Private education unfair?

nice_guy80

There is no private school in my area for my children, so why should I not get the same option?

The state is creating an unfair situation that those who live in areas with private schools can get their fees subsidised by the state.

They are not paying the full price of the private education. Private school fees should be a lot higher, the subvention from the state allows them to hire more teachers, provide extra activities for students and build better facilities for the pupils.

why would eg a doctor, sending their kids to private schools pay more taxes that a doctor sending their children to a non private school?

ted1

nice_guy80 wrote: »

There is no private school in my area for my children, so why should I not get the same option?

The state is creating an unfair situation that those who live in areas with private schools can get their fees subsidised by the state.

They are not paying the full price of the private education. Private school fees should be a lot higher, the subvention from the state allows them to hire more teachers, provide extra activities for students and build better facilities for the pupils.

why would eg a doctor, sending their kids to private schools pay more taxes that a doctor sending their children to a non private school?

The private school gets less funding than a public school and costs the state less.

So your problem is now that their is non on your area? Is there a children's hospital,nursing home, dart, Luas, Airport etc?
Your going to have to realise that when you choose to live in a certain area you will not get the same facilities as if you choose to live in a different area.

Your attempt to use a Doctor as a comparasion is pathetic.
Take the average wage of a patent whose kid goes to a public school V that if those whose kid goes to a private school.

nice_guy80

Why does it matter about the wage of a parent who chooses to send their child to private school or public school?

A private school shouldn't cost the state anything. It's private! Like a private hospital. Or private nursing home.

ted1

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Why does it matter about the wage of a parent who chooses to send their child to private school or public school?

A private school shouldn't cost the state anything. It's private! Like a private hospital. Or private nursing home.

That's why we have semi private schools as oppose to private schools .

Other than begrudary you have yet to explain why they shouldn't .

nice_guy80

They shouldn't what?

You haven't explained why the state should subvent private schools.

ted1

nice_guy80 wrote: »

They shouldn't what?

You haven't explained why the state should subvent private schools.

Because they Save the state money, they are obliged to follow the state curriculum, the consitution states that state must provide education to them ,the pupils are just as entitled to funding as pupils in a fully public school, why shouldn't they be?
Most services in every sector allow for service top ups.

nice_guy80

They shouldn't be entitled to the funding because their parents made the decision to send them to a private school
When they also had state schools to send the kids to

It is ridiculous that there are so many state schools in disadvantaged areas crying out for funding and better teacher ratios....
When the privileged pupils in private schools are being subsidised by the state

ted1

nice_guy80 wrote: »

They shouldn't be entitled to the funding because their parents made the decision to send them to a private school
When they also had state schools to send the kids to

It is ridiculous that there are so many state schools in disadvantaged areas crying out for funding and better teacher ratios....
When the privileged pupils in private schools are being subsidised by the state

Right do you finally admitted that it's due to begrudary, however you have not once accepted that it costs the state more money to provide public schools as private schools are responsible for their own upkeep.
So private schools actually free money to schools in disadvantaged areas.
Why should the state provide more money for schools in disadvantaged areas. What makes those pupils more special

Seth Brundle

Are there independent costings to show how private schools save the state money?
I'm curious to see the difference.

nice_guy80

ted1 wrote: »

Right do you finally admitted that it's due to begrudary, however you have not once accepted that it costs the state more money to provide public schools as private schools are responsible for their own upkeep.
So private schools actually free money to schools in disadvantaged areas.
Why should the state provide more money for schools in disadvantaged areas. What makes those pupils more special

not an ounce of begrudgery. As an educationalist myself I expect every school and child to be treated equally.

they are going to a state school
paid for by taxes
not a private institution

their parents aren't buying an advantage for their children, subsidised by the tax payer.
show me an INDEPENDENT analysis of how private eduation saves the state money (not one paid for by the private schools themselves!)

ted1

kbannon wrote: »

Are there independent costings to show how private schools save the state money?
I'm curious to see the difference.

Yes there are many , the big difference is the upkeep, private schools have to pay for their own , public schools upkeep is the responsibility of the states

ted1

kbannon wrote: »

Are there independent costings to show how private schools save the state money?
I'm curious to see the difference.

http://factsaresacred.ie/memes/how-much-do-fee-paying-schools-save-the-irish-state/
There's many studies out there

ted1

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Maybe try attacking the post, not the poster? that's if you have an actual argument, rather than just abuse to dole out.

The poster is constantly ducking the issues and changing his reason why he opposes some pupils in the state being allowed an education capitation.
I've made plenty of points and cases as to why payments should be maintained

If he made a point it would be easy to attack his post

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

ted1

nice_guy80 wrote: »

not an ounce of begrudgery. As an educationalist myself I expect every school and child to be treated equally.

they are going to a state school
paid for by taxes
not a private institution

their parents aren't buying an advantage for their children, subsidised by the tax payer.
show me an INDEPENDENT analysis of how private eduation saves the state money (not one paid for by the private schools themselves!)

Semi private schools pay for their own upkeep. Public schools don't that's where the money is saved

mickdw

Is a clear undisputed fact that a child attending a private school costs the state less per school year than a child attending a public school.
There is no argument there. That is a fact - the figures are readily available.
The argument arises over the opinion that some people hold, believing that the child in the private school deserves no government funding whatsoever.
Personally I believe any school which provides an education at least equal to a public school is entitled to the same funding per child enrolled.
It is then the schools own business if they ask the parents for top up of 100 euro or 100,000 euro per year depending on quality of service provided and what the families are happy to pay.

nice_guy80

mickdw wrote: »

Is a clear undisputed fact that a child attending a private school costs the state less per school year than a child attending a public school.
There is no argument there. That is a fact - the figures are readily available.
The argument arises over the opinion that some people hold, believing that the child in the private school deserves no government funding whatsoever.
Personally I believe any school which provides an education at least equal to a public school is entitled to the same funding per child enrolled.
It is then the schools own business if they ask the parents for top up of 100 euro or 100,000 euro per year depending on quality of service provided and what the families are happy to pay.

But the state is allowing them to have a restrictive enrollment policy and cherry pick their students - no special needs children, very few students from lower socio economic background
and subsidising the payment of the teachers to allow them deliver this service

Surely private education should be costing the state nothing? Because it is a private school? With private enrollment policies. And different teacher contracts (teacher can earn bonuses - paid for with the money save via the state funding of teacher salaries)

Are the grinds colleges eg Institute of Education, Ashfield College, Yeats College subsidised? And if not, why not?

The parents should be paying for the full cost of their child's PRIVATE education. They pay their taxes, state schools provide a service that is available, but they choose to send their children elsewhere

K-9

Mod: Posts moved to a new thread.

Please keep the discussion civil and avoid calling others begrudgers, snobs etc Adds nothing to your point and the debate.

micosoft

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Why does it matter about the wage of a parent who chooses to send their child to private school or public school?

A private school shouldn't cost the state anything. It's private! Like a private hospital. Or private nursing home.

The state funds both private hospitals and private nursing homes directly and indirectly.

ted1

nice_guy80 wrote: »

But the state is allowing them to have a restrictive enrollment policy and cherry pick their students - no special needs children, very few students from lower socio economic background
and subsidising the payment of the teachers to allow them deliver this service

Surely private education should be costing the state nothing? Because it is a private school? With private enrollment policies. And different teacher contracts (teacher can earn bonuses - paid for with the money save via the state funding of teacher salaries)

Are the grinds colleges eg Institute of Education, Ashfield College, Yeats College subsidised? And if not, why not?

The parents should be paying for the full cost of their child's PRIVATE education. They pay their taxes, state schools provide a service that is available, but they choose to send their children elsewhere

They are SEMI PRIVATE, not PRIVATE, they must follow the state curriculum.
They do let in special needs and many go to them.
Some teachers are hired directly and do have a different contract what's your point there.

Once again your post is just full of begrudary and ignores the fact that they cost the state less.

Berserker

nice_guy80 wrote: »

They shouldn't be entitled to the funding because their parents made the decision to send them to a private school
When they also had state schools to send the kids to

The funding is being cut at the moment and those cuts are forcing a number of private schools to move away from that model and they are now dependent on the state, which is taking more funding away from the existing state schools.

kbannon wrote: »

Are there independent costings to show how private schools save the state money?
I'm curious to see the difference.

As others have said, there are plenty of reports available online. Just google it.

fly_agaric

ted1 wrote: »

Most services in every sector allow for service top ups.

In Ireland they do; you can "top up" your children's schooling, healthcare etc. - great if you can do it.
I think however in alot of places you take the service that your taxes pay for (often better than what we get in fairness but taxes are higher too), or you pay for it all yourself. That seems fairer and more honest.

edit: Anyway, all a waste of typing. The so-called "Labour" party had (has!) education for years and did not change the situation.

jimmycrackcorm

nice_guy80 wrote:

The parents should be paying for the full cost of their child's PRIVATE education. They pay their taxes, state schools provide a service that is available, but they choose to send their children elsewhere

The parents pay their taxes so why shouldn't they expect that their children get equal funding from the state? There's a ,myth that private schools exit only for wealthy brats when a significant number of parent make sacrifices to put any spare money towards their children's education instead of changing their car etc.

That's the reason why private school enrollments dropped during the recession, not because rich people were less rich. A large number of private schools were in discussions with the dept of education to move into the public system over the last few years as a result.

While some people might think this is equality, the only equality is in, rightly or wrongly, bringing the standard of education down to the average level. The real issue is not that private schools should be completely privately paid for but that the resources aren't there to bring state schools up to the same level.

seamus

I agree in principle that private schools should be 100% privately funded. But private schools actually relieve burden from the public system.

We had this discussion before, and while on the face of it taking away funding from private schools seems like an easy win, the figures don't stack up. In particular, it would require private schools to massively increase their fees. As others mention above, the vast majority of parents are making sacrifices to send their kids to private schools. An increase in fees would mean an exodus from private to public schools as parents can no longer afford private schooling.

This would in fact result in an increase in public education spending, rather than a reduction.

In effect, parents who send their children to private schools are subsidising the Dept. of Education, and not the other way around.

rubberdiddies

As has been said many times, semi private schools actually save the state money. That much is clear.

I choose not to send my kids to such a school but I don't begrudge anyone who does.

As someone mentioned, those who choose to smoke for example spend €3500 or so per person for a 1 pack a day habit. That's probably the cost of private school for many people. My point is adults get to choose what they want to spend their money on.

Creche fees in Dublin cost about €1000 per child per month so at €12000 per year is significantly more expensive than private school

Zubeneschamali

mickdw wrote: »

Is a clear undisputed fact that a child attending a private school costs the state less per school year than a child attending a public school.

I have an idea for how to improve the situation so that a child attending a private school costs the state nothing at all!

Zubeneschamali

rubberdiddies wrote: »

My point is adults get to choose what they want to spend their money on.

I have no issues with parents spending their own money to send their kids to a private school.

My issue is with the Government spending my money to send those children to a private school.

ted1

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I have no issues with parents spending their own money to send their kids to a private school.

My issue is with the Government spending my money to send those children to a private school.

why? They pay for your kids ? What's the difference other than they want to top up what the state gives do they can have smaller classes and better facilities.

What's your gripe?


What about private healthcare? What about toll roads, Should they get no state funding ?

mickoneill31

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I have an idea for how to improve the situation so that a child attending a private school costs the state nothing at all!

How much does a child attending a private school cost the state? Serious question, I've no idea.

If this cost is passed onto the parent I'm sure many would pay. Many wouldn't. They're not all rich people going to these schools. Some parents are stretching themselves to the limit to get their kids the best education they can. Who'd have to pay for the new schools? I keep hearing we need more schools so I'm sure the public system doesn't have loads of spare capacity so this would need to be built.

It'd need to be analysed. I'm sure somebody can do it. Or I'd imagine it's already been done by some departments.

How much does it cost the state for a private school child?
How many children would be moved out of private schools to state schools if the state refused to pay anything for a child in a private school.
How many of these kids can be accommodated by the current system and how many new places would have to be created in new / existing schools and what's the cost of that?

seamus

mickoneill31 wrote: »

How much does a child attending a private school cost the state? Serious question, I've no idea.

There have been a few number bandied around, it's hard to pin them down.

The known cost in total is €100m per year, the question is how many students. This article puts the number at 26,000 students.

The Dept. Of Education's own figures say that it costs about €8k per year for each student in the public system.

So the state in effect is saving 50% on every child that goes to a private school.

Kev1001

I assume private schools operate to make a profit?
They have to cover the state curriculum otherwise no one would use their service.

A private company operating to make a profit should not be part-funded by the state.
Private bus companies that compete with Bus eireann don't get funding for providing their service.

Zubeneschamali

ted1 wrote: »

What's the difference other than they want to top up what the state gives do they can have smaller classes and better facilities.

I have nothing against you running your private school with its small classes and elite sports program and keeping out the children of asylum seekers, travellers and poor people generally.

I just don't want to subsidize it.

What about private healthcare?

Same deal. We should have public hospitals that treat public patients, and private ones with no state subsidies.

What about toll roads

Toll roads are a bad idea, we shouldn't allow them.

ted1

Kev1001 wrote: »

I assume private schools operate to make a profit?
They have to cover the state curriculum otherwise no one would use their service.

A private company operating to make a profit should not be part-funded by the state.
Private bus companies that compete with Bus eireann don't get funding for me providing their service.

They don't make a profit. Yes private companies competing with Bus Eireann do receive funding. PSO??

ted1

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I have nothing against you running your private school with its small classes and elite sports program and keeping out the children of asylum seekers, travellers and poor people generally.

I just don't want to subsidize it.



Same deal. We should have public hospitals that treat public patients, and private ones with no state subsidies.



Toll roads are a bad idea, we shouldn't allow them.

So out of begrudary you don't want it.
The patents of the kids going to the schools also pay taxes. So your logic is flawed, they don't want to subsidise your kids.

Socialism is a failed idea.

seamus

Kev1001 wrote: »

I assume private schools operate to make a profit?

No, very rarely. Private schools run by religious orders, for example, would probably make a minimal profit, if any, at the end of the year. What they primarily get out of running the school is the upkeep of the buildings, indoctrination, etc.

In very few cases are they run as profitable businesses. Non-religious and non-teaching staff will take a salary, which may be linked to performance, but with no actual "owner" or shareholders at the top, any excess funding usually goes into a development fund for expansions, repairs, etc.

"Making a profit" would assume that there's a parent company who takes the profits, a group of owners who take drawings from the school, or a group of shareholders who take a dividend. To the best of my knowledge, there are no state-assisted private schools operating on this model.

mickoneill31

ted1 wrote: »

So out of begrudary you don't want it.
The patents of the kids going to the schools also pay taxes. So your logic is flawed, they don't want to subsidise your kids.
.

I'm beginning to change my mind on this. I don't have kids. Why should I pay taxes to support kids in either state or private schools. I don't want to subsidize them either

seamus

mickoneill31 wrote: »

I'm beginning to change my mind on this. I don't have kids. Why should I pay taxes to support kids in either state or private schools. I don't want to subsidize them either

If your taxes don't pay to educate other people's kids now, there won't be enough money to pay your pension when you're 68 75.

mickoneill31

seamus wrote: »

If your taxes don't pay to educate other people's kids now, there won't be enough money to pay your pension when you're 68 75.

I understand this.
And at current rates 75 might be optimistic.

Jawgap

ted1 wrote: »

They don't make a profit. Yes private companies competing with Bus Eireann do receive funding. PSO??

No, they generate 'surpluses' - some of which are then, prudently, used to build reserves.

Parents should have complete freedom to send their children wherever they want to receive their education - but private schools should be just that, private.

Funding received from the state displaces other funding they receive, freeing that money up to use in other areas which itself drives a degree of educational apartheid - not too many state schools with swimming pools, weight rooms and full time librarians.

Private schools also distort the 'market' for the best teachers - yes the teachers are nominally on the same salaries as their colleagues in the state sector, but state schools can't offer the 'sweeteners' private schools can. Thus they're better placed to offer incentives to recruit & retain the better teachers.

and of course they have to teach the state curriculum - even if there was no requirement to teach the state curriculum, they'd still have to teach it otherwise how would their students get into uni?

Is that unfair? Yes, in my view.

ted1

Private schools don't offer sweetness , they hire some teachers directly but the rest are on the same contract as other teachers.
They save the state money, if they received no finding the state would have huge costs providing room in public schools and face higher on going costs

As regards curriculum, they could choose to follow a different system , they could do the A levels or similar. The CAO accepts other state exams not just the leaving, you just highlighted your lack of understanding of the system



https://myucd.ucd.ie/admission/alevel_cal.ezc

mickoneill31

Jawgap wrote: »

Private schools also distort the 'market' for the best teachers - yes the teachers are nominally on the same salaries as their colleagues in the state sector, but state schools can't offer the 'sweeteners' private schools can. Thus they're better placed to offer incentives to recruit & retain the better teachers.

What sweeteners?

Jawgap

ted1 wrote: »

Private schools don't offer sweetness , they hire some teachers directly but the rest are on the same contract as other teachers.
They save the state money, if they received no finding the state would have huge costs providing room in public schools and face higher on going costs

Sorry, but they do.

My sister teaches in one and when you're wheeled in and given the 'cooks tour' and you see the facilities available and you're told what funding is available for projects and activities in your area of teaching or that you won't have to pay to go on the school ski trip - that's an inducement. As I said, nominally, teachers receive the same salary, but not the same perquisites.

seamus

Jawgap wrote: »

My sister teaches in one and when you're wheeled in and given the 'cooks tour' and you see the facilities available and you're told what funding is available for projects and activities in your area of teaching or that you won't have to pay to go on the school ski trip - that's an inducement. As I said, nominally, teachers receive the same salary, but not the same perquisites.

Largely the same reason why parents send their children to private schools too; because the facilities available are superior.

But that's kind of a side-issue. Even in the public system the same kind of inequality exists - wealthier communities use "community donations" and the school has access to many facilities for free by virtue of what the local church or local community council has managed to put together.

Fundamentally the question here is whether it makes sense for the state to pay teachers in private schools. And the answer is yes.

Aside from the financial benefit, it also softly enforces a certain level of teacher equality. In the current system, the inducements for teachers are somewhat small, in relative terms. A great teacher from Tipperary may choose to stay in his local public school because that's where he's from, and the promise of a slightly better stocked private classroom in Dublin isn't enough of a draw, considering his salary won't change.

Remove state funding and the small number of private schools that remain will start offering salaries 50% larger than the state salary. And that great teacher from Tipp will happily make his way to that elite school in South Co. Dublin. Effectively making the "elitism" worse by concentrating the best teachers into the most affluent areas and schools.

nice_guy80

Jawgap wrote: »

Sorry, but they do.

My sister teaches in one and when you're wheeled in and given the 'cooks tour' and you see the facilities available and you're told what funding is available for projects and activities in your area of teaching or that you won't have to pay to go on the school ski trip - that's an inducement. As I said, nominally, teachers receive the same salary, but not the same perquisites.

a few trips abroad with the rugby teams for the teachers who coach a team is normal
some nice sweeteners from the parents association are also mandatory

the state doesn't pay half the salary costs for a private nursing home or private hospital
I don't see why it should do it for private schools

Zubeneschamali

ted1 wrote: »

The patents of the kids going to the schools also pay taxes.

Yes, and they are free to sit next to my children.

But mine are not free to sit by theirs.

So this is not symmetrical.

Zubeneschamali

seamus wrote: »

Even in the public system the same kind of inequality exists - wealthier communities use "community donations" and the school has access to many facilities for free by virtue of what the local church or local community council has managed to put together.

Yes, but the school is not allowed to turn away poor people, which is the whole point of the semi-private tax-funded school model: no riffraff.

Zubeneschamali

seamus wrote: »

Remove state funding and the small number of private schools that remain will start offering salaries 50% larger than the state salary. And that great teacher from Tipp will happily make his way to that elite school in South Co. Dublin. Effectively making the "elitism" worse by concentrating the best teachers into the most affluent areas and schools.

Elitism will be greatly reduced since there will only be 2 or 3 private schools left in the country.

ted1

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, and they are free to sit next to my children.

But mine are not free to sit by theirs.

So this is not symmetrical.

Inequalities exist.
You could send your kid to a private school if you wish too, just make sacrifices.

Zubeneschamali

nice_guy80 wrote: »

the state doesn't pay half the salary costs for a private nursing home or private hospital I don't see why it should do it for private schools

As i said earlier, they shouldn't do it for hospitals or nursing homes either, but that would be much harder to fix.

Schools could be sorted at the stroke of a pen.

Jawgap

seamus wrote: »

Largely the same reason why parents send their children to private schools too; because the facilities available are superior.

But that's kind of a side-issue. Even in the public system the same kind of inequality exists - wealthier communities use "community donations" and the school has access to many facilities for free by virtue of what the local church or local community council has managed to put together.

Fundamentally the question here is whether it makes sense for the state to pay teachers in private schools. And the answer is yes.

Aside from the financial benefit, it also softly enforces a certain level of teacher equality. In the current system, the inducements for teachers are somewhat small, in relative terms. A great teacher from Tipperary may choose to stay in his local public school because that's where he's from, and the promise of a slightly better stocked private classroom in Dublin isn't enough of a draw, considering his salary won't change.

Remove state funding and the small number of private schools that remain will start offering salaries 50% larger than the state salary. And that great teacher from Tipp will happily make his way to that elite school in South Co. Dublin. Effectively making the "elitism" worse by concentrating the best teachers into the most affluent areas and schools.

Well the question is whether it's fair, not whether it makes financial sense. Lots of things make financial sense that are not ethically or morally fair.

.....and while public schools in in wealthy communities can and do benefit from that fact, it's not to the same degree.

The DES report "Fee Charging Schools - Analysis of Fee Income" found that

....the 55 fee charging schools shows that they currently have €81.3 million available to them, above that which is available to similarly sized
schools in the Free Scheme. The discretionary income works out at an average of €1.48 million for each of the fee charging schools. This funding allows them to privately recruit additional subject teachers and extra ancillary staff or invest in capital improvements and extracurricular activities.

there are substantial differences between schools in the fee charging sector with discretionary income ranging from €112,000 for one relatively small school to €4.7 million for a large school

even in wealthy communities, I doubt there are public schools sitting on six and seven figure cash piles.

Or to put those figures another way, fee-paying schools have an average discretionary spend of €3,177 per student – up to seven times that available in the public schools.

And that's just fee income.

I doubt too many public schools benefit in philanthropic terms the same way private schools do.

Blackrock College receives €1.8m from US organisation over five years

Again, I'm not against private schools, but private should be that, private.

Zubeneschamali

ted1 wrote: »

Inequalities exist.
You could send your kid to a private school if you wish too, just make sacrifices.

If we stopped subsidising private schools, inequalities would reduce.

Which is the whole point of state funded education.