A well-funded public system is the right of every child, and the responsibility of us all. Privatization creep threatens public education.
Author of the article:Heather Ganshorn, Medeana Moussa
Publishing date:Sep 01, 2022 •
The debate over public funding of private/independent schools in Saskatchewan has been reignited.
Public funding of private schools has been on the radar in Saskatchewan recently in light of troubling allegations of abuse at Legacy Christian Academy, a school that receives significant public funds (more than $730,000 last year). While schools like Legacy currently receive 50 per cent of the per-student allocation of students in the public system, Saskatchewan has announced plans to create a new class of private schools that would be funded at 75 per cent of the public per-student allocation. In a recent interview with CBC, Education Minister Dustin Duncan said that Legacy would have met the criteria for this level of funding, though it will not be funded at this level pending an investigation.
This funding hike, which seems to have been implemented without public consultation, will put Saskatchewan well ahead of the rest of the country, where public funding for private schools ranges from zero in Ontario to 70 per cent in Alberta. Our organization, Support Our Students Alberta, advocates for an equitable and accessible public education system. We have seen years of “privatization creep” in Alberta education, and we are dismayed to see Saskatchewan pursuing a similar path.
Privatization is not about individuals paying for choices outside the public system, it’s about diverting public dollars to private, unaccountable entities. As this is generally unpopular, privatizers work hard to manufacture consent using other arguments.
Private schools prefer to call themselves “independent schools” (despite increasing dependence on public funds). Proponents suggest that public funding for meeting certain requirements balances a school’s independence with a reasonable level of oversight by government.
However, the Legacy case suggests that these rules are enforced minimally until a crisis draws scrutiny. It’s an impossible contradiction to have a school that is both “independent” and subject to government oversight. We should all question the use of public funds for unaccountable organizations that may place vulnerable children in a precarious situation.
Sask. taps administrators to oversee three schools after abuse allegations
Bank loans, farmland accepted as donations by Saskatoon church linked to Legacy Christian Academy
Privatizers frame education as a private good rather than a public one that benefits all of society. In this view, “parent choice” is the overriding value, rather than the right of all children to a quality education, or the broader societal interest in having an education system that prepares future citizens to participate in democracy.
Public funding of private schools has been on the radar in Saskatchewan recently in light of troubling allegations of abuse at Legacy Christian Academy, a school that receives significant public funds (more than $730,000 last year). While schools like Legacy currently receive 50 per cent of the per-student allocation of students in the public system, Saskatchewan has announced plans to create a new class of private schools that would be funded at 75 per cent of the public per-student allocation. In a recent interview with CBC, Education Minister Dustin Duncan said that Legacy would have met the criteria for this level of funding, though it will not be funded at this level pending an investigation.
This funding hike, which seems to have been implemented without public consultation, will put Saskatchewan well ahead of the rest of the country, where public funding for private schools ranges from zero in Ontario to 70 per cent in Alberta. Our organization, Support Our Students Alberta, advocates for an equitable and accessible public education system. We have seen years of “privatization creep” in Alberta education, and we are dismayed to see Saskatchewan pursuing a similar path.
Privatization is not about individuals paying for choices outside the public system, it’s about diverting public dollars to private, unaccountable entities. As this is generally unpopular, privatizers work hard to manufacture consent using other arguments.
Private schools prefer to call themselves “independent schools” (despite increasing dependence on public funds). Proponents suggest that public funding for meeting certain requirements balances a school’s independence with a reasonable level of oversight by government.
However, the Legacy case suggests that these rules are enforced minimally until a crisis draws scrutiny. It’s an impossible contradiction to have a school that is both “independent” and subject to government oversight. We should all question the use of public funds for unaccountable organizations that may place vulnerable children in a precarious situation.
Sask. taps administrators to oversee three schools after abuse allegations
Bank loans, farmland accepted as donations by Saskatoon church linked to Legacy Christian Academy
Privatizers frame education as a private good rather than a public one that benefits all of society. In this view, “parent choice” is the overriding value, rather than the right of all children to a quality education, or the broader societal interest in having an education system that prepares future citizens to participate in democracy.
Privatizers argue it’s only fair for parents to take “their” share of public funding to the provider of their choice. But this is not how publicly funded services work. If we don’t use the public library, we don’t get a subsidy to go buy books at Indigo instead. Nor do people without children receive any kind of tax break because they are not directly using the education system. Taxes are collected from everyone, to fund public services that serve everyone.
Privatizers suggest that private school families are somehow costing the public system less because their children receive less funding. However, funding individuals is not how education spending works. The per-student allocation is meant to be an estimate of how much an “average” child costs to educate. Some children require more resources than others, and that per-student funding is pooled to serve all students.
Private schools can select students with fewer special needs, from better-off families. When “funding follows the student” out of the public and into the private system, public schools risk being left with fewer students, but a greater concentration of high-needs students, and fewer dollars to support those needs. Schools also have fixed costs such as utilities and maintenance, which they must now cover with less funding, or make hard choices such as closing schools, increasing class sizes, or cutting support staff.
A well-funded public education system is the right of every child, and the responsibility of us all. Privatization creep threatens public education and is done largely without public discussion.
Heather Ganshorn is the research director and Medeana Moussa is the executive director for Support Our Students Alberta.
No comments:
Post a Comment