private schools: for or against?

[forsaken]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think it's the other way round. I'm pretty sure private get $4000 per student and public get $8000 per student.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your second statement is also untrue. At the school I go to most of the money from fees goes into building facilities. In the last 3-4 years, my school has built a library/computer/study area, a hall and are currently building a gymnasium. Each project cost several million dollars. I hardly think a gymnasium is going to fit into a teacher's pocket :wink:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, the funding going to non-governmental schools usually exceeds that provided to governmental schools.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This financial year, the federal government has budgeted for a $4.7 billion spending spree on non-government schools, compared to just $2.2 billion being allocated to government schools.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

According the the above, they exceed the funding for public schools to the tune of 4.7 billion to a mere 2.2 billion. Take into consideration the fact that there are far more public schools then private schools and I'll leave the conclusion to you. Note the fact that the private schools also get subsidiary funding by means of the students paying to go to the school, to the school.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Personally, I'm a bit saddened at the hefty amount of generalisations in this thread. All I will say is comments regarding the pupils - or more specifically, quality of pupils and teachers - are inherently ignorant. There is just as much likelihood of turning out a bad egg in a private school as there is in a public school, period. Utilisating that as a basis of an argument to or for either system is poor at best.

[Ss_J9_Goten]

Hmmm, 2004 seems a little outdated. I'll try and find something more recent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT: Well, here's something. Meanwhile, I'll try and find something better

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Over 2005 to 2008, $700 million will be provided to State schools to help repair, replace or install new items critical to their school's overall needs as determined by school communities and an additional $300 million will be provided to improve infrastructure in non-government schools.

[forsaken]

That the specific funding for repairing and not necessarily everything else. Consider the following:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. Private schools already have BETTER and updated equipment, thus negating the need to repair.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. Public schools usually have outdated and old equipment, ergo the need to repair is significantly greater. My school's infrastructure is pretty run-down for example, though that might not be a particularly accurate representation of other public schools.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. There are considerably more public schools than private schools. This is shown in the very same article you used, which states: "Overall, state government schools enrol 68 per cent of students, while non-government schools enrol 32 per cent of students."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This however, is still not an accurate indicator of how much overall funding is attained by either public or private schools. At best, it's split 50-50 now, as it should have been, However the private schools - by looking at the earlier figure of 4.7 billion to 2.7 billion - were getting 370% what public schools were, for what, at least over 10-20 years you'd think. That puts them quite a bit ahead of public schools, regardless of contemporary evened-out funding.

[Ss_J9_Goten]

1. But the article states "to improve infrastructure". If there is still room for improvement, it should be improved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. I concede that, yes, many public schools are in desperate need of repair.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. Well, that article was talking about $1 billion dollars for education, with $700 million going to public and $300 million going to non-government schools. Going by percentages, 70% is going to government schools, whilst 30% is going to non-government schools.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But now government schools are getting 200 and a third percent more than non-government schools. Now consider the next image

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As we can see (this table is under the Literacy, Numeracy and special Learning Needs program), non-government schools are receiving $129,581 of $393,829. This, by my calculations (which may be wrong) is roughly 32.9%. This means that government schools are getting 67.1% of these particular funds, which is pretty close to the ratio of public to private schools. There are many more examples.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Before I hi-jack this thread, however, I will quit. If you would like to debate this further through pm, I would be more than happy to accommodate you.

[assassin_696]

The argument seems to be not that we should remove public schools but make state schools better?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I totally agree. There's nothing bad about public/private schools being kept if you're lucky enough to go to one. But yeah, state schools should be made better, that's a given.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All I was saying is that you don't have to have a brilliant education to succeed in life. Of course everyone should be entitled to a brilliant education, but the fact that they don't have one shouldn't mean that they become defeatist and think that they can never achieve anything.

[megakiller32]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Private schools reinforce already disparate opportunities between privileged and underprivileged groups.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Still, if nothing is done to make public schools better, why should everyone get a poor education?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So basically what your saying is that poor people have less of a right to an educatation than anyone else?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No matter what you say. In real life that's what matters.

 

 

 

Poor people DO get less health, education, entertainment, etc. You saying they have the right to get good education isn't going to change that.

 

 

 

My point here is: why should everyone get poor education when there are people who can get better education, and perhearps figure out a way to give everyone good education in the future?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Some people are naturally more intelligent than others and given an equal playing field this would be reflected to a greater extent by a persons grades. Unfortunatly high school grades are slowly begining to reflect the quality of the school the student has attended.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Equality in schooling would better reflect the skills of a student rather than the ability of schools to force-feed limited syllabus specific information to students at the expense of teaching actual subjects.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its why they give out Scholarships sorry, i needed to make that big and bold, because nobody realised :-k

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry could you quote me the percentage of the entire private school population that is there via Scholarships clever clogs? Im willing to bet it is less than 20% if not less than that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I dunno how many, but if your smart enough, then you can get one. If your not, your not. :shock:

[mad4u689]

The majority of low-income intelligent students I'm talking about are never even made aware that these possibilities exist. They never know that they could just apply for scholarships and get in. They don't have guidance counselors watching their back, and their parents never knew about these scholarships to guide them and tell them about.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By providing scholarships, private schools (and many universities) get to "feel like" they're being good and helpful and making all these opportunities available, when in reality, they're just patting their own backs.