Private schools? Want em? Pay yourself. Every single cent.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011 at 1:35PM I'VE wanted to write about the social apartheid and false economy of private schools for a while. And the Government's "privatisation by stealth" of the education system. So a few months ago I hunted down the speech that writer Shane Moloney made to Scotch College. Reading it, I cheered, thumped the table and yelled "hallelujah" at the sheer brilliance and balls of Moloney. I then slumped in a heap thinking, "Well, there's no point me writing anything because he's said everything that I want to, but much better."
A recent chance meeting with Moloney had me gush about the speech and explain my quandary. He encouraged me to basically "just say it all again". So Shane Moloney, if you're out there, this one's for you. And for the 70 per cent of parents who send their children to government schools. And for the 70 per cent of students who attend them.
Here's something in the budget that you may have missed: federal funding for private schools will increase from $5.8 billion to $7.5 billion over the next five years. Funding to public schools will rise from $3.1 billion to $3.4 billion over the next five years. Shame on us.
Here's where I stand: private schools should not receive funding. That's it. We have a police force funded by the Government. If you want a bodyguard or private security, you pay for it out of your own pocket.
The same should go for schools. If you want your child to go to a school where they wear blazers so you can get over your own insecurities, or the chip on your own shoulder, you should pay for it. Every single cent.
And it should be compulsory for all politicians to send their children to government schools. And use only public health care.
It's liberating not to be worried about where my young sons will be going to high school. It will be one of the closest government high schools. If things don't work out, we'll try somewhere else. It's not their education. It's their school. Not the same thing. The school a child attends has no bearing on their future success or happiness. I'm disgusted by parents' nauseating obsession with the perfect school for their perfect child. Parents panic that any "wrong" decision may mess up their kid's potential trajectory. They seem to believe that kids can simply be programmed by their parents' desires. Here's a tip: instead of both working full time just so you can send your kids to a private school, cut down your work, be less stressed, stop outsourcing your life, send them to the local secondary and be home more. Teenagers need, and want, their parents to be around.
Sending children to private schools seems to be less about parents doing what they think is best for their child and more a case of parents wanting their children to have something better than every other child. Education is the entire community's responsibility and the outcome affects us all.
I am torn between saying that the public schools desperately need more funding and writing about how wonderful they are. Both of which are true.
The lessons kids learn in government schools — resilience, motivation, community and tolerance — hold them in much better stead than hand-holding, spoon-feeding, mollycoddling and segregation.
When I think of kids less fortunate than my own, I think of kids stuck in middle-class, single-sex, white ghettos from the age of five (or four if they're "gifted").
The independent and Christian schools are divisive, discriminatory, reliant on hand-outs and implicitly teach children that some kids deserve nicer playgrounds than others. Even within their own tribe. The preps at Burke Hall surely don't deserve better facilities than the preps at St Gabriel's in Reservoir. Give me a child when they are seven and I'll show you an invoice for $12,477 (excluding uniforms, excursions and music lessons) for something they could get around the corner free.
I added up the cost of fees for what it would cost to send my three children to a middle-of-the-range private school for six years. Not counting uniforms, excursions, transport, building funds etc. And it was about $330,000, give or take. My first thought? No one can be getting value for money. My second thought? I could buy my kids a degree for that amount of money, and I might have to if education keeps heading the way it is. But I'm hoping that my kids will all be tradies. Because the happiest blokes I know are the tradies. People say, "Stop funding private schools? It's not as easy as that."
Yes it is. Like smoking in hospitals, gender-based pay and taking babies away from unmarried mothers, funding private education is something we will look back on and be ashamed of.
Buy tickets to Catherine Deveny in Conversation with Samuel Johnson 17th June 2012
Reader Comments (20)
something is really backwards in this country... with the recent decision to increase the funding of school chaplains and in NSW, the churches having the final say on what makes up the ethics classes (the alternative to religion), making state schools increasingly unsecular and, as you point out - private schools increasingly publicly funded and public schools being defunded... I despair
I couldn't agree more. Can you imagine if there were only public schools? If there was a level playing field? How much more transparent the system would be, and how much easier it would be to make improvements across the board, so every child benefits, and not just an elite minority.
Well said. There has been little public discussion (that I've seen) about the distorting effects of 'protecting the brand' on decisions around addressing in-school problems such as bullying, alcohol and other drug use, issues of resilience etc.
That is, there is a profound disincentive for schools that are essentially marketed to (and for) the elite, to ever deal with this issues honestly and transparently. Which is itself yet another way that there is no such thing as an 'even playing field'.
Wow I get where you are coming from really I do but frankly your comments about people who send there children to private schools are offensive.
Yes I send my child to a private school but that is because the state of the public schools in my region are appalling and I wouldn't send my dog there. Am happy to pay, I am an at home mother (so yes I am there for my child) and my husband works 2 jobs so we can pay the fees. I am not asking for extra funding and I don't think your generalisations about private schools or parents who send their children to private schools are fair or accurate.
My child does not go to a single sex school, the christian school she attends is not discriminatory, I do not have a chip on my shoulder. Just want my child to have a good education. The local primary school has had several students whom are children of friends of mine and the Principal has stated to the parents directly "you are doing the right thing I wouldn't send my child here either". So tell me now that I am sending my child to a private school to get over my own insecurities.
Sorry but I back your argument in principle but your ranting is rude and offensive.
Lise, hear hear!
I think an appropriate policy would be to give $x per child to the school they attend. It doesn't matter whether its public or private.
Additional funding would then be decided on a case by case basis.
If there is a Principal out there who has stated to parents directly "you are doing the right thing I wouldn't send my child here either", or words to that effect, then they really need to be sacked, immediately.
Have you notified the Education Department?
I pay my taxes and therefore, I should be entitled to receive funding towards my kids education, regardless of whether I choose to TOP UP that funding.
The big problem with the removal of funding to private schools is that by doing so, the tuition fees would skyrocket and a SIGNIFICANT proportion of private school parents simply couldn't afford the fees.
Immediately that happens, 1000's and 1000's of students will flood back into the state system and overrun a system that already can't maintain their facilities and provide enough teachers.
It's exactly the same with medicare and private health insurance. If the 30% rebate was removed, heaps of people would drop health insurance and the public health system would collapse.
Finally, please don't assume that all private school students are from privileged backgrounds. Many of us make significant sacrifices on other things to enable our kids to attend these schools. Sure, some come from privileged backgrounds but not all.
We went school hunting for my daughter and given that my wife and I have taught in the state system, that was our preference. It turned out though, that the right school for our daughter was a private school.
Sadly, your opinion is held by two groups in our society - the bitter and twisted who have this ridiculous "us and them" outlook on life and the ill-informed. I'm still trying to work out which group you belong in.
Sorry, I'll get off my soapbox now ...
Tax is not a purchase. You pay tax as a duty mirroring your rights to any number of state provided services depending on your circumstances or merit. Because you pay tax does not mean you get to choose to have that tax pay for your kid's elitist private school education instead of your proportional to income share of everything else, including public schools, the state and country needs to pay for to facilitate business as usual.
When did so many Aussies become infected with the Tory disease? God didn't make these ppl wealthier, nor an innate superiority, nor their delusions of having worked so much harder then working class people. More then anything else they were lucky. Capitalism is a twisted, backward, convoluted, self-contradictory, and fundamentally irrational system; it never has been and never will be meritocracy. Forget the Oprahs and Gates, they're unrepresentative exceptions. The real story of capitalism is the millions working hard for a series of carrots on a sticks until they die, while a few live in opulence most are oblivious to on the value the labor of the masses created; for their economist high priests to speculate over and smear on the news nightly as though we were all in the same boat.
Absolutely, I've been appalled at the entitlement people who send their kids to schools (because they are overflowing with cash thanks to the govt).
So when are the private schools going to pay back the money for the school halls and other infrastructure paid for out of govt funds?
Zero funding and if the schools are struggling then parents can send their kids to public schools (and save themselves 20-30k a year).
PS And politicians should have to use public transport.
Actually, I'd have a problem with "independent" schools even if parents paid the whole fees themselves. It's still an out for the rich, and a method by which they can avoid sending their kids to the underfunded public schools (rather than actually funding them). And I see your argument that MPs should be forced to send their kids to state schools anyway, but I don't think that's enough of a solution. The RICH should be forced to send their kids to state schools as well. If they had to, you can bet they'd be properly funded.
Independent schools enable parents to indoctrinate their kids in particular religions. They enable them to demand special privileges for their kids. They create divisions.
I'd rather the government simply refused to recognise independent schools as legitimate providers of compulsory education. By all means, send your kids to some special facility after 3.15pm - but between 9am and 3.15pm they're mixing with everyone else's kids. It's called equality of opportunity.
"Immediately that happens, 1000's and 1000's of students will flood back into the state system...."
Sure, Neil. But that's a good thing. That's the whole point. Equality of opportunity etc. All kids having the same access to 9-3.15 schooling.
Nobody's suggesting doing it in isolation, though. You'd increase tax rates for the wealthy to pay for it. But they wouldn't have to pay school fees any more, so they wouldn't be too much worse off.
Hey here's a radical notion. If the government stopped funding independent schools altogether then put that money into teacher salaries and facilities for government schools people just may not need to send their kids to independent schools to get the best.
OH my God. LAst time I checked this was a democracy. You utter bunch of commies. I am a single mother and move heaven and earth to send my boys to an independant school. NOT for my ego.. how insulting and utterly absurd. I suppose my ego likes that i can never buy myself new clothes or have my hair done. I MAKE serious life sacrifies for a better education for my boys. FACT.. you idiots talk about federal funding.. what about state funding. You always seem to miss the cumilitave total of funding across the board. Or that each child in non governement school SAVES the goverment thousands of dollars EACH and every year.. If we pulled our kids out tomorrow your centres of excellent ( cough vomit) would collapse overnight. Many teahers in publisc schools dont give a toss and are abused and assulted by thugs. AND i have no right to want to protect my children from the garbage in these holes. I am not overflowing with cash. I will never own my own home. your radical left winged bullshit makes me sick to the core. WE HAVE A CHOICE. Get your facts straights. maybe we are not so much as pricking our ego as your are bitter and jealous because your parents didnt care enough about your education. This country is damned. .
Addit. I pay taxes and am entitled to my share of what is spent on education per head per child, Therefore if anything it should be dollar for dollar CUMILITIVE for both state and federal. Most people who send their kids to non hole schools are not wealthy.
http://www.vicparentscouncil.vic.edu.au/current-issues/funding-a-statistics
"non-government school children receive only a fraction of what it costs to educate government school children. This means that Catholic and independent school students DO NOT receive more government money for their education than their counterparts in government schools. The shortfall is made up by parents who choose to spend their after tax dollars on their children's education through fees"
All these people talking about how their child saves the system money by going private. Silly. The schools already have facilities for more children, esp. in the richer areas, and the cost per student doesn't rise util the class becomes full. Then there are costs to provide more teachers and resources, but the cost is the same whether the class has 2 or 20 kids in it. So fill em up.
"I pay my taxes, I am entitled to choose where that tax goes" say the private school parents.
OK then. I don't have kids. I'd like to nominate that my taxes not go towards education at all, since I'm not sending any children into the system. Also, I'd like to nominate that my taxes be spend on health rather than, say, defence. And I don't want my taxes spent on spreading religion via that tax breaks churches get.
And I'd also like a lollypop, if anyone's got one.
What's that? I don't get to choose where my taxes are spent? Well, what a gip! Isn't this democracy thing all about choice?
I"m a single mum with an Aboriginal child, I sent her to the local primary school for 6 years, at Grade 1 she was assessed as having a learning difficulty, which has required her to have two hours of tutoring a week. Her school government school has not supported her learning at all, and I have had to be on their back the entire time. Yes she get tutorial funding though the Aborigional tutorial assistance scheme, but it took me two years of beauracy to get it! I could of sent her to a private or catholic school but I chose to keep her there for other reasons. She has been accepted to a single sex private school on an Aborigional scholarship which is fully funded by the parents of the school. I will be paying less than what it would cost to send her to a government high school. I am grateful that they will be giving her the oppurtunity to learn at her own pace, give her the intensive support she needs, and work with her exisiting strengths. It has absolutly nothing to do with me wanting her to go to a private school, she will just have the support she needs which i cant get from anywhere else in our school community. Not all parents of children who send their kids to private schools are as you describe, and yes i find your comments insulting. I think your arguments are good but you'll loose alot of support because your always on the attack, and it's always directed at parents! Your sweeping generalisations are factually incorrect!
Your generalisations in this article are astounding! Not all public schools are great, just like not all private schools are great. To say private schools teach "hand-holding, spoon-feeding, mollycoddling and segregation." are you serious?
Or would you just prefer that people who choose to or can afford private schools due to funding assistance from the government all send their children to public schools? Yeah that would be a great idea seeing how most public schools are bursting at the seams with capacity.
When o when will the judging stop? Why can't people just let people do what they see best for THEIR family? Because their 'your' tax dollars being spent? If you really want to make a change how about becoming a politician?
Oh and P.S. I went to a public school.
I'm amazed by the argument that if subsidies for private schools are cut, there will be a flood of kids into the public system. It suggests that if parents find that they can't afford to keep their child in their current school, that they will automatically have to resort to the public system.
I thought there was a variety of schools at a variety of prices. We have been told that there should be a "choice". Well there is. It is unlikely that parents who can afford to send their kids to the most expensive schools would even notice the change. Those on the edge of the price bracket would simply move their child to the next tier down. Sure, there will be a few who will need to drop down to the public system, but surely not the unmanageable torrent suggested by some proponents of government funding for private schools.