Why do private schools deserve state funding again? (1 Viewer)

[HazzRat]

I came on here to justify why private schools deserve public funding, but they don’t need that much funding.

But basically not every private school parent is heading to the alps every summer break and sending their kid to Sydney Grammar. Most are just normal middle class people who chose to send their kid to the local catholic school for slightly better extra-curricular opportunities.

That is fine. And they shouldn’t be expected to pay Sydney Grammar prices to do this.

So what should happen is the government subsidises these cheaper private schools to encourage parents to leave the public system and reduce their fiscal burden. All together it would be a net positive for society. The government would pay less for the average private school student than the public school student, contracting the budget. The parents would financially be able to send their kid to a private school on a middle class salary. And the tax payer would get to pay less. All in all a good thing.

However our government has succumbed to the liberal party’s bullshit in many ways and we don’t get this win-win-win scenario. Instead we get a win for the parents of Sydney Grammar yay I hope they get a new swimming pool the old one’s already a decade old .

 

[iloveeggs]

I came on here to justify why private schools deserve public funding, but they don’t need that much funding.

But basically not every private school parent is heading to the alps every summer break and sending their kid to Sydney Grammar. Most are just normal middle class people who chose to send their kid to the local catholic school for slightly better extra-curricular opportunities.

That is fine. And they shouldn’t be expected to pay Sydney Grammar prices to do this.

So what should happen is the government subsidises these cheaper private schools to encourage parents to leave the public system and reduce their fiscal burden. All together it would be a net positive for society. The government would pay less for the average private school student than the public school student, contracting the budget. The parents would financially be able to send their kid to a private school on a middle class salary. And the tax payer would get to pay less. All in all a good thing.

However our government has succumbed to the liberal party’s bullshit in many ways and we don’t get this win-win-win scenario. Instead we get a win for the parents of Sydney Grammar yay I hope they get a new swimming pool the old one’s already a decade old .

totally agree but i still cant digest the idea that some schools have swimming pools on campus. my school rents out the crappy local outdoor swimming pool for sswimming carnivals and has the non-competitive swimmers in the grout filled kiddy pool no joke

 

[Eagle Mum]

private schools get more federal funding whereas public schools get more state funding, it adds up to only slightly more funding for private schools which yeah is pretty insane

I am definitely an advocate for more funding to public schools, but it’s also important to be clear about the details.
The full statement was ‘The NSW Teachers Federation reported that more than half of private schools in New South Wales now receive more combined Government funding (Commonwealth and State) per student than public schools of very similar size, location and with similar student needs.’

A very large proportion of private schools are Catholic diocese churches that charge modest fees of around $5K per year and take students with disabilities and special needs. The state funding that they receive are needs based and for these kids. IMHO, public schools ought to receive more funding, but I don’t have any objections to needs based funding for students in either public or private schools. I suspect these private schools submit more applications for additional needs funding as their parent population are probably more motivated to get their child(ren) assessed and diagnosed with learning and other disabilities, than public school parents.

 

[Ilikedrivingbymycarandthe]

i think we get the point in terms of taxpayers and things like that but as you may be able to understand when a privileged private school principal advocates for decreased govt support for public/selective schools it becomes harder to think in terms of kids of taxpayers going to all kinds of schools etc.

this is bc going to a private school and paying full tuition is a privilege, and frankly speaking a premium, that the parents of these students are paying on purpose for their belief that they will get a superior experience and quality of education in that school as opposed to the public ones.

for example the full costs to study Y12 in Meriden is approx 42K per annum, a PREMIUM cost that is not mandatory for anyone but those that choose to pay it. so as you may imagine its just a bit hard to understand for a lot of people why even after having to pay that much for resources and tuition taxpayers still need to contribute more towards their education.

in all honesty private schools like Meriden need to recieve some budget cuts from the govt bc surely they can be self sufficient with the exorbitant fees they charge (and i dont know, maybe if they dont build that aquatic centre planned for 2026, they could save some cash). i dont see why allowing more kids to experience premium education is the average taxpayer's concern when we are going through a housing crisis right now. like people cant afford a house to live in and we want to pour money into non-essential premiums.

again im sure some private schools could use some govt funding but the context of the lady's statements matter and thats why im using Meriden and schools like Meriden as an example.

im glad you were kind and able to contribute towards local school improvement but im sure you did it without an intention to benefit any specific group and more so for the general good. thats really what is lacking in the statements made by that principal i'm sure. there is a hint of malice in wanting a specific set of schools to be defunded when they serve a purpose in creating a pathway for individuals without the financial privilege to pay for private schools to still attend an academically rigorous school or be in what they percieve to be a better school environment.

i hope this principal lady is able to take a trip to Girraween High School someday and take a good look at the type of school she wants defunded by the govt. she def wont find a "centre for drama and music" there nor plans for a swimming pool of any sort

No exactly, I def agree with this. The only private schools I can understand, deserving funding r those located in rural/regional communities especially ones that serve as boarding schools for families who don’t have close access to education. However a majority of the private schools which r located in Sydney ( in regards to NSW) don’t deserve that level of funding. I also def think there was malice/hypocrisy in Meriden’s principal’s suggestion. Because if you’re acknowledging the state needs to treat families that rely on public education better, why would you proceed to suggest a cut on student selective school numbers and funding. She said it was bc selective schools encouraged tutoring but it was a very wishy washy reason that made no sense. Idk how ppl can be por-private but then not like selective schools, seems hypocritical

 

[Ilikedrivingbymycarandthe]

I am definitely an advocate for more funding to public schools, but it’s also important to be clear about the details.
The full statement was ‘The NSW Teachers Federation reported that more than half of private schools in New South Wales now receive more combined Government funding (Commonwealth and State) per student than public schools of very similar size, location and with similar student needs.’

A very large proportion of private schools are Catholic diocese churches that charge modest fees of around $5K per year and take students with disabilities and special needs. The state funding that they receive are needs based and for these kids. IMHO, public schools ought to receive more funding, but I don’t have any objections to needs based funding for students in either public or private schools. I suspect these private schools submit more applications for additional needs funding as their parent population are probably more motivated to get their child(ren) assessed and diagnosed with learning and other disabilities, than public school parents.

Hey I had some friends at these modest catholic schools that supported students with special needs and I still don’t think it holds merit. Like I get what you mean, but as these catholic schools actively avoid students with ACTUAL disabilities and special needs— usually only giving scholarships to kids located rurally who would benefit the schools in terms of diversity ( and they accept less than 4 on average). Furthermore, the reason why ( at least what im told by my ex priv school teachers) is that priv school kids get diagnosed because their parents can afford to get it assessed and for HSC benefits if yk. I think there r some private schools that do support students with special needs, but a majority aren’t interested in that- especially Catholic schools ( at least in Sydney). So, while some deserve funding, a majority don’t nearly help the community enough to actually deserve it.

I def get your point tho. I just don’t think many of these schools r helping enough as they are able to

 

[Ilikedrivingbymycarandthe]

totally agree but i still cant digest the idea that some schools have swimming pools on campus. my school rents out the crappy local outdoor swimming pool for sswimming carnivals and has the non-competitive swimmers in the grout filled kiddy pool no joke

Hahah mood omg. I moved to a selective school bc the resources at my reg public were so bad, and next door was literally one of Sydney’s most infamous boys priv schools. What makes it worse is that they’re not even grateful for their facilities, wdym you have a front yard larger than my school’s oval and don’t put it to use

 

[HazzRat]

priv school kids get diagnosed because their parents can afford to get it assessed and for HSC benefits if yk

yh I swear the majority of adhd diagnoses r just bullshit

 

[Ilikedrivingbymycarandthe]

yh I swear the majority of adhd diagnoses r just bullshit

No bc apparently by y12 suddenly 50% of priv kids have mental health issues that “DisADvanTagE” them. That’s a real stat btw

 

[C2H6O]

No bc apparently by y12 suddenly 50% of priv kids have mental health issues that “DisADvanTagE” them. That’s a real stat btw

i feel like a factor of that might be that in public schools some students arent made aware that provisions exist or that they're eligible for one, whereas private schools that care about their reputation want all their students to make use of all the perks so they make sure everyone who is eligible does apply. also maybe cause the students actually go and get diagnosed or smth

 

[iloveeggs]

She said it was bc selective schools encouraged tutoring but it was a very wishy washy reason that made no sense. Idk how ppl can be por-private but then not like selective schools, seems hypocritical

i feel like this argument falls apart really easily. a lot of kids in private school still go to tutoring. but i think maybe she genuinely thought kids in her school and other private schools didnt go to tutoring (my school deludes themselves that way too, they want to attribute the success to the school not to the tutoring). students also dont always disclose the tutoring they go to to their teachers as well so again this could have been a genuine mistake. then again you shouldnt talk out of your butt if you dont know if youre right so i dont think shes absolved.

but make no mistake private school kids make up a huge amount of the kids that go to some form or tutoring outside of school hours so its not the selective school system that promotes tutoring, its just the HSC system in general.

selective schools also cant afford the same salaries highly qualified teachers in HSC subjects get in the private sector so a lot of them flock there or literally anywhere else instead (sometimes even DET administrative jobs, administrative positions such as being a principal or smth that doesnt have a role in teaching etc). we couldnt even afford atomi for my school (top 50 selective) so that should tell you what kind of situation we are in. i can think of non-selective government schools that can pool together enough money for atomi but we cant afford to.

there is a reason why a lot of selective kids do tutoring, esp in harder subject areas such as sciences, maths and english and its a consequence of us not really recieving the funding we need to maintain the good teachers or resources that prevent us from needing the tutoring in the first place.

and heres where it circles back to a counter for her argument that selective schools should be defunded. we dont have anything else left to take away man, selective schools will not be self sufficient without funding bc more effort is put into them in terms of academics beyond what public schools do (thats the whole point of the selective system, to cater for kids who want to be extended beyond the average student in the state).