Public vs Private School funding

[Carn The Berries]

broken system is broken

Revealed: Private school students reap thousands more than public students in disability funding

Exclusive: New data shows children with disabilities at wealthy fee-paying schools are receiving up to six times the government support funding as those at public schools

www.theguardian.com

Geez... Would be interested to see what data they've used to come to these findings... The first school that is mentioned has a grand total of... 43 enrolments! Feels a bit cherry pick'y to me to use them as an example of the per student funding being provided. That could literally be one kid...

 

[Gralin]

Geez... Would be interested to see what data they've used to come to these findings... The first school that is mentioned has a grand total of... 43 enrolments! Feels a bit cherry pick'y to me to use them as an example of the per student funding being provided. That could literally be one kid...

I mean its clear from the article that the states are very much yeah we won't/can't tell you how much funding individual students get or what we do with the federal funding we receive that is for an individual student

 

[Carn The Berries]

I mean its clear from the article that the states are very much yeah we won't/can't tell you how much funding individual students get or what we do with the federal funding we receive that is for an individual student

Which, interestingly, is one of the major claims that critics of the non-government system have of their funding allocations models, particularly the Catholic ones!

 

[Gralin]

Which, interestingly, is one of the major claims that critics of the non-government system have of their funding allocations models, particularly the Catholic ones!

I mean they'd be looking at data that says the commonwealth paid this school xx dollars for these students

whether the school allocated it correctly wasn't part of the article, just that the school had definitely received the federal funding if it was not a public school

for the public schools the government passes that funding to the state and the state was saying they couldn't tell you how that flowed through to the school it was meant to

 

[Not Important]

while state schools are deprived with some parents paying for some services. outrageous

 

[Carn The Berries]

while state schools are deprived with some parents paying for some services. outrageous

I was 6 months out with my estimate... Schools are on a path to the correct funding levels and have been for some time...

This gets reported every few months as though it is some new information, usually like this with no context...

 

[Chief]

I was 6 months out with my estimate... Schools are on a path to the correct funding levels and have been for some time...

This gets reported every few months as though it is some new information, usually like this with no context...

Do you have more context?

 

[Carn The Berries]

Do you have more context?

There was a similar article quoted several months ago, discussing the fact that some non-government schools are over-funded compared to what the SRS calculates. A few years ago, over-funded schools were put on a path to 100% funding, some with a time frame of up to 10 years. There are many schools that are still over-funded, all would be on a trajectory (of varying lengths) back to 100% SRS funding.

Most of the articles posted that talk about this issue conveniently leave out this part of the story.

 

[Chief]

A few years ago, over-funded schools were put on a path to 100% funding, some with a time frame of up to 10 years. There are many schools that are still over-funded, all would be on a trajectory (of varying lengths) back to 100% SRS funding.

How do they square that extended time line? Existing projects?

 

[Carn The Berries]

How do they square that extended time line? Existing projects?

I'm not 100% sure of the methodology (if there was one at all). I suspect it took into account the financial position of the school (probably using average SES) and how far above the 100% SRS that they were.

 

[Gruffles]

There was a similar article quoted several months ago, discussing the fact that some non-government schools are over-funded compared to what the SRS calculates. A few years ago, over-funded schools were put on a path to 100% funding, some with a time frame of up to 10 years. There are many schools that are still over-funded, all would be on a trajectory (of varying lengths) back to 100% SRS funding.

Most of the articles posted that talk about this issue conveniently leave out this part of the story.

If Chief or anyone else wants to explore this a little more then they can get the information here:

• Quality Schools Package info
• Better & Fairer Schools Agreement (note, agreement starts next year)

 

[Not Important]

I was 6 months out with my estimate... Schools are on a path to the correct funding levels and have been for some time...

This gets reported every few months as though it is some new information, usually like this with no context...

there has been significant context in the thread. private schools have had their snouts in the taxpayer trough for decades and the balance in favour of them is growing. and it’s getting worse. check the thread content rather than just singing from the hymn sheet of the independent schools p.r group

 

[Reg Grundy35]

there has been significant context in the thread. private schools have had their snouts in the taxpayer trough for decades and the balance in favour of them is growing. and it’s getting worse. check the thread content rather than just singing from the hymn sheet of the independent schools p.r group

Amen! I can't stand to even engage with defenders of the current rort. Turns my guts that people could think its ok.

 

[Gruffles]

I was 6 months out with my estimate... Schools are on a path to the correct funding levels and have been for some time...

This gets reported every few months as though it is some new information, usually like this with no context...

Just an FYI, but you weren't actually 6 months out. The article that the X thread is referring to in Not Important's post is actually the same Guardian article Not Important posted here 4 months ago.

 

[Sttew]

Just an FYI, but you weren't actually 6 months out. The article that the X thread is referring to in Not Important's post is actually the same Guardian article Not Important posted here 4 months ago.

Not important then?

 

[Carn The Berries]

there has been significant context in the thread. private schools have had their snouts in the taxpayer trough for decades and the balance in favour of them is growing. and it’s getting worse. check the thread content rather than just singing from the hymn sheet of the independent schools p.r group

Can you please point to how the balance is tipping further in favour of non-government schools? As I have stated on more than one occasion, currently over-funded schools are on a path back to the appropriate level of funding as per the SRS framework. Posting headlines like the one you provided is misleading at best and deliberately deceptive at worst. It is known that there are schools that will remain over-funded for the next few years, yet people try to use that data to show a horrible inequity like it's something that has only just been discovered (and isn't being rectified) without acknowledging that this is a known issue with the previous framework that is actually being corrected (albeit, over a time horizon of several years).

THAT is the context I'm referring to...

There is a debate to be had about what level of funding non-government schools should receive (i.e. what the SRS framework should spit out) but sensationalist headlines like the one you posted have absolutely nothing to do with that conversation.

Also thanks to Gruffles... Turns out I gave you too much credit and thought it was 6 months since you trotted this out... Apparently it was only 4...

 

[Chief]

currently over-funded schools are on a path back to the appropriate level of funding as per the SRS framework

Which, to my mind, should be: you get the proper amount next year and we are putting in laws and rights of action to stop this rip off happening in future.

 

[Gruffles]

Which, to my mind, should be: you get the proper amount next year and we are putting in laws and rights of action to stop this rip off happening in future.

I think I'd prefer the more rational gradual approach that has been adopted to avoid a potential mass displacement of private students to public schools that wouldn't have the capacity to properly absorb them.

The funding model needs fixing, and there is some progress happening in that area (note: I feel there is more to be done), but ripping the band-aid off is only going to be to the detriment of students.

 

[Chief]

I think I'd prefer the more rational gradual approach that has been adopted to avoid a potential mass displacement of private students to public schools that wouldn't have the capacity to properly absorb them.

So do you think that once this funding has tapered off, those students will be in the public system anyway?

The funding model needs fixing, and there is some progress happening in that area (note: I feel there is more to be done), but ripping the band-aid off is only going to be to the detriment of students.

 

[Gruffles]

So do you think that once this funding has tapered off, those students will be in the public system anyway?

Not necessarily. It doesn't matter what school you are (independent or not), you've done budgeting based on financial forecasting. If you suddenly had funding removed then the only logical way to recuperate that sudden loss is to significantly raise fees, which is where I'd see the sudden loss of students.

If it was gradual then schools can adjust their forecasting to take this into account and potentially find alternative revenue sources so that the loss of funding isn't fully incorporated into fees. Sure, fees will likely rise, but not as much. Some students will leave, but not as many and in a more gradual and controlled fashion.

 

[Chief]

Where would this alternate funding come from?

 

[Not Important]

Not necessarily. It doesn't matter what school you are (independent or not), you've done budgeting based on financial forecasting. If you suddenly had funding removed then the only logical way to recuperate that sudden loss is to significantly raise fees, which is where I'd see the sudden loss of students.

If it was gradual then schools can adjust their forecasting to take this into account and potentially find alternative revenue sources so that the loss of funding isn't fully incorporated into fees. Sure, fees will likely rise, but not as much. Some students will leave, but not as many and in a more gradual and controlled fashion.

perhaps rather than only raising fees, cut back on the opulence and concentrate on the necessities?

 

[Gruffles]

Where would this alternate funding come from?

Well, potentially they could lease out their facilities to externals. Maybe classroom space to after hours education programs? Sporting facilities to clubs? Things like that.

 

[Gruffles]

perhaps rather than only raising fees, cut back on the opulence and concentrate on the necessities?

I'm never going to support the grandiose levels that those ultra elite schools have gone to. But that opulence is money already spent.

 

[Chief]

Well, potentially they could lease out their facilities to externals. Maybe classroom space to after hours education programs? Sporting facilities to clubs? Things like that.

So the government has been funding them so these assets could sit idle when? It just doesn't sound like good management.

I mean, the private schools in Brisbane are WAY over funded, and ridiculously over developed. It's a non-stop rort from what I've seen. This is mainly why I'd shut them down tomorrow and put the land and facilities in state hands.

Qld Ed already runs selective entry schools, with large specialised facilities. They can do it, and sounds like with much better use of the assets than the private organisations.