Private School Funding

davet82

http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/education/latest-news/quinn-reviews-cash-to-feepaying-schools-3252444.html

EDUCATION Minister Ruairi Quinn is considering cutbacks to the €100m subsidy given to fee-paying schools in the forthcoming Budget.

Should the state be paying the salaries of teachers in fee paying schools at all? If they are private schools should they not be solely privately funded?

or

By people part funding their childrens education they are infact saving the tax payer some of the cost in the long run?

RoyalMarine

Why should tax payers money pay salaries of teachers in private schools when the majority of tax payers children don't go to these schools?

I went to a private school. I am no better educated than my friends who went to public schools.

Private schools should pay teachers 100% of their wages.

say_who_now?

davet82 wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/education/latest-news/quinn-reviews-cash-to-feepaying-schools-3252444.html

EDUCATION Minister Ruairi Quinn is considering cutbacks to the €100m subsidy given to fee-paying schools in the forthcoming Budget.

Should the state be paying the salaries of teachers in fee paying schools at all? If they are private schools should they not be solely privately funded?

or

By people part funding their childrens education they are infact saving the tax payer some of the cost in the long run?

I had always assumed private fee paying schools funded themselves, I was surprised tbh when I heard that this morning that they were subsidised by the government when there's not even enough money in the coffers to fund public schools!

Has to be more to this surely?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

look why dont we just kill the rich and have done with it

mike65

If the contention is that Private Schools should have funding removed to save money can anyone demonstrate how that money will be saved, bearing in mind teachers need paying for regardless of the status of the school.

Micky Dolenz

You don't need to be rich to go to private school.However if they cut funding, you will need to be.

Zamboni

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

look why dont we just kill the rich and have done with it

Bit dramatic.
Private enterprise is private enterprise. If the business model has become overly dependent on state support and is not viable on an independant basis then blame the management not the tax payer.

ted1

look this is pure nonsense.

each student in the state should get x, this should go towards paying teachers etc.

now if people want to pay money to the school. the school then hires extra teachers to reduce class sizes and provide more learning support, then so be it.

That's how semi private school works. they get no more than a public school, if they didn't go to a private school, the same burden or even a bigger one will be on the state.

Jogathon

I think that the state should pay all teacher's wages, every child is entitled to an education from the state.

If the parents then choose to subsidise their child's education by sending them to a fee-paying school, with all the extra frills that entails then that is their right. If they have the money then they can spend it anyway that they want.

Stark

RoyalMarine wrote: »

Why should tax payers money pay salaries of teachers in private schools when the majority of tax payers children don't go to these schools?

I went to a private school. I am no better educated than my friends who went to public schools.

Private schools should pay teachers 100% of their wages.

The reason you're no better educated is because private schools can't poach the best teachers by offering higher wages like they do in places like the States.

ted1

RoyalMarine wrote: »

Private schools should pay teachers 100% of their wages.

Rubbish, each child should be enetitled to the same funding as others.

If they where to stop, i think there should be a complete opt out clause. that is, i should be able to choose to send my kids to private school and not pay taxes that go towards paying other kids parents.

Actually privatise everthing, I'd rather pay only for the services i use.

seamus

Two major issues with this:

- Remove teacher pay from private schools and the tuition fees will have to increase. Back-of-napkin figures, if a school has 60 teachers paid on average €50k + pensions & allowances, then the private school will need to raise at least an extra €400k per year to keep going. With 1,000 pupils, that'll be €400 extra per pupil. Minimum - it'll probably work out far more than that when other expenses (tax & admin) are taken into account.
That will force a big chunk of parents to put their kids into the public system, putting more pressure on it and inadvertently raising costs.

- Teachers will have freedom to pick and choose based on salary. The private schools will be able to offer greater incentives to better teachers - hoovering up all of the best teachers by offering them more money, leaving the poorer teachers in the public system. Parents will pay big money if a school has exceptionally good staff. Schools in poorer areas will invariably get worse as teachers chase better wages even in mid-level private schools.

Zamboni

seamus wrote: »

Two major issues with this:

- Remove teacher pay from private schools and the tuition fees will have to increase. Back-of-napkin figures, if a school has 60 teachers paid on average €50k + pensions & allowances, then the private school will need to raise at least an extra €400k per year to keep going. With 1,000 pupils, that'll be €400 extra per pupil. Minimum - it'll probably work out far more than that when other expenses (tax & admin) are taken into account.
That will force a big chunk of parents to put their kids into the public system, putting more pressure on it and inadvertently raising costs.

Is there any hard math showing that this would be the case?

griffdaddy

seamus wrote: »

Two major issues with this:

- Remove teacher pay from private schools and the tuition fees will have to increase. Back-of-napkin figures, if a school has 60 teachers paid on average €50k + pensions & allowances, then the private school will need to raise at least an extra €400k per year to keep going. With 1,000 pupils, that'll be €400 extra per pupil. Minimum - it'll probably work out far more than that when other expenses (tax & admin) are taken into account.
That will force a big chunk of parents to put their kids into the public system, putting more pressure on it and inadvertently raising costs.

- Teachers will have freedom to pick and choose based on salary. The private schools will be able to offer greater incentives to better teachers - hoovering up all of the best teachers by offering them more money, leaving the poorer teachers in the public system. Parents will pay big money if a school has exceptionally good staff. Schools in poorer areas will invariably get worse as teachers chase better wages even in mid-level private schools.

If people actually stopped and realised this before ranting the argument would be over before it started. Where do people think children would go to school if they didn't go to private schools?

TwoTokeTommy

davet82 wrote: »

By people part funding their childrens education they are infact saving the tax payer some of the cost in the long run?

Parents paying for "extras" saves the state nothing.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

look why dont we just kill the rich and have done with it

Ah, shur let's have a go! They're killing us with a two tier health system. And don't forget "being better off" increases your life expectancy.

Zamboni wrote: »

Bit dramatic.
Private enterprise is private enterprise. If the business model has become overly dependent on state support and is not viable on an independant basis then blame the management not the tax payer.

Yes!! It's not the role of the State to support every failed business venture.

Jogathon wrote: »

I think that the state should pay all teacher's wages, every child is entitled to an education from the state.

If the parents then choose to subsidise their child's education by sending them to a fee-paying school, with all the extra frills that entails then that is their right. If they have the money then they can spend it anyway that they want.

The key word above being choice. They can choose to send the kids to public school, or choose to opt out of the system and pay full whack.

You can have your choices and pay for it or else STFU.

Internet Hero

Parents of children in private schools pay alot of tax so they are entitlede to getting the money back as teachers wages. if they want to pay extra on top of that its up to them. why should there taxes not work for them too?

theholyghost

As someone who went to a really sh1t public school I've never had a problem with private schools.

The government provides the same amount per student regardless of what school they go to and then this is topped up by parents. This even happens in state schools just to a lesser degree. Parents still have to give the school an extra payment at the start of the year for extra costs under the umbrella of art, activities etc..

If capitation grants for priavte schools are abolished will the government channel that money into state schools so that free education is truly free? I doubt it.

Everyone will just be a little worse off.

ted1

TwoTokeTommy wrote: »

Parents paying for "extras" saves the state nothing.



Ah, shur let's have a go! They're killing us with a two tier health system. And don't forget "being better off" increases your life expectancy.



Yes!! It's not the role of the State to support every failed business venture.



The key word above being choice. They can choose to send the kids to public school, or choose to opt out of the system and pay full whack.

You can have your choices and pay for it or else STFU.

Actually, a child in a private school does cost the state less. So your points are mute.

TwoTokeTommy

seamus wrote: »

Two major issues with this:

- Remove teacher pay from private schools and the tuition fees will have to increase. Back-of-napkin figures, if a school has 60 teachers paid on average €50k + pensions & allowances, then the private school will need to raise at least an extra €400k per year to keep going. With 1,000 pupils, that'll be €400 extra per pupil. Minimum - it'll probably work out far more than that when other expenses (tax & admin) are taken into account.
That will force a big chunk of parents to put their kids into the public system, putting more pressure on it and inadvertently raising costs.

- Teachers will have freedom to pick and choose based on salary. The private schools will be able to offer greater incentives to better teachers - hoovering up all of the best teachers by offering them more money, leaving the poorer teachers in the public system. Parents will pay big money if a school has exceptionally good staff. Schools in poorer areas will invariably get worse as teachers chase better wages even in mid-level private schools.

You missed a decimal point in your calculations (which are good rough estimates). Cost to school would be approx. €4,000 per pupil

This is a significant cost to pay per pupil per year, it would be interesting to see how many parents would cough up for this.

You are correct there would be an increase cost to the state if private students turn public.. HOWEVER, you seem to be forgetting the savings to the State by ceasing payments to ALL teachers in private schools.

So, if some pupils move to public, so what? The State was already paying for all their teachers under the old system. Unless all private students turned public (which would never happen, a lot of millionaires still in Ireland) savings exist.

Teachers wages could be regulated and capped if that was going to be an issue. Also, you're first point indicated that removing the subsidy would put pressure on costs at private schools. Unless the fees jump big time, they would have real problems offering the highest salaries.

*Note: I remember the pay system for teachers being very backward and needing changing itself.

TwoTokeTommy

Internet Hero wrote: »

Parents of children in private schools pay alot of tax so they are entitlede to getting the money back as teachers wages. if they want to pay extra on top of that its up to them. why should there taxes not work for them too?

Reason: They chose to OPT-OUT of the public system.

Stark

TwoTokeTommy wrote: »

Reason: They chose to OPT-OUT of the public system.

In many cases because the public schools in their area gave preferential enrollment to Catholic children.

Internet Hero

TwoTokeTommy wrote: »

Reason: They chose to OPT-OUT of the public system.

nonsense and very silly. your creating standards are rules that dont exist. they choose to go to private schools under the understanding that they can add to there tax payments with additional money in order to get a better service. they opt for private schools which are given added funding by parents on top of the public funding, never did they decide to abandon public funding by going to private, it is part of the deal.

TwoTokeTommy

ted1 wrote: »

Actually, a child in a private school does cost the state less. So your points are mute.

It could cost the State nothing.

TwoTokeTommy

Stark wrote: »

In many cases because the public schools in their area gave preferential enrollment to Catholic children.

Ok, but that's religious b/s which shouldn't be allowed continue anyway.

Micky Dolenz

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

You don't need to be rich to go to private school.However if they cut funding, you will need to be.

Boo-hoo to them. Why cant they just slum it in a Public school like the rest of us then? The country is broke so everyone has to make sacrifices.

Stark

TwoTokeTommy wrote: »

It could cost the State nothing.

Could cost the State nothing if we took away funding from all schools. Let's take State funding away from all schools where parents pay a "voluntary contribution". That will save even more money.

ted1

TwoTokeTommy wrote: »

It could cost the State nothing.

it'll cost them more. the schools will close and there''ll be an influx of people to public schools.

Internet Hero

Deleted User wrote: »

Boo-hoo to them. Why cant they just slum it in a Public school like the rest of us then? The country is broke so everyone has to make sacrifices.

so your just gonna go with not making any point then? cool

admiralofthefleet

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

You don't need to be rich to go to private school.However if they cut funding, you will need to be.

we considered sending our son to a private school but in the end we went for an educate together. the fees werent the issue but we realised there would be no difference in the education and we are doing everything in our power to sheild him from catholic influence

Boombastic

mike65 wrote: »

If the contention is that Private Schools should have funding removed to save money can anyone demonstrate how that money will be saved, bearing in mind teachers need paying for regardless of the status of the school.

Teachers paid by private schools should be paid what that school can afford to pay them.

TwoTokeTommy

Internet Hero wrote: »

nonsense and very silly. your creating standards are rules that dont exist. they choose to go to private schools under the understanding that they can add to there tax payments with additional money in order to get a better service. they opt for private schools which are given added funding by parents on top of the public funding, never did they decide to abandon public funding by going to private, it is part of the deal.

"Choose" not "chose" is what I meant to say as we're talking about the "how should things be", which is where rules that don't yet exist come into the realm of possibility.

In my opinion, the state should not be funding for the well off, a system that (supposedly) greatly helps in protecting their privileged position over the rest of society. I do accept that less people will afford private fees if the state halts paying for private school teachers. To those kids, "welcome back to society" (bbye high society :pac: )