Private School Funding

Zab

Rasheed wrote: »

Ah no, I'm getting your points but the budget for education has to be cut. The fact that there is nearly a 100 million euro subvention being paid to fee paying schools has to be looked at as well as all other areas.

Absolutely, there are realities at play where we'll have to make the best out of a bad situation. This doesn't mean that their going to actually make the best decision, but I guess we'll see. Private schools are bound to be seeing a pinch these days anyway.

Correct me if I'm wrong but one of the main benefits of private education are smaller class sizes, therefore more teachers. So if this subvention is merely paying teachers salaries, then why should a privately run school have lower class numbers?

That's what the fees pay for. The state contribution gets them down to the state standard for class sizes then the fees bring them down further and also pay for extracurricular teachers and the rest of the running of the school.

Boombastic

Zab wrote: »

Absolutely, there are realities at play where we'll have to make the best out of a bad situation. This doesn't mean that their going to actually make the best decision, but I guess we'll see. Private schools are bound to be seeing a pinch these days anyway.


That's what the fees pay for. The state contribution gets them down to the state standard for class sizes then the fees bring them down further and also pay for extracurricular teachers and the rest of the running of the school.

Some DEIS schools in my area have a pupil teacher ratio of 5:1

Zamboni

the_syco wrote: »

Just how many primary/post-primary schools are "Educate Together" schools? If we did this, the rest would just go on strike, and the government would just back down.

On the other hand, I'd be all for an ultimatum for the religious bodies to GTFO of any involvement in the school, so that the schools would actually become religion free, or all money for the school (including wages) gets cut.

I completely accept that my statement was a hypothetical ideal. Any and all incremental movements towards that ideal that doesn't result in a cost increase for the state should be encouraged.

jmayo

Ever time I hear this debate brought up, I wonder why my taxes should be used to help somone elses kids probably get a better standard of education and probably be given a better start in life than my own.

If people want their kids to be taught in a private school, with many of the advantages that entails, then let them pay for the teachers in the school.

Should I be expected to help through my taxes pay the salaries of consultants and surgoens in a private hospital that I can never hope to attend ?

Zamboni

jmayo wrote: »

Ever time I hear this debate brought up, I wonder why my taxes should be used to help somone elses kids probably get a better standard of education and probably be given a better start in life than my own.

It shouldn't be.
The tax payer should fund education, the state should provide a secular uniform level of education for all.
If a company or religious order wish to provide an alternative on a fee paying basis, and believe they have a customer base and business model to achieve that goal, they should be free to do so of their own accord.

*I'll keep dreaming over in this little corner*

Zab

jmayo wrote: »

Ever time I hear this debate brought up, I wonder why my taxes should be used to help somone elses kids probably get a better standard of education and probably be given a better start in life than my own.

If people want their kids to be taught in a private school, with many of the advantages that entails, then let them pay for the teachers in the school.

Should I be expected to help through my taxes pay the salaries of consultants and surgoens in a private hospital that I can never hope to attend ?

Your taxes aren't being used for shít, their taxes are.

Eboggles

Is there something I'm missing here? If the government actually removed these state subsidies most of theses schools would close down. Where would these students go? Yup, they'd go to their local secondary school down the road. And with that massive influx of children into every public school in the country the state would need employ more teachers, and as a result they wouldn't actually be saving anything. It seems the people with a chip on their shoulder about some people being privately schooled have nothing better to do than bitch and moan all day.

I highly doubt this is going to be passed, anyway. How many TDs out of the 166 in the Dáil send their kids to private education? I'd say a lot. It just looks like a populist move by Labour to drum up some support.

Yeah, I am privately schooled and if my school didn't have the state subsidy it'd have to massively increase its fees, to a point where I wouldn't actually be able to attend anymore.

Seems bizarre, that's all.

Fuinseog

the facilities in private schools are only top notch when it comes to things like sports. should the taxpayer give funding so a private school can have seven rugby pitches instead of only six?
the classrooms are standard. messing can be as rampant as a regular school.

the_syco

Eboggles wrote: »

Is there something I'm missing here? If the government actually removed these state subsidies most of theses schools would close down. Where would these students go? Yup, they'd go to their local secondary school down the road. And with that massive influx of children into every public school in the country the state would need employ more teachers, and as a result they wouldn't actually be saving anything.

Actually, no. You'd probably either just get more overcrowded classes; the reason why most people probably put their kids into a private school in the first place, or the kids wouldn't be able to join their local school as it's at max capacity, and they'd have to go elsewhere.

Also, if "private schools" were shut down, what would happen to that school (forget the name) in the middle of Dublin that students like to repeat in?

Zab

the_syco wrote: »

Actually, no. You'd probably either just get more overcrowded classes; the reason why most people probably put their kids into a private school in the first place, or the kids wouldn't be able to join their local school as it's at max capacity, and they'd have to go elsewhere.

So ... it'd make the situation worse for everyone, right?

Also, if "private schools" were shut down, what would happen to that school (forget the name) in the middle of Dublin that students like to repeat in?

The Institute, and it doesn't receive state funding so I assume they'd end up profiting.

Equality

This funding will vanish in the budget.

Historically, it was to facilitate minority religious faiths (meaning Church of Ireland and Presbyterian).

It will be cut because there are now lots of minority religious faiths (some of which are not as mainstream as the two I mentioned above) and Dept does not want said faiths to establish schools under this scheme.

This is partly about employment - if said minority faiths were able to establish schools under this scheme, they could employ members of their own faith, resulting in increased immigration to Ireland, because well paid teaching jobs would be available to said minority faith communities.

Personally, I would like the funding to continue, and to be available to all faiths, but not gonna happen.

Kinski

Eboggles wrote: »

Is there something I'm missing here? If the government actually removed these state subsidies most of theses schools would close down. Where would these students go? Yup, they'd go to their local secondary school down the road.

The private schools could practice price discrimination, charging larger fees to wealthy parents and lower ones to the scrimp and save brigade. We're always hearing how much more efficient and responsive to the needs of customers the private sector is, yet for some reason when it comes to this issue we have people who'd ordinarily echo such sentiments arguing that these particular private enterprises would simply close without massive State subsidies.

Zab

Equality wrote: »

This funding will vanish in the budget.

I estimate that there's approximately zero chance of the funding "vanishing" in the budget.

Zab

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2011/11/29/00135.asp question 183. When asked in November 2011 how much it cost when a private student transferred to public school, Quinn estimated €829.42 per annum. Going by 90 million in salaries for the 26,200 in fee-paying schools, this would imply that these students cost the state €3435 while attending fee-paying schools or €4264 if they moved to state schools.

BenEadir

Zab wrote: »

When asked in November 2011 how much it cost when a private student transferred to public school, Quinn estimated €829.42 per annum.

QED, if the Dept of Education reduces further the amount it pays fee paying schools for the children of tax paying parents a lot will be forced to move their kids to public schools which in turn will end up costing the state more than the amount 'saved'.

Even Labour lefties aren't that stupid

Ben

pawrick

If a business can't stand on it's own feet it should be allowed to fail.

Couple of points I've seen mentioned here but I'm not certain of:

Do private schools not already pay their teaching staff extra on top of what the State pays in wages?

Do they receive other sources of funding outside ordinary teacher wages from the state such as capitation grants, fees to run plc type courses etc?

Maybe this is where some bankers got the idea that they could and would be bailed out?

Fuinseog

pawrick wrote: »

If a business can't stand on it's own feet it should be allowed to fail.

Couple of points I've seen mentioned here but I'm not certain of:

Do private schools not already pay their teaching staff extra on top of what the State pays in wages?

Do they receive other sources of funding outside ordinary teacher wages from the state such as capitation grants, fees to run plc type courses etc?

Maybe this is where some bankers got the idea that they could and would be bailed out?

most teacher in a private school are dept paid. they get paid extra for coaching sport, which often takes place on a Saturday, which is fair enough. i would however question why they need so many pitches? if they are short of cash they could sell off part of their land and believe me some of these schools have no shortage of land.

also part of the fees are to keep the riff raff out and the government should not be funding elitist attitudes. there are some kids whose parents struggle but the majority of the kids I have known in these schools are loaded.

Scanlas The 2nd

TwoTokeTommy wrote: »

griffdaddy wrote: »

No, it couldn't, unless you were to rewrite the law. You can't force people who 'might have sent their kids to a private school' to send their kids to a private school and then pay full whack. You'd also have to rewrite article 42.2 of the constitution which provides that the state 'shall endeavour to supplement and give reasonable aid to private and corporate educational initiative.'

Choice. Choose private and pay, nobody is forcing anyone to send their kids to private school.

Yes, change the law. Sound good to me, i'm sure they're will be endless middle class moan against it though.

Each child should be given equal funding, what's the problem if parents want to supplement that.

Why punish parents for wanting to improve the facilitiies their children have available to them by removing the funding every child is entitled to?

juan.kerr

Not thus bloody topic again.

Wait until all the private schools are forced to close down and the state has to step in and fund the education of the students.

That'll learn them even if it costs the state (i.e. taxpayer) more. Money well spent to get one over on those who can afford to send their offspring to private schools.

juan.kerr

BenThere wrote: »

Even Labour lefties aren't that stupid

:rolleyes:

Can we quote you on that?

Fizzical

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Each child should be given equal funding, what's the problem if parents want to supplement that.

Why punish parents for wanting to improve the facilitiies their children have available to them by removing the funding every child is entitled to?

No problem, Scanlas, well said.

Every public school has what's called a 'voluntary contribution' where parents can do just that. In a situation where the Government doesn't have enough cash to outfit each school properly, the schools themselves ask the parents to supplement the equal funding that each child already gets. Parents pay it every year, just like a fee. Well off parents are very welcome to pay extra to improve the facilities of the school so that everyone benefits.

I'm sure you wouldn't approve of a situation, though, where the well off parents deliberately keep their money to themselves so that the average school contribution is kept artificially low and everyone else's facilities are of an artificially lower standard? :eek:

juan.kerr

Fizzical wrote: »

Well off parents are very welcome to pay extra to improve the facilities of the school so that everyone benefits.

Presumably under this model these same parents who will no longer be in receipt of Childrens Allowance.

kodoherty93

Having gone to a private school my understanding is that the school receives no funding for upkeep. Like our school was nice when built but some of the room havent been painted in 10 years meaning there was 10 years of dicks on the walls.

Often student who go to private schools are obviously from higher income families meaning they pay more taxes( Half of income earners in Ireland pay no tax). If this was in America part of there income tax would go to the local district. (that's why in the movies Beverly hills high school is 10 times better than east Compton high even though they're in the same city)

In my class of 25 all of the students had both parents working so they could send their children to a private school. I heard from a past pupil one students mother worked 3 jobs to send her child to a public school to keep him out of trouble.

In the words of Ja'ime from summer heights high "some people believe private schools produce better citizens, I believe they produce better quality citizens"

Milk & Honey

Eboggles wrote: »

Is there something I'm missing here? If the government actually removed these state subsidies most of theses schools would close down. Where would these students go? Yup, they'd go to their local secondary school down the road. And with that massive influx of children into every public school in the country the state would need employ more teachers, and as a result they wouldn't actually be saving anything.

Most parts of the state don't have a nearby private school. Most private schools are in South Dublin. If they were unable to continue as private schools they would just convert into public schools with a big voluntary contribution and continue as before. Large numbers of the public schools in the country were once private until they opted into the free education scheme in the 1960s.

RMD

pawrick wrote: »

If a business can't stand on it's own feet it should be allowed to fail.

Couple of points I've seen mentioned here but I'm not certain of:

Do private schools not already pay their teaching staff extra on top of what the State pays in wages?

Do they receive other sources of funding outside ordinary teacher wages from the state such as capitation grants, fees to run plc type courses etc?

Maybe this is where some bankers got the idea that they could and would be bailed out?

I can't speak for all private schools but to my knowledge their wages are paid entirely by the department. For teachers that engage in co-curricular activities such as coaching etc they are paid for out of the schools pocket. I know the school I went to had ratios of teacher to students greater than that of public schools. When budget cuts came into place these were further raised.

Again I can't speak for all but I don't know of any private school which received any funding other than that for teachers. I remember in a primetime debate the headmaster of Belvedere college mentioned figures released by the DoE showing private education was cheaper to the state in comparison to public. I think it cost the state approximately 3-4 thousand a year for a student in private education, in comparison to something along the lines of 7-8 thousand for a student in public.

I don't see a problem with private education, it's the parents decision to pay out of their own pocket on what they're already contributing towards education through their taxes. Remove government subsidy and you create a situation where those who can no longer afford private education send their child to public which costs a greater amount to the state, while schools now being entirely private can poach and headhunt teachers due to offers of greater wages.

kodoherty93

Milk & Honey wrote: »

Eboggles wrote: »

Is there something I'm missing here? If the government actually removed these state subsidies most of theses schools would close down. Where would these students go? Yup, they'd go to their local secondary school down the road. And with that massive influx of children into every public school in the country the state would need employ more teachers, and as a result they wouldn't actually be saving anything.

Most parts of the state don't have a nearby private school. Most private schools are in South Dublin. If they were unable to continue as private schools they would just convert into public schools with a big voluntary contribution and continue as before. Large numbers of the public schools in the country were once private until they opted into the free education scheme in the 1960s.

Most private schools have really small year sizes like 50-75 is an average. Its not economically viable keeping a ton of small schools open. Or merging them into a local school.

Most of the south side private schools have north siders. What do you do with all the north siders. Tell their parents to stop sending their children to a school in which 95% of students go to second level education and tell them to send their Children to a school in which it's a celebration that 50% made it to 6th year and it's not exam focused

Milk & Honey

kodoherty93 wrote: »

Most private schools have really small year sizes like 50-75 is an average. Its not economically viable keeping a ton of small schools open. Or merging them into a local school.

Most of the south side private schools have north siders. What do you do with all the north siders. Tell their parents to stop sending their children to a school in which 95% of students go to second level education and tell them to send their Children to a school in which it's a celebration that 50% made it to 6th year and it's not exam focused

So the state should subsidise private education to the tune of €100m just because some Northsiders don't want their children going to school with their neighbours?
At least one Southside school refuses to admit Northsiders. I am not sure that there are many Northsiders at school in the South.
Nowadays parents don't send their children to school. They bring them. In great big 4 x 4s, clogging up the roads.

kodoherty93

Milk & Honey wrote: »

kodoherty93 wrote: »

Most private schools have really small year sizes like 50-75 is an average. Its not economically viable keeping a ton of small schools open. Or merging them into a local school.

Most of the south side private schools have north siders. What do you do with all the north siders. Tell their parents to stop sending their children to a school in which 95% of students go to second level education and tell them to send their Children to a school in which it's a celebration that 50% made it to 6th year and it's not exam focused

So the state should subsidise private education to the tune of €100m just because some Northsiders don't want their children going to school with their neighbours?
At least one Southside school refuses to admit Northsiders. I am not sure that there are many Northsiders at school in the South.
Nowadays parents don't send their children to school. They bring them. In great big 4 x 4s, clogging up the roads.

I don't know what year you live but it isn't 2012. Stand outside any private city centre school and it's children as young 11 taking the bus to school from the other side of the city.

Out of my year of 100 there was a minimum of 75 north siders. Private schools aren't that exclusive if 15% of students go to them. Which a majority would be in Dublin.

€100 million is a drop in the ocean compared to the millions spent on social welfare because people are poorly educated. Eg some inner city schools don't offer higher levels maths at junior cert

steddyeddy

griffdaddy wrote: »

You can afford a car, get off the (state subsidised) bus.
You can afford private treatment, get out of the hospital.
You can afford to maintain the footpaths, stop expecting the council to do it.

Do you see where this is going?

The thing thats glossed over here is that the kids going to these schools dont pay for their fees, Its their parents who pay. Kids dont deserve a better education than other kids because their parents did or didnt work hard. That said I think the fact that colleges will take into account the school you went to (Eg private or disadvantaged) is a step in the right direction.

The purpose of the leaving cert is to ascertain ones suitability for college. For that to work we need a fairly even playing field. Throwing money at certain students disguises their natural talent. Ie it is easier for a person of less academic ability to get into college from a private school than someone of similar academic ability getting in from a deis school. Thats my problem with private schools. I have worked with too many people who shouldnt have been in college but because of grinds and small teacher pupil ratios got in.

sock puppet

Kinski wrote: »

The private schools could practice price discrimination, charging larger fees to wealthy parents and lower ones to the scrimp and save brigade.

How exactly would they do this?