ALP Education Policy [regarding funding to independant and non-independant schools] (1 Viewer)

Kwayera

Passive-aggressive Mod
Joined
May 10, 2004
Messages
5,959
Location
Antarctica
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
ALP schools policy: 64 questions await answers

The Australian Labor Party released its 2005-2009 policy for all schools in mid-September as part of its election campaign. The policy creates serious concerns for the parents of most students in the independent school sector.

Central to the sector's concerns about the ALP's policy is its promotion of division between schools and the fact that it penalises high levels of parental contribution to schooling. It fails to deliver a reasonable basic entitlement for all students, is overly complex and lacks consistency, clarity and transparency. It is poor public policy.

The ALP policy has created such high levels of confusion and uncertainty within the sector that the Independent Schools Council of Australia (ISCA) has sent a list of 64 initial questions to Labour Shadow Minister of Education Jenny Macklin about how the policy would work. Parents and schools may view these on the Election 2004 page at www.isca.edu.au

Key points on the ALP policy

-The ALP announced it had reached an agreement with every state and territory government to introduce a new national resource standard to all schools. But no detail has been released about state and territory government funding commitments under this agreement.

-The standard would set recurrent funding for every Australian school at $9,000 (primary) and $12,000 (secondary), to be reached by 2012. These figures are in 2004 prices. Currently, most Australian schools operate below this standard.

-Schools with income from fees and charges above these levels would be limited to a per student basic grant (federal and state government funds combined) of 15 per cent of the standard. Sixty-seven independent schools have been named in this category.

There is no independent school in Australia that be certain about its future public funding under a Labor government - there are simply too many unanswered questions about its schools policy.

-The standard would be indexed at a much lower rate than the Australian Government currently provides.

-Schools below the standard would receive funding indexed to a higher measure -Average Government School Recurrent Costs.

-There would be no additional funds for the non-government sector as a whole.

-There would be a redistribution of $520 million within the non-government sector from some 'high fee' independent schools to some 'needy' schools.

-$378 million of the above $520 million would be redistributed to systemic Catholic schools, leaving $142 million for 'needy' independent schools to be allocated through a range of targeted programmes, but not through general recurrent grants.

-To fund the $520 million redistribution, 164,000 students in 178 independent schools would receive less public funding. Students in these schools already receive the least public recurrent grants.

-The ALP has entered into a 'Community Charter' with Catholic education authorities.

-Federal funding of government schools would increase, with an additional $1.9 billion for a range of targeted programes over the period to 2009. This represents a two per cent increase in the resources available to government schools - or about $4 per week per student.

Thousands of students to lose funding

The ALP named 67 independent schools in New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia as already operating above the standard, based on their fess. Funding for the 73,230 students in these schools would be phased down from 2006, so that by 2008 they would receive a per student basis grant from federal and state governments combined of $1,550 (primary) and $2,066 (secondary). These are 2008 price levels, equating to about $1,350 and $1,800 in 2004 terms.

In addition, a further 111 independent schools with 91,170 students across all states and the Australian Capital Territory were named as operating above the standard through income from all sources. These schools would become 'funding guaranteed', whereby their public funding would be frozen until their total income drops to the level of the new standard. This will result in a substantial reduction in the real value of government grants to these schools. The reduction will be about 7-9 per cent per annum.

The policy creates an illogical outcome whereby students in the schools with the lower Soci-Economic Status scores in the above groups will lose more funding.

Lack of transparency about this basis of a school's inclusion on the above lists means that many schools remain uncertain why they are included or excluded.

At least 40 per cent of students in Australia's independent schools sector would lose public funding through the ALP's cuts to 178 schools.

Shortfall on funding principles
In July 2004 ISCA called for the sides of politics to ensure the following principles were underpinned in schools funding legislation:

-stability for families and schools

-basic entitlement for all students

-additional needs-based support.

The ALP's policy introduces fundamental changes and unpredictability to schools funding, creating instability for parents and schools throughout the sector.

Taking an average of $3,000 from each student in Labor's hit list schools will create a financial crisis for thousands of parents in those schools who already struggle to pay fees. This hurts a 'few' to provide negligible gain for others.

While the ALP policy identifies specific areas for targeted support, it fails to provide a reasonable basic entitlement for all students and a clear basis for additional needs-based support on which recurrent funding can be calculated. Its basic grant falls well below ISCA's call for a per student basic entitlement of at least 25 per cent of the total public funding provided to each government student.

Regrettably, the policy discourages parental contribution. Parents who already contribute most through fees will need to pay even more just to maintain the quality of their children's schooling.

Timelines for change under Labor
The ALP has promised to pass the Coalition's schools funding legislation for 2005-2008, which was about to be considered by the Senate when the election was called. Legislation would need to be introduced and passed by the parliament before the end of this year for schools to be funded in 2005.

The ALP says it would treat 2005 as a transition year, prior to introducing its changes for a new schools funding period for 2006-2009.


Authorised by Bill Daniels, Executive Director,
Independent Schools' Council of Australia, 12 Thesiger Court, Deakin, ACT 2600

Considering those of us in independant schools are ALREADY the lowest-funded by the current government (indeed, only ELEVEN independant schools are less-funded than my own, which puts my school almost at the bottom of the list of funding for ALL the schools NATION-WIDE), and we at independant schools represent a THIRD of Australia's school population - it's a bit misleading to say that only a 'few families' will be affected.

In fact, here are the facts on school funding (authorised by the Hon Dr Brendan Nelson).

About 2.2 million students (68% of all school students) attend State Government schools and receive 76% of the taxpayer funds spent on school education. About 1.1 million children (or 32%) attend Independent and Catholic schools and receive the remaining 24% of taxpayer’s funds.

The Australian Education Union says parents of the 1.1 million students in Independent and Catholic schools should receive no public funding.

The Howard Government believes that every parent, having paid their taxes, deserves some level of public assistance to support the education of their child, regardless of which school their child attends.

The Australian Government gladly supplements the States and Territories’ funding of their state schools through an annual indexation arrangement that consistently delivers increases in funding greater than the states.

The Federal Government’s funding of Independent and Catholic schools is based on a socio economic status model which delivers funding based on the income and education profile of parents.

The schools serving the poorest communities receive 30% less that then average cost of educating that child at a State Government school. The schools serving the wealthiest communities receive 86.3% less than the average cost of educating that child at a State Government school.
You can read the full document HERE: http://www.dest.gov.au/Ministers/Media/Nelson/2004/07/n802110704.asp
 

thorrnydevil

Ancient Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2004
Messages
1,521
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Kwayera said:
Considering those of us in independant schools are ALREADY the lowest-funded by the current government (indeed, only ELEVEN independant schools are less-funded than my own, which puts my school almost at the bottom of the list of funding for ALL the schools NATION-WIDE), and we at independant schools represent a THIRD of Australia's school population - it's a bit misleading to say that only a 'few families' will be affected.

In fact, here are the facts on school funding (authorised by the Hon Dr Brendan Nelson).



You can read the full document HERE: http://www.dest.gov.au/Ministers/Media/Nelson/2004/07/n802110704.asp
What do you expected from the ALP, they dont have any good, well thought policies so they fabricate shit. Then lie about it.
 

Kwayera

Passive-aggressive Mod
Joined
May 10, 2004
Messages
5,959
Location
Antarctica
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
thorrnydevil said:
What do you expected from the ALP, they dont have any good, well thought policies so they fabricate shit. Then lie about it.
So very, sadly true.
 

thorrnydevil

Ancient Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2004
Messages
1,521
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Kwayera said:
So very, sadly true.
I just went to the link, geez its interesting...I didn't think the teachers could stoop that low.
 

Kwayera

Passive-aggressive Mod
Joined
May 10, 2004
Messages
5,959
Location
Antarctica
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
thorrnydevil said:
I just went to the link, geez its interesting...I didn't think the teachers could stoop that low.
They do!

Maybe I should make a sig about it.
 

Generator

Active Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2002
Messages
5,244
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
It's a necessary policy. I believe that it has much more merit than the Coalition's current policy.

Besides, if the mum and dad feel the need to buy an upbringing for their kids, then why should they not be burdened with the greater proportion of the cost?
 

thorrnydevil

Ancient Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2004
Messages
1,521
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Generator said:
It's a necessary policy. I believe that it has much more merit than the Coalition's current policy.

Besides, if the mum and dad feel the need to buy an upbringing for their kids, then why should they not be burdened with the greater proportion of the cost?
What, the policy of sharing funding around?
 

Kwayera

Passive-aggressive Mod
Joined
May 10, 2004
Messages
5,959
Location
Antarctica
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
thorrnydevil said:
What, the policy of sharing funding around?
You know what I find most amusing? Most of the heavy Laborites are shying away from this thread - they can't seem to face the truth. :rolleyes:
 

dangerousdave

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2004
Messages
176
Location
around, I'll be around
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
I don't completely understand, is Labour supporting the Australian Education Union and saying that independant and catholic deserve no funding at all? or do they just want to lower the funding to those schools?
 

ellymelly

Member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
87
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2005
The current policy is one which demonstrates fairness to the community as a whole. The Labor policy is one which encourages separation and disadvantage to a group within society which, on average, is taxed the most. Every child is entitiled to support and this comes in the way of funding. why should we punish a family for making considerable sacrifes for the education of their children? How can you support a policy which threatens to destroy the independent schools?
This is one of the most dangerous and disturbing policies ever dreamt up - to support it in any way defies the morals and ethics to which to which we hold.
 

paper cup

pamplemousse
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Messages
2,590
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
look...seriously...maybe the reason your school is underfunded is because it already has all the money it needs from the fees students pay.
public schools need the money, and they need it badly. I'm sorry, I don't mean to offend, but...have you ever been to a regional school? we don't have enough books, we have to use photocopied sheets. we don't have enough chairs. yes, it's that bad.
and please...it's spelt...independent.
 

Generator

Active Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2002
Messages
5,244
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
ellymelly said:
Every child is entitiled to support and this comes in the way of funding. why should we punish a family for making considerable sacrifes for the education of their children?

This is one of the most dangerous and disturbing policies ever dreamt up - to support it in any way defies the morals and ethics to which to which we hold.
Evey child is supported as it is and will be supported no matter which party gains power, yet why must we live in a society that believes that coughing up private school fees is the most that you could possibly do for your child? The sacrifice argument reeks of elitism when spoken in terms of a 'better' education.

The 'morals and ethics' that supposedly characterise Australia as a whole are based upon the idea of a giving everyone a fair go within an egalitatrian society... That is exactly what Labor's policy seeks to do.


Haha shit, sorry Asquithian, but I first created this post with ellymelly's post being the last in the thread.
 

ellymelly

Member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
87
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2005
Asquithian said:
1. Who says a private school is better?

2. There is obviously a funding shortfall in the public system...you only have to go to a public school to see it...

thornydevil where are you? You would probably collapse in shock if you saw what the elite private schools had in comparison to the average public school...such inequality in a country that prides (well at least to before the howard government) equityand fair go is pretty shocking...
The private schools receive a mere fraction of the funds of public schools. Labor's policy is taking away much needed support from unfairly selected families to make little to no difference to a few others. Why does everyone have the opinion that private schools don't deserve their funds?! Not all of them are wealthy, most struggle to exist, and those that are wealthy are only such from generous donations by the few parents who can afford it. The majority of people who attend these independent schools people live in a delicate balance, a raise in school fees to these schools as a direct result of Labor's policies, (anywhere upwards of $500 per student) would see these parents unable to continue their child's private education.

Someone explain to me how this policy could possibly fair?

And if you are looking for more funding, how about you ask you state government? they were given shit loads of money to be directed at school funding. They seem to have misplaced it in their back pockets.
 

Generator

Active Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2002
Messages
5,244
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Why do we have struggling independent schools? Surely there should be a 'market' (not the greatest term, but it will have to do) before such schools are established with very generous federal grants.
 

ellymelly

Member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
87
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2005
Asquithian said:
BTW people make arguments around the idea that private schools will increase fees if the labor plan is implemented...

QUOTE]

schools will naturally be forced to increase their school fees if funding is taken from them. Otherwise how would they be able to continue to fund their current standard of education?
 

Generator

Active Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2002
Messages
5,244
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
ellymelly said:
Asquithian said:
BTW people make arguments around the idea that private schools will increase fees if the labor plan is implemented...

QUOTE]

schools will naturally be forced to increase their school fees if funding is taken from them. Otherwise how would they be able to continue to fund their current standard of education?
A standard that you see as being above that of the public system, no doubt.
 

Kwayera

Passive-aggressive Mod
Joined
May 10, 2004
Messages
5,959
Location
Antarctica
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
Asquithian said:
privare schools fees increase anyways...

If the private schools would never charge 30 000 a year...no one would go...they would go broke...fees would stay the same...


under the liberal government i will assume thatr funding has remained the same or has increased to private schools howeverprivate school fees continue to increase?
Once again, I must ask you to rephrase your sentence(s) - I find them nonsensical, and it's difficult to pinpoint the, er, point. Care to summarise?
 

ellymelly

Member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
87
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2005
oh, yes, how could i be so stupid. Private schools will leave their fees the same while they lose a hefty chunk of their funding. they'll continue to pay their expenses by... [ feel free to finish the sentence]
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top