Taxpayers fund private school orchestra pits and swimming pools...

[delirium]

"if they cut funding for our school, I'll pull my child out of the private school and place a bigger burden on the public school system"...

I read and heard that many a time. Little do they know their child is receiving almost the same as public schooling kids.....

Untitled.jpg

[atomicmama]

I read and heard that many a time. Little do they know their child is receiving almost the same as public schooling kids.....

Attachment 80226

That's what people that make those comments expect, though.
If even $1,000 p/a per child was redirected to public schools, it would barely impact private schools, but make a huge difference to public schools.

[Elijahs Mum]

And Killara is the top Performing co-ed government school in NSW. I think this is quite embarrassing for parents of PLC who spent $36.5m in school fees and fundraising to get a better education for their children.

I know it's not a popular view but I really dont think private schools should get any funding from the government at all. They don't need it! If that funding wasn't given, the school could cut down their capital expenditure or have parents absorb the costs - it wouldn't create a mass exodus from private to public, no chance!

I think it's a huge misconception that if you pay $ to send your child to a private school they are miraculously expected to be transformed into a super smart student - these schools absolutely can help with better resources and more teachers etc but it still comes down to the parent involvement/encourage and students abilities - no amount of money or privilege can make you smarter if you don't have it in you or if your parents don't give a crap - we don't contribute to DS schooling so he gets a perfect high school result but because we want to provide him with all the possible options and opportunities we can while having a great school experience

DH and I are both willing to contribute to DS education and I've had to go back to work to be able to afford it, as the majority of the other parents in his class also have , I do believe as pp said if the funding did stop altogether then yes the school fees would be a lot higher and that would make them more out of reach for most of us, should the budget be looked at and maybe adjusted to help public schools more - absolutely - according to the my school site per student DS gets approx 20% funding from the government and we fund the rest , also I didn't realise, now I'm on the P and F at our school , how much money they do raise for the school , as they do in a lot of public schools

[babyno1onboard]

And Killara is the top Performing co-ed government school in NSW. I think this is quite embarrassing for parents of PLC who spent $36.5m in school fees and fundraising to get a better education for their children.

I know it's not a popular view but I really dont think private schools should get any funding from the government at all. They don't need it! If that funding wasn't given, the school could cut down their capital expenditure or have parents absorb the costs - it wouldn't create a mass exodus from private to public, no chance!

Many parents simply couldn't absorb the costs, hence the mass exodus. The article said that the average government funding per child per year at private schools was $8,500. If DSS1 and DSS2's fees went up by that we couldn't afford to send them to their current private school and would move them to a public school.

[delirium]

I do believe as pp said if the funding did stop altogether then yes the school fees would be a lot higher and that would make them more out of reach for most of us,

PLaying devil's advocate here bc we can't know either way, but I suspect elite private schools would simply drop their fees. Independent schools (as opposed to catholic) would essentially close down if it became out of reach. This is entirely JMHO, but paying 30k a year to educate your child is crazy. Not that parents will pay that (I get we want to give our kids every opportunity right?) but that these schools charge that. If you have a look at the links I've provided, as of 2013, independent schools get almost the same as public.

I argue cutting some funding to these elite schools will mean these schools will drop their prices and those funds can be redirected to low SES schools. As you say, swimming pools and massive sound halls don't change performance. You are completely correct the number 1 factor is parental involvement, not so much in direct involvement in the school but being involved in reading, setting goals, helping them with projects etc.

[cheeeeesecake]

I think when we say 'private school' we do think of the elite top high-fee school. You have to remember there are thousands of kids in low-fee private schools who are on low incomes too. My family of 5 is on a single income of less than 60k. We send our kids to a low fee ($4,000 per year) private school. The reason I send her there is because I am a teacher & have worked in thr local public schools. I've seen the teachers moan in the staff room about how much they hate their jobs & would rather work in a factory than with the sh!tty kids. I've seen the appalling educational standards. I've seen the bullying amongst students, & the teachers turn a blind eye. I've heard the teachers say that their job is mostly just "babysitting the little sh!ts" I'm sure there are high quality public schools with fantastic teachers - but not in my area. That's why I pay for my child to go to a private school, & even though we are not on a high income,we will sacrifice & do what it takes to make it work.

I also taught in a private school (the same one my kids are at) - I would always spend around 4-6k per year of my wage on resources for my classroom. Teachers generally spend their own money on their classroom whether they be private or public.

[Sonja]

I don't agree that cutting government funding would mean fees go up. If private schools can't run on donations and fees then they need to take a good look at where their money goes.

That argument grinds my gears (ie that a cut in funding = higher fees and therefore an exodus of students).

ETA just read the above post (sorry cheesecake too many eeeee's to tag you) and I'm talking about schools that are $15k and above a year.

[cheeeeesecake]

I don't agree that cutting government funding would mean fees go up. If private schools can't run on donations and fees then they need to take a good look at where their money goes.

That argument grinds my gears (ie that a cut in funding = higher fees and therefore an exodus of students).

It would definitely mean that in my school. Its means tested, so lower income families pay 1.5k a year, I pay the higher fees at 4k per year. Per student, our school gets 1k less from the government than the public schools. Someone on a low income (30-35k) just couldnt pay 10k fees at my school. I couldnt on our 60k income. I would probably homeschool if that was my choice, the local public school would be a last resort.

[atomicmama]

It would definitely mean that in my school. Its means tested, so lower income families pay 1.5k a year, I pay the higher fees at 4k per year. Per student, our school gets 1k less from the government than the public schools. Someone on a low income (30-35k) just couldnt pay 10k fees at my school. I couldnt on our 60k income. I would probably homeschool if that was my choice, the local public school would be a last resort.

I think majority of comments in here are referring to elite private schools, not those within reach of most families.

[Rose&Aurelia&Hannah]

Are people who are adamant that private schools should receive no govt funding including the local Catholic/Anglican high schools?

Certainly I understand the elite 30K+ a year schools getting less funding but my local Catholic primary school charges $800/term. By cutting funding to these schools, yes, there would be an exodus of kids to the local public schools as parents couldn't absorb the costs.