Torpedo wrote on Apr 25
th, 2013 at 11:08am:
No, sometimes people just don't have that choice, so they'd rather move to a different school instead of continue putting up with what they have. What do you think would be more affordable, choosing private school or buying a house in a better area?
Not all private schools are equivalent to The Kings or St Josephs, some small schools are quite reasonable and yet provide better standards than average public school. Catholic schools are one example. I am not saying all private schools are amazing, I am just saying that if you were unfortunate enough to end up in the wrong place, and can't afford to move, you should be able to at least have a choice of a different school, not only the one in your area.
Well, that's fair enough. A few months ago I heard on the radio a conversation where a woman called in saying that their family's annual income was $200k, yet somehow that wasn't enough. It got me thinking. How could people get themselves in a situation like that? My theory was that they either had a mortgage on an expensive house, sent their kids to a private school or both. I just don't have sympathy for high-income households that put themselves in a situation like that. They are not going to convince me that an annual $200k income isn't enough when it isn't that hard to cut costs. It is something I wouldn't encourage or support.
I suppose people like you would be an exception: single parents in a low socio-economic environment who can't afford to move. Maybe the government could offer the equivalent of HECS in these low socio-economic areas for students in private secondary schools where you only have to pay a third of the full fee. The government pays the rest. It would be limited to low-income families, say an annual income below $50k. Above $50k the assistance offered gradually drops, reaching zero for incomes at $100k+ and the fees go back up to the full fee. I would prefer this over increasing funding for private schools.
Torpedo wrote on Apr 25
th, 2013 at 11:08am:
And if you think that by flooding public schools with more funding you would get better results you are also wrong, all it will be is you will get more strikes in the future demanding more funding.
How is more funding not going to help? Private schools get their resources through higher fees (including tuition). Assuming more money means higher quality teaching, the main reason public schools do worse is likely to be because they have fewer resources than the private ones. The solution then is to give the public schools the resources they need. I get the impression you think of public schools as like an aging cancer patient on his last days.
I think the real reason why public schools are doing so badly nowadays is because they have been underfunded. See this article, published in July 2000.
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2000/07/eba-j19.htmlTorpedo wrote on Apr 25
th, 2013 at 11:08am:
The funding that is provided today is really more than enough for teachers to shut up and do their work, yet, I have a friend who's child has behavioural problems, the public school demanded her to go through all kinds of tests, she cooperated, she ended up quitting her job. How does school participate? heh, they call her everytime they can't deal with the small child, after all the trouble she went through, after all the tests she had to do, they've received the funding, but are they doing anything different? Not much!
Here is your more funding for public schools.
Not saying we shouldn't fund public schools, but people are people, it's like how I told you about large organisations, they don't work, they only get paid. It's instilled in Australians. You'd have to change the attitude first before you pile them up with unnecessary funds.
As weird as this may sound, I've heard that behavioural problems are often the result of food intolerance. The processed food we often eat nowadays contain chemicals that can affect children's moods. Maybe your friend could take her child to a dietician or nutritionist. I don't think the schools can really do anything about it if it's her diet that's causing her to misbehave.
I don't think private schools are immune to mismanagement. Read this story about Methodist Ladies' College. They paid their staff much more than their equivalents in the public school system. Same skills, experience and expertise. Higher salaries. They really didn't need that extra money.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/a-school-lesson-on-equity-20121014-27k...Torpedo wrote on Apr 25
th, 2013 at 11:08am:
Private schools, on the other hand, realise how hard it is for parents to get around with payments so they do all they can to make sure that at least the expected standards are there, and they, not you, teach your kid.
Well, that's what the tuition fees are for, to guarantee teacher performance. It's part of the contract you have with the school. With public schools you have no such contract. Their contract is with the government.
Forum
Pages: 
