-
Looking for HSC notes and resources? Check out our Notes & Resources page
Public AND Private Schools (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter ujuphleg
- Start date
- Status
"NSW government schools educate more than two-thirds of all students in the state, yet they get less than a quarter of Commonwealth funding. How is this fair?" - NSW Minister for Education, Dr Andrew Refshauge
Edit: I've also found this from abs.gov.au
More than two-thirds (68%) of full-time students attended government schools, compared with 72% a decade earlier. Between 1993 and 2003 the number of full-time students increased by 1% (26,600) in government schools and by 22% (193,700) in non-government schools.
Last edited:
yep sarah, your figures are correct.
i'm not saying that private schools should stop getting funding altogether mind. they have their purpose,and in the words of mr howard, its all about choice.
but i still can't get over the fact that some schools like the ones mentioned before (upper north shore and eastern suburbs) private schools continue to get heaps of money from the government when there are private schools in western sydney in need of money and public schools all over sydney in DIRE need of more money, not to mention the rest of the state and the country.
the other thing is, cro_angel also mentioned that government school students get $9164 a year and private gets $4065 but my question is which government?? the state government is the one responsible for public schools so naturally we get more money. but at federal level there is a huge imbalance and the money simply isn't going where its needed.
thats why i can't stand the phrase public versus private. we aren't versing anyone its more of a needy as opposed to privelaged...
does that make sense?
i'm not saying that private schools should stop getting funding altogether mind. they have their purpose,and in the words of mr howard, its all about choice.
but i still can't get over the fact that some schools like the ones mentioned before (upper north shore and eastern suburbs) private schools continue to get heaps of money from the government when there are private schools in western sydney in need of money and public schools all over sydney in DIRE need of more money, not to mention the rest of the state and the country.
the other thing is, cro_angel also mentioned that government school students get $9164 a year and private gets $4065 but my question is which government?? the state government is the one responsible for public schools so naturally we get more money. but at federal level there is a huge imbalance and the money simply isn't going where its needed.
thats why i can't stand the phrase public versus private. we aren't versing anyone its more of a needy as opposed to privelaged...
does that make sense?
ameh
dirty trick
You can choose to pay ridiculous amounts of money to send your child to a non-government school but in the end it's ot the money that pays for your childs motivation and dedication towards the HSC
cro_angel
<3<3<3
well that was the only conclusion i could make from what i found.. cuz i couldnt see why else private schools would be getting more from the figures from the parents council..
ummm government schools get 83% funding from state government.. 12% funding from commonwealth government and 5% from private input
while non government schools get 43% private input.. 45% commonwealth government and 12% state government
i go to a public school for saturday school.. and they have about the same amount of computers as my school.. and some things my school doesnt have like an internet cafe and gymnasium.. and a huge ass playground.. comparing it to my school i would see it as very similar besides the fact they have graffiti on their desks and we dont..
from a couple of people from other public schools.. they are about on the same level as this school.. and if public schools like that can have such good facilities why cant others if everyone gets around the same amount of funding?
and if they dont get the same amount of funding.. why not? why do some public schools get more than others? how do they decide how much each school gets?
[edit] the %'s are what goes towards each student from the different sources of funding..
ummm government schools get 83% funding from state government.. 12% funding from commonwealth government and 5% from private input
while non government schools get 43% private input.. 45% commonwealth government and 12% state government
i go to a public school for saturday school.. and they have about the same amount of computers as my school.. and some things my school doesnt have like an internet cafe and gymnasium.. and a huge ass playground.. comparing it to my school i would see it as very similar besides the fact they have graffiti on their desks and we dont..
from a couple of people from other public schools.. they are about on the same level as this school.. and if public schools like that can have such good facilities why cant others if everyone gets around the same amount of funding?
and if they dont get the same amount of funding.. why not? why do some public schools get more than others? how do they decide how much each school gets?
[edit] the %'s are what goes towards each student from the different sources of funding..
Last edited:
snapperhead
Has decided to retire
*sigh*... this thread has been done to death before.....
Please get your funding facts straight before you start bashing either system but to "correct" a few things said in here:
there are more state school students than "private" (I really dislike this term as it lumps everyone together which is wrong as there are many systems and "private" doesnt describe them all.
the state govt funds the state schools and federal govt funds non-public schools (majority). Some funding for non-public comes from the state govt but majority is from the federal govt.
funding is now based on socio-economic factors. Non-public schools are categorised 1-11 with the majority of Catholic schools being cat.9,10 and 11 (ie at the bottom of the scale). There are but a small handfull of top cat. schools and these tend to be the small, elite "private" schools (I dont like this one but its the way it is...)
most of the money figures you see quoted by the media for non-public schools include teachers wages which constitute the bulk of funding from the gov't. Figures quoted for state schools generally dont include teachers wages hence the difference in figures. Its called propaganda people... LOL
all schools are entitled to funding from the govt (state and/ or federal)... indirect result of the Public Instruction Act of 1880 which sawte birth of both the state school system and the Catholic school system
the govt parties are aware of the funding issue as was seen from the last election campaign when the opposition switched its argument from lambasting all non-govt schools to naming elite cat. 1 and 2 "private" schools. These schools in question were later found out to have received lump payments (which I agree are wrong) of what was "owed" to them ie they got 3 years payment in one hit....this was wrong but it accounted for the large figure of $$ that the govt was "giving" to them....
the whole us vs them argument is wrong as there are schools on both sides of the fence that are suffering eg about the pool...I was down at Hurlstone Ag College on the weekend and their facilities would rival any non-govt school including a pool.... and they are a selective ag school which IMHO is a bit dodgy as how can any govt school be selective and a boarding school?? Maybe I have got this one wrong but the idea is a bit strange....
Funding to school districts is administered through the govt (both state and federal) so if anyone is to blame for the lack of facilities in state schools, I would be looking at the administration not the theory that "they stole our money" as the state education budget (esp. when combined with the federal contribution to state schools) blows what non-govt schools get per student out of the water (and
yes, this also takes into account the 70%/30% ratio of students).
BTW dont forget that the teachers (including myself) are lobbying for a pay rise in line with the cost of living blah blah blah and the State Teachers Union is using the funding issue to yet again bash the non-govt schools yet they can not get anywhere without the direct support and help (and to be honest, the guidance of non-govt teachers as the IEU is making better inroads than the State Teachers union re trade negiotiations). The have shown this in the media but hey still continue to inflame division in the community. A case of biting the hand that feeds you when you think about it......
Like I said, please dont believe the retoric as its just politics..
Sorry about the long post but this whole thing is BS and will change when there is an election as the "true facts" strangely emerge (if history is any guide)
Please get your funding facts straight before you start bashing either system but to "correct" a few things said in here:
there are more state school students than "private" (I really dislike this term as it lumps everyone together which is wrong as there are many systems and "private" doesnt describe them all.
the state govt funds the state schools and federal govt funds non-public schools (majority). Some funding for non-public comes from the state govt but majority is from the federal govt.
funding is now based on socio-economic factors. Non-public schools are categorised 1-11 with the majority of Catholic schools being cat.9,10 and 11 (ie at the bottom of the scale). There are but a small handfull of top cat. schools and these tend to be the small, elite "private" schools (I dont like this one but its the way it is...)
most of the money figures you see quoted by the media for non-public schools include teachers wages which constitute the bulk of funding from the gov't. Figures quoted for state schools generally dont include teachers wages hence the difference in figures. Its called propaganda people... LOL
all schools are entitled to funding from the govt (state and/ or federal)... indirect result of the Public Instruction Act of 1880 which sawte birth of both the state school system and the Catholic school system
the govt parties are aware of the funding issue as was seen from the last election campaign when the opposition switched its argument from lambasting all non-govt schools to naming elite cat. 1 and 2 "private" schools. These schools in question were later found out to have received lump payments (which I agree are wrong) of what was "owed" to them ie they got 3 years payment in one hit....this was wrong but it accounted for the large figure of $$ that the govt was "giving" to them....
the whole us vs them argument is wrong as there are schools on both sides of the fence that are suffering eg about the pool...I was down at Hurlstone Ag College on the weekend and their facilities would rival any non-govt school including a pool.... and they are a selective ag school which IMHO is a bit dodgy as how can any govt school be selective and a boarding school?? Maybe I have got this one wrong but the idea is a bit strange....
Funding to school districts is administered through the govt (both state and federal) so if anyone is to blame for the lack of facilities in state schools, I would be looking at the administration not the theory that "they stole our money" as the state education budget (esp. when combined with the federal contribution to state schools) blows what non-govt schools get per student out of the water (and
yes, this also takes into account the 70%/30% ratio of students).
BTW dont forget that the teachers (including myself) are lobbying for a pay rise in line with the cost of living blah blah blah and the State Teachers Union is using the funding issue to yet again bash the non-govt schools yet they can not get anywhere without the direct support and help (and to be honest, the guidance of non-govt teachers as the IEU is making better inroads than the State Teachers union re trade negiotiations). The have shown this in the media but hey still continue to inflame division in the community. A case of biting the hand that feeds you when you think about it......
Like I said, please dont believe the retoric as its just politics..
Sorry about the long post but this whole thing is BS and will change when there is an election as the "true facts" strangely emerge (if history is any guide)
Last edited:
cro_angel
<3<3<3
thanks snapperhead!
i dont really understand the category concept.. so do elite schools get more funding because they are category 1 or something? what factors determine the category?
btw whats the difference in wages if u teach at a public school compared to a non government school? just out of curiosity..
i dont really understand the category concept.. so do elite schools get more funding because they are category 1 or something? what factors determine the category?
btw whats the difference in wages if u teach at a public school compared to a non government school? just out of curiosity..
snapperhead
Has decided to retire
to be honest, I dont get the category thing either. Not sure if it will exist under the socio-economic basis for funding (???) BTW: I believe there are categories for state schools similar to those used for non-state... just as an interesting but useless bit of info...
as for pay, currently I teach in the parramatta diocese. I am moving into the independent (or private system to use the common term) and I am taking a pay cut in my base rate (am going to be a co-ordinator but the base rate as a level 13 teacher is a cut). When I worked in the state system and moved into the Catholic system (about 9 years ago), I again took a pay cut by moving into the non-govt system..... I dont know if it is the same now but back then, state teachers got more $$ (not much but more) and had reduced responsibilities like yard duty, taking extras (didnt exist and still doesnt, hence the shortage of casual teachers and students sitting in libraries instead of learning as has been reported in the papers.. gain another eg of themedia demonising the non-state system as they claimed there were no teachers as the non-state schools had taken them all!! HA!! What BS....sorry...) and general admin duties are also different (programming etc).
Not the same for all schools I know but from what I experienced and from what I have been told by colleagues who have "crossed over", the expectations and work rate required between the two systems is different (*NOTE* this isnt to say that there are not hard working and decent teachers in the state system OK guys so dont jump down my throat...).
I think the pay rates are more equitable but as to what you do to earn said money, well thats different....
The big schools charge extra mainly to cover teachers wages (amongst other things) as the teachers are not subject to the state award (ie the negiotiate their wages and this is a yearly thing eg at Reddham House, Joeys,Riverview (??), it is purely negiotiated (based on what friendsw ho teach there have said....)
Hope this makes sense!!
snapperhead
Has decided to retire
this is for state schools not non-state schools....
ie the question of category schools in the non-govt system.
Funny thing is if you were to look at resources etc (ie what the $$ is for), most Western Suburb schools are far outstripped by their Northshore and Eastern Suburb equivalents....
plus there is a lot more to it than just location re state schools
Last edited:
snapperhead
Has decided to retire
does anyone else find that this is starnge that the NSW minister for Education isnt carrying the party line...... LOL
Plus it just shows the way it is funding wise....why should the federal govt fund a large % of state run and administered schools??? Thats the job of the state govt. If not, hand control over to the federal govt and watch how things go backwards.....
LOL
Giant Lobster
Active Member
a combination of unfriendly ppl, incompetent teachers and povo environment has contributed to my hatred of my school 
- Status