Public education advocates call on Alberta to axe funds to private schools

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

And as we've seen time and time again, any increase in funding to public education goes to teachers salaries first, and students second. Unions FTW.

In the bargaining sessions with the Stelmach Conservatives, the teachers asked for smaller class sizes and better working conditions. The government increased their wages instead. The fact of the matter is that it is cheaper to give the teachers more money than to make classes smaller, so that is what the government does.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by John Doe

In the bargaining sessions with the Stelmach Conservatives, the teachers asked for smaller class sizes and better working conditions. The government increased their wages instead. The fact of the matter is that it is cheaper to give the teachers more money than to make classes smaller, so that is what the government does.

Really? I was under the impression that the ATA threatened to strike unless Stelmach gave them a 5 year contract with built in raises, plus a 2 BILLION dollar payment towards the teachers portion of pension liabilities.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...ement-1.637248

It makes one wonder how much class sizes could have been reduced for those billions of dollars.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

Your going to want to check the math on that.

if the public system gets thousands of kids back in the fold they won't come with classrooms and teachers and support staff and maintenance budgets. snuffing out private schools and charter schools will add stress to the public system, not ease it.

That is true, but if everyone went to public schools, do think that the people who currently send their children to the private schools would accept the standards for public education that they do now? If anything, it shows that public education is underfunded.

I suggest that you go look at the link for Strathcona-Tweedsmur School on undercoverbrother's post.

This is what they pay for tuition:

Membership Fee: $3,500
Grades 1-3: $18,175
Grades 4-6: $19,615
Grades 7-9: $20,505
Grades 10-12: $21,055
Technology Fee Grade 6-12: $620
Mandatory Transportation Fee: $500
Busing Fee: $2,570

http://www.sts.ab.ca/Admissions/FAQ

This is how much a school district gets per student from the government:

Kindergarten: $4012.13 per child
Grades 1 to 3: $8,024.27 per student
Grades 4 to 6: $6,561.68 per student
Grades 7 to 9: $6,561.68 per student
Grades 10 to 12: (Per CEU to a maximum of 60 CEUs per year per funded student)
Tier 1: $187.48
Tier 2: $199.81
Tier 3: $222.25
Tier 4: $112.48
ADLC course CEUs are funded at 44 per cent of the Tier Rate
The high school base rate of $6,561.68 is block funding for high school students who are coded. This includes Special Education eligibilities, Institutional and Refugee students.

http://www.asba.ab.ca/being-a-school...ation-funding/

Since a private school is getting 60% of the money that a public school does, then Strathcona-Tweedsmur is getting an additional $4815.56 per grade 1-3 and $3937.01 per grade 4-12, so it is costing them from approximately $23000 to $25000 (not including the $3500 membership fee) to educate a child per year. Compare that to the public system that costs approximately $4000 to $5000, or about 20% of the cost. Why should the rest of society subsidize such an inefficient organization at all?

[photon]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Do all private schools have to accept anyone who pays, including students with disabilities?

Nope, my son's been rejected from a depressing number of private schools most of which say they specialize in kids with disabilities.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

So if a parent decides their kid is best served somewhere outside the normal system, whether by choice or necessity, how much less are their needs worth? What makes them less valuable?

It's not about them being less valuable. It's about choices. The Calgary public school board has the GATE program for gifted students, Science schools, Arts schools, Aboriginal schools, language immersion schools, sports schools, Montessori schools, all-boy schools, all-girls schools. And that's just the public system. Then there are publicly-funded charter schools. The thing all those schools have in common is they don't turn away anyone based on ability to pay. They're universal. Private schools aren't. They're private and discretionary.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I know several businesses that do not have shareholders and do not make 'profit' that are still businesses.

I can tell you from witnessing the inner workings of a private school from the administration side that it is very much a business.

'Keeping the lights on' is often a euphemism for "building a new soccer pitch to attract better student-athletes (and the dollars that go with them). Maybe the school needs a new state of the art rowing centre. I've seen student athletes like this up close, they carry huge dollar symbols around them in the form of their parents who are willing to invest it all if it means Johnny or Sally has a better shot 'at the big time'. It's not uncommon that a school will have separate administration departments for Alumni squeezing and student recruitment, where one is usually paying for the other.

Sitting in some of those staff meetings where the discussion on the table is to increase the amount of spaces for students or increase the amount of administrative positions can be pretty freakin' awkward.

Yep. Any organization that is beholden to its customers is essentially a business even if they're technically a non-profit organization. Particularly where the administrators and board of governors can personally profit from the success of the school.

In certain ways that has its value, in that can help weed out incompetence. But it also has an ugly side where teachers are keenly aware that what keeps them employed is satisfying the customers, even when doing that runs contrary to providing the best education. Teachers at high end private schools tend to be very cognizant of which students have influential parents and what can happen if you happen to provoke the ire of the wrong person. If it comes down to supporting a teacher or keeping a wealthy family happy it's usually pretty clear where administration will place their loyalty.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Really? I was under the impression that the ATA threatened to strike unless Stelmach gave them a 5 year contract with built in raises, plus a 2 BILLION dollar payment towards the teachers portion of pension liabilities.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...ement-1.637248

It makes one wonder how much class sizes could have been reduced for those billions of dollars.

My mistake. It was with the Redford Conservatives.
http://www.teachers.ab.ca/News%20Roo...ttlements.aspx

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by John Doe

That is true, but if everyone went to public schools, do think that the people who currently send their children to the private schools would accept the standards for public education that they do now? If anything, it shows that public education is underfunded.

I suggest that you go look at the link for Strathcona-Tweedsmur School on undercoverbrother's post.

This is what they pay for tuition:

http://www.sts.ab.ca/Admissions/FAQ

This is how much a school district gets per student from the government:
http://www.asba.ab.ca/being-a-school...ation-funding/

Since a private school is getting 60% of the money that a public school does, then Strathcona-Tweedsmur is getting an additional $4815.56 per grade 1-3 and $3937.01 per grade 4-12, so it is costing them from approximately $23000 to $25000 (not including the $3500 membership fee) to educate a child per year. Compare that to the public system that costs approximately $4000 to $5000, or about 20% of the cost. Why should the rest of society subsidize such an inefficient organization at all?

Isn't that just operating costs? What about capital costs and infrastructure or does that all come out of the cost per student?


Some people just can't stand rich* people getting some of the money they pay in taxes back if it means they MIGHT be getting something a little bit better.

It's like the health care debate, we should just lower everyone's education quality because some people might be getting a slightly better one.

Public education in Canada is high quality, be happy with what you have, you're getting more of a subsidy than private school people so why are you complaining? What's not fair about that?

*rich is defined as anyone who makes more than the personcomplaining, whether it's 100k or 200k.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Isn't that just operating costs? What about capital costs and infrastructure or does that all come out of the cost per student?.

No. The public infrastructure bill is extra and bring the cost per public student up to around 13k. They'd have to pay it anyway though so it doesn't really change much.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Isn't that just operating costs? What about capital costs and infrastructure or does that all come out of the cost per student?

Mostly operating costs, but includes some capital costs as well.

Some people just can't stand rich* people getting some of the money they pay in taxes back if it means they MIGHT be getting something a little bit better.

It's like the health care debate, we should just lower everyone's education quality because some people might be getting a slightly better one.

Public education in Canada is high quality, be happy with what you have, you're getting more of a subsidy than private school people so why are you complaining? What's not fair about that?

*rich is defined as anyone who makes more than the personcomplaining, whether it's 100k or 200k.

Look, I don't give a d*** if someone richer than me (by your definition, of course) gets money back from their taxes. In fact, if they put their kids in public schools they would get just as much money put into their child's education as the poorest of the poor (assuming neither were coded), and I assure you that nobody would mind in the least.

However, if you say that public education is fine for my kid and I should be satisfied with it (which I am, by the way), but it just isn't up to your high standards so you think that you should get subsidized for your child to get a "better" education then I do have a problem with it.

I don't have a problem with public funding for schools for special needs kids, nor do I have a problem with charter schools. I don't even have a problem with private schools as long as they fund themselves. But if you want to put your kid in a school where they will get preferential treatment then don't expect me or anyone else than yourself to pay for it.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by John Doe

My mistake. It was with the Redford Conservatives.
http://www.teachers.ab.ca/News%20Roo...ttlements.aspx

This press release from the ATA doesn't say anything to support your claim that teachers asked for smaller class sizes and weren't interested in increases in pay. What I recall is that the teachers union were demanding a reduction in hours in exchange for a pay freeze, and concerned with 'working conditions' but nothing really about students.

According to union representatives, teachers are willing to accept a salary freeze if it means their proposal to limit “assigned” hours to 1,200 a year — a move Education Minister Jeff Johnson previously refused.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2012/11/3...contract-offer

From everything that you seem to hear, it's students that come last to the ATA.

[Shazam]

My 9 year old in grade 4 was assessed as gifted last year. We applied for both the GATE program and Westmount Charter.

A few things:

- All schools in Alberta must follow the Alberta Program of Study.
- Private schools and charter schools are two different things. Private schools do their own thing. Charter schools follow a mandate. Private schools charge tuition, Charter schools do not. Charter schools, since they derive most of their funds from Alberta Education are much more accountable in terms of finances and academic results to them.
- Very few schools in Calgary (and I'm sure everywhere else in Alberta) are funded 100% from taxes. Fees and fundraising efforts are very important at even public schools.

We chose Westmount. They dedicate a lot of resources (read: people they hired) in the form of teaching and learning assistants and student support specialists. They are a very lean operation. You can go to their website and view their financial statements (http://westmountcharter.com/pdfs/Fin...roved_2015.pdf), their academic results (http://westmountcharter.com/pdfs/acc...ar_summary.pdf) and their staff lists (http://westmountcharter.com/info/Con...gh_Campus.html)

Both GATE and Westmount turn away many qualified applicants. The practical fact of the matter is that even if all that money was diverted back to the public school boards, it'd all go to the kids that got added back anyhow.

Also, lost in the shuffle is that fact that home schooled children get funds too, which they would also lose.

Man, no one wants a special snowflake. But my daughter needs more challenging studies and some better emotional and social support at school. I'm 100% certain that GATE could never offer the sort of support services that Westmount has. The money would be too spread out. The amount of academic rigor at Westmount is very high - they do the APOS in 60% of the time at a regular school.

The CBE tries. They really do. We have been extremely lucky at her current elementary school. I have met many dedicated and simply awesome teachers, VPs and principals. But they are also the ones that realize the most the limitations of such large, behemoth systems. Principals do have basically carte blanche as to how their schools are operated within the scope provided to them. However they (and therefore the children) are at the mercy of the functions outside of their purvey. For those I can say that the CBE still needs some serious work.

I guess I'm just afraid that the charter schools are going to be caught in the crossfire with all the blasting that the private schools are getting over this matter.

I did attend quite a few private school open houses. Some are quite nice. Yeah, a lot are for rich kids. I know the assistant Dean of Math at the U of C and she finds their students are awful even with the supposed grades they receive. There are however a few like Calgary Academy, Rundle Academy (NOT College) and Foothills Academy that offer services that could never be offered in the public system without a whole lot of massive, massive effort.

I really hope there's room for something different.

I'll leave this here. I knew Reed (and many of the other people mentioned in this article) personally. I tried to make friends with him in high school. He was far too damaged by then.

http://calgaryherald.com/life/swerve...-misunderstood

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I'm sure there are some families that will make sacrifices to send their kids to private school but the vast majority of the families in private schools are pulling in $250k plus per year vs $80k. We were looking at some private school options (the big guys like Webber, Rundle College, Calgary Academy) and the general impression that was received during open house events and meeting with other parents is that pretty much all of them had lots of money to burn.

We also looked at a number of charter schools and those seemed to offer a much better value. Lower tuition costs with a slightly better education experience. The major issue that held us back from private or charter schooling, aside from waitlists, was location and transportation. It just didn't make sense to bus a kid to and from school for upwards of an hour each way. We ended up going with a public school that is just three blocks away but it is a lower enrollment school because it is early French immersion. Classroom sizes, which is pretty important, are only around 20 students and the school has a lot of good teachers that have been there for many years.

Calgary Academy is meant for children with severe learning disabilities. Why did you go there, if you thought places like Rundle College were also acceptable? They're two totally different ends of the spectrum.

May I ask what charter schools charged tuition at all? Because they're not supposed to.

Did you actually do the things you claimed you did?

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Calgary Academy is meant for children with severe learning disabilities. Why did you go there, if you thought places like Rundle College were also acceptable? They're two totally different ends of the spectrum.

May I ask what charter schools charged tuition at all? Because they're not supposed to.

Did you actually do the things you claimed you did?

Maybe before calling people out for making #### up you can do your research. Calgary Academy has two streams.

Whether you’re considering the Academy program for your child who is struggling to succeed in their core classes and is in need of specialized support, or the innovative Collegiate program for your student who is working at grade level and is ready for a greater challenge in their learning, Calgary Academy is the place to be.

[corporatejay]

Just to be clear, what do we consider rich kids?

Because people keep talking about "rich kids" but I'd like to know what that means.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by John Doe

I don't have a problem with public funding for schools for special needs kids, nor do I have a problem with charter schools. I don't even have a problem with private schools as long as they fund themselves. But if you want to put your kid in a school where they will get preferential treatment then don't expect me or anyone else than yourself to pay for it.

Can you please contact David Eggen and tell him that? Because I don't think he understands what the charter schools are.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Maybe before calling people out for making #### up you can do your research. Calgary Academy has two streams.

Nobody, and I mean nobody, refers to CA other than the learning disabilities program. I guess he meant the CAC program then. Fair enough.

However, no charter schools charge tuition. They cannot.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Just to be clear, what do we consider rich kids?

Because people keep talking about "rich kids" but I'd like to know what that means.

If the parents make more money than you, then they're rich.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Calgary Academy is meant for children with severe learning disabilities. Why did you go there, if you thought places like Rundle College were also acceptable? They're two totally different ends of the spectrum.

May I ask what charter schools charged tuition at all? Because they're not supposed to.

Did you actually do the things you claimed you did?

At the time I didn't know too many specifics about each school which is why I visited Calgary Academy and did learn about the two programs that they offer.

By tuition at charter schools I was actually just referring to their fees in general. Learning and materials fees, technology fees, gym fees, E-C fees, bus fees, etc which are more extensive and costly than the fees for public schools.

[harmony]

why are private schools funded by the government at all? it's ridiculous.