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

[Kwayera]

A standard that you see as being above that of the public system, no doubt.

As a person who has attended both public and private schools - I personally have to say that IN GENERAL (and there are exceptions to every rule - major ones), yes.

 

[Generator]

As a person who has attended both public and private schools - I personally have to say that IN GENERAL (and there are exceptions to every rule - major ones), yes.

Why is it at a higher standard (in general)?

 

[Kwayera]

Why is it at a higher standard (in general)?

Because (for one) with the *extra* money provided by parents, the schools are able to afford higher quality (e.g. newer) facilities.

 

[ellymelly]

why are they not?

 

[Kwayera]

Sorry bad typing...in a hurry

- Private schools would never increase their fees massively...no one would be able to afford it...elit schools would have to cancell plans to build a 12th swimming pool

- I presume that funding for private schools ahs risen or has remained stable under the liberal government...so why do private school fees continue to go up?

Also if say we were to increase funding to private schools in order to take pressure of the public system would the private schools decrease fees? II DONT THINK SO

- Private schools will have to increase their fees (well, at least at AGS) by at least $500 per student. That is a LOT of money.

- Actually, my school (and several others) already recieved a sizeable funding cut last year, due to Labor pressure on the Liberal government. This will be a FURTHER cut, thereby forcing my school to up their fees.

 

[ellymelly]

not true. ( on the topic of 500 extra)

$500 is a lot of money to anyone. especially if you are struggling to start with or have multiple children at the school. again, who says private school parents have oodles of money? some do, most don't.

 

[Kwayera]

not true. ( on the topic of 500 extra)

$500 is a lot of money to anyone. especially if you are struggling to start with or have multiple children at the school. again, who says private school parents have oodles of money? some do, most don't.

And don't forget, that's $500 PER TERM fees; thus you end up paying $2000 extra annually.

That is a LOT of money on top of normal fees.

 

[Generator]

why are they not?

Typical, I guess. Is the idea that the 'private' system offers the same standard of education as the public system that hard to accept? Must mummy and daddy feel that their great 'sacrifice' is worthwhile?

 

[ellymelly]

The underlying point is that there is NO NEED for this policy. it is divisive, descriminative and for what?

 

[Kwayera]

Typical, I guess. Is the idea that the 'private' system offers the same standard of education as the public system that hard to accept? Must mummy and daddy feel that their great 'sacrifice' is worthwhile?

Is it so hard to accept that Government schools actually do, with some exceptions (just as there are exceptions on the other side), offer a substantially lower standard of education (in regards to academics AND sporting facilitations)?

And must you make petty comments? They no further your position than the rest of what you say.

 

[Kwayera]

Jeepers you might not get spoon fed !!!

We are anything BUT spoon-fed. We WORK for what we achieve.

 

[ellymelly]

How much of an effect is this policy really going to have on public education? according to Labor's own figures it constitutes approx. $4 per child. wow. wonderful.

most of the money take from idependent schools is going to catholic schools, the wealthies church in the world. Now let's talk about need...

 

[ellymelly]

How do you justify taking money away from students who are just as needy and already receiving less?

does anyone have a justification for this?

 

[ellymelly]

and why is that?

 

[dangerousdave]

then again you have paid for teachers to pay close attention to you...that does happen in the real world

But life outside of school is nothing like school in any way, the outside world has very little in common with school life.

 

[ellymelly]

direct questioning never gets you very far with a Labor supporter.

 

[Generator]

Is it so hard to accept that Government schools actually do, with some exceptions (just as there are exceptions on the other side), offer a substantially lower standard of education (in regards to academics AND sporting facilitations)?

And must you make petty comments? They no further your position than the rest of what you say.

Sport? GPS rugby or rowing is not a concern for the wider public.
Academics? Unlikely (Exceptions? Are we comparing the exceptions or the norm?).
Petty comments? We all do it when we are annoyed.

Also, "a substantially lower standard of education"... How does that claim support your position? I may have understood 'a lower standard of education' given your point of view, but the above phrase does seem to take it too far.

 

[Generator]

How do you justify taking money away from students who are just as needy and already receiving less?

does anyone have a justification for this?

Do you have a justification for sending such kids to a school that should not have been established in the first place when the local comprehensive high or even the local Catholic systemic high would have in all likelihood offered a more productive learning environment?

 

[ellymelly]

you are a science person...end of story

yes, i analyse facts, in your case, i found none.

 

[ellymelly]

Do you have a justification for sending such kids to a school that should not have been established in the first place when the local comprehensive high or even the local Catholic systemic high would have in all likelihood offered a more productive learning environment?

EXCUSE ME?

a school that should not have been established?!

just who the hell do you think you are to determine whether or not a school should or should not be established OR to pass such judgement on a school which already exists.