Garrett says review will make school funds fair



The Minister for School Education, Peter Garrett, says a review of school funding will examine whether the current funding system is equitable.

Education unions have called for a new funding regime after it was revealed elite schools are charging annual fees of up to $28,000.

Unions say some private schools made $14 million profits last year but they are still receiving Government money.

Mr Garrett says the current system was set up by previous governments and it is now time to examine how it is working.

"It is critical that we have a system which is effective, which is sustainable, which is transparent and which is fair," he said.

"An independent review on schools funding which this Government has commissioned will give us some consideration and recommendations as we look at school funding overall."

Mr Garrett says the review will determine the most equitable model of funding schools.

"We have had a funding system in place for decades now which is the product of decisions by previous governments," he said.

"It's time for us to take the opportunity to have a fresh and clear sighted look at Commonwealth funding."


http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/01/23/3119241.htm?section=justin

My old school charges about $20k pa for yr11 and 12 day boys and near $40k pa for boarders.
Back when I was there it did perfectly well without any govt funding.

My dad always used to joke my schooling cost the same as a new ford falcon each year - that measurement would still seem to hold true.

My old school now receives a decent chunk of govt  funding.
Why?

Quote:




There’s also nothing new about the union’s argument that Catholic and independent schools do not deserve funding and that only state school students deserve taxpayer support.

Based on the union’s arguments the public could be forgiven for thinking that non-government schools are awash with funds as a result of government largesse, especially during the Howard years, and that state schools, by comparison, are starved of funding.

Not true, based on Productivity Commission figures, over the years 2003-04 to 2007-08 while government funding to state schools increased by 1.6% a year in real terms, the figure for non-government schools was only 0.65%.

When arguing that the current socioeconomic status (SES) model of funding is inequitable and unfair critics, like the AEU, always forget to include the contribution states make to school funding. Given that states provide the lion’s share of funding to schools (approximately 78%), ignoring their contribution and only focusing on the Commonwealth expenditure is misleading and false.

If state and Commonwealth funding are combined then it is clear that state school students, compared to those in non-government schools, receive substantially more support.

The reality, as noted in the 2010 Report on Government Services, is that total government funding per state school student is $12,639, while non-government schools only receive $6,606 per student. Every student that attends a non-government school saves government, and taxpayers, approximately $6,000.

It’s also the case that the current socioeconomic status (SES) model of funding is needs based. Wealthier non-government schools only receive 13.7% of the recurrent cost of educating a student in a government school, with needier non-government schools receiving up to 70% of the figure.

These figures refer to recurrent funding, when capital funding is included the imbalance is even greater. In relation to independent schools close to 90% of capital funding is provided by parents and school communities, with state and Commonwealth governments providing 10%.

The other fact that the AEU rarely mentions is that government funding to Catholic and independent schools is an increasingly sensitive and volatile political issue as more and more parents, especially amongst aspirational voters in marginal seats, are voting with their feet and choosing non-government schools.

Between the years 1998-2008 the number of students attending Catholic and independent schools grew by 21.9% while the figure for state school students was only 1.1%. Based on 2008 figures, approximately 30% of primary school students attend non-government schools, the figure rises to 40% for secondary school students.

I don't know why there is always this fuss about funding to private schools etc.

At the end of the day, we need to treat all equally.

In my personal experience, kids at schools in the public sector do just as well in some respects as we do.
It's just all sour grapes.

People need to stop being concerned with this and get on with it.

I don't lose any sleep about public v private arrangements at all.

We all get the same chances in life from what I can see.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jan 24^th, 2011 at 1:37pm:


So Andrei, you going to send your kids to public school? And if not, why?

Another purposefully difficult issue to understand to any real degree.
The feds fund private and the states fund public.
1st question asked would have to be do any public schools have investment funds?
The argument used rightly, is all children deserve the same amount of taxpayer funding after all wealthy families who typically use private schools pay more tax than a family on a lower to middle income.
Private schools also are the main if not only schools that receive bequests of $$ and scholarships( I haven't heard of any public schools receiving any and wouldn't it go to consolidated revenue) which of course free up funds to invest.
Perhaps the solution is a higher tax rate on a sliding scale on investments starting around the 5 mill mark.
Or even better would be not to increase funding per student(forcing the feds to up theirs and the roundabout continues)but to maintain  and invest in improving excisting schools, keeping libaries stock,computers and printers up to date, air conditioning & safely heat all classrooms, in short maintain and improve the investment already made.
Who knows with more up to date,cleaner,modern looking public schools may find more students attending.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 24^th, 2011 at 6:18pm:


ONE person's outcome is hardly the standard by which you judge two competing educational systems. And based on the vitriol and class-bias that you often display, you are hardly the standard-bearer for education excellence in the public sector.

The FACTS remain that private school students have vastly better educational outcomes and general life outcomes. That is not even denied by public school advocates.

I am beginning to think that public education is too infested with ideology and politics to be actually fixable. And clearly a lot agree based on the huge rush to the private sector.

I just don't think there is that much of a problem in regards to the schooling.

In my own experience, I think the current education system seems to work pretty well.

Good, driven, intelligent people succeed.
Dropouts, losers and deadbeats don't.

Irrelevant of schooling.

In Melbourne I worked with plenty of people in management positions who had been through the public system.

From my perspective, the private system did ok by me as well. I thought my school gave me a chance, but if I didn't grab it I'd be pushing trolleys in Sainsburys. As I should be if I didn't work hard.

Too many people too often will use 'not given the opportunity' excuse to make themselves feel better about their own failure in life.