BF2S Forums Federal Endowments for Private Schools

DrunkFace wrote:

All universities are private in Australia.

As for schools, every student gets some funding no matter what school you go to. One reason is on average the people going to private schools have the parents paying more tax dollars so shouldn't be excluded from the funding, another is to make it somewhat more affordable taking the burden off the public system. So no, I don't agree.

If our system worked like yours, I'd agree with you.

Here, however, it doesn't.  Universities here are either public or private.  A lot of rich parents still send their kids to public schools, so it's not like they're missing out on what's funded already.

The problem I see with our system is that private universities often hoard the money they're given because a lot of them don't need the funds.  Harvard is a perfect example.  Tuition rates keep rising while they keep the tax funds in an account that mostly just accrues interest.

It really serves no benefit to a working class person.

Kmarion wrote:

I'd rather see the money distributed via scholarships, grants, and through our GI bill. If the universities are simply given the money they can keep or even raise tuition anyways, and this does not motivate them to produce quality education.

I would definitely support more money for the GI bill.

DrunkFace wrote:

This might be worth looking into if your at all interested in the Australian system.
http://www.dest.gov.au/Ministers/farmer … ochure.pdf

Some pertinent facts:
Average government funding per student:
Government school: $9908
Non-Government: $5092
High Fee school: $2399

Funded by:
Government school:
82.7% State Gov, 12.6% Fed Gov, 4.6% Fees/Donations.
Private school:
16.9% State Gov, 44.3% Fed Gov, 38.7% Fees/Donations

The Australian Government funds non-government schools according to a formula which measures the socio-economic status of the communities they serve.
Schools which draw students from the neediest communities receive from the Australian Government 70% of the cost of educating a student in a state school. Schools serving the wealthiest communities receive about 13.7% of that cost.

Interesting...  but I thought you said all universities are private in Australia?

DrunkFace wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Here, however, it doesn't.  Universities here are either public or private.  A lot of rich parents still send their kids to public schools, so it's not like they're missing out on what's funded already.

I could be what you consider rich, my parents easily had enough money to send me to a private school if that is what I wanted, but it's not something I would have enjoyed and I got into a better public school anyway. Also if you read above funding for private schools is based on social economic conditions.

Turquoise wrote:

Interesting...  but I thought you said all universities are private in Australia?

Errr they are... schools aren't though.
Commonly speaking School only means K-12, Uni is where you get a degree after school.

Ah...  I missed that.  I didn't realize at first that this article was talking about pre-collegiate education.

I understand why your system works the way it does because you don't have any public universities to pick from.  If you did, however, I think the funding system would be quite different.

This is why I don't think your country's way of doing things would work here unless we only had private universities.

As for pre-collegiate education, your way might work here.

Turquoise wrote:

So, for the sake of this thread, would you agree with me that private schools should not receive any federal funds?

Depends on what the funds are for. If it's a grant supporting a research project, what's the difference between a private or a public school?

If the funding goes to scholarships, what's the problem?

If the funding goes to pamphlets proselytizing their religious beliefs...there's a problem.