A few people have been putting forward stats about public school kids doing better in university. My hunch would be that this is due to what you’re describing. A kid in a less resourced school will definitely learn to work more independently.
But isn’t that only well and good for the kids who don’t get left behind? It seems like there are plenty in the public system need their hand held to stop them giving up altogether. Are we taking the precocious public school kids who make the best of a sub-optimal situation and selling that as a benefit?

I still think it comes down to what we were discussing a week ago; there are private schools, and there are Private Schools.

I went to a Catholic churning house, but my sister - who my parents weren't going to have my school treating her cello the way they treated my violin - paid an extra 12 grand a year to send her to a superior non-religious private school; the supposed 'hippy' school, where students were nurtured, looked after, etc. That school taught - as much as anything else - curiousity; if you wanted to know something, they'd hand you the tools to get it and say, 'off you go.' Good instruction, lesson planning, and resources equalling vastly superior practice.

I’m still trying to find those drop-out rates by the way. Might you have them? This seems to be an area of interest for you.

Disclaimer: open to the idea that I’m wrong on this.

Not immediately at hand, I don't.

I'll have a look, see what I can find.

 

[Bloods86]

I'd question whether taxpayer funds are propping up religious values at all.

Last time I looked, the basic education funding per capita was approx 12k. If our governments are paying that same rate for private education (which they're not), private tuition can be considered a privilege that's privately funded.

I don't care if that money goes towards religion or other bullshit. The fact is that someone is personally paying for it.

Why do lefties whinge so much over something they're not even funding? It makes no sense to me.

Government is paying between about $11k and $13k per student in non government schools (depending on the type of school). It pays more per student in government education sure. But, spending increases per student have heavily been in favour of private schools in the last decade or so, while we continually have an underfunded public system. Personally, I think it's warranted to look at government funding of private schools and move some of that back to the public system, especially the upper tier schools where there is quite substantial private fees.

"The fact is that someone is personally paying for it" - yes, the taxpayer for the most part for some private schools, and partially (still a substantial amount) for the top tier ones.

My comment was in regards to someone touting the values that a private school may teach. I responded by saying that public schools also try to instill kindness, generosity etc in students. So what values are we talking about? Religiously informed values obviously, which shouldn't really be part of government funded education. Which we as a taxpayer at the very least are partially paying for. This is all in the context of people saying private is better, so I think it's fair to point out where it's not, and that private gets a leg up.

 

[Bloods86]

Well, Geth. It’s interesting in this thread at least that there appears to be some pattern of people favouring the type of school they didn’t go to.

Again, you’re selling me the virtues of private schools when you describe their “shape up or ship out” approach.

Eh, some of us favour what we went to. I don't really recall heaps about the 2 years of private primary school in year 2 and 3, wasn't really a stark difference in standard that I can remember, though as I've said, the private schools in my hometown weren't that fancy or expensive.

In any case, I favour public or private over homeschooling. Just don't do it folks.

Re: "shape up or ship out" - I mean if your purpose isn't to educate literal children, this would make sense.