Public vs Private School funding

[kranky al]

Is it the fault of private schools that the Education Department didn't staff your High School with appropriate teachers ? You could send a letter of congratulations to the Immigration Department for letting that German kid in.

Private schools have more funding from the feds - lots more per student.

This equals more money for teachers, smaller class sizes, less stress for teachers, more attention can be paid to students who dont understand.

That’s right off the top of my head. Pre coffee.

 

[O Grobbecker]

Private schools have more funding from the feds - lots more per student.

This equals more money for teachers, smaller class sizes, less stress for teachers, more attention can be paid to students who dont understand.

That’s right off the top of my head. Pre coffee.

I think it was you who produced figures on the rate of increase in Govt funding in the past decade, about 3:1 in favour of private schools. I read Part 4 of that Govt report you (?) produced. It showed that in 2020, 75 % of govt funds went to state schools and 25 % to private schools BUT there are around 8 times as many state schools as there are private schools. So far, I can't disagree with your proposition that private schools do better out of govt money than state schools, although, whether that includes capital costs in state schools, buildings, equipment in science labs, computer labs etc isn't clear whereas in Victoria, Govt money goes to private schools for capital works as specific grants, new classrooms etc (footy fields and coaches are from school fees). It's still unclear to me so don't hold me to any admissions. I query your smaller class sizes, though. Perhaps at Scotch/Melbourne Grammar but not at St Joseph's Dandenong or Mercy College, Coburg where the converse is more likely. Whilst you are enjoying your late morning latte, consider that quality education comes from curriculum, material taught, motivation of students and focus of teachers rather than money, class size, playing fields or ex AFL coaches for the 1st XVIII.

 

[owen87]

consider that quality education comes from curriculum, material taught, motivation of students and focus of teachers rather than money, class size, playing fields or ex AFL coaches for the 1st XVIII.

False dichotomy.

 

[O Grobbecker]

False dichotomy.

Why false ?

 

[owen87]

Why false ?

You've presented it in such a way as to suggest that the former group is mutually exclusive with the latter group.

Focus of teachers is linked to class sizes, for example, which can be linked to money, which can be linked to the kind of student that attends a school, which can be linked to facilities at the school, which can be linked to motivation of students and/or means of students to access resources to assist learning.

So it's not playing fields OR focus of teachers.

 

[O Grobbecker]

You've presented it in such a way as to suggest that the former group is mutually exclusive with the latter group.

Focus of teachers is linked to class sizes, for example, which can be linked to money, which can be linked to the kind of student that attends a school, which can be linked to facilities at the school, which can be linked to motivation of students and/or means of students to access resources to assist learning.

So it's not playing fields OR focus of teachers.

Whilst it's probably true that teachers operate better in smaller rather than larger sizes, a politically correct teacher with an ideological agenda will be unsuccessful in imparting valid numeracy, literacy or logic, no matter what the size of her/his class. "can be linked to" introduces uncertainties and dependencies. Why not present what you want to say in definite terms ? It's only a footy forum, nobody's going to out you or sue youl. Ideologies like safe schools, womens' studies, history interpreted in terms of cultural genocide, climate change hysteria, racial theory at the expense of STEM subjects and literacy is why state schools under perform.

 

[owen87]

a politically correct teacher

ideological agenda

Ideologies

safe schools

womens' studies

history interpreted in terms of cultural genocide

climate change hysteria

racial theory

And there we go.

 

[FredLeDeux]

And there we go.

The ideologically correct answer to all that ignorant moronic drivel would have been "utter bawls".

 

[Evolved1]

Give me a spell.

Firstly this "influx into the public system" is garbage. Do you think private schools are going to just let those dollars walk out the door? They are a business, if people start spending elsewhere they will adjust their fees until people start coming back.

They're registered as not for profit organisations. Profits go towards making the schools better, not towards shareholders pockets.

Plus the majority of people sending their kids to these schools view it as a status symbol as much as anything else, they're not going to all of a sudden shift to the public system because school fees are slightly higher (they already go up every year anyway).

Based on the vibe, yeah?

Secondly these schools want to remain "independent" but then gladly put their hand out for government dollars. If you need government subsidies then perhaps your business model doesn't work. Like a lot of private enterprise they want the government to stay out of their business - until it's time for the government to start funelling money to them then all of a sudden they're not so principled about this whole "independent" thing.

Government funds private enterprise. If it's cheaper for the taxpayer to fund private schools than public schools per capita, there's no need to complain about the current funding arrangements for private schools.

Thirdly it's not jealousy, it's wanting to see funds diverted to where they're really needed to the public schools that are in vital need of repair - classrooms and buildings that haven't been refurbished or renovated in decades, lack of facilities and resources that sees teachers needing to dip into their pockets etc

Fourthly the private schools don't need the funding

Private schools buoyed by record cash and new enrolments

ANZ says the buildings “arms race” between expensive schools is over as Victoria’s priciest schools hike annual fees by 4.3 per cent.

www.theage.com.au

Government funding per capita compared to public schools is irrelevant - the government shouldn't fund them full stop.

Find other funding sources then. Where is government wasting money that could otherwise be spent on public schools? Is it feasible to raise taxes or hold back on cuts in some areas?

The ALP seem to have learned lessons from partaking in class wars. The SRP, not so much.

 

[Gralin]

You run a dataset that is 4 years old.
What I demonstrated is that 1 + 1 = 2, not the number you might want it to be :
100 cents in the dollar, 84 cents, 69 cents. Sourced from the dataset you chose & its cherrypicking.

Then you offer a different thread .....

Yes a different thread because it's no longer a discussion relevant to the Andrews thread.

Private school funding has been increasing quicker than public school funding for years.

When you look at comparable schools private funding is significantly outpacing public funding.

There are significantly more public than private schools and averages are skewed when you lump everyone in together.

When you look at the actual data the idea that private schools are saving tax payers money doesn't wash

 

[Connoisseur]

The government subsidy is a bit more than a few thousand.

Government funding per capita is lower for private school students than public school students. Removing private school funding will shift a large number of private school students into an already overburdened public system while saving the public nothing.

How are you going to find space for the influx of new students into our public schooling system? Will you build new schools? If so, who pays for it?

I suspect a lot of the opposition to private school funding is pure jealousy and hate towards those who have more.

How are you going to find space for the influx of new students into our public schooling system? Will you build new schools? If so, who pays for it?

A compromise would be to introduce a sliding scale and a threshold for Private School Fees, similar to income tax, with say Private Schools that charge above $10,000 receiving no financial assistance from the government from that point onwards.

This should cover most lower end Catholic Private Schools with facilities that aren’t a whole lot better than your average Public School, which are attended by students from mostly blue collar worker parents who understandably don’t want their children’s education to be disrupted by feral dickheads commonly found in Public Schools that don’t want to be there and learn but unfortunately can’t be disciplined nor expelled permanently for their disruptive antisocial behaviour.

At the same time it disqualifies the toff schools (Haileybury, Scotch, Melbourne Grammar, Geelong Grammar, Wesley, Camberwell Grammar, Brighton Grammar, Xavier, etc..), that typically charge per annum for 1 student what a low income earner takes home in a year (around $30,000 + ).

These Private Schools don’t need a single cent from the taxpayer as the vast of majority of parents who have children enrolled there would never ever contemplate for one millisecond sending their kids to a Public School if that assistance was removed.

 

[Kwality]

A compromise would be to introduce a sliding scale and a threshold for Private School Fees, similar to income tax, with say Private Schools that charge above $10,000 receiving no financial assistance from the government from that point onwards.

This should cover most lower end Catholic Private Schools with facilities that aren’t a whole lot better than your average Public School, which are attended by students from mostly blue collar worker parents who understandably don’t want their children’s education to be disrupted by feral dickheads commonly found in Public Schools that don’t want to be there and learn but unfortunately can’t be disciplined nor expelled permanently for their disruptive antisocial behaviour.

At the same time it disqualifies the toff schools (Haileybury, Scotch, Melbourne Grammar, Geelong Grammar, Wesley, Camberwell Grammar, Brighton Grammar, Xavier, etc..), that typically charge per annum for 1 student what a low income earner takes home in a year (around $30,000 + ).

These Private Schools don’t need a single cent from the taxpayer as the vast of majority of parents who have children enrolled there would never ever contemplate for one millisecond sending their kids to a Public School if that assistance was removed.

Are you across boarding schools ?

 

[Kwality]

Yes a different thread because it's no longer a discussion relevant to the Andrews thread.

Private school funding has been increasing quicker than public school funding for years.

When you look at comparable schools private funding is significantly outpacing public funding.

There are significantly more public than private schools and averages are skewed when you lump everyone in together.

When you look at the actual data the idea that private schools are saving tax payers money doesn't wash

I used numbers from the dataset you chose to support your view.
'Doesnt wash', unsupported, is a shallow contribution to the discussion.

 

[Gralin]

I used numbers from the dataset you chose to support your view.
'Doesnt wash', unsupported, is a shallow contribution to the discussion.

You should be familiar with that level of discussion given its where you live

 

[Not Important]

The government subsidy is a bit more than a few thousand.

Government funding per capita is lower for private school students than public school students. Removing private school funding will shift a large number of private school students into an already overburdened public system while saving the public nothing.

How are you going to find space for the influx of new students into our public schooling system? Will you build new schools? If so, who pays for it?

I suspect a lot of the opposition to private school funding is pure jealousy and hate towards those who have more.

so u do it gradually. it's outrageous the funds going into luxurious facilities at private schools while many state run schools struggle. i would have thought as a conservative 'user pays' would b your mantra. or is it the case that it only applies when it suits?

 

[Crankyhawk]

The government subsidy is a bit more than a few thousand.

Government funding per capita is lower for private school students than public school students. Removing private school funding will shift a large number of private school students into an already overburdened public system while saving the public nothing.

How are you going to find space for the influx of new students into our public schooling system? Will you build new schools? If so, who pays for it?

I suspect a lot of the opposition to private school funding is pure jealousy and hate towards those who have more.

It’s a natural reaction to the punching down poor people get from rich people though. Politics of envy and class war is a valid action.

 

[Gralin]

Those who have more don't need tax payer money but they sure do push for as much of it as possible while shitting on poor people

 

[eddiesmith]

A compromise would be to introduce a sliding scale and a threshold for Private School Fees, similar to income tax, with say Private Schools that charge above $10,000 receiving no financial assistance from the government from that point onwards.

This should cover most lower end Catholic Private Schools with facilities that aren’t a whole lot better than your average Public School, which are attended by students from mostly blue collar worker parents who understandably don’t want their children’s education to be disrupted by feral dickheads commonly found in Public Schools that don’t want to be there and learn but unfortunately can’t be disciplined nor expelled permanently for their disruptive antisocial behaviour.

At the same time it disqualifies the toff schools (Haileybury, Scotch, Melbourne Grammar, Geelong Grammar, Wesley, Camberwell Grammar, Brighton Grammar, Xavier, etc..), that typically charge per annum for 1 student what a low income earner takes home in a year (around $30,000 + ).

These Private Schools don’t need a single cent from the taxpayer as the vast of majority of parents who have children enrolled there would never ever contemplate for one millisecond sending their kids to a Public School if that assistance was removed.

I often feel those schools are ignored in these discussions with private school = Xavier etc yet there are plenty of lower end private schools that are much better than the local public schools but would definitely be out of reach for a lot of parents of fees jumped significantly due to no government funding.

But there are also a few students at these private schools run by churches who don’t pay or get an extremely reduced rate as the churches help those who struggle but want their kids to get a good education.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

They're registered as not for profit organisations. Profits go towards making the schools better, not towards shareholders pockets.

Unless it's just banked because they've got more money than they know what to do with.

Private schools buoyed by record cash and new enrolments

ANZ says the buildings “arms race” between expensive schools is over as Victoria’s priciest schools hike annual fees by 4.3 per cent.

www.theage.com.au

If government stops funding private schools do you think those schools will maintain their fees at the higher rate even at the expense of falling enrolments? Do you think they would cut off their nose to spite their face and see money walk out the door just so they can maintain higher fees that are not needed (due to the large cash reserves they already have)?

Government funds private enterprise. If it's cheaper for the taxpayer to fund private schools than public schools per capita, there's no need to complain about the current funding arrangements for private schools.

This is based on the false argument that should government stop funding pruvate schools you will see private schools close due to falling enrolments and the public system swamped. It's simply not true, schools would adjust their fees to ensure enrolments are maintained.

Again it is capitalism and free enterprise until we want a handout then we're more than happy for the government to funnel money our way.

Find other funding sources then. Where is government wasting money that could otherwise be spent on public schools? Is it feasible to raise taxes or hold back on cuts in some areas?

Private schools. The funding is already there it is just being spent in the wrong area.

 

[Not Important]

Those who have more don't need tax payer money but they sure do push for as much of it as possible while shitting on poor people

there's a private school that is building a "science and technology hub". comprising 3 stories. gov’t funding is needed 2 complete it. no idea the degree, just that without gov’t funding it wouldn’t happen.

now i’m all 4 this hub but it should b user pays. not by starving the state system.

of course we know things won’t change as the powerful and influential private school lobby will ensure that. and neither major party will take ‘em on. just as the powerful and influential mining lobby thwarted the super profits tax.

 

[Kwality]

there's a private school that is building a "science and technology hub". comprising 3 stories. gov’t funding is needed 2 complete it. no idea the degree, just that without gov’t funding it wouldn’t happen.

now i’m all 4 this hub but it should b user pays. not by starving the state system.

of course we know things won’t change as the powerful and influential private school lobby will ensure that. and neither major party will take ‘em on. just as the powerful and influential mining lobby thwarted the super profits tax.

You must know the name of the school involved, not linking it, then finishing off with a motherhood claim ...

 

[Kwality]

You should be familiar with that level of discussion given its where you live

Knowing that if I made a similar comment about yourself, you would ban me.

 

[Connoisseur]

Are you across boarding schools ?

No really but if the fees as are exorbitant as the top private schools then I presume most parents sending their children to boarding schools are fairly well off as well. They should receive the same amount of funding as parents that send their children to standard schools unless it's some sort of necessity like living out in Woop Woop or something.

 

[Connoisseur]

I often feel those schools are ignored in these discussions with private school = Xavier etc yet there are plenty of lower end private schools that are much better than the local public schools but would definitely be out of reach for a lot of parents of fees jumped significantly due to no government funding.

But there are also a few students at these private schools run by churches who don’t pay or get an extremely reduced rate as the churches help those who struggle but want their kids to get a good education.

In terms of teaching delivery they are miles ahead, it's why parents make a concerted effort to send their children there so they get a fair shot at learning and not be held back by disruptive ferals who don't.

But as far facilities are concerned from what I've observed the disparity in this regard isn't that significant when compared to elite Private Schools that charge $30k pa, which have facilities that some of the smaller professional Australian sporting teams would be envious of.

 

[Kwality]

No really but if the fees as are exorbitant as the top private schools then I presume most parents sending their children to boarding schools are fairly well off as well. They should receive the same amount of funding as parents that send their children to standard schools unless it's some sort of necessity like living out in Woop Woop or something.

Clearly you have not travelled far from sleepy hollow.