School Incentive Payments

[KatiesMum]

Labor unveils plan to offer schools up to $100,000 in incentives

KATHARINE MURPHY

August 9, 2010
SCHOOLS will be eligible for new incentives of up to $100,000 if they can boost literacy, numeracy and attendance rates under a $388 million program that Labor will unveil today.
Prime Minister Julia Gillard will try to push past the dramas of the weekend and build momentum in the critical final fortnight with a new policy pitched at the families that applauded the accountability culture encouraged by the government's MySchool website.


Under the new program, primary schools will be offered $75,000 if the schools improve attendance, literacy and numeracy.
High schools will be offered $100,000. The criteria for high schools will be school attendance and year 12 retention, year 12 results, and the number of students going on successfully to work, vocational training, or university study.


Parents and school principals will be given control over how to spend their incentive payments. This follows sustained criticism that the government's huge school building program was driven too rigidly by state education authorities rather than by school communities.
The new schools program Ms Gillard will unveil in Perth will offer payments to 500 campuses in 2012 - pitching Labor's campaign discussion into an area of traditional strength. Labor will promise the system will be fully operational by 2014, offering the bonuses to 1000 schools.
The budget for the program is $388 million over five years. More than $160 million will be spent over the current forward estimates.
The Prime Minister will commit to establishing an Office of National School Evaluation within the Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority to oversee the new incentives system.
Assessments for the bonus payments will be done with a combination of national data and a self-assessment by individual schools. Schools must be able to demonstrate clear year-on-year improvements to have a prospect of winning incentive payments.


The combination of national and self-assessment will aim to overcome the inherent difficulties in comparing very enriched schools with highly disadvantaged schools.
Labor has aimed to capitalise on voters' perceptions that it is better for education than its Liberal opponents with several campaign pledges. Labor has also narrowed the policy difference with the Liberals in two key areas.
Last week the government neutralised the fraught political issue of funding for private schools by promising to maintain the current investment for a year longer than expected.


Sorry - but this is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

The elite (and rich) schools - who already have high attendance and good results (or they get rid of the students who dont perform) will easily get incentives.

The poorer schools, who struggle (ie the ones who need the extra money) are the ones who will not be able to meet the criteria.

Also - it will be easier for smaller schools to get a % increase in these things than for bigger schools.

Another :thumbsdown: from me for this one.

[Ana Gram]

A terrible idea. However, not enough to make me vote Liberal, especially after seeing Abbott talk about welfare recipients.

[Benji]

A terrible idea. However, not enough to make me vote Liberal, especially after seeing Abbott talk about welfare recipients.

:iagree:

[Angelmist♥]

I have to agree with you :(. At first I thought cool, more money for schools! But in reality, the schools in low socio-economic areas will go without AGAIN.

I'm all for raising numeracy,literacy and attendance levels but you can't do that without funding most of the time so IMO they're definitely putting the cart before the horse.

[Nomsie]

Sorry - but this is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

The elite (and rich) schools - who already have high attendance and good results (or they get rid of the students who dont perform) will easily get incentives.

The poorer schools, who struggle (ie the ones who need the extra money) are the ones who will not be able to meet the criteria.

Also - it will be easier for smaller schools to get a % increase in these things than for bigger schools.

Another :thumbsdown: from me for this one.

I'm in two minds about this. It *could* be good if executed correctly and has minimal loopholes to take advantage of.

Because it's based on percentage it won't matter the size of the school. And little schools don't necessarily have good percentage attendance rates. My school currently has 39 students. Of the grade 5/6 grade in which there is 13 students, 5 are chronic absentees- and the parents are ok with this. Up to 50% of school days are spent elsewhere for some of these kids and it's the norm. I'm not quite sure what this school can do to convince the parents to send their children to school that they haven't already tried- BUT if they can increase the attendance rates the money would be a huge help in other areas.

It's a hell of a lot more favourable than taking away sports from the kids- which would be much harder to execute anyway... because wouldn't that mean that private school attendance records would have to be made available to any 'sporting team' to ensure their members have a high enough attendance to play? :confused:

IDK... I'm not quite sure it is a perfect plan, but I like it better than yesterday's :rolleyes:

[MummaBear03]

Ok so none of the ideas are fantastic, but what do YOU suggest the govt does to increase attendance?

[Benji]

Ok so none of the ideas are fantastic, but what do YOU suggest the govt does to increase attendance?

I don't think the answer would be easy but I find it sad that neither of the two major parties ever make a correlation between low attendance and the REAL underlying issues as to why, i.e. poverty.

[Nomsie]

Ok so none of the ideas are fantastic, but what do YOU suggest the govt does to increase attendance?
Like I said in the other thread- bring back truancy officers!!

[KatiesMum]

I don't think the answer would be easy but I find it sad that neither of the two major parties ever make a correlation between low attendance and the REAL underlying issues as to why, i.e. poverty.

yep that.

As for what I suggest - I think it should not be a 'one size fits all' solution. Different things will work in different places for different kids. The schools and communities need to have a bit of discretion to put different plans in place.


Please note - I am not in any way suggesting that people should vote for either party just because of one or two policies they dont like.

There are many Liberal policies I dont like either ... and I will undoubtedly post some of those for discussion too.

All I am trying to do is actually raise some of the issues and policies for debate rather than just the blanket statements of "Tony Abbott is a pratt" that we seem to be focussed on.

[nothanksbye]

I dont agree.

Its about improving their own attendance, literacy and numeracy.

Its not based on who gets the best its on who can improve.

Any school can work to improving..not just private schools.

[Pippi Longstocking]

I would prefer to see that money made available to schools with already-existing truancy problem and poor achievements etc so that extra resources, whatever they may need, can be made available. This seems like really lazy, sloppy policy. We dunno how to fix it, here's some cash if you can work it out...:rolleyes:

That being said, I'm not sure how to address truancy, to be honest. I would want to know what was causing kids to not want to go to school. Ideally, school would be an enjoyable, safe, nurturing and supportive environment that kids want to be in. Why isn't it and how can we make it closer to that ideal?

[jaq]

I haven't had a good look at the policy detail (if detail exists prior to an election :p) but it does says 500 selected schools.

Now, I would imagine that those schools would be selected on the basis of need ... ie who needs to improve literacy and numeracy most. The likelihood that it applies to ELITE schools, where literacy and numeracy shouldn't be a problem in the first place, is low, I would think.

I don't know. But I actually think it is a great plan ... IF, like Noms said, it is put into place with the appropriate safeguards to ensure the money is a) effective in achieving its goal and b) targeted to schools where a problem has been identified.

[River Song]

as you say...private schools already have good attenance levels and some have excellent literacy and numeracy skills...so it will be harder for them to "improve them".

I like the idea of incentive payments...maybe the school/region could pool the money and hire their own truancy officer that could be effective in the area they live in.

The problem is, it is mainly up to the parents if the kids attend or not...and often if they even care.

I applaud anything that tries to get more kids to attend school...and to focus on basic skills. Sadly, i can not think of a way to force other parents to care.

[KatiesMum]

I haven't had a good look at the policy detail (if detail exists prior to an election :p) but it does says 500 selected schools.

Now, I would imagine that those schools would be selected on the basis of need ... ie who needs to improve literacy and numeracy most. The likelihood that it applies to ELITE schools, where literacy and numeracy shouldn't be a problem in the first place, is low, I would think.

I don't know. But I actually think it is a great plan ... IF, like Noms said, it is put into place with the appropriate safeguards to ensure the money is a) effective in achieving its goal and b) targeted to schools where a problem has been identified.

See I dont think that its appropriate.

If truancy is seen as a real problem that the government wants to seriously address - they would be attributing funds to actual programs to deal with the issue .... not give 'bonus payments' to be spent on anything they want to the schools who can best manipulate the results.

[trishalishous]

breakfast club and homework club, before and after school would be a huge step in the right direction.

[Nowhere]

How about they get to the bottom of WHY kids are wagging instead of chucking money around. WHy are they wagging are they getting bullied are they not going well in class, problems at home, Just dont want to be there if so why, How can we make that better etc etc

[MummaBear03]

Have buses that pick kids up from their doorstep.

Take them to school early enough to participate in the breakfast program.

Supply them with books and uniforms rather than give parents money to buy these items.

Hire tutors for after school to be available to all children at no charge.

Allow them to have supervised time after school to do homework with their friends.

Run sports programs at the school for after school.

Those are my ideas. Expensive? Yes, initially, but like anything really, the initial layout might cost a fortune but when the rewards start coming in it's all repaid in full, and then some.

[NevasMum]

If schools are judged and PAID according to certain improvements then of course they will take the necessary steps to get these funds.

This is not necessarily a good thing.
I have just come from a school where they were specifically targeting students in Yr 3, 5 and 7 who had the capability of moving up a band on the NAPLAN scale, because the school was to receive more money for students they'd moved up a level.

So instead of teachers focussing on all students, they were directed to coach these ones. Special programs were put in place for these students. Others missed out.

'Unfortunately' the year 7s had performed at 100% the previous tests and so there was no change of getting funds for 'improvement.' Should the school therefore ignore these students because they can get more money if they put their resources and extra staff towards improving the potentially money-making student.
School are not there to make money. They are there to educate children. Most teachers do not teach for the great salary, they are there to educate children.

Put the money into providing the school with resources according to what the school judges it needs.

Children don't go to school because there's too much emphasis on performance, grades, tests.
Stop this competitive comparative rubbish, support schools and teachers to provide a nurturing, happy and safe place for children to learn and grow and the children will be lining up at the door.

[mysonroger]

I dont agree.

Its about improving their own attendance, literacy and numeracy.

Its not based on who gets the best its on who can improve.

Any school can work to improving..not just private schools.

I agree. If the elite schools already have good attendance and literacy/numeracy rates, its going to be more difficult to improve on already good results to snag the grants. If schools in lower socio economic areas perform badly in these areas, then their opportunities for improvement are far greater. ...if you're at the bottom , there's no where to go but up.

[mysonroger]

isn't it something like the elite schools are self funded and according to their socio economic demographic, have got cut off limits of how much funding can be provided from the government because the parents are expected to fund raise for the rest......

does that apply to this as well?

[Pinkzy]

I would prefer to see that money made available to schools with already-existing truancy problem and poor achievements etc so that extra resources, whatever they may need, can be made available. This seems like really lazy, sloppy policy. We dunno how to fix it, here's some cash if you can work it out...:rolleyes:

That being said, I'm not sure how to address truancy, to be honest. I would want to know what was causing kids to not want to go to school. Ideally, school would be an enjoyable, safe, nurturing and supportive environment that kids want to be in. Why isn't it and how can we make it closer to that ideal?

:iagree::iagree::iagree: