Private schools are unfair? Discussion of a TABOO topic [SPLIT]

[Russ]

It's on page 165.

Page 165, to the best of my reading, does not suggest we divert all funding from private to public, all it does is come up with a funding number basis for each student.

About practicality, perhaps it is not practical straight away, but in my opinion it is a much better long term strategy than disregarding it because of its initial impracticality and continuing the current strategy.

So you agree with me then, that's it not practical? If you have no evidence to support it being practical, then why are you willing to risk the education system on what is basically a guess? Implementing a system solely "because the current one needs fixing" is not enough. Having $X available means nothing if you can't actually address the consequences of cutting funding, which is where my doubts are.

In answer to your other question, it would help if you clarify a little. What about the increase in private school fees?

It was just one of a number of examples of problems associated with removing public funding. I can't remember if you mentioned it before.

[brenden]

I skimmed over so apologies if its already been mentioned,
but i think one thing that public schools lack sometimes is a strong culture than  private schools bring.
Im not saying public schools have NO culture at all, but in most cases, the learning culture is better than public schools.
and thats probably one advantage in terms of education; the facilities you get and stuff..

This is certainly one of the bigger differences.

[ninwa]

Also my school provoked a minor international incident once

We have an internationalism program for year 9 students where we visit China for 5 weeks and some idiot in my year decided to graffiti on the Terracotta Soldiers with permanent marker

[brenden]

Also my school provoked a minor international incident once

We have an internationalism program for year 9 students where we visit China for 5 weeks and some idiot in my year decided to graffiti on the Terracotta Soldiers with permanent marker

That was pretty bright. He must have duxed.

[paulsterio]

Also my school provoked a minor international incident once

We have an internationalism program for year 9 students where we visit China for 5 weeks and some idiot in my year decided to graffiti on the Terracotta Soldiers with permanent marker

hahahahaha, that is actually hilarious!! permanent marker?! LOL!

[slothpomba]

Also my school provoked a minor international incident once

We have an internationalism program for year 9 students where we visit China for 5 weeks and some idiot in my year decided to graffiti on the Terracotta Soldiers with permanent marker

Don't forget his other fine work:

[Truck]

Also my school provoked a minor international incident once

We have an internationalism program for year 9 students where we visit China for 5 weeks and some idiot in my year decided to graffiti on the Terracotta Soldiers with permanent marker

I remember seeing that on the news way back! On a random note, your school's China program is pretty damn awesome.

@TTTT (also commonly referred to as Tom Tank, Triple T Tanker, Tommy T.T Totalled etc), as much as ideologically I would want there to be no funding to the majority of private schools, practically I also don't think it's possible for that to happen, at least in the short-term. I think the policies should be directed towards raising the standards of public schools progressively, with the eventual aim of eliminating the majority of private schools not through forced elimination, but through having a public system so good that people will no longer see the point in sending their kids to a private school. I don't think that'll be a reality any time soon, but I think that is what the government should be striving towards with their education policy.

[ninwa]

That was pretty bright. He must have duxed.

Yeah my school expelled him because they didn't understand his genius

[paulsterio]

Truck, amongst others, I still don't understand your motive for taking away all of the funding from private schools, what you're essentially doing, per se, is taking away water from a strong agricultural area that is growing well and pouring it all on drought land where it will just not be absorbed by the soil.

You're essentially making private schools worse off and public schools not really much better. Like I have said before, I'm a fan of private schools, but it's not an issue of money, you can chuck in all the money you want, but it still doesn't give you results.

[Lasercookie]

Truck, amongst others, I still don't understand your motive for taking away all of the funding from private schools, what you're essentially doing, per se, is taking away water from a strong agricultural area that is growing well and pouring it all on drought land where it will just not be absorbed by the soil.

But what if that drought land was prepared before the watering though? I think the very strong parts of the agricultural area could still survive with the water that they get from other sources. There's a lot more drought land (I think anyway) and if it was saved then maybe we would be able to live in a land of green and happiness.

Of course that's probably a bit too idealistic, some of the plants that do get their water from other sources are also struggling to grow well.

[paulsterio]

Laseredd, I understand what you're saying, but there's a difference between a school that needs money and a school that simply needs a culture change. I agree, there are schools which need money for a very specific purpose, but apart from that, it won't change the classroom dynamic.

Buying new smartboards or buying new computers won't change a school from being a low performing one to a high performing one. Innovative measures such as streaming, changing the classroom dynamic and trying to make an impact on the culture will all make more difference for less money. Like I've said before, even if you build a state of the art chemistry lab, it's not automatically going to make the students there more interested in chemistry.

[Truck]

Truck, amongst others, I still don't understand your motive for taking away all of the funding from private schools, what you're essentially doing, per se, is taking away water from a strong agricultural area that is growing well and pouring it all on drought land where it will just not be absorbed by the soil.

You're essentially making private schools worse off and public schools not really much better. Like I have said before, I'm a fan of private schools, but it's not an issue of money, you can chuck in all the money you want, but it still doesn't give you results.

Funding inequality, whilst not being the only issue that effects education (and far from it), is still an element of inequality which exists and should be rectified, and it's not crazy to assume that having roofs that don't leak, textbooks + co-curricular programs for students and passionate teachers won't in some way improve educational outcomes - and these things cost money. Programs to help "change the culture" as you say are costly, and a multi-pronged approach of increased funding and changing the way education works is the only way to combat the issues.

With that said, I'm not advocating taking money away from Private schools right now. What I'm saying is that we should invest in making public schools as good or better then private schools (schools such as GWSC, Uni High, Balwyn North are examples of top performing schools) so that the necessity for a private school system no longer exists. When the time comes that Public schools can support all private school students with a comparative level of education, and before you say that's impossible have a look at Finland as a good example, THEN I think we should stop funding private schools.

Australia ranks #1 on the Human development education index with Finland, New Zealend and Denmark. Why we can't provide a system as good as Finlands or Denmarks is therefore beyond comprehension.

[MonsieurHulot]

It's on page 165.

Page 165, to the best of my reading, does not suggest we divert all funding from private to public, all it does is come up with a funding number basis for each student.

Reading back through your posts, it seems I gave you the impression that I thought the Gonski report supported redirecting all funds to public schools. That wasn't my intention. I cited the Gonski report for the $10,500 figure; which is on page 165. As far as I know, the report doesn't support what I'm proposing.

About practicality, perhaps it is not practical straight away, but in my opinion it is a much better long term strategy than disregarding it because of its initial impracticality and continuing the current strategy.

So you agree with me then, that's it not practical? If you have no evidence to support it being practical, then why are you willing to risk the education system on what is basically a guess? Implementing a system solely "because the current one needs fixing" is not enough. Having $X available means nothing if you can't actually address the consequences of cutting funding, which is where my doubts are.

Apart from the unlikely possibility of all private school students moving to public schools (in which case there would be enough money for each student) you haven't provided any negative consequences.

In answer to your other question, it would help if you clarify a little. What about the increase in private school fees?

It was just one of a number of examples of problems associated with removing public funding. I can't remember if you mentioned it before.

I don't see how it is a problem. If the costs are too high, send your kid to a public school, which, with help from the extra funding, will provide a high class education.