The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > It’s a Con-ski > Comments

It’s a Con-ski : Comments

By Stephen Elder, published 20/4/2015

When you include all forms of government funding – state and federal – Victorian Catholic schools still operate on 10% less resources than government schools.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
The public schools are for the public. Non-public schools are for those who wish to avoid the public schools and segregate their children from the rest of the Australian public. Other purposes are indoctrination of religion and lessening the possibility of intermarriage with Australians of other backgrounds. There is absolutely no reason that their choice should be funded by taxpayer money. If Catholic schools get 90% of what the public schools get from the government it is 90% too much.

We will have a better society if children of different backgrounds learn together, grow up together and work together.
Posted by david f, Monday, 20 April 2015 8:24:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Stephen Elder’s statement, “And let’s not pretend that either the Gillard or Rudd education funding policy was truly Gonski – by then it had been politicised to the point where it was recognisable by author’s name only”, is false.

The Gonski model recommended a per capita payment, called the schooling resource standard. The Labor government model includes a per capita payment, called the schooling resource standard.

The Gonski model recommended loadings for size, remoteness, ESL, Aboriginality, low-SES and disability. The Labor government model includes loadings for size, remoteness, ESL, Aboriginality, low-SES and disability.

The Gonski model recommended an SRS to be paid in full to government schools and on a sliding scale for private schools. The Labor government model includes an SRS to be paid in full to government schools and on a sliding scale for private schools.

The Gonski model recommended having private schools funded on the basis of the wealth of the students’ neighbours; i.e., keeping the Howard government’s SES scheme. The Labor government model includes having private schools funded on the basis of the wealth of the students’ neighbours; i.e., keeping the Howard government’s SES scheme.

The Gonski model recommended allowing jurisdictions to allocate the money to their own schools according to their own policies provided they were needs-based and transparent. The Labor government model includes allowing jurisdictions to allocate the money to their own schools according to their own policies provided they were needs-based and transparent.

There was one change to the funding model, however: the Gonski panel recommended that the loadings for socio-economic disadvantage go to the bottom quarter of students. Labor extended it to the bottom half. The reason? To help the very Catholic schools whose director, Stephen Elder (former parliamentary secretary for education in the teacher-bashing Kennett government), now most ungratefully puts the boot in (“Gonski reforms were about education, not funding, and they were lost in the political mire”, The Weekend Australian, 30/11-1/12)!
Posted by Chris C, Monday, 20 April 2015 8:36:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
“The real Gonski proposal would” not “have seen funding follow a child”. The SRS was to be paid on a sliding scale according to how well off the neighbours of the students in the school were. Worse than that, loadings for disadvantage were to be adjusted according to how well off the neighbours of the students in the school were. Thus a student with a disadvantage would get 100 per cent loading in a government school, a 90 per cent loading in on non-government school and a 20 per cent loading in another non-government school. Only one type of loading was to follow the student, that for disability:
“Unlike the schooling resource standard per student amounts and other loadings, the students with disability loading should be fully publicly funded as an entitlement, irrespective of the type of school the student attends or its school SES.” (p 184, Review of Funding for Schooling Final Report)

This is where the Victorian model is superior: it pays the loadings for disadvantage in full irrespective of the wealth of the neighbours of the students who attend the school. That is why we ought not want James Merlino to “revive the true model proposed by David Gonski” and why that should not produce “no bigger supporter than Catholic education.” The best course of action for the Catholic education authorities and the teachers’ unions is to get the federal government to adopt the Victorian model of funding. Then funding would follow the disadvantaged child.
Posted by Chris C, Monday, 20 April 2015 8:57:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
“On matters as important as our children’s future we simply must work together.” Indeed! That is why I tried to get the AEU, the IEU and the Catholic education authorities to work together in the Gonski review. Can you imagine the power of a joint approach form those bodies? While the Catholic education authorities and the IEU were unresponsive, the AEU is stuck in the 1950s. One would think that after 50 years of the public education lobby campaigning against public funding of non-government schools, during which time the proportion of students in them has grown by half, the AEU and the rest of the lobby would give up its failed campaign and seek an integrated education system, in which non-government schools are funded to keep their fees low and thus be as socially integrated a government schools (as occurs in much of the developed world). But alas, that is not to be! The public education lobby ignored the opportunity presented by Gonski, failed to propose any funding system at all, consequently saw the Howard government’s absurd SES model extended to all schools currently protected from it and thus undermined its own schools. It will keep campaigning as if it is still 1955 until its market share falls below 50 per cent, thus further undermining the very system it claims to be defending, and it probably won’t stop then either.
Posted by Chris C, Monday, 20 April 2015 9:03:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Catholics get less money, but as proven with Rudd's school cash-splash they got twice the value hence have better schools. Overheard in Blacktown (in Sydney), parents describing if one can afford NOT to send your kids to a State School that it is "Child Abuse" to do so. Not a silver spoon in sight.

Anyway State monopolies, such as "Poles and Wires" (which Schools aspire to) allowed the ETU to pluck money from the pockets of such parents to pay for their feather-bedding.
Posted by McCackie, Monday, 20 April 2015 9:17:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Stephen Elder strongly objects to what the AEU are doing in relation to Catholic education. Unfortunately for those of us not so close to the issue, he hasn't explained what "AEU" and "Catholic education" are. I assume that AEU is a union of teachers and "Catholic education" is a body which runs Catholic schools in one of the Australian states (from the context it appears to be Victoria). This appears to be an important issue, but could we have an explanation of what it is about, for those not closely involved with it?
Posted by tomw, Monday, 20 April 2015 9:19:32 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Maybe Mr Elder needs to check his facts before continuing to launch into print. His April 1st contribution contained a number of errors, some of which are addressed in my blog at http://www.edmediawatch.com/
Rather than representing a saving, the amount given by governments to run Victorian Catholic schools each year is over $50 million dollars more than that given to similar government schools.

Now to his current article. I can't comment on his guerilla warfare with the AEU but once again he has used misleading information. Some Catholic schools do "sit shoulder to shoulder with government schools" in disadvantaged areas but they actually enrol kids who, even in those areas, are more advantaged. Anyone with the time can check this on My School.

But his biggest error is his claim that Victorian Catholic schools still operate on 10% less resources than government schools. If he is referring to recurrent funding (he doesn't say) this is not the case. My School shows that, when you compare groups of schools enrolling similar students - a far more honest comparison - Catholic schools operate on a net recurring income per student which is mostly higher than that available to government schools.

The reality is that the availability of school data on My School has started to change the debate. Mr Elder needs to catch up.
Posted by bunyip, Monday, 20 April 2015 10:57:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well, I mostly agree with the Author and Chris C's take.

The original Gonski proposed means tested funding of school children alone, then left the choice of schooling and attendance to the responsible parents.

And I agree with the original idea of just subsidizing the bottom quarter of so called disadvantage, to more or less eliminate that disadvantage/contain costs.
And that still remains the choice for all federal funding of all education!

And no it not the actual funds just the choice of where they're spent by far better informed parents! And indeed, a better model of all Federal funding of all federally funded service provision!

Which would all but force the available providers to compete via massively improved service models, for that funding, with not for profit models leading the way!?

Albeit, and thankfully, forced to remove the non performing drones from their staffing ranks, and a win/win all round, expect the affiliated and obstructionist unions, only ever concerned with retaining numbers, regardless of how well they do or don't perform!?

And while we're talking education, we need to include a similar funding mechanism for higher education, if only to end the sham some of it has become, which has the potential to flood our health services/surgical wards i.e., with folks who just shouldn't be there?

Given they don't yet have enough english to take our courses or pass our exams, and have allegedly have paid others to do so (before and after) for them?

[You vant vot? A cataract removed? Vots a cataract?

Ah Jess, body of vater flovink true a narrow gorge?

You vant encheneerink I tink Senor Pine, Jess?]

But golly ghee buddy, that's the American way and free enterprise we all Pyne for!? Doncha think?
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Monday, 20 April 2015 12:25:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I like the under & over game when talking about school teachers.

Primary school teachers,
Over educated, over paid, over unionised, under employed, under worked public servants.

High school teachers.
Over paid, over unionised, under educated, under employed, under worked public servants.

And that's just the good ones.
Posted by Hasbeen, Monday, 20 April 2015 1:01:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hasbeen, I've volunteered at my children's state school, and I can assure you the teachers I've seen have been dedicated and hard working. They stay up to midnight planning and marking. They are up at the crack of dawn preparing for the day ahead. They volunteer at after hours school events and extracurricular activities. I am proud of my children's state school.

I challenge anyone to control, nevermind teach a classroom of 25 students and keep up with a very full curriculum when a quarter of the students have not eaten breakfast. Then you have a child on the autism spectrum, then you have a child with dyslexia who can't write and can barely read, but dyslexia is not recognized in the Australian school system, so they aren't eligible for extra assistance, then you also have to attend to those children who need extra work as they are gifted.

We need to start funding schools based on need. If we believe in a fair go, it is the only way to make sure every Aussie kid gets the start they deserve. Are we all in this together or not?
Posted by BJelly, Monday, 20 April 2015 5:58:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David F, correct
Posted by Ojnab, Monday, 20 April 2015 6:36:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You are pulling my leg aren't you BJelly?

My lady is a librarian. When she was a city librarian for city/shire of 60,000 people, one of her duties was to give lessons on library use in all the schools, from 1600 kids high schools to 100 kid country primary schools.

In the larger primary schools it was normal for them to dump 3 or 4 classes, up to 100 kids on her, & all pee off to put their feet up for an hour. One high school actually dumped 130 kids on her on one occasion.

Do you think they would do this if they actually thought handling 100 kids was impossible? Yes I guess you are right, of course they would.

My wife & I established & ran the school textbook hire scheme for the P&C of our local high 1700 student school for just on 15 years. This not only saved parents money, but put $170,000 into the school each year, once fully established.

With just 3 exceptions I have never dealt with such a slack incompetent bunch as those heads of departments we had to liaise with to earn that money for the P&C. We had to damn near nail them down to get them to do the job they were paid to do, & give us their textbook requirement for next year so we could do our volunteer work for the school & the kids.
Posted by Hasbeen, Monday, 20 April 2015 8:21:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As a Catholic school parent I was alerted to Stephen Elder’s opinion piece and was then immediately motivated to comment.
Surely I, as a tax paying citizen, deserve the benefit of government funds to educate my children just as much as my next door neighbours who chooses to send their children to a public school.
Isn’t that the issue here. Choice.
And if we then agree that every family should benefit from some of their tax dollars assisting their children’s education then what is wrong with those dollars being guaranteed to allow the schools we chose to plan for the future.
I don’t know much about the politics of the AEU but I do know that everyone has to be in this together.
Posted by Anthony Dunstall, Monday, 20 April 2015 9:12:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Hasbeen,
if that has been your experience I'm sorry, no one should be put in that position - that sounds not only unprofessional, but negligent. Maybe my kids are lucky, as the teachers I've seen are more than diligent, they are devoted to their students. As far as I'm concerned, you couldn't pay me enough to be a teacher - I'm in awe of the ones I know. It hurts me to see school teachers denigrated. But I accept you have seen the opposite.
Posted by BJelly, Monday, 20 April 2015 10:41:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
BJelly, my daughter went to a "State Centre of Excellence" at Summer Hill (NSW). A large Primary where she was bullied, their entire bloated apparatus failed for years to be effective so we moved her to a Catholic Primary. Surprise, surprise, they had control of the kids, no nasty little "Madam Mao"s running around and even the daughter said the education was better than the "Centre of Excellence".

Don't give me garbage about how good the State system is, we've been their with nothing but regrets. Kids need protection from the grasping Teachers Union.
Posted by McCackie, Tuesday, 21 April 2015 9:38:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
well McCackie, my child attended a NSW public primary school without a hint of bullying, and now attends a state high school also without a hint of bullying. The seniors were very supporters of first years in each occasion.
Posted by McReal, Tuesday, 21 April 2015 2:18:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
McReal you must have been extremely lucky. My father was moved around a lot, so I went to 17 different schools. From about 5Th class I would be picked by the bully at every new school within 3 days.

As the schools offered no help, my WW11 commando father taught me how to fight, not box, but fight. Once you have taken out the first bully your school life is easier. Making the school football or cricket teams will help further.

My last school, Young high had a brilliant head master. It was like moving from hell to heaven when we moved from Bathurst to Young. Nothing wrong with Bathurst, a great town, but the high had a lousy headmaster.

The headmaster is critical to the school. I bought our property when we came south to have my kids able to go to a particular high school, although it gave me a 60 kilometre commute. The head was often in trouble with the department for suspending too many kids. Drugs, fighting, bullying or theft led to suspension with him, with no exceptions.

It was he who conned my wife & I to establish the textbook scheme. It will run it's self he said, but he got that $170,000 PA for improvements to "his" school.

When he was head hunted by a smart private school, the new bloke started sweeping things like drug possession under the carpet. The P&C had to come down very heavy, with a promise of legal action & charges, to teach him how to run a safe, drug free school. When the head is a wus, & allowed to get away with it, the school will be a catastrophe.
Posted by Hasbeen, Tuesday, 21 April 2015 4:10:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hasbeen,

Your post rings some bells (school!!); my first wife was a primary school teacher of great ability.
We moved from Sydney to the country when we married and she got a position at a two teacher school in a small town near Bathurst, the head master waas a top bloke but after about 6 months he got a promotion and moved on.
His replacement was a useless place server although a very pleasant person and she and I got on well with him.
Because of her experience he never interfered with her work and it was not until about 12 months later that he began to show his true colours.

The wife was expecting and left the school and all seemed well until the her young replacement called in one afternoon for a chat and suddenly broke down sobbing.
It was her first appointment and the Head (or more correctly 'teacher in charge') was giving her hell.
He would walk into her class and criticize her in front of the children and embarrass her in other ways; he gave her no support whatsoever, instead of being a mentor he was a tormentor.

She left the school and it was only a week or so before her replacement was sobbing in our kitchen, ditto the next one.

By this time the parents were up in arms at the way that their children were slipping back from the standard that they had reached under my wife.

Public meeting, and a delegation to the office in Bathurst, where there was an attempt to fob them off, but my wife was one of the delegates and met the official's blurb with "Balderdash!"
and read him a few salient points from some of the relevant rules/acts/whatever and a brief rundown on her teaching career.

Up shot: he was removed from the school by being promoted to a senior teaching position at Bathurst High School.
His father was high up in the Education Dept. of NSW, which may have helped!!
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 21 April 2015 6:16:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hasbeeb; I'm referring to current 21st century society.
Posted by McReal, Wednesday, 22 April 2015 6:43:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
.
This deserves highlighting >>>>

.
"... the amount given by governments to run Victorian Catholic schools each year is over $50 million dollars more than that given to similar government schools.

" ... Some Catholic schools do "sit shoulder to shoulder with government schools" in disadvantaged areas but they actually enrol kids who, even in those areas, are more advantaged. Anyone with the time can check this on My School.

"But his biggest error is his claim that Victorian Catholic schools still operate on 10% less resources than government schools. If he is referring to recurrent funding (he doesn't say); this is not the case. My School shows that, when you compare groups of schools enrolling similar students - a far more honest comparison - Catholic schools operate on a net recurring income per student which is mostly higher than that available to government schools.

"The reality is that the availability of school data on My School has started to change the debate. Mr Elder needs to catch up."

Posted by bunyip, Monday, 20 April 2015 10:57:28 AM
Posted by McReal, Wednesday, 22 April 2015 6:51:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Surely I, as a tax paying citizen, deserve the benefit of government funds to educate my children just as much as my next door neighbours who chooses to send their children to a public school.

"Isn’t that the issue here. Choice.

"And if we then agree that every family should benefit from some of their tax dollars assisting their children’s education then what is wrong with those dollars being guaranteed to allow the schools we chose to plan for the future.

"I don’t know much about the politics of the AEU but I do know that everyone has to be in this together."

Posted by Anthony Dunstall, Monday, 20 April 2015 9:12:20 PM

Except everyone isn't in this together: the Catholic church gets a lot of kudos for having a 'strong' independent education system.

It's not just a case of a families tax dollars going back to that family: some families taxes don't cover their childrens' education, and some families pay tax in excess of others. It's pooled funds, and

as Bunyip's post highlights, the pooled funds do not seem to be being distributed equitably.
Posted by McReal, Wednesday, 22 April 2015 6:52:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It is worth noting that much primary schooling was initiated by church groups of various denominations, my own distant relative Mary MacKillop being my favourite.
The bigoted actions of such notables as Sir Henry Parkes led to the destruction of most of the Church schooling in NSW with the exception of the Catholics who resented Sir Henry's attacks on their religion and their efforts to educate working class children.

Sir Henry, judicial murderer, philanderer and Father of Federation has left a not quite unstained legacy.
Posted by Is Mise, Thursday, 23 April 2015 9:52:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As chair of the Victorian Catholic Schools Parents' Body I wholeheartedly support the sentiment behind Stephen Elder's defence of our schools' right to fair funding for all students.

We seek State and Federal government funding because it's so important that parents have the opportunity to choose a school for their child.

Catholic education is an integral part of that choice based upon what will best suit their family, their values, their child's needs and abilities and their desire to belong to a Catholic community firmly based within its local community.

Politics aside, it is our expectation as parents that Catholic education will always be an affordable option through fair and equitable funding.
Posted by Tracey O, Thursday, 23 April 2015 7:14:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy