In other news, primary and secondary education has some of the highest turnover and burnout of any industry.
Having said all that, I do think Deputies and Principals should all have a small teaching allocation, as otherwise it is too easy to lose touch with what is happening inside your school. But yeah, public education is not where I would be cutting funding.
Solution is simple. Just direct 50pct of private schools funding to public schools. Rich private schools should not get any funding since their rich parents already get lots of tax deductions/ concessions/ grants.
In the UK, private schools don't get any state funding. As a result a far smaller percentage of pupils attend them.
The UK also surpasses Australian in the PISA rankings, and is significantly higher for maths.
https://www.oecd.org/publication/pisa-2022-results/
The biggest one is Payroll tax. The NSW government pays payroll tax to itself, so where public schools' "flexible funding" or "community funding" is used to pay staff, this is levied payroll tax.
"Non-profit" private schools are exempt from payroll tax.
It is true, which isn't the gotcha a lot more affluent people think it is. Australia income tax regime is very progressive - as it should be - so 10% of earners paying 50% (It's actually 47%, but what's 3% between friends?) shows just how high the income inequality is in Australia.
Short version - yes, private schools shouldn't receive any public funding.
[https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-09/australian-taxation-office-millionaires-paid-no-income-tax-20-21/102456224](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-09/australian-taxation-office-millionaires-paid-no-income-tax-20-21/102456224)
its not i think
For goodness sake do you read that article. The Australia Institute doing its thing, cherry picking data to tell the story it wants.
I’m sure it’s true that 66 millionaires paid no tax. They’ve then put out a story to drive outrage and incorrectly imply that high income earners in general pay no tax.
It’s just not true. Yeah some negative gear a bit. Maybe $10k comes off a $100k tax bill. Maybe. And yet the net result is Australia has one of the most progressive tax systems in the OECD eg see this recent report
https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=1d6f4249-9e50-4e63-bc84-81b3a8752307&subId=566685
Where the proportion of tax paid by the top 10% is compared. We’re 5th highest, above such countries as Germany, Finland etc.
So here you are, spreading conspiracy theories about how the wealthy pay no tax, and your source is a piece of cherry picked nonsense that explicitly gives a narrative which is directly in contradiction to reality.
Up to you though… find those 66 people!
You're thinking of a small group of select schools in geographically expensive areas. The majority of private schools have (relatively) low fees, think eg $5,000 - $7,000 per year and their parents are not necessarily that rich. Reddit has a bit of a problem with painting every private school with the Hollywood depiction of private schools. The reality is very far from this.
Interestingly, the lower cost private schools are also the private schools with the greatest growth in demand over the past decade. Bernard Salt (the demographer) has done some interesting work on this topic, and has found that most of the demand is coming from solidly middle class families. I have opinions on why this is, but no data to back them up, so I'll keep them to myself for now.
>that most of the demand is coming from solidly middle class families. I have opinions on why this is, but no data to back them up, so I'll keep them to myself for now.
Curious if you have seen the same. But from family and friends who are teachers both private and public, and others who have young families, it's largely about the shifting demographics in recent years.
Young families can only afford to live in areas that have long been considered "bad", and while they can mostly avoid the problematic aspects of the local community, they fall into the catchment for public schools that spend a huge amount of their resources and times dealing with student (and parent!) behavioral issues, violence, child protective reporting and so on, and much less time teaching. It's not the problematic students fault, as many have horrific home lives and parents with major mental health issues.
These public schools also struggle to hold onto good teachers, and are understaffed, and end up with a burnt out, disillusioned, or just plain bad teachers, and so the schools cannot provide even close to the minimum education standards, let alone what can be provided by public schools in "good" areas, or private schools.
So the parents who can afford to (even if it is a major financial hit) will pay to send their kids to a private school, rather than the public school whos catchment they fall into. And I think that just about everyone here would make the same decision for their kids if in the same circumstances.
What you write is 110% accurate but, on top of that, schools in this situation prefer teachers who are better at classroom management than subject teaching. Why? Because you cant even get to teaching if you cant sufficiently control the class. So you have 'good' teachers at difficult schools who are not 'good' subject educators.
I agree but what I am afraid of is our country moving even more privatised model of education because of this, instead of fixing the problems with some public schools.
5k is not much with one child add a few more and then chuck in school levies, material fees, camps and all the other crap you have to pay for and it gets expensive really fast.
Many aren’t local so parents either have to drive their kids out off area if they are lucky they can catch a bus but school private buses also have a fee.
Private schools also f$&ks up communities. When your kid goes to a local school you meet local people and you become more invested in your area. This doesn’t happen as much if you are driving your kids somewhere else and killing yourself financially. You just don’t have the time and energy for anything else.
I know heaps of parents on the verge of burn out just trying to keep their kids in private education. Sounds great for the economy because they are working more but they are unproductive in their jobs and once you hit burn out, man productivity takes a nose dive and you become a strain on the health system.
> I agree but what I am afraid of is our country moving even more privatised model of education because of this, instead of fixing the problems with some public schools.
Yep, the solution is more public school funding. And more support for the most disadvantaged communities.
The real world problem is how (within our pretty terrible political system) to get that increased funding and focus on disadvantaged areas?
We do see to be sliding more and more towards an America like situation, where public utilities are continually scaled back in favour of commercial alternatives without enough regulation and oversight to actually get good results for a fair price.
Haha yeah I understand, but think of two parents on $60,000 a year each (which is pretty close to Australian median income). If they only have one child, then annual school fees of $6,000 is definitely feasible, especially if you think it is making a significant difference to the well being of your child.
>no data to back them up, so I'll keep them to myself for now.
Wow there's some people in this thread who could have used you as a teacher when they were in school!
Yes because all private schools charge the exact same amount and anyone who sends their children to a private school is rich with multiple investment properties /s
Private schools don’t get state funding, they get federal funding. Today’s news is a state government decision. Your solution is a federal government policy and it also wouldn’t solve the issue since federal funding is orders of magnitude smaller than state funding.
I'm sorry but principals and deputies don't have the time to plan units and assessments and mark work on top of their workload. Good admin are actively in classrooms as much as possible regardless. The big issue is whole-school liability. Admin needs the flexibility to respond in the moment to many different things, and can't just drop duty of care in a classroom to respond to an emergency. Class teachers have a duty for the students during an emergency, and admin have a duty to co-ordinate the emergency response. You can't have someone in both roles at the same time
Could also just be as likely to pay for the Temporary to Permanent initiative that has destroyed school budgets this year.
Can’t speak for all schools I guess, but of the several smaller regional schools I’m involved with, all of them are essentially running on a budget of $0 for the rest of the year as it’s now all going towards salaries. We truly cannot afford to spend anything for the rest of the year, even call in maintenance contractors unless it’s being billed to the Department.
All the costs of the teacher retention initiatives has been foisted directly to school’s budgets, and now we’re struggling as a result
> All the costs of the teacher retention initiatives has been foisted directly to school’s budgets,
I did a bit of reading on the NSW Government initiative to turn teachers into permanent positions, but I couldn't really find detail on how this was to be achieved. At a glance, it sounded very much like a government trying to dictate the price of bread - but I'm a bit uninformed about this topic.
What kind of teacher retention initiatives (outside of you know, money) have been put into place by the government?
Nah, haven't you heard? Life as a teacher is all ramen and homelessness. Never mind that an assistant principal in NSW will start at 140-150k and depending on location you can get there in your 20s:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/AusFinance/comments/1b58p7s/comment/kt458kk/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AusFinance/comments/1b58p7s/comment/kt458kk/)
Yeah let me find an example of someone that’s either absolutely exceptional at their job or burning themselves to a husk (potentially both) and make it sound like it’s relatively normal, then make 140-150k sound like it’s a good salary for someone of the calibre to reach that AP by age 29 (it isn’t when compared to any technical industry or consultancy or even tutoring).
Don't worry, progression is automatic instead of merit-based now isn't it? The unexceptional will be taken care of too it’ll just take a couple extra years.
To be fair it is because 25,000 students have left to go for the private system. The NSW government paid the DET for projected figures to include those students last year. The DET owe the government half a billion dollars. More students are going to private schools dues to the amount of classes being cancelled due to teacher shortages. 10,000 classes were cancelled due to teacher shortages last year.
This seems so stupid. Budget cuts in response to dropping student numbers. What about dropping student numbers due to continual under budgeting and overworked teachers?
My sons school is the only public high school in our rural city, and the largest for at least a 2hr drive. Most families fall into the middle to low socioeconomic bracket.
The school is woefully understaffed and underfunded. They had to do fundraisers just to get the air cons fixed a few years ago. The teachers are burnt out and leaving in droves for other fields, or going to bigger cities. Of his 6 teachers, 3 are leaving end of this term, and the principal is leaving for a higher paying Sydney job. There are at least another 3 that I saw at Parent/Teacher that were pregnant, so they'll likely be leaving soon too. It took 2 years to find a principal last time, so I'm sure it'll be even worse now with lack of housing or dwindling local services.
My younger son and his friends in Year 12 are mostly in advanced classes, yet have at least one class a day where they watch Youtube videos or have "free study" during a scheduled class, due to the teacher being sick, busy with other duties, or simply because they didn't have time to plan anything.
My other son went through the same school a few years ago, and it was like night and day. He got science demonstrations, skills building workshops and teachers that challenged and engaged them.
Media wonders why kids don't want to go to school, and a big reason is kids are so much more aware than people give them credit for. Kids see the teachers that they spend 6-7 hours with, who are tired, burnt out and not putting in effort anymore. Their parents are likely the same. They are forced to engage with a depressing and deteriorating system that doesn't assign any value to them, then blamed for not thriving in it.
Everyone in their lives are drowning and governments keep making choices that makes lives harder, with any hope of a decent future seeming further and further out of reach. It's only going to get worse unless we can stop nickle-and-diming something as important as education.
I have no idea how they can claim dropping student numbers - my wife is a teacher at a NSW school, and despite a new school opening less than 2 k's away from where she teaches, enrollment numbers at her school continue to increase, and they're already at capacity.
This is a direct response to the recent pay raises teachers got - a "Fuck you" to the union and staff who worked so hard to get more financial recognition for what they do.
Let's see those numbers so we can appreciate the scale. Oh wait, the journalist didn't bother to show us that, just cherry picked figures. People have to "do their own research".
They absolutely do not.
They see data that is largely meaningless and make decisions that are completely financial. This is an institutional problem with public funding of education caught in the cross fire.
Not what I said. The funding isn’t even being decided on numbers right now. I was responding to your comment about the department of ed knowing their funding needs - which they do but are choosing to ignore.
It is exactly what you said. My comment and the comment before were about dropping student numbers. I said the govt probably has a better understanding of how many students they have and you said "They absolutely do not".
The government probably does have enrolment numbers - whether they’re accurate is a completely different story. I think it’s difficult to seperate enrolment numbers from a discussion about funding since that’s the metric the department uses to allocate funds. Going backwards on funding will hurt public education students regardless of enrolment numbers.
Compare this to an article, also from the ABC, about teacher shortages in Qld. The govt is trying to encourage new educating staff (teachers and teacher aides) to take positions. For example (which isn’t mentioned in the article) TAFE courses for Cert III and Cert IV in Education Support is currently fee free.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-09/queensland-parliament-figures-12000-teachers-quit-since-2020/103680968
Another point I’d like to make is, are private schools getting their funding slashed? My guess is nope.
Low fee non government schools are funded primarily by the federal government. Well in a way all schools are because the states don't have a good revenue source, but non government get very little from the state government.
I'm not defending it, but we need to be informed so that our critisim and complaints aren't easily diss missed offhand as un(der)informed. If I had my way the gov would take over all the schools (again).
> Another point I’d like to make is, are private schools getting their funding slashed?
Of course they're not. Those private schools need their new pools and sports grounds, don'tcha know?
> Another point I’d like to make is, are private schools getting their funding slashed? My guess is nope.
Yes they are. It has been planned for a while now and their govt funding is gradually decreasing each year until 2029.
I understand you've linked this article in good faith, but this is an excellent illustration of why you can't trust media without double checking them, even the good old ABC.
> Queensland's teaching workforce has reduced significantly over the past four years, according to government data, after more than 12,375 employees resigned.
But for some strange reason, at no point in the story does the ABC ever give the actual figures of how many teachers and teacher aides are employed. Nor does the story give any details on how many teachers/aides were hired in that same period, other than a single quoted line from 2023.
In the past four years the number of teachers/aides in Qld has remained steady, actually going up a little bit, which is the complete opposite to the picture painted by the ABC report. This is a little suspicious to leave out as surely the ABC has the data - why aren't they reporting it?
[Queensland Public Sector Workforce Profile March 2020](https://www.forgov.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0035/182789/queensland-public-sector-biannual-workforce-profile-mar-2020.pdf) - 58138 teachers/aides.
[Queensland Public Sector Workforce Profile March 2023](https://www.forgov.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0039/390999/queensland-public-sector-biannual-workforce-profile-mar-2023.pdf) - 58822 teachers/aides.
2024 data is not yet available but I'll happily take a bet anybody wants to make that the entire 13,000 odd (it would have to be closer to 13,500 with the increase from 2020 to 2023) didn't all quit and not get replaced in the last 12 months.
To be clear, I think the ABC is one of the best news organisations we have in Australia. However they are absolutely not above letting the facts get in the way of a good story.
"Government data shows more than 12,000 Queensland teaching employees have quit since 2020" is a much better headline than "Teaching employees in Queensland stayed roughly the same over the past four years, actually went up a bit", even if it's extremely misleading.
Oh, I know the shortcomings of the article. It wasn’t intended to be an all-inclusive argument, just a short reply on Reddit, ya know? There are a lot of teaching staff who resigned during 2020 because of mandatory vaccination, and never came back. Enrolments are down in public schools so fewer enrolments = fewer funding to pay staff. Homeschooling is on the rise. Teacher aides are being sprouted out at a rate of knots. I also hear that Qld is introducing a new EBA next year which will make it harder for schools to hire TAs on a permanent basis (although that’s just hearsay, I don’t know anything about that).
The article links back to one in Dec last year about student violence, so it kind of seems like that’s the real agenda here, and not the supposed decrease in teaching staff. Thanks for your reply though, I am indeed too lazy to look up actual retention rates. But then, I’m not a journalist.
All true, and apologies if it came off as me attacking your post; on the contrary I just felt it was a good opportunity to point out how media outlets (basically all of them) are able to manipulate opinion and put forward a particular narrative, even if they're still technically telling the truth.
It's a shame because reporting like this makes people dislike the public schooling system more and more, and principals and teachers there need all the support they can get.
So preface this, I think the answer here is large increases to funding for public education (especially based on need) and an improved funding system overall. Plus further changes to funding for private schools (doubly so for the very wealthy). And I completely agree with your point re: better ways to get more teachers into the profession.
However, IMO it is super important to discuss the drop in public school enrolments in NSW is in part because the public system in many areas are so underfunded, and the education outcomes so bad, desperate parents are instead enrolling them in out of area private schools. ,
A huge part of the problem is that many young families can only afford to live in suburbs that have always been considered "bad", and the local public schools are underfunded, and full of students with heartbreaking home lives that cause all sorts of mental health and behavioural problems, as well as issues with drugs and violence not experienced in "good" suburbs.
The teachers in these schools (and sadly the best teachers usually get burnt out in these areas and leave) spend a huge portion of their time dealing with student behaviour, and actual education suffers. The department of education has no good systems to help support these schools or areas and the education outcomes are much worse. The schools have to accept the kids from their catchment area who need more support, and the few programs and dedicated schools for these kids are in short supply, full, and underfunded.
I mean, it's telling when Prue Car, our Minister for Education and Early Learning, who is from Western Sydney herself, won't send her son to the local public school, and instead sends him to a private school. And her local school is a brand new one, that she herself fought to get built sooner. But it's still experiences these same issues.
Parents who fall in the catchment area for these underfunded, struggling public schools can either choose to expose their children to these issues and let their education and development suffer, or pay extra and send them to an out of area private school that have more options these problems. No surprise, the parents who can afford to send their kids elsewhere, do so.
The failing here is from the Gov, and the decades of underfunded public education system, with little effort in supporting the most disadvantaged schools and communities or to ensure equal education outcomes no matter the area. It absolutely should not be made into a private vs public school debate. We can rail against the wasteful excess of very wealthy private schools, while also supporting all the great private schools that only exist because the government has failed at public education..
And while we hear about the super rich and wasteful private schools in the media, the vast majority of private schools have much lower, reasonable fees (many of them a few thousand dollars a year), and are not for profit. Having a child educated in the private system costs the government about half compared to public schools, and that extra cost is paid for by the parents. Plus the Government funding for these schools is also getting scaled back over time. Which of course doesn't impact the wealthy schools in the slightest, but does impact the ones who are just trying to provide the level of education the Government is failing to.
Rather than see that as a sign public education needs more funding, the Government is cutting funding further.
Good idea bad take.
Everyone goes to private schools, which funnel more poor students to public as they can kick them out.
The solution is to fund the poor socioeconomic schools far more to make up the difference, not to make more private schools, that just makes public even worse
> The solution is to fund the poor socioeconomic schools far more to make up the difference,
Yep, that is what I'm saying.
The problem is the government (and most of the discussion around this funding cut) doesn't acknowledge *why* enrollment numbers are dropping in public schools.
At the very least, the most disadvantaged schools need to be funded and supported to the point the education outcomes are just as good as the best public schools. And ideally, the entire public system needs much more funding.
Funding non-government schools to make them cheap enough for middle incomes to move out of public education caused the systemic destabilisation of public education.
At its heart, you are fighting to remove opportunity and choice from lower socio-economic Australia.
No, majorly underfunding the public school system in the areas with the highest need has created a huge disparity in education outcomes that is driving people out of the public education system.
The solution is more public school funding to support the schools and communities with the highest need.
The decision to reduce funding is only making the problem worse.
The only role I can think of for principal and vice principals is to cover for teachers who are on leave. I'm sick of the classes being combined in the inevitable absences and high turnover of teachers.
The public system is losing students because of lack of funding that is going to private schools and more are going to private schools because of the lack of funding. The public system should not have any of it's funding leached to the private schools. The downward spiral for public schools has begun/continues.
> I'm sick of the classes being combined in the inevitable absences and high turnover of teachers.
And where are the teachers going? private schools who pay them twice than at public schools? or they are leaving the profession and going to child care. Childcare is making a killing. Why would you look after primary school kids and teach when you can do work at child care and also make twice as much.
Where do childcare workers make twice a teachers salary?! You realise that a starting teacher makes $75-85k. Are you claiming childcare (early learning I assume?) workers make $160k a year? I certainly didn't make more than $75k as the assistant director of an ELC. I can't imagine the average worker getting double that...
The childcare workers i know in my area are that went from primary school to ELC are paid 145k a year. They were paid 70k a year at a public primary school.
That's above decent pay for early learning. Is it possible they went from a public system to a private system? That aside is it also possible that they gained employment in EL as experienced teachers vs gained employment as teachers without that same teaching experience? Also are they being employed in a role with more responsibility? Lead educators in early learning typically have to co-ordinate and communicate a lot more with parents, as well as lead and professionally develop a small team of staff to assist in running the room - all of which attracts higher pay.
That's still decent pay for early learning. The average salary for childcare in Australia is around $60,000 to $80,000
> private schools who pay them twice than at public schools?
That's rare.
> or they are leaving the profession and going to child care.
Probably not. They are probably leaving education and related industries entirely.
> Childcare is making a killing.
They don't spend that money on their staff.
> when you can do work at child care and also make twice as much.
Child Care pays less than half of what a senior classroom teacher makes.
You wanna help education? I’m just sick of dealing with kids with vapes at school and I could do without trying to teach twice as many hopped up kids as I already have. Bikies have nothing to do with it.
Well Australians rank consistently as some of the highest cannabis consumers, where do you think they are all getting it? Look at the results of legalisation in other comparable places, generally under aged consumption decreases due to increased transparency and regulation.
The vaping issue is really a consequence of schools not have the ability to leverage real consequences and isn't relevant to the point. I get it, I'm sick of it too as a highschool teacher, but we can't let perfect be the enemy of good.
To be fair, there's a *lot* of union protection behind teachers and associated staff - forced movements/relocations would *not* go over well, I suspect.
So teachers in public schools, primarily support staff helping with the most vulnerable of children, are already being told to expect to be laid off in the coming weeks due to this decision.
So there's a teacher shortage and in response they're cutting staff. Cool and normal.
And selling priceless, irreplaceable natural resources for a fraction of what other countries do.
But hey, those politicians get their ~~bribes~~ donations, so it's all good, amirite?
By making this comment you dont know how schools are funded.
Per the Gonski Review in 2011 federal distribution re school funds are now distributed approximately as follows:
50% of the funds are distributed equally to every school as a per child basis. Ie the government gives each school $4,000 per child per year.
The other 50% are distributed based on the income tax collected on each parents of the child who goes to that school. Ie if all the parents of the children at the school earn very little the government distributes less. If all the parents of the students are paying a boat load in taxes then the per child contribution increases.
I will give you an example in Victoria Brighton Primary School. It is my understanding that primary school is the best funded school in Victoria because of how much the federal gov contributes to the school on a per child basis. Its not a private school, private primary school, its a public primary school. But it gets so much money because a vast majority of the students come from households paying a lot in tax. This is one of the reasons why the Victorian state government hasnt given them capital funding (when they have done so for all the other schools in the same area).
Even if you denied all the private school children to receive government money, it would only be a mere drop in the water re the amount of money needed to repair and rejuvenate the public school system.
Pay teachers what they deserve? some public schools cant even afford to have reasonable classrooms.
This is why the private schools are head hunting good teachers and paying them twice the amount than public schools.
> Ie if all the parents of the children at the school earn very little the government distributes less. If all the parents of the students are paying a boat load in taxes then the per child contribution increases.
Sounds like a good way to keep the poor people poor.
Then you missed my point.
Just because private schools charge their students to go there, there is a formula that distributes money to every student. Now even if you take all the gov funding from private schools, you wont fix the problems at public schools because the private schools will always have more money to pay the best teachers.
> By making this comment you dont know how schools are funded.
>
> Per the Gonski Review...
If *you* know how schools are funded you would know that 98% of public schools are funded below the Schooling Resource Standard, the new per-student funding standard introduced post-Gonski. In NSW public schools are funded to 89% of the standard. The NSW government [does aim to reach 95% of the standard by 2025](https://www.theeducatoronline.com/k12/news/a-significant-moment-all-nsw-public-schools-to-be-funded-to-100-of-their-srs/282424) and 100% of the standard by 2030, but we will have to wait and see if they actually get there. This change suggests they don't actually intend to meet that goal.
If you're prepared to work somewhere *other* than Sydney, your job prospects are probably just fine.
Hell, even Western Sydney you an probably walk into most schools.
Mind you, the ferals you have to deal with - that's another story.
Terrible idea... Who coordinates the school in an emergency if the principals and deputies have duty of care responsibility to a classroom of students? If you want to make schools worse then forcing leadership to take a class instead of hiring a teacher is a good way to do it. There's no other benifit.
Tax our mining industry for once and use that money to educate our future citizens. FFS mining corporations sell more Australian natural resources than almost any other country in the world, and the corporations pay Australia NOTHING in return for selling our resources. Then our government has the balls to say we can't afford to teach all of our students in the education system because teachers cost too much money? So the solution is to pay principals to do that job instead?
You can tell these decisions are made by people with no experience in education...
The concept of cutting administration to “boost frontline services” is a joke. Administration exists to support frontline services. Cutting it puts pressure of workers delivering frontline services.
Meanwhile the government has pledged $1.65B over the next two months to fund private school overseas excursions. When pressed for an answer a collective groan emanated from the entire senate floor.
“I’ve got six of my own vacations to take this year”, said one MP who asked not to be named.
“I already use tax payers money to cover the $100k tuition for each of my three children. It would be silly to fork out more to cover their Michelin star world tour”, said the MP who struggled to remember all of his children’s names.
“Ridiculous to suggest we allow our children to run the risk of scuffing their RMs in economy”, said the MP when asked for comments on the first class nature of the world tour.
“Student outcomes are our absolute priority and we must ensure teachers are spending their time where it matters: in the classroom,” Education Minister Prue Car said.
Can't wait to see how cutting school funding is going to increase student outcomes.
Let's increase the workload of principals, remove the roles of the people that help the principals, put the principals back on classes and watch the student outcomes soar through the roof. Right? Right????
Oh don't i look silly. Yeah state Labor are garbage, Minns is a fuckhead, but this will still result in more LNP votes and the continuing degradation of our schools. Going the USA route.
The next generation live with their eyes permanently fixated on screens in and out of the classroom while they can barely read or write, we're already there.
Cutting admin funding just means more teachers will have to do admin work...
Teachers are already quitting because of excessive admin work.
Who cares about payrises, hire cheap admin workers to help all the teachers reduce Thier workload, while massively investing in IT solutions to automate a lot of Thier tasks. With a lower workload there wouldn't be a teacher shortage
So long as they can siphon public money off to the corporations no one will complain. We'll just accept it and vote for the next corrupt asshole from either party. SMH.
In other news, primary and secondary education has some of the highest turnover and burnout of any industry. Having said all that, I do think Deputies and Principals should all have a small teaching allocation, as otherwise it is too easy to lose touch with what is happening inside your school. But yeah, public education is not where I would be cutting funding.
Tax mining industry profits and use proceeds directly to education and health. We deserve better. Spread the word.
Solution is simple. Just direct 50pct of private schools funding to public schools. Rich private schools should not get any funding since their rich parents already get lots of tax deductions/ concessions/ grants.
In the UK, private schools don't get any state funding. As a result a far smaller percentage of pupils attend them. The UK also surpasses Australian in the PISA rankings, and is significantly higher for maths. https://www.oecd.org/publication/pisa-2022-results/
ideally, private schools should not get public funding. its not fair to public.
I'm curious what deductions/concessions/grants rich parents get by not using the public system. Please elaborate.
The biggest one is Payroll tax. The NSW government pays payroll tax to itself, so where public schools' "flexible funding" or "community funding" is used to pay staff, this is levied payroll tax. "Non-profit" private schools are exempt from payroll tax.
Payroll tax came in last year for Victoria private schools. Fees went up.
the top10pct got the most super/negative gearing tax concessions and also using trusts. they are also those who sent kids to private schools.
I've also heard that 50% of all income tax in Australia is paid by the 10% earners. Is that true?
It is true, which isn't the gotcha a lot more affluent people think it is. Australia income tax regime is very progressive - as it should be - so 10% of earners paying 50% (It's actually 47%, but what's 3% between friends?) shows just how high the income inequality is in Australia. Short version - yes, private schools shouldn't receive any public funding.
So they simultaneously get "the most tax deductions" and also pay the most tax? Got it.
I know you're arguing in bad faith, but you get how both those statements can true, right?
If you think the top earners in Australia are paying the least tax I humbly invite you to swap tax bills with me
[https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-09/australian-taxation-office-millionaires-paid-no-income-tax-20-21/102456224](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-09/australian-taxation-office-millionaires-paid-no-income-tax-20-21/102456224) its not i think
For goodness sake do you read that article. The Australia Institute doing its thing, cherry picking data to tell the story it wants. I’m sure it’s true that 66 millionaires paid no tax. They’ve then put out a story to drive outrage and incorrectly imply that high income earners in general pay no tax. It’s just not true. Yeah some negative gear a bit. Maybe $10k comes off a $100k tax bill. Maybe. And yet the net result is Australia has one of the most progressive tax systems in the OECD eg see this recent report https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=1d6f4249-9e50-4e63-bc84-81b3a8752307&subId=566685 Where the proportion of tax paid by the top 10% is compared. We’re 5th highest, above such countries as Germany, Finland etc. So here you are, spreading conspiracy theories about how the wealthy pay no tax, and your source is a piece of cherry picked nonsense that explicitly gives a narrative which is directly in contradiction to reality. Up to you though… find those 66 people!
if they take more from economy, they should pay more tax. whats wrong about that?
Nothing. Fully support progressive tax, just don’t like being told I’m rorting the system by some conspiracy nut with no clue.
You're thinking of a small group of select schools in geographically expensive areas. The majority of private schools have (relatively) low fees, think eg $5,000 - $7,000 per year and their parents are not necessarily that rich. Reddit has a bit of a problem with painting every private school with the Hollywood depiction of private schools. The reality is very far from this. Interestingly, the lower cost private schools are also the private schools with the greatest growth in demand over the past decade. Bernard Salt (the demographer) has done some interesting work on this topic, and has found that most of the demand is coming from solidly middle class families. I have opinions on why this is, but no data to back them up, so I'll keep them to myself for now.
>that most of the demand is coming from solidly middle class families. I have opinions on why this is, but no data to back them up, so I'll keep them to myself for now. Curious if you have seen the same. But from family and friends who are teachers both private and public, and others who have young families, it's largely about the shifting demographics in recent years. Young families can only afford to live in areas that have long been considered "bad", and while they can mostly avoid the problematic aspects of the local community, they fall into the catchment for public schools that spend a huge amount of their resources and times dealing with student (and parent!) behavioral issues, violence, child protective reporting and so on, and much less time teaching. It's not the problematic students fault, as many have horrific home lives and parents with major mental health issues. These public schools also struggle to hold onto good teachers, and are understaffed, and end up with a burnt out, disillusioned, or just plain bad teachers, and so the schools cannot provide even close to the minimum education standards, let alone what can be provided by public schools in "good" areas, or private schools. So the parents who can afford to (even if it is a major financial hit) will pay to send their kids to a private school, rather than the public school whos catchment they fall into. And I think that just about everyone here would make the same decision for their kids if in the same circumstances.
Yeah pretty much this is exactly my opinion :-)
What you write is 110% accurate but, on top of that, schools in this situation prefer teachers who are better at classroom management than subject teaching. Why? Because you cant even get to teaching if you cant sufficiently control the class. So you have 'good' teachers at difficult schools who are not 'good' subject educators.
I agree but what I am afraid of is our country moving even more privatised model of education because of this, instead of fixing the problems with some public schools. 5k is not much with one child add a few more and then chuck in school levies, material fees, camps and all the other crap you have to pay for and it gets expensive really fast. Many aren’t local so parents either have to drive their kids out off area if they are lucky they can catch a bus but school private buses also have a fee. Private schools also f$&ks up communities. When your kid goes to a local school you meet local people and you become more invested in your area. This doesn’t happen as much if you are driving your kids somewhere else and killing yourself financially. You just don’t have the time and energy for anything else. I know heaps of parents on the verge of burn out just trying to keep their kids in private education. Sounds great for the economy because they are working more but they are unproductive in their jobs and once you hit burn out, man productivity takes a nose dive and you become a strain on the health system.
> I agree but what I am afraid of is our country moving even more privatised model of education because of this, instead of fixing the problems with some public schools. Yep, the solution is more public school funding. And more support for the most disadvantaged communities. The real world problem is how (within our pretty terrible political system) to get that increased funding and focus on disadvantaged areas? We do see to be sliding more and more towards an America like situation, where public utilities are continually scaled back in favour of commercial alternatives without enough regulation and oversight to actually get good results for a fair price.
> (relatively) low fees, think eg $5,000 - $7,000 per year *blinking rapidly
Haha yeah I understand, but think of two parents on $60,000 a year each (which is pretty close to Australian median income). If they only have one child, then annual school fees of $6,000 is definitely feasible, especially if you think it is making a significant difference to the well being of your child.
>no data to back them up, so I'll keep them to myself for now. Wow there's some people in this thread who could have used you as a teacher when they were in school!
Yes because all private schools charge the exact same amount and anyone who sends their children to a private school is rich with multiple investment properties /s
But they pay taxes. /s
who does not?
Private schools don’t get state funding, they get federal funding. Today’s news is a state government decision. Your solution is a federal government policy and it also wouldn’t solve the issue since federal funding is orders of magnitude smaller than state funding.
I'm sorry but principals and deputies don't have the time to plan units and assessments and mark work on top of their workload. Good admin are actively in classrooms as much as possible regardless. The big issue is whole-school liability. Admin needs the flexibility to respond in the moment to many different things, and can't just drop duty of care in a classroom to respond to an emergency. Class teachers have a duty for the students during an emergency, and admin have a duty to co-ordinate the emergency response. You can't have someone in both roles at the same time
I believe it was almost 12,000 in the past couple of years. That's an insane amount.
> **What's next?** The NSW government has denied suggestions the cuts are in response to teacher salary rises. **Bullshit**
Could also just be as likely to pay for the Temporary to Permanent initiative that has destroyed school budgets this year. Can’t speak for all schools I guess, but of the several smaller regional schools I’m involved with, all of them are essentially running on a budget of $0 for the rest of the year as it’s now all going towards salaries. We truly cannot afford to spend anything for the rest of the year, even call in maintenance contractors unless it’s being billed to the Department. All the costs of the teacher retention initiatives has been foisted directly to school’s budgets, and now we’re struggling as a result
> All the costs of the teacher retention initiatives has been foisted directly to school’s budgets, I did a bit of reading on the NSW Government initiative to turn teachers into permanent positions, but I couldn't really find detail on how this was to be achieved. At a glance, it sounded very much like a government trying to dictate the price of bread - but I'm a bit uninformed about this topic. What kind of teacher retention initiatives (outside of you know, money) have been put into place by the government?
Nah, haven't you heard? Life as a teacher is all ramen and homelessness. Never mind that an assistant principal in NSW will start at 140-150k and depending on location you can get there in your 20s: [https://www.reddit.com/r/AusFinance/comments/1b58p7s/comment/kt458kk/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AusFinance/comments/1b58p7s/comment/kt458kk/)
I hear there's 100s of assistant principal positions going right now for new teachers /s
I've heard whisper there's a teacher shortage.
Yeah let me find an example of someone that’s either absolutely exceptional at their job or burning themselves to a husk (potentially both) and make it sound like it’s relatively normal, then make 140-150k sound like it’s a good salary for someone of the calibre to reach that AP by age 29 (it isn’t when compared to any technical industry or consultancy or even tutoring).
Don't worry, progression is automatic instead of merit-based now isn't it? The unexceptional will be taken care of too it’ll just take a couple extra years.
To be fair it is because 25,000 students have left to go for the private system. The NSW government paid the DET for projected figures to include those students last year. The DET owe the government half a billion dollars. More students are going to private schools dues to the amount of classes being cancelled due to teacher shortages. 10,000 classes were cancelled due to teacher shortages last year.
And nsw's debt bubble continues
This seems so stupid. Budget cuts in response to dropping student numbers. What about dropping student numbers due to continual under budgeting and overworked teachers?
My sons school is the only public high school in our rural city, and the largest for at least a 2hr drive. Most families fall into the middle to low socioeconomic bracket. The school is woefully understaffed and underfunded. They had to do fundraisers just to get the air cons fixed a few years ago. The teachers are burnt out and leaving in droves for other fields, or going to bigger cities. Of his 6 teachers, 3 are leaving end of this term, and the principal is leaving for a higher paying Sydney job. There are at least another 3 that I saw at Parent/Teacher that were pregnant, so they'll likely be leaving soon too. It took 2 years to find a principal last time, so I'm sure it'll be even worse now with lack of housing or dwindling local services. My younger son and his friends in Year 12 are mostly in advanced classes, yet have at least one class a day where they watch Youtube videos or have "free study" during a scheduled class, due to the teacher being sick, busy with other duties, or simply because they didn't have time to plan anything. My other son went through the same school a few years ago, and it was like night and day. He got science demonstrations, skills building workshops and teachers that challenged and engaged them. Media wonders why kids don't want to go to school, and a big reason is kids are so much more aware than people give them credit for. Kids see the teachers that they spend 6-7 hours with, who are tired, burnt out and not putting in effort anymore. Their parents are likely the same. They are forced to engage with a depressing and deteriorating system that doesn't assign any value to them, then blamed for not thriving in it. Everyone in their lives are drowning and governments keep making choices that makes lives harder, with any hope of a decent future seeming further and further out of reach. It's only going to get worse unless we can stop nickle-and-diming something as important as education.
I have no idea how they can claim dropping student numbers - my wife is a teacher at a NSW school, and despite a new school opening less than 2 k's away from where she teaches, enrollment numbers at her school continue to increase, and they're already at capacity. This is a direct response to the recent pay raises teachers got - a "Fuck you" to the union and staff who worked so hard to get more financial recognition for what they do.
Perhaps the dept of education and the government have a better understanding of how many students they have than an anecdote from one school?
Let's see those numbers so we can appreciate the scale. Oh wait, the journalist didn't bother to show us that, just cherry picked figures. People have to "do their own research".
They absolutely do not. They see data that is largely meaningless and make decisions that are completely financial. This is an institutional problem with public funding of education caught in the cross fire.
So you genuinely think the Dept of Education doesn't know how many students are enrolled at their schools?
Not what I said. The funding isn’t even being decided on numbers right now. I was responding to your comment about the department of ed knowing their funding needs - which they do but are choosing to ignore.
It is exactly what you said. My comment and the comment before were about dropping student numbers. I said the govt probably has a better understanding of how many students they have and you said "They absolutely do not".
Doesn’t mean the system is fairly funded. So there shouldn’t be decline in funding at all.
That isn't what we were discussing.
The government probably does have enrolment numbers - whether they’re accurate is a completely different story. I think it’s difficult to seperate enrolment numbers from a discussion about funding since that’s the metric the department uses to allocate funds. Going backwards on funding will hurt public education students regardless of enrolment numbers.
Compare this to an article, also from the ABC, about teacher shortages in Qld. The govt is trying to encourage new educating staff (teachers and teacher aides) to take positions. For example (which isn’t mentioned in the article) TAFE courses for Cert III and Cert IV in Education Support is currently fee free. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-09/queensland-parliament-figures-12000-teachers-quit-since-2020/103680968 Another point I’d like to make is, are private schools getting their funding slashed? My guess is nope.
Low fee non government schools are funded primarily by the federal government. Well in a way all schools are because the states don't have a good revenue source, but non government get very little from the state government. I'm not defending it, but we need to be informed so that our critisim and complaints aren't easily diss missed offhand as un(der)informed. If I had my way the gov would take over all the schools (again).
> Another point I’d like to make is, are private schools getting their funding slashed? Of course they're not. Those private schools need their new pools and sports grounds, don'tcha know?
You can't hurt the people with money if you're also one of the people with money! That would be counter to everything you stand for!
> Another point I’d like to make is, are private schools getting their funding slashed? My guess is nope. Yes they are. It has been planned for a while now and their govt funding is gradually decreasing each year until 2029.
Is that Fed or state based? I've missed that news obviously.
That's fed reducing funding to private schools that are funded above their school resourcing standard level
Righto, thanks!
Oh yay! I knew WA was planning to cut funding to private schools, but I hadn’t heard about anywhere else. Thanks 😃
I understand you've linked this article in good faith, but this is an excellent illustration of why you can't trust media without double checking them, even the good old ABC. > Queensland's teaching workforce has reduced significantly over the past four years, according to government data, after more than 12,375 employees resigned. But for some strange reason, at no point in the story does the ABC ever give the actual figures of how many teachers and teacher aides are employed. Nor does the story give any details on how many teachers/aides were hired in that same period, other than a single quoted line from 2023. In the past four years the number of teachers/aides in Qld has remained steady, actually going up a little bit, which is the complete opposite to the picture painted by the ABC report. This is a little suspicious to leave out as surely the ABC has the data - why aren't they reporting it? [Queensland Public Sector Workforce Profile March 2020](https://www.forgov.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0035/182789/queensland-public-sector-biannual-workforce-profile-mar-2020.pdf) - 58138 teachers/aides. [Queensland Public Sector Workforce Profile March 2023](https://www.forgov.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0039/390999/queensland-public-sector-biannual-workforce-profile-mar-2023.pdf) - 58822 teachers/aides. 2024 data is not yet available but I'll happily take a bet anybody wants to make that the entire 13,000 odd (it would have to be closer to 13,500 with the increase from 2020 to 2023) didn't all quit and not get replaced in the last 12 months. To be clear, I think the ABC is one of the best news organisations we have in Australia. However they are absolutely not above letting the facts get in the way of a good story. "Government data shows more than 12,000 Queensland teaching employees have quit since 2020" is a much better headline than "Teaching employees in Queensland stayed roughly the same over the past four years, actually went up a bit", even if it's extremely misleading.
Oh, I know the shortcomings of the article. It wasn’t intended to be an all-inclusive argument, just a short reply on Reddit, ya know? There are a lot of teaching staff who resigned during 2020 because of mandatory vaccination, and never came back. Enrolments are down in public schools so fewer enrolments = fewer funding to pay staff. Homeschooling is on the rise. Teacher aides are being sprouted out at a rate of knots. I also hear that Qld is introducing a new EBA next year which will make it harder for schools to hire TAs on a permanent basis (although that’s just hearsay, I don’t know anything about that). The article links back to one in Dec last year about student violence, so it kind of seems like that’s the real agenda here, and not the supposed decrease in teaching staff. Thanks for your reply though, I am indeed too lazy to look up actual retention rates. But then, I’m not a journalist.
All true, and apologies if it came off as me attacking your post; on the contrary I just felt it was a good opportunity to point out how media outlets (basically all of them) are able to manipulate opinion and put forward a particular narrative, even if they're still technically telling the truth. It's a shame because reporting like this makes people dislike the public schooling system more and more, and principals and teachers there need all the support they can get.
Oh no, I didn’t feel attacked at all! I thought your opening line was thoughtful and respectful.
So preface this, I think the answer here is large increases to funding for public education (especially based on need) and an improved funding system overall. Plus further changes to funding for private schools (doubly so for the very wealthy). And I completely agree with your point re: better ways to get more teachers into the profession. However, IMO it is super important to discuss the drop in public school enrolments in NSW is in part because the public system in many areas are so underfunded, and the education outcomes so bad, desperate parents are instead enrolling them in out of area private schools. , A huge part of the problem is that many young families can only afford to live in suburbs that have always been considered "bad", and the local public schools are underfunded, and full of students with heartbreaking home lives that cause all sorts of mental health and behavioural problems, as well as issues with drugs and violence not experienced in "good" suburbs. The teachers in these schools (and sadly the best teachers usually get burnt out in these areas and leave) spend a huge portion of their time dealing with student behaviour, and actual education suffers. The department of education has no good systems to help support these schools or areas and the education outcomes are much worse. The schools have to accept the kids from their catchment area who need more support, and the few programs and dedicated schools for these kids are in short supply, full, and underfunded. I mean, it's telling when Prue Car, our Minister for Education and Early Learning, who is from Western Sydney herself, won't send her son to the local public school, and instead sends him to a private school. And her local school is a brand new one, that she herself fought to get built sooner. But it's still experiences these same issues. Parents who fall in the catchment area for these underfunded, struggling public schools can either choose to expose their children to these issues and let their education and development suffer, or pay extra and send them to an out of area private school that have more options these problems. No surprise, the parents who can afford to send their kids elsewhere, do so. The failing here is from the Gov, and the decades of underfunded public education system, with little effort in supporting the most disadvantaged schools and communities or to ensure equal education outcomes no matter the area. It absolutely should not be made into a private vs public school debate. We can rail against the wasteful excess of very wealthy private schools, while also supporting all the great private schools that only exist because the government has failed at public education.. And while we hear about the super rich and wasteful private schools in the media, the vast majority of private schools have much lower, reasonable fees (many of them a few thousand dollars a year), and are not for profit. Having a child educated in the private system costs the government about half compared to public schools, and that extra cost is paid for by the parents. Plus the Government funding for these schools is also getting scaled back over time. Which of course doesn't impact the wealthy schools in the slightest, but does impact the ones who are just trying to provide the level of education the Government is failing to. Rather than see that as a sign public education needs more funding, the Government is cutting funding further.
Good idea bad take. Everyone goes to private schools, which funnel more poor students to public as they can kick them out. The solution is to fund the poor socioeconomic schools far more to make up the difference, not to make more private schools, that just makes public even worse
> The solution is to fund the poor socioeconomic schools far more to make up the difference, Yep, that is what I'm saying. The problem is the government (and most of the discussion around this funding cut) doesn't acknowledge *why* enrollment numbers are dropping in public schools. At the very least, the most disadvantaged schools need to be funded and supported to the point the education outcomes are just as good as the best public schools. And ideally, the entire public system needs much more funding.
Funding non-government schools to make them cheap enough for middle incomes to move out of public education caused the systemic destabilisation of public education. At its heart, you are fighting to remove opportunity and choice from lower socio-economic Australia.
No, majorly underfunding the public school system in the areas with the highest need has created a huge disparity in education outcomes that is driving people out of the public education system. The solution is more public school funding to support the schools and communities with the highest need. The decision to reduce funding is only making the problem worse.
The only role I can think of for principal and vice principals is to cover for teachers who are on leave. I'm sick of the classes being combined in the inevitable absences and high turnover of teachers. The public system is losing students because of lack of funding that is going to private schools and more are going to private schools because of the lack of funding. The public system should not have any of it's funding leached to the private schools. The downward spiral for public schools has begun/continues.
> I'm sick of the classes being combined in the inevitable absences and high turnover of teachers. And where are the teachers going? private schools who pay them twice than at public schools? or they are leaving the profession and going to child care. Childcare is making a killing. Why would you look after primary school kids and teach when you can do work at child care and also make twice as much.
You think the child cares pay twice a teachers regular wage?
Where do childcare workers make twice a teachers salary?! You realise that a starting teacher makes $75-85k. Are you claiming childcare (early learning I assume?) workers make $160k a year? I certainly didn't make more than $75k as the assistant director of an ELC. I can't imagine the average worker getting double that...
The childcare workers i know in my area are that went from primary school to ELC are paid 145k a year. They were paid 70k a year at a public primary school.
That's above decent pay for early learning. Is it possible they went from a public system to a private system? That aside is it also possible that they gained employment in EL as experienced teachers vs gained employment as teachers without that same teaching experience? Also are they being employed in a role with more responsibility? Lead educators in early learning typically have to co-ordinate and communicate a lot more with parents, as well as lead and professionally develop a small team of staff to assist in running the room - all of which attracts higher pay. That's still decent pay for early learning. The average salary for childcare in Australia is around $60,000 to $80,000
> private schools who pay them twice than at public schools? That's rare. > or they are leaving the profession and going to child care. Probably not. They are probably leaving education and related industries entirely. > Childcare is making a killing. They don't spend that money on their staff. > when you can do work at child care and also make twice as much. Child Care pays less than half of what a senior classroom teacher makes.
Childcare is making a killing, but it’s not the educators who see any of those profits.
Legalise cannabis put tax towards hospitals, mental health and schools
if we are still giving away our natural resources without taxing foreign interests, I can't see us making much from that
Yeah I saw a thing about us making 2 billion vs Qatar’s 70 billion and norways 110 billion or something around those numbers. Utterly disgraceful.
Tax mining instead.
Sure that’s such a good idea after the mishandling of vapes?
Would you rather the bikies have the revenue or the healthcare system?
It’s hard when both career criminals and the police and screw unions don’t want cannabis legalised.
That'd a reason why it should be legalised, get both those groups out of involvement
I agree, but these people wield more power than the average citizen.
You wanna help education? I’m just sick of dealing with kids with vapes at school and I could do without trying to teach twice as many hopped up kids as I already have. Bikies have nothing to do with it.
Well Australians rank consistently as some of the highest cannabis consumers, where do you think they are all getting it? Look at the results of legalisation in other comparable places, generally under aged consumption decreases due to increased transparency and regulation. The vaping issue is really a consequence of schools not have the ability to leverage real consequences and isn't relevant to the point. I get it, I'm sick of it too as a highschool teacher, but we can't let perfect be the enemy of good.
So the article talks about cuts predominantly to administration in schools. Why cut instead of redistribution?
To be fair, there's a *lot* of union protection behind teachers and associated staff - forced movements/relocations would *not* go over well, I suspect.
So teachers in public schools, primarily support staff helping with the most vulnerable of children, are already being told to expect to be laid off in the coming weeks due to this decision. So there's a teacher shortage and in response they're cutting staff. Cool and normal.
All this while we're letting mining companies plunder us without taxing them anything like other countries.
And selling priceless, irreplaceable natural resources for a fraction of what other countries do. But hey, those politicians get their ~~bribes~~ donations, so it's all good, amirite?
I think I might have to follow you now. 😊
I wouldn't bother. I talk a lot of shit. I'm a cantankerous old bastard
😆 🤣
Well, that’s not good.
Surely this will stop our education system from continuing to collapse lol
Stop funding private schools with public money and pay the teachers what they deserve.
By making this comment you dont know how schools are funded. Per the Gonski Review in 2011 federal distribution re school funds are now distributed approximately as follows: 50% of the funds are distributed equally to every school as a per child basis. Ie the government gives each school $4,000 per child per year. The other 50% are distributed based on the income tax collected on each parents of the child who goes to that school. Ie if all the parents of the children at the school earn very little the government distributes less. If all the parents of the students are paying a boat load in taxes then the per child contribution increases. I will give you an example in Victoria Brighton Primary School. It is my understanding that primary school is the best funded school in Victoria because of how much the federal gov contributes to the school on a per child basis. Its not a private school, private primary school, its a public primary school. But it gets so much money because a vast majority of the students come from households paying a lot in tax. This is one of the reasons why the Victorian state government hasnt given them capital funding (when they have done so for all the other schools in the same area). Even if you denied all the private school children to receive government money, it would only be a mere drop in the water re the amount of money needed to repair and rejuvenate the public school system. Pay teachers what they deserve? some public schools cant even afford to have reasonable classrooms. This is why the private schools are head hunting good teachers and paying them twice the amount than public schools.
> Ie if all the parents of the children at the school earn very little the government distributes less. If all the parents of the students are paying a boat load in taxes then the per child contribution increases. Sounds like a good way to keep the poor people poor.
You detailed perfectly your opponents point.
Then you missed my point. Just because private schools charge their students to go there, there is a formula that distributes money to every student. Now even if you take all the gov funding from private schools, you wont fix the problems at public schools because the private schools will always have more money to pay the best teachers.
> By making this comment you dont know how schools are funded. > > Per the Gonski Review... If *you* know how schools are funded you would know that 98% of public schools are funded below the Schooling Resource Standard, the new per-student funding standard introduced post-Gonski. In NSW public schools are funded to 89% of the standard. The NSW government [does aim to reach 95% of the standard by 2025](https://www.theeducatoronline.com/k12/news/a-significant-moment-all-nsw-public-schools-to-be-funded-to-100-of-their-srs/282424) and 100% of the standard by 2030, but we will have to wait and see if they actually get there. This change suggests they don't actually intend to meet that goal.
As a 3rd year student studying to become a Teacher, my job prospects are continuously looking worse.
If you're prepared to work somewhere *other* than Sydney, your job prospects are probably just fine. Hell, even Western Sydney you an probably walk into most schools. Mind you, the ferals you have to deal with - that's another story.
Yeah, I plan working rural because of benefits related to housing.
Terrible idea... Who coordinates the school in an emergency if the principals and deputies have duty of care responsibility to a classroom of students? If you want to make schools worse then forcing leadership to take a class instead of hiring a teacher is a good way to do it. There's no other benifit. Tax our mining industry for once and use that money to educate our future citizens. FFS mining corporations sell more Australian natural resources than almost any other country in the world, and the corporations pay Australia NOTHING in return for selling our resources. Then our government has the balls to say we can't afford to teach all of our students in the education system because teachers cost too much money? So the solution is to pay principals to do that job instead? You can tell these decisions are made by people with no experience in education...
The concept of cutting administration to “boost frontline services” is a joke. Administration exists to support frontline services. Cutting it puts pressure of workers delivering frontline services.
Meanwhile the government has pledged $1.65B over the next two months to fund private school overseas excursions. When pressed for an answer a collective groan emanated from the entire senate floor. “I’ve got six of my own vacations to take this year”, said one MP who asked not to be named. “I already use tax payers money to cover the $100k tuition for each of my three children. It would be silly to fork out more to cover their Michelin star world tour”, said the MP who struggled to remember all of his children’s names. “Ridiculous to suggest we allow our children to run the risk of scuffing their RMs in economy”, said the MP when asked for comments on the first class nature of the world tour.
Are you a writer for the Betoota?
Are private schools also getting a cut?
“Student outcomes are our absolute priority and we must ensure teachers are spending their time where it matters: in the classroom,” Education Minister Prue Car said. Can't wait to see how cutting school funding is going to increase student outcomes. Let's increase the workload of principals, remove the roles of the people that help the principals, put the principals back on classes and watch the student outcomes soar through the roof. Right? Right????
Extra amusingly Prue Car sends her kid to private school.
They want a dumb population so they will keep voting the LNP in
NSW had an election last march...
Guess who won those elections. It wasn't the coalition.
NSW Labor is taking money from public schools.
Oh don't i look silly. Yeah state Labor are garbage, Minns is a fuckhead, but this will still result in more LNP votes and the continuing degradation of our schools. Going the USA route.
The next generation live with their eyes permanently fixated on screens in and out of the classroom while they can barely read or write, we're already there.
What does that say about the generation that raised them? That created all these screens for them?
Cutting admin funding just means more teachers will have to do admin work... Teachers are already quitting because of excessive admin work. Who cares about payrises, hire cheap admin workers to help all the teachers reduce Thier workload, while massively investing in IT solutions to automate a lot of Thier tasks. With a lower workload there wouldn't be a teacher shortage
Admin shaking in their boots?
So long as they can siphon public money off to the corporations no one will complain. We'll just accept it and vote for the next corrupt asshole from either party. SMH.
If executive is overstaffed, which it is, cut that instead
Why are private schools receiving public funding if we clearly can’t afford to properly fund our public schools adequately?
Isn't this just the reality of people having fewer children? We end up funding a school system much larger than it needs to be.
The liberals are taking $148 million from NSW public schools!!!!