Opinion & Commentary
Equity and the costs of learning
Once again the knives have come out over school funding. But what is the real basis of the opposition to public funding of non-government schools? Is it about the proper use of taxpayers’ money? Or is it about equity? Each issue requires a different response.
If the issue is the proper use of taxpayers’ money, one must view this paper’s revelations concerning funding increases to non-government schools in context.
Taking Abbotsleigh, an Anglican school for girls, as an example, it is a simple matter to present the funding figures in a different light. The Daily Telegraph stated two days ago that Abbotsleigh will receive $2.144m in Commonwealth funding in 2005. That year, Abbotsleigh expects to enrol approximately 1260 students. This means that per capita Commonwealth funding will be $1700, plus a smaller amount (around $700 on average) contributed by the state government.
The average per capita public (Commonwealth and state) funding for a NSW state school was $6287 in 1998/99. This will presumably be higher in 2005. Even using this conservative figure, if Abbotsleigh were a state school it would be entitled to at least $7.9m in public funding. That’s a taxpayer saving of almost $5m, which the parents of Abbotsleigh students must then compensate for. The same scenario can be presented for each non-government school. In this light, it is difficult to argue that such schools are a drain on the public purse.
If the issue is equity, there are again alternative viewpoints. It can be argued that parents of non-government school students are disadvantaged by unequal public funding. They are taxpayers and citizens, and therefore have an equal entitlement to public assistance for the education of their children. It is highly dubious to suggest that a state-provided education contributes more to the public good than one provided by a private non-profit organisation.
It is easy to pick a struggling state school and compare it to a school where parents pay fees of up to $12,000 a year. But it is not so easy to explain why one state school has an inadequate library, demountable classrooms and flooding, when another state school has academic programmes and facilities to rival high-fee non-government schools.
Information about funding allocated to public schools is not available on a school-by-school basis, but it should be. Then we could compare, for example, North Sydney Girls High or James Ruse High with Bulahdelah Central School. It’s not hard to imagine what such a comparison might reveal.
Clearly, the same differences that exist between state and non-government schools also exist within the state school system, observed most strikingly between high and low socio-economic areas. For a system supposedly built on the ideal of equality of opportunity, this is inexcusable, especially because it is avoidable.
Proper and equitable use of taxpayers’ money is not achieved by discriminating against families who, for whatever reason, prefer non-government schools. All this does is make choice unavailable to those families who cannot afford it. A fair funding system would involve equal funding for all children, regardless of school.
If all children were entitled to the same level of public funding toward their education, all schools would be on a level playing field. If differences in parental means must be taken into consideration, this must apply equally to all parents, not just those who seek an alternative to state schooling.
Such a funding system would have two major benefits. First, there would be equity in school funding between state schools and between state and non-government schools. Funding that is child-centred instead of school-centred makes the amount of public funding received by any particular school irrelevant.
Second, all families would have the means and the opportunity to choose a school that they think offers the best environment and education for their child. Research over the last decade has provided ample evidence that giving families responsibility for their child’s schooling enhances education across the board.
Australians have a school funding system that seems incapable of delivering either equity or efficiency, and denies choice to many families. The benefits of choice provide as good a reason as any to abandon the current divisive funding system, and to adopt one that makes children more important than politics.
About the Author:
Jennifer Buckingham is Policy Analyst at the Centre for Independent Studies.
