Quote:


I'm guessing you don't know the actual numbers. Just the spin that little pinks are supposed to put on them.

John Smith wrote on May 19^th, 2024 at 3:33pm:


So the government should only be allowed to fund 100% or 0% of a school? Did you read that in a pamphlet? Why not anywhere in between?

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2024 at 3:42pm:


No, the govt shouldn't fund private schools. The rest of your stupidity is yours and yours alone

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2024 at 5:26pm:


Good to see you asking a 'sensible' question (allowing for your crippled capacity for rational thought, of course).

(google)

https://www.indaily.com.au/news/adelaide/2024/04/30/campaign-begins-amid-public-...

The AEU has reported public schools will be underfunded by $1.8 billion from 2024-2028, with each student underfunded by an average of $2004 in 2024, based on the Schooling Resource Standard (SRS).

The SRS, based on recommendations made in the 2011 Review for Funding for Schooling, indicates the amount of public funding needed at a school for its students’ educational needs to be met.

Based on these figures, the AEU found all public schools in South Australia are being underfunded by a total of $337 million in 2024, while private schools are overfunded by $64.2 million.30 Apr 2024

That's $64 million which should be going to public schools in SA alone, based on those figures which themselvesare based on the SRS (noted above).

But in my book, NO public funding ought being going to private schools; the state's responsibility is  to provide the best education for all; any 'special' education requirements (mostly ideology)  beyond that should be a matter for the private sector alone.    

Quote:
 

Given the overfunding for private schools (fancy swimming pools etc), it's hard to say; but in any case education should be free up to the levels commensurate with the student's ability.


Note: literally free: after the infrastructure is built, Treasury can fund  education for free because education is a 'renewable' resource (as one mainstream economist conceded); the transmission of knowledge from teacher to student (requiring mostly mental effort and time from both) doesnt expend scarce resources. 

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2024 at 6:08pm:


Wow, a supreme example of your ideologically deluded brain's crippled capacity for reason, and/or simply missing the argument which I provided:



Quote:


No, see above.

freediver wrote on May 19^th, 2024 at 6:41pm:


Priceless! (laughter is the best medicine    )

What part of "the state's responsibility is to provide the best education for all" don't you understand?

For each school there is an income and assets test...................... once past the point determined, funding is progressively reduced in relation to income and assets - same as pension and unemployment - with a defined cut-off point.

Means the rich schools don't get richer out of the public purse.  No more Olympic swimming pools in the backyard unless the school budget pays for it out of funds received for tuition.

One of the things wrong with our country at this time, and like affirmative action, it fed the fat who still copped all their benefits of connections and even 'name (I worked in the PS with a guy who was grandson of an Admiral - guess who was on the 'inside running'), and all the other forms of discrimination that persist in such bodies, as well as the largesse of 'belonging' to a socially disadvantaged or oppressed group.

Now look at the state of the joint ................. quarter-baked twerps are artificially fed into the Gauleiter spots to obey der Fuhrergruppen with the same predictable results as with the Nazis.  What are these 'contracted senior management' in the PS other than Gauleiters appointed from the equivalent of the old schoolyard mobs, the SA, SS and other old party fighters and comrades?

How many are NOT of the 'old school tie' and 'connections' mobs?  NFMIA!!  (Nicht viele, wenn überhaupt!)

Quote:


Our state does guarantee education for all. But it is absurd to suggest it is responsible to provide everyone with the best possible education, unless you have a very limited imagination. Really, this is just more meaningless gibberish.

thegreatdivide wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 2:00pm:


Ah. Of course. You were not referring to the best possible education. You were referring to some paperwork.

Quote:


You never explained what would happen with the funding for all the students who leave private schools if the government cancelled the funding to them. You understand that they would all end up costing the government more money, right? And those students would receive a lower quality education?

Baronvonrort wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 8:45pm:



They charge a fortune for your children to attend.

Why should they get any Govt aka taxpayer funding at all?

freediver wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 2:39pm:


1. The parents currently sending their kids to private schools would be richer, while the government money currently devoted to funding private schools would be freed up to fund better public education and schools.

2. As for costing the government more money (as private funding for private schools is withdrawn),  government money created in Treasury is free for the government (or alternatively, given the general public's ignorance of how money is created,  the govt. could raise more taxes from the wealthy who currently want to send their kids to exclusive ideology-based schools).

In either case, the issue is providing sufflicient resources to provide quality education for all. 

Gordon wrote on May 20^th, 2024 at 5:56pm:


Argh aye - personal choice, innit?  Choice-mobile...

Of course my pair both got scholarships to a private college, don' cha know?  No stuffing about... but I suppose I shouldn't discuss the situation of others with lesser offspring  (ooooOOOOOHHHHHHHHHH!!) ....

Gnads wrote on May 21^st, 2024 at 9:10am:


Why shouldn't they?

freediver wrote on May 21^st, 2024 at 9:34am:


Because they push their own ideology-based concept of education, not an education for the collective, eg based on universal morality, justice and fairness. 

Now.... why should private schools get government funding?

thegreatdivide wrote on May 21^st, 2024 at 12:27pm:


So you oppose private schools because they teach a different concept of morality and fairness from public schools?

How does it differ?

There are all sorts of good reasons to fund them. But no-one has presented a good reason not to. Just an idiotic mantra.

greggerypeccary wrote on May 21^st, 2024 at 4:59pm:


A lot of future leaners in Australia would lose their opportunity to network and develop connections ... some of them might even be introduced to the real world.....

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on May 21^st, 2024 at 5:38pm:


You went to a public school, didn't you Grapps?

freediver wrote on May 21^st, 2024 at 9:34am:


Here we go again ... you answer my question first.

greggerypeccary wrote on May 21^st, 2024 at 4:59pm:


Stiff shyte .. that's what happens in the private sector ......no?

And the govt funding that was given to those private schools could then be diverted to the public schools to cope with the extra students from the private ones that closed.

Gnads wrote on May 22^nd, 2024 at 12:01pm:


They'll just build new classrooms and toilet blocks overnight?

greggerypeccary wrote on May 22^nd, 2024 at 12:22pm:


they'd have the money to do it.

John Smith wrote on May 22^nd, 2024 at 6:05pm:


And the tradespeople?

The materials?

Setanta wrote on May 22^nd, 2024 at 6:50pm:


Who needs private schools when we have demountables?

Primary schools in NSW are pretty good.
Secondary schools are an abject failure and are totally propped up by the coaching industry.

People love the say how the kids with the best ATARs in NSW come from Govt selective schools but it's a total fraud because their parents pay for coaching to a financial level rivaling private school fees.

Gordon wrote on May 22^nd, 2024 at 9:40pm:

True.  Selective schools are hugely rorted by Asians. Coaching colleges for Asians are huge. Selective schools are full of their products.

Two of my sons went to private schools, one to a selective school. The brown kids were pointing to him as a rarity: a smart white kid because the coaching colleges where the Asians all go are full of tinted kiddies , Monday to Friday until 9, 10 pm. So they thought white kids were less inteligent because they didnt see any at those colleges and saw only three white kids in a class of 30 in the selective school.

Frank wrote on May 22^nd, 2024 at 9:43pm:


And all the doctors , nurses tradesmen etc that save your miserable arse are able to do so because they were educated in public schools.    
You dumbarse. 

freediver wrote on May 23^rd, 2024 at 6:43am:


It is a rort, a distortion, a manipulation.



My daughter might not get into the top class, but at least I know she's had a childhood


Securing a spot in the prestigious program is a numbers game — and with only 1,700 places for some 11,000 applicants, the odds are stacked against them.


While the OC stream was designed to give children a classroom environment where they could excel, in recent times, it seems the classes are full of those children who have excelled at sitting a test.

It means children (or rather, their parents) are forced to up the ante, forking out exorbitant fees for tuition colleges to get exam ready.

"Parents can spend more than $20,000 a year on preparation for [opportunity class] or selective high school tests," NSW Department of Education secretary Mark Scott remarked in 2017.

And they do.

At our local tuition college, intensive coaching holiday workshops cost $100 a day or more, depending on how many hours the children attend.

If the intention of the OC and selective stream classes was to give children from disadvantaged backgrounds a boost, then that has certainly gone out of the window.

There has been much talk about overhauling the test so it could not be coached.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-19/opportunity-class-nsw-children-coaching-c...

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-26/why-we-dont-need-more-selective-schools/8...

My high school years were generally a learning experience about how to socialise and be educated in a balance. Knowing what I know about life in general, if I could go back and redo my high school years, I would take it a lot more seriously on the education side, and be more casual about the social side of things.

Going home and starting up the Nintendo to rescue Mario's girlfriend is what had my grades going downhill. If I did my homework for an hour of the afternoon, I would have had everything done and could well have been a B-average student at the very least with even my worst subjects.

You don't need tutors. You need discipline to value education to succeed.

Quote:


What is the distinction you are trying to make? The only way to systematically measure, or even define academic ability is with an exam.

Quote:


How do you measure academic ability, or define it, other than by exam marks?