tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/catholic-schools-3288/articlesCatholic schools – The Conversation2024-03-20T12:29:15Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2258682024-03-20T12:29:15Z2024-03-20T12:29:15ZA century ago, one state tried to close religious schools − a far cry from today, with controversial plans in place for the nation’s first faith-based charter school<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582250/original/file-20240315-30-6vl8a7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C1024%2C663&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A Catholic schoolroom in the U.S. around 1930.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/catholic-elementary-school-class-portrait-usa-circa-1930-news-photo/629453645?adppopup=true">Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Almost 100 years ago, a group of nuns joined a suit against the state of Oregon – <a href="https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100326625">and made it all the way</a> to the U.S. Supreme Court.</p>
<p>Their cause? Keeping Catholic schools open. In 1922, voters approved an initiative requiring almost all children ages 8-16 to attend public schools – a motion <a href="https://www.oregonencyclopedia.org/articles/pierce_vs_society_of_sisters_1925_/">aimed at closing faith-based schools</a> in particular.</p>
<p>But the Supreme Court’s 1925 ruling in their case, <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/268us510">Pierce v. Society of Sisters of the Holy Name of Jesus and Mary</a>, favored the nuns. The ruling became a Magna Carta of sorts for private schools, including faith-based ones, safeguarding their right to operate – both secular and religious. Equally as importantly, Pierce <a href="https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/udetmr78&div=25&id=&page=">has been used to protect parental rights</a> to make choices about their children’s education.</p>
<p>Nonpublic schools such as the ones run by the Society of Sisters no longer must defend their rights to exist. Today, the pendulum has swung the other way: In recent years, the Supreme Court has increasingly <a href="https://theconversation.com/state-funds-for-students-at-religious-schools-supreme-court-says-yes-in-maine-case-but-consequences-could-go-beyond-184618">allowed public funding</a> to go to faith-based schools, their students or both.</p>
<p>On April 2, 2024, Oklahoma’s Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in <a href="https://www.aol.com/oklahoma-supreme-court-hear-arguments-015922066.html">a case that could reshape rules</a> even further: whether to allow <a href="https://theconversation.com/oklahoma-oks-the-nations-first-religious-charter-school-but-litigation-is-likely-to-follow-207103">a Catholic charter school</a> to open its doors, which critics say would all but <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/06/06/oklahoma-s-new-state-funded-religious-charter-school-isn-t-ok/d50b4e5a-047d-11ee-b74a-5bdd335d4fa2_story.html">demolish the line between church and state</a> in education.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582848/original/file-20240319-8759-3673sk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A dark wooden platform with several seats built in, and dark green velvet curtains behind them." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582848/original/file-20240319-8759-3673sk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582848/original/file-20240319-8759-3673sk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582848/original/file-20240319-8759-3673sk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582848/original/file-20240319-8759-3673sk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582848/original/file-20240319-8759-3673sk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582848/original/file-20240319-8759-3673sk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582848/original/file-20240319-8759-3673sk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The state Supreme Court bench in Oklahoma City in 2017.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/SupremeCourtOklahoma/2400a4bf66084ec9bda3b443d26adf81/photo?Query=oklahoma%20supreme%20court&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:asc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=195&currentItemNo=127">AP Photo/Sue Ogrocki</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Property and parenting</h2>
<p>In 1922, Oregon voters approved an initiative requiring parents of children ages 8-16 to send them to public schools. The act carved out many exceptions, including for children who had already completed eighth grade or lived too far away, but did not include private schools among them.</p>
<p>The law would have effectively outlawed nonpublic schools. This push came just as the influence of nativist groups such as the <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/Know-Nothing-party">Know-Nothing Party</a>, which <a href="https://www.encyclopedia.com/religion/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/nativism-american">opposed the largely Catholic waves of immigrants</a> as un-American, began to wane.</p>
<p>Officials from a Catholic school challenged Oregon’s act, as did officials from the secular Hill Military Academy. After the federal trial court in Oregon decided that the statute could not go into effect, Gov. Walter M. Pierce appealed, acting on behalf of the state. The U.S. Supreme Court then unanimously affirmed <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/268us510">in favor of the schools</a>.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court made two major points, both of which rely on the 14th Amendment’s <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv">due process clause</a>, which declares that no state shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”</p>
<p>The justices recognized the power of the state to “regulate all schools, to inspect, supervise, and examine them, their teachers and pupils,” whether private or public – though apart from health and safety issues, states typically impose fewer rules on nonpublic institutions. Yet, the Court agreed that the law would have seriously undermined the owners’ ability to operate their schools, while greatly diminishing the value of their properties. </p>
<p>Second, the justices turned to parental rights, identifying them as one of the liberties protected by the 14th Amendment. In often-quoted language, the court declared that <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/268/510/">the child “is not the mere creature of the state</a>; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.”</p>
<p>The justices thereby invalidated Oregon’s statute, because it “unreasonably interfere[d] with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control.”</p>
<h2>Nonpublic schools, public funds</h2>
<p>Recent battles over <a href="https://udayton.edu/directory/education/eda/russo_charles.php">religion and education</a> at the Supreme Court are not about faith-based schools’ right to exist but about how much state funding they and their students can receive. Starting in 2017, the Supreme Court handed down a trilogy of cases greatly increasing the governmental aid available.</p>
<p>The first, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-577_khlp.pdf">Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer</a>, arose after officials in Missouri prevented a Christian preschool and day care center from purchasing recycled, cut-up tires to resurface their playground to enhance safety – a state program available to other nonprofits.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-577_khlp.pdf">ruled in the church’s favor</a> in 2017. The <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/">free exercise clause</a> of the First Amendment forbids the government from prohibiting the “free exercise” of religion. The majority reasoned that the free exercise clause means states cannot single out institutions or people by denying them generally available benefits, for which they are otherwise eligible, solely on the basis of religion.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582849/original/file-20240319-26-ssjqm7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A small statue of a child holding a book sits in the foreground, with a large columned white building in the background." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582849/original/file-20240319-26-ssjqm7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582849/original/file-20240319-26-ssjqm7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582849/original/file-20240319-26-ssjqm7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582849/original/file-20240319-26-ssjqm7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582849/original/file-20240319-26-ssjqm7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582849/original/file-20240319-26-ssjqm7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582849/original/file-20240319-26-ssjqm7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 22, 2024.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/SupremeCourt/2df44ba2a63d402092e7559a7e8d5f71/photo?Query=supreme%20court&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:asc&dateRange=now-30d&totalCount=243&currentItemNo=31">AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In 2020, the court again expanded the limits on aid for students at K-12 religious schools. This case, <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/18-1195">Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue</a>, stemmed from a state program that allowed tax credits for parents sending their children to private schools. However, the state’s constitution prohibits public funding for religious education programs, so parents who sent their children to faith-based schools were barred from participating.</p>
<p>Using a rationale similar to the one it applied in Trinity Lutheran, the court held that this no-aid provision <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/18-1195">discriminated on the basis of religion</a>, violating the <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/">free exercise clause</a> of the Constitution.</p>
<p>Most recently, in 2022, the court further expanded public funding for faith-based schools in <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/carson-v-makin/">Carson v. Makin</a>, a case from Maine. The Supreme Court invalidated a statute excluding “sectarian” schools from a tuition program for parents living in districts lacking public secondary schools. Because Maine’s constitution guarantees a free public education, the tuition payments allow parents in these districts to send their children to schools of their choice.</p>
<p>The justices also <a href="https://theconversation.com/state-funds-for-students-at-religious-schools-supreme-court-says-yes-in-maine-case-but-consequences-could-go-beyond-184618">struck the law down</a> because it violated the free exercise clause by treating religious people and institutions differently than others. Moreover, echoing Pierce, the court found that Maine’s statute failed to protect parents’ rights to send their children to the schools of their choice.</p>
<h2>Pushing the boundary</h2>
<p>Pierce also laid the groundwork for the “parental choice movement” in education, including charter schools. Typically, these schools operate under performance contracts, or “charters,” with public sponsors: either local school boards or occasionally colleges. While charter schools have more freedom to design their own standards and curricula, they can, <a href="https://www.law.com/thelegalintelligencer/almID/1202727802943/">unlike regular public schools, be closed</a> for failing to reach stated targets on student achievement.</p>
<p>In June 2023, Oklahoma’s statewide virtual school board authorized the creation of <a href="https://theconversation.com/oklahoma-oks-the-nations-first-religious-charter-school-but-litigation-is-likely-to-follow-207103">the nation’s first faith-based charter</a>, demonstrating how far the pendulum of allowing government aid into religious schools may be swinging. But <a href="https://stisidorevirtualschool.org/">St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School</a>, which plans to open under the direction of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa, will not start classes without a fight.</p>
<p>Oklahoma’s highest court has <a href="https://www.aol.com/oklahoma-supreme-court-hear-arguments-015922066.html">scheduled oral arguments</a> for April 2, 2024, as the state’s attorney general and others filed suit to stop St. Isidore from opening. Opponents of the school argue that the existence of a faith-based charter <a href="https://www.kosu.org/education/2023-10-23/oklahoma-attorney-general-files-lawsuit-against-state-board-over-catholic-charter-school">would violate the U.S. Constitution</a>, as well as Oklahoma’s state Constitution – according to which public schools shall be “free from sectarian control,” such that public funds cannot be used to support religious institutions – and various state statues.</p>
<p>Pierce remains a watershed moment for nonpublic schools’ rights to operate, including religious ones, and for parents’ rights. In light of recent Supreme Court developments, it appears that both of these rights are alive and well heading into Pierce’s second century – but not without controversy.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/225868/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Charles J. Russo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In 1922, Oregon voters approved an initiative to require public school for most students ages 8-16 − but it didn’t hold up in court.Charles J. Russo, Joseph Panzer Chair in Education and Research Professor of Law, University of DaytonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2071032023-06-07T13:23:25Z2023-06-07T13:23:25ZOklahoma OKs the nation’s first religious charter school – but litigation is likely to follow<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/530470/original/file-20230607-19-tzkryd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=6%2C3%2C2111%2C1406&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Courts have wrestled with questions about public funds for students at religious schools for decades.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/catholic-school-royalty-free-image/539002989?phrase=catholic+school&adppopup=true">Godong/Stone via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>U.S. courts have long wrestled with the extent to which government funding <a href="https://theconversation.com/state-funds-for-students-at-religious-schools-supreme-court-says-yes-in-maine-case-but-consequences-could-go-beyond-184618">can be used at private religious schools</a>. And on June 5, 2023, Oklahoma’s five-person Statewide Virtual Charter School Board pushed this much-debated question into new territory by approving plans for a religious charter school – the first in the nation.</p>
<p>Under the proposed charter, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School plans to open in the fall of 2024 with up to 500 <a href="https://www.kgou.org/2023-06-05/oklahoma-charter-school-board-approves-application-for-nations-first-publicly-funded-religious-school">K-12 students</a> from across the state. The school would be run by the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa, but, like all charter schools, would be paid for with taxpayer dollars.</p>
<p>School choice advocates have <a href="https://theconversation.com/state-funds-for-students-at-religious-schools-supreme-court-says-yes-in-maine-case-but-consequences-could-go-beyond-184618">won key cases at the Supreme Court</a> in recent years, opening up more ways for public dollars to support faith-based education. A charter school – privately operated, but publicly funded – would be the most dramatic of these challenges to how the separation of church and state applies to education.</p>
<p>“The approval of any publicly funded religious school is contrary to Oklahoma law and not in the best interest of taxpayers,” Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond said in a statement <a href="https://apnews.com/article/religious-charter-school-oklahoma-be6e51ffcdaeb393c4be34a6f27feba4?user_email=749e9d2568002efab588f57f3ab140bff3f59d39817c4f7cc52171bc9a261656&utm_medium=Morning_Wire&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_campaign=MorningWire_June06_2023&utm_term=Morning%20Wire%20Subscribers">after the Monday vote</a>, warning that the board and state will likely face legal challenges.</p>
<p>The key question is not whether a charter would help or harm local education, but whether explicitly religious instruction at charter schools is constitutional, given <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/">the First Amendment’s</a> protections against government establishment of religion. Moreover, Oklahoma law <a href="https://oksenate.gov/sites/default/files/2019-12/os70.pdf">requires charter schools to be nonsectarian</a>.</p>
<h2>Recent trend</h2>
<p>Advocates of <a href="https://www.the74million.org/article/analysis-opening-the-door-to-faith-based-charter-schools/">expanding public funding to faith-based schools</a> have been encouraged by three recent Supreme Court cases that upheld greater aid to their students. </p>
<p>All three of these cases relied on a legal idea <a href="https://www.worldcat.org/title/872266049">I have written about</a> called the “child benefit test.” Essentially, according to this concept, it is constitutional under some circumstances to provide public funds to students who attend faith-based private schools or their parents – but not directly to the schools, as would happen with Oklahoma’s charter school.</p>
<p>The first of these decisions, 2017’s <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/15-577">Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer</a>, dealt with a private Christian preschool that was denied public grants to update its playground. School administrators sued, arguing that denying generally available funding constituted religious discrimination in violation of the First Amendment’s protections for freedom of religion. The high court agreed.</p>
<p>Three years later, <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/18-1195">Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue</a> further opened up government aid to private religious school pupils, relying on Trinity Lutheran. A 5-4 court ruled that Montana’s tax credit program for parents sending their children to independent schools must apply even if those schools are faith-based.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/530475/original/file-20230607-23-z1rail.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="The back of a school bus seen driving along an autumn country road." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/530475/original/file-20230607-23-z1rail.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/530475/original/file-20230607-23-z1rail.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530475/original/file-20230607-23-z1rail.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530475/original/file-20230607-23-z1rail.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530475/original/file-20230607-23-z1rail.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=498&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530475/original/file-20230607-23-z1rail.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=498&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530475/original/file-20230607-23-z1rail.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=498&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Heading to a religious school or a secular one?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/school-bus-on-country-road-royalty-free-image/AB07269?phrase=school+bus&adppopup=true">Stephen Simpson/Stone via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In 2022, the court extended this perspective in a case from Maine, <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/20-1088">Carson v. Makin</a>. Maine, with its low population density, pays parents in areas lacking their own public schools to either transport their children to nearby public schools or a secular private school. The Supreme Court found that <a href="https://theconversation.com/state-funds-for-students-at-religious-schools-supreme-court-says-yes-in-maine-case-but-consequences-could-go-beyond-184618">this program should apply</a> to parents without a local public school who wish to send their child to a religious school as well.</p>
<h2>Rethinking church and state?</h2>
<p>By expanding the boundaries of permissible aid, these three cases have boosted proponents’ hopes for even greater public funding for faith-based schools.</p>
<p>Yet, it is important to keep in mind what likely prompted these changes in the first place: new faces on the Supreme Court. A majority of today’s justices tend to favor an “<a href="https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/825/accommodationism-and-religion#:%7E:text=Accommodationism%20rests%20on%20the%20belief,or%20government%20hostility%20toward%20religion.">accommodationists</a>” interpretation of the First Amendment, meaning they largely reject the idea that it demands a “<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/separation_of_church_and_state">wall of separation</a>” between church and state, so long as the government is not privileging one faith over another. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/530476/original/file-20230607-28-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A huge building with ornate white columns seen with pink-flowered trees and an American flag." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/530476/original/file-20230607-28-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/530476/original/file-20230607-28-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530476/original/file-20230607-28-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530476/original/file-20230607-28-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530476/original/file-20230607-28-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530476/original/file-20230607-28-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530476/original/file-20230607-28-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">New justices, new views.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/supreme-court-and-cherry-blossoms-royalty-free-image/1399070257?phrase=supreme+court&adppopup=true">John Baggaley/Moment via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Nevertheless, the parameters of the “child benefit test” often used to justify greater public funding has been evolving for years. The concept – one that legal scholars use to describe the Supreme Court’s arguments, not a term the court has used itself – first emerged in a 1947 dispute from New Jersey, <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/330/1">Everson v. Board of Education</a>. In Everson, the court upheld a state statute that allowed local school boards to transport students to faith-based schools – mostly Roman Catholic ones – reasoning that the students, not the schools themselves, were the primary beneficiaries of state aid.</p>
<p>In another illustrative case, 2002’s <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-1751.ZO.html">Zelman v. Simmons-Harris</a>, the Supreme Court allowed parents whose children attended Cleveland’s public school system, which was then failing state standards, to use public vouchers to attend faith-based schools instead. A majority of justices upheld the program’s constitutionality because, again, students were the primary beneficiaries, not the religious schools themselves.</p>
<h2>Eyes on Oklahoma</h2>
<p>Today, in what may be the largest expansion of the child benefit test, legislators in various states are considering laws to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/02/08/school-choice-vouchers-private-religious-school-huckabee-sanders/">expand how parents can participate in public education fund programs</a> even if their children attend private religious schools, such as by broadening voucher or tax-credit programs. However, the Oklahoma proposal was the first to consider establishing a charter school with religious instruction and standards. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/charter-school">Charters</a>, which trace their origins to Minnesota in 1991, are publicly funded and part of local school districts, yet free from many regulations, such as standards about curricular content and teacher qualifications. The idea of <a href="https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/commentary/why-not-religious-charter-schools">faith-based charters</a> has attracted proponents for more than 20 years, but they have had little success until Oklahoma’s – which may never materialize, given the potential legal challenges. Americans United for Separation of Church and State <a href="https://www.4029tv.com/article/oklahoma-catholic-charter-school/44107888#">has already announced</a> it will “take all possible legal action to fight this decision and defend the separation of church and state that’s promised in both the Oklahoma and U.S. constitutions.”</p>
<p>Even the board that eventually approved St. Isidore, which is responsible for approving the state’s charter schools, was initially skeptical. On April 11, 2023, members unanimously voted <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/04/12/oklahoma-religious-charter-school-catholic/">to reject the original proposal</a>. However, the board gave organizers 30 days to <a href="https://www.koco.com/article/oklahoma-state-board-rejects-proposal-public-catholic-charter-school/43570335">revise the proposal and try again</a>. The second attempt in June succeeded in a 3-2 vote.</p>
<p>If other states authorize faith-based charters, the new schools will likely be a boon to their religious organizers by facilitating students’ ability to attend. Proponents of charters, whether traditional or faith-based, support them as part of the larger school choice movement that seeks to give parents in failing districts opportunities to move their children into better schools without paying private school tuition.</p>
<p>Faith-based charters are likely to raise headaches for their supporters, too. Because charters must still comply with some state standards, faith-based charters could be subject to greater government oversight about issues such as policies on LGBTQ+ students and staff – <a href="https://hechingerreport.org/supreme-court-ruling-brings-an-altered-legal-landscape-for-school-choice/">a longtime sticking point</a> – or accepting <a href="https://www.edweek.org/leadership/charter-schools-more-likely-to-ignore-special-education-applicants-study-finds/2018/12">students with disabilities</a>. And it remains to be seen whether proponents of a Catholic charter school would be as supportive if a minority faith group proposed one.</p>
<p>While this legal battle is just heating up, I believe it has the potential to reshape public education as we have known it.</p>
<p><em>Editor’s note: This is an updated version of <a href="https://theconversation.com/plans-for-religious-charter-school-though-rejected-for-now-are-already-pushing-church-state-debates-into-new-territory-203541">an article originally published on April 17, 2023</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/207103/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Charles J. Russo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The school’s approval may be the strongest challenge yet to limits on public money in religious schools.Charles J. Russo, Joseph Panzer Chair in Education in the School of Education and Health Sciences and Research Professor of Law, University of DaytonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1554552021-02-17T19:11:47Z2021-02-17T19:11:47ZAustralian schools are becoming more segregated. This threatens student outcomes<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/384674/original/file-20210217-21-18mpsn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MGS_Senior_Campus.jpg">Wikimedia Commons</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Australian school system is concentrating more disadvantaged students in disadvantaged schools, with serious implications for student achievement. A <a href="https://www.gie.unsw.edu.au/structural-failure-why-australia-keeps-falling-short-its-educational-goals">report released today by the Gonski Institute</a> says schools in Australia are more regressive, divided and socially segregated than in most other rich countries.</p>
<p>Our report examines how well Australian education meets our agreed national educational goals. These were most recently articulated in the Alice Springs <a href="http://www.educationcouncil.edu.au/site/DefaultSite/filesystem/documents/Reports%20and%20publications/Alice%20Springs%20(Mparntwe)%20Education%20Declaration.pdf">(Mparntwe) declaration</a> as “improving educational outcomes for all young Australians” through “excellence and equity”.</p>
<p>When governments provide funding to schools, obligations and expectations rightly flow from this. If one of those is promoting “excellence and equity”, it’s time for a serious revision.</p>
<h2>We’re becoming more segregated</h2>
<p>The Australian school system is increasingly concentrating disadvantaged and advantaged students in separate schools.</p>
<p>For example, all Australian schools <a href="https://docs.acara.edu.au/resources/About_icsea_2014.pdf">have an ICSEA score</a>, which stands for the Index of Community Socio-Educational Advantage. ICSEA provides an indication of the socio-educational backgrounds of students. The higher the ICSEA, the higher the level of the school’s educational advantage.</p>
<p>Our analysis shows that in the government sector higher ICSEA schools are 26% bigger than they were in 2011, while lower ICSEA schools are marginally smaller than they were in 2011. Lower ICSEA Catholic schools are around 10% smaller than they were in 2011. </p>
<p>Our data show higher ICSEA schools in all sectors are not only growing in size, but have an increasing concentration of highly economically advantaged students. The reverse is happening in lower ICSEA schools.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/to-reduce-inequality-in-australian-schools-make-them-less-socially-segregated-95034">To reduce inequality in Australian schools, make them less socially segregated</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>While some might think this is just the natural order of things, rising inequity creates major and ongoing structural problems that hold back our national education system. Both the <a href="https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/equity-in-education_9789264073234-en">OECD</a> and <a href="https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/995-an-unfair-start-education-inequality-children.html">UNICEF</a> have warned Australia of the risks of our growing educational inequity. </p>
<p>The rise in inequity is not just a problem for the most disadvantaged. It creates a burden with impacts across schooling. The distortions in school growth, according to level of advantage and location, mean management of the school system is unstable — and policies that give all students “a fair go” are actually difficult to implement. </p>
<p>This leads to “needs-based” approaches. But these are inevitably complex and often fail in implementation. The <a href="https://saveourschools.com.au/funding/the-facts-about-school-funding-in-australia">Gonski funding model</a> is one example.</p>
<h2>We’ve gone backwards since Gonski</h2>
<p>The first Gonski review argued additional funding for schools should be allocated on the basis of need. If implemented, this would have boosted equity funding to all sectors. But while funding since the Gonski review pays homage to the language of equity, the data about the overall distribution of funding don’t tell the same story.</p>
<p>Since 2011, the percentage increase in government per-student recurrent funding of Australia’s low ICSEA (under 1,000) schools has been more than the increase to high ICSEA (over 1,000) schools. However, funding aggregated from all sources shows less advantaged schools are no further ahead. And some schools and school sectors have received greater growth in funding – even when needs are matched and accounted for. </p>
<p>My School data also show Australia’s very remote schools, on average, received the same percentage funding increases as major city schools – despite metropolitan areas having clear social and educational advantage. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/384678/original/file-20210217-21-fyrpiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A school bus sign on a rural road." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/384678/original/file-20210217-21-fyrpiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/384678/original/file-20210217-21-fyrpiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384678/original/file-20210217-21-fyrpiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384678/original/file-20210217-21-fyrpiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384678/original/file-20210217-21-fyrpiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384678/original/file-20210217-21-fyrpiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384678/original/file-20210217-21-fyrpiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Remote schools, on average, have received the same amount of funding as metropolitan schools — even under a needs-based funding model.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/school-bus-stop-warning-road-sign-398839681">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There is no simple answer to why this happens, but it is an inevitable consequence of a competitive system of schools. While the Gonski review recommended independent oversight of the funding arrangements, this was never implemented.</p>
<h2>So, what do we do?</h2>
<p>We acknowledge responses to the report will include the perennial “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/catholic-leader-dismisses-school-funding-reform-as-flight-of-fantasy-20210217-p573a2.html">it’s too hard</a>”. </p>
<p>And while we acknowledge choice of schooling has a strong hold on the Australian psyche, we are calling for a new conversation about what obligations might contribute to more equitable outcomes in all schools. Our report offers ten policy recommendations.</p>
<p>These include fully funding non-government schools with comparable governance and accountability arrangements as government schools, and banning them from charging fees. This means reframing all schools, and consequent funding, as a “<a href="http://www.oecd.org/education/School-choice-and-school-vouchers-an-OECD-perspective.pdf">public good</a>” across all sectors. </p>
<p>The fully funded non-government private schools would still be run by the same organisations as before, and abide by the same educational philosophy. But no student would be turned away. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2020/03/16/myth-busted--private-schools-don-t-save-taxpayers--dollars.html#:%7E:text=Their%20report%2C%20'The%20School%20Money,culture%20publication%20Inside%20Story%20today.&text=The%20researchers%20said%20this%20is,level%20as%20similar%20public%20schools.">Our previous study</a> revealed combined state and federal recurrent funding of non-government schools is close to, and in many cases exceeds, combined government funding of government schools. </p>
<p>In effect, this means the taxpayer saves little by funding competing systems. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-primary-private-schools-should-be-fully-funded-by-governments-but-banned-from-charging-fees-131753">Australian primary private schools should be fully funded by governments — but banned from charging fees</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>One of the biggest barriers to achieving educational equity is the lack of routine reporting of school education outcomes relating to <a href="https://docs.education.gov.au/documents/2017-section-11-equity-groups">equity groups</a>, as is <a href="https://docs.education.gov.au/documents/2017-section-11-equity-groups">required in higher education</a>. For example, the ICSEA does not make a single appearance in any annual <a href="https://www.acara.edu.au/reporting/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia-2018">national reports on schooling</a>. </p>
<p>To improve equity in schooling, we need clear analysis, monitoring and targeting of inequity. To gain due policy attention the <a href="https://www.acara.edu.au/reporting/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia-2018">National Report on Schooling in Australia</a> needs to report on school data and student attainment across all equity groups, across time. We simply cannot allow this growing problem to go unrecognised in our annual national school report card. </p>
<p>Our report team includes two former school principals (one government, one non-government) and a former education minister. We are sensitive to the positioning of diverse interested voices, but we can’t help concluding that something’s got to give. </p>
<p>Rising school inequity means inclusive schooling, providing “a fair go” for all Australian children, is increasingly a pipedream. Growing segregation and residualisation among Australian schools also mean students are less likely to engage with peers from a wide range of backgrounds. In the long term both these issues will lead to shifts in Australian society and character.</p>
<p>We cannot continue to put the important work of structural school reform in the too-hard basket. If we do, countless students, teachers, communities and our nation will continue to suffer.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/155455/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>One recommendation to fix inequity in Australia is for the government to fund non-government schools to the same degree as government schools, while banning them from charging fees.Rachel Wilson, Associate Professor in Education, University of SydneyPaul Kidson, Lecturer in Educational Leadership, University of WollongongLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1216162019-09-25T20:42:36Z2019-09-25T20:42:36ZFive charts on Catholic school enrolments: they’re trending down while Australia’s population booms<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/293718/original/file-20190924-54775-ghthn3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=8%2C633%2C2986%2C1297&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Catholic secondary schools experienced significant growth prior to 2015, but since then, enrolments have stagnated.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In recent months, one of Victoria’s oldest Catholic girls’ schools, Presentation College, <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-30/presentation-college-windsor-catholic-girls-school-to-close/11364188">announced it was closing</a> down, citing falling enrolments. Other <a href="https://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/inner-south/st-bedes-college-mentone-and-st-james-college-east-bentleigh-to-merge-in-2021/news-story/e5004f9cbc3251bb1c5a2f503fe34619">Catholic schools</a> have decided to merge together, some also pointing to dwindling enrolments.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Australia is in the midst of a population boom with new schools being built and <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4221.0Main+Features12018?OpenDocument">overall enrolment numbers</a> on the rise. So, are enrolments in Catholic schools going down across the country, and if so, why?</p>
<h2>Enrolment numbers over the last decade</h2>
<p>School enrolments across Australia are, overall, trending upwards. Our calculations show <a href="https://www.acara.edu.au/reporting/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia-data-portal">enrolments increased</a> by nearly 12% from 2009-2018, representing around 409,000 extra students across all schools. If the current trend continues, four million students will be studying in Australian schools by 2022. </p>
<p>The trends show government and independent schools are becoming more popular than Catholic schools.</p>
<p>As the graph below shows, government primary school enrolments steadily increased until 2014. There was a fall in 2015, but then the numbers kept climbing. Government secondary school enrolments showed no similar lull, steadily increasing over the last four years. </p>
<hr>
<iframe title="Government school enrolments (primary and secondary)" aria-label="Interactive line chart" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/1BONq/2/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<hr>
<p>The trend for independent schools was similar to that of government schools. The only difference is that independent schools generally have higher enrolments in secondary schools than in primary, as parents are more likely to make the choice to transition to an independent school in the secondary years.</p>
<hr>
<iframe title="Independent school enrolments (primary and secondary)" aria-label="Interactive line chart" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/VqbNo/1/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<hr>
<p>Catholic primary school enrolments increased until 2014, then dropped slightly in 2015, like the government and independent school enrolments. However, Catholic primary enrolments didn’t recover and have remained reasonably stagnant since 2015.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/three-charts-on-why-catholic-primary-school-parents-can-afford-to-pay-more-102643">Three charts on: why Catholic primary school parents can afford to pay more</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Catholic secondary schools have been on a slight <a href="https://www.acara.edu.au/reporting/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia-data-porta">downward trajectory</a> from 2016, with a loss of 1,798 students in the last two years.</p>
<hr>
<iframe title="Catholic school enrolments (primary and secondary)&nbsp;" aria-label="Interactive line chart" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Y07Gm/2/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<hr>
<p>The difference in primary and secondary student enrolments from 2014-2015, in part, reflects <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4221.0Explanatory%20Notes12015?OpenDocument">changing definitions</a> of primary and secondary students in Western Australia and Queensland. The trend is mirrored in secondary schools where enrolments went up between the two years.</p>
<h2>Enrolments increasing, but slower for Catholic schools</h2>
<p>Government schools <a href="https://www.acara.edu.au/reporting/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia-data-portal">saw enrolments grow</a> by 11% between 2009 and 2018 – an increase of around 260,000 students. Independent school enrolments grew by around 17% (84,600 new students) while Catholic school enrolments grew by only 8%, which accounted for around 61,000 new students.</p>
<p>As a share of the total enrolment growth, government schools accounted for around 64%, Catholic schools for 15% and independent schools 21%. </p>
<hr>
<iframe title="School sectors' share of total enrolment growth, 2009-2018" aria-label="Interactive pie chart" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/4n6wq/2/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" width="100%" height="700"></iframe>
<hr>
<p>Government schools experienced significant growth from 2011. There was a decrease in extra student numbers between 2017 and 18, but the overall trend is up. Independent schools have maintained similar enrolment levels with a noticeable increase in enrolments over the last two years. But Catholic school enrolment growth steadily decreased each year since 2013.</p>
<p>In 2017 and 2018, Australian Catholic schools had a net decrease of 180 and 1,135 students respectively. Victoria and Queensland are the only jurisdictions that have experienced increases over the same period, with 839 and 1,153 additional enrolments respectively.</p>
<hr>
<iframe title="Student enrolment growth by sector, 2009-2018" aria-label="Interactive line chart" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/9JqZu/3/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" width="100%" height="428"></iframe>
<hr>
<h2>Why is this happening?</h2>
<p>So, what’s driving the overall downturn in Catholic school enrolments? There has been <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/education/enrolments-in-catholic-schools-fall-as-independent-schools-grow-20190308-p512ud.html">some speculation</a>, such as from the NSW Teachers Federation, it may be due to fallout from the <a href="https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/">Royal Commission into child sex abuse</a> (which ran from 2013 until the final report’s release in December, 2017).</p>
<p>But the data also indicate enrolment patterns may be driven by broader demographic and social trends. New migrants may be partly responsible. Over the last ten years Australia has experienced a <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/3412.0Main+Features12017-18?OpenDocument">net overseas migration</a> of more than two million people. </p>
<p>Analysis of <a href="http://isca.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/The-changing-face-of-Australian-schooling_FINAL_web.pdf">census data shows</a> students who arrive in Australia in the three years before the census date are most likely to go to a government school. In 2016, 77% of these students attended a government school.</p>
<p>Fewer of these students attend Catholic schools, with enrolments dropping from 12% in 2011, to 9% in 2016 among migrant groups. Migrant enrolments in independent schools have remained steady over those five years.</p>
<p>For many parents, the decision about which school their children will attend can be complex and dependent on many factors. Most of the <a href="https://minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au/handle/11343/225639">research on school choice</a> shows families typically exercise this choice at the secondary school level.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-im-choosing-the-local-state-school-even-though-it-doesnt-have-all-the-bells-and-whistles-48154">Why I'm choosing the local state school – even though it doesn't have all the bells and whistles</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The key factors influencing parents when choosing a particular government primary school is the convenience of its location and whether other family members are at the school. </p>
<p><a href="https://aifs.gov.au/media-releases/parents-primary-school-choice-about-more-academic-results">Research</a> on school choice shows parents of children attending an independent school most frequently referred to academic results as the motivating factor behind their decision to send their child there. For Catholic schools, it was the religious values. </p>
<p>More Australian families are identifying as having “no religion”. Since 2006, students in the “no religion” category have increased, and those with a Catholic affiliation have decreased, <a href="http://isca.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/The-changing-face-of-Australian-schooling_FINAL_web.pdf">from 30% to 27% respectively</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/as-australia-becomes-less-religious-our-parliament-becomes-more-so-80456">As Australia becomes less religious, our parliament becomes more so</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Of course, many families choose schools based on financial considerations. Recent analysis by the ANZ shows mid-tier private schools (which charge between A$10,000 and A$20,000 a year in tuition fees) <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/private-school-enrolments-slump-as-parents-feel-economic-pinch-20190914-p52rba.html">saw a drop in enrolments</a> in 2017 and 2018. </p>
<p>These families may be opting for so-called “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/a-lesson-in-location-20090530-gdtk7o.html">magnet schools</a>” which are high performing government schools where parents move to the catchment area to increase their chances of admission. This shows parents make strategic choices within school sectors as well as between them. </p>
<hr>
<p><em>Note: Data was sourced from the <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/4221.0">ABS</a> and <a href="https://www.acara.edu.au/reporting/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia-data-portal">ACARA</a> and may not correspond with annual data released by school system authorities. However the overall trends are the same.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121616/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Zoran Endekov does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Australia is in the midst of a population boom. But Catholic school enrolments have been decreasing since 2013.Zoran Endekov, Education Policy Fellow, Victoria UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1090232019-01-16T23:48:06Z2019-01-16T23:48:06ZHomophobia in the hallways: LGBTQ people at risk in Catholic schools<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/253755/original/file-20190114-43517-1nt9sd3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C979%2C2827%2C2441&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Catholic pronouncements about LGBTQ people can be summarized as, "It's OK to be gay - Just don't act on it," a position some Catholics reject. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Recently, <a href="https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/former-principal-alleges-calgary-catholic-school-district-pushed-her-out-over-her-sexuality-1.4204633">a Calgary woman filed two human rights complaints with the Alberta Human Rights Commission. The employee, Barb Hamilton, says she was pushed out the Calgary Catholic School District (CCSD) because of her sexuality</a> and was refused employment on the grounds of marital status, religious belief and sexual orientation. </p>
<p>Hamilton <a href="https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/principal-says-she-was-forced-out-of-job-over-sexual-orientation-1.4205296">says she knew of 10 LGBTQ students in the school where she was principal who had hurt themselves</a>, including by cutting themselves or attempting suicide because of homophobia at home or school. She says she went to the district for help but nothing changed. </p>
<p>Many Canadians may believe that LGBTQ people are protected from discrimination. But my research into <a href="https://books.google.ca/books/about/That_s_So_Gay.html?id=bjNMLgEACAAJ&redir_esc=y">religiously inspired homophobia and transphobia in Canadian Catholic schools since 2004</a> shows there are <a href="https://utorontopress.com/ca/homophobia-in-the-hallways-2">other LGBTQ-identified teachers who suffer similar fates</a>.</p>
<p>I personally experienced this risk when <a href="https://globalnews.ca/news/4741818/former-teachers-book-homophobia-in-the-hallways-takes-aim-at-calgary-catholic-schools/">I taught high school English for CCSD</a>. </p>
<p>It might seem strange that someone like me, a publicly “out” lesbian, sought employment with a Catholic school. But I was raised in a Catholic family that counts clergy among its members and I regarded myself as <a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/09/03/who-are-cultural-catholics/">culturally Catholic</a>. Having a Catholic background also made it easier for me to find a teaching position at a time when they were hard to get. </p>
<p>In the years that I taught for CCSD, I experienced homophobia daily. I knew I could no longer work for CCSD when a student where I was teaching died by suicide after suffering months of homophobic bullying because he was gay.</p>
<p>I left teaching to research homophobia and transphobia in Canadian Catholic schools and also to begin to question and understand how these phobias are institutionalized. In other words, who or what systems are responsible for creating and implementing homophobic and transphobic religious curriculum and administrative policies?</p>
<h2>Hotbeds for homophobia?</h2>
<p>Using Catholic doctrine to fire LGBTQ teachers and to discriminate against queer students in Catholic schools violates <a href="https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art15.html">Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the equality rights provision</a>. Shouldn’t publicly funded Catholic schools respect the law? </p>
<p>Publicly funded Catholic schools currently have constitutional status in the provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario. These separate schools are operated by civil authorities and are accountable to provincial governments. <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/978-1-137-55425-3_33">Religious bodies do not have a legal interest in them, and as such, Canadian Catholic separate schools are not private or parochial schools as is common in other countries</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/253940/original/file-20190115-152986-gh1h5a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/253940/original/file-20190115-152986-gh1h5a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/253940/original/file-20190115-152986-gh1h5a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/253940/original/file-20190115-152986-gh1h5a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/253940/original/file-20190115-152986-gh1h5a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/253940/original/file-20190115-152986-gh1h5a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/253940/original/file-20190115-152986-gh1h5a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">When teachers are not able to freely express their LGBTQ identities and relationships, queer students lose important role models.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Rene Bohmer/Unsplash</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Of course, the Charter also ensures <a href="https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art2a.html">freedom of conscience and religion</a>. However, when the expression of particular religious beliefs calls for the suppression of another’s equality rights, freedoms are curtailed rather than safeguarded. </p>
<p>This recurring discrimination against sexual and gender minority groups could be due to <a href="https://www.hrc.org/resources/stances-of-faiths-on-lgbt-issues-roman-catholic-church">the central contradiction within Catholic doctrine itself</a>: the church’s teaching best summarized as “It’s OK to be gay, <a href="https://www.dignityusa.org/">just don’t act on it,” — a position some Catholics reject</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://journals.sfu.ca/pie/index.php/pie/article/viewFile/405/211">An influential 2004 Ontario curricular and policy document</a>, <a href="https://www.hcdsb.org/Board/Equity/Documents/Pastoral%20Guidelines%20to%20Assist%20Students%20of%20Same-Sex%20Orientation.pdf">“Pastoral Guidelines to Assist Students of Same-Sex Orientation”</a>, presents a variety of guidelines, personal stories and <a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm">sections of the Catechism of the Catholic Church</a> pertaining to homosexual attraction to convey a <a href="https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2018/04/06/what-official-church-teaching-homosexuality-responding-commonly-asked-question">contradictory position</a>. While homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered,” people experiencing homosexual attraction are called to chastity and “must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity” and therefore are in need of “pastoral care.” </p>
<p>The pastoral guidelines document includes a statement on building safe communities and a 1986 letter to Canadian Bishops from <a href="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/index.htm">the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (a Vatican office)</a>. The letter elaborates on the official Church teachings, stating the “inclination of the homosexual person” is a “strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil.” Many LGBTQ people refer to this document as the “Halloween Letter” because it is so scary and was issued October 1 (1986). The Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario shares <a href="http://acbo.on.ca/downloads/pastoral-guidelines/">the resource, with this letter, on its website</a>.</p>
<p>Where schools promote such contradictory messages associating respect and depravity with LGBTQ people, they have made Alberta and Ontario Catholic schools potential hotbeds for homophobia — places where dedicated teachers fear for their jobs, and where LGBTQ youth are denied true acceptance and as a consequence are at risk of bullying and depression among other things. </p>
<h2>Impact on students</h2>
<p>My recent book <a href="https://utorontopress.com/ca/homophobia-in-the-hallways-2"><em>Homophobia in the Hallways: Heterosexism and Transphobia in Catholic Schools</em></a> explores causes and effects of the long-standing disconnect between Canadian Catholic schools and the Canadian Charter of Human Rights vis-à-vis sexual and gender minority groups. </p>
<p>Charter rights regularly clash with Catholic doctrine about sexuality in schools as this doctrine is <a href="https://www.catholicregister.org/item/28731-complaint-opens-debate-on-educators-catholicity">selectively interpreted and applied regarding how employees embody a “Catholic lifestyle</a>,” as <a href="https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/alberta-bishops-meet-over-growing-controversy-surrounding-catholic-teacher-contracts">suggested in Catholic lifestyle teacher contracts</a>.</p>
<p>I sought to document how such homophobic policies and views are impacting teachers and students and to uncover what is actually happening. </p>
<p>Through interviews with 20 LGBTQ students and teachers in some Alberta and Ontario Catholic schools, and through media accounts, I found that publicly funded Catholic schools in Canada respond to non-heterosexual and non-binary gender students and teachers and in contradictory and inconsistent ways. </p>
<p>All of the research participants experienced some form of homophobia or transphobia in their Catholic schools. None described a Catholic school environment that accepted and welcomed sexual and gender diversity.</p>
<p>I documented the firing of lesbian and gay teachers because they married their same-sex partners; the firing of lesbian and gay teachers because they wanted to have children with their same-sex partners; the firing of transgender teachers for transitioning from one gender to another.</p>
<p>Something as simple as discussing holiday plans can reveal that a teacher who is a lesbian has a same-sex partner. If this detail is revealed to leaders, this teacher can be at risk of being deemed to be living contrary to Catholic teaching and therefore subject to punitive action.</p>
<p>The teachers are given very little, if any, warning and find themselves in meetings without the support of a union representative or lawyer.</p>
<p>I also documented how schools seek to prohibit students from attending their <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/gay-teen-wins-fight-over-catholic-prom-1.348831">high school proms with their same-sex dates</a>, bar students from appearing in gender-variant clothing for official school photographs or functions like the prom; and deny students the right to establish <a href="https://egale.ca/portfolio/mygsa/">Gay–Straight Alliances</a>. </p>
<p>I noted a similarity of experiences among research participants in the distant provinces of Alberta and Ontario, in terms of how they were subject to heteronormative repression where schools are legally accountable to provinces <a href="http://www.livingwaters.ab.ca/documents/general/Marks%20of%20an%20Excellent%20Catholic%20Leader%20-%20FINAL.pdf">but look to Bishops for pastoral leadership</a>. </p>
<p>Oppression is a problem not only for LGBTQ people and our allies, but for all of us concerned about human dignity, human rights, love for our neighbours and social justice.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/109023/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tonya D. Callaghan receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. </span></em></p>Using Catholic doctrine to fire LGBTQ teachers and discriminate against queer students in Catholic schools violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.Tonya D. Callaghan, Associate Professor, University of CalgaryLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1036772018-09-24T04:31:58Z2018-09-24T04:31:58ZPublic schools losing out in political power plays<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/237411/original/file-20180921-129865-11t3k0u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Funding boosts to private schools will not necessarily result in lower fees.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Last week Prime Minister Scott Morrison <a href="https://ministers.education.gov.au/tehan/more-choice-australian-families">announced</a> a significant funding boost for private schools. The federal government will provide an extra A$4.6 billion over the next ten years for Catholic and Independent schools exclusively. </p>
<p>The package includes a A$1.2 billion “Choice and Affordability Fund”, with poorly defined priority objectives relating to diversity and access. </p>
<p>This is an historically significant announcement for the state of Australian schools. Since the Howard government, there have been no significant boosts of income, particularly of this size, for private schools exclusively. It comes in the wake of the previous education minister, Simon Birmingham, conceding private schools are “<a href="https://theconversation.com/yes-some-australian-private-schools-are-overfunded-heres-why-66212">over-funded</a>”. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/to-reduce-inequality-in-australian-schools-make-them-less-socially-segregated-95034">To reduce inequality in Australian schools, make them less socially segregated</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>The mantra of choice</h2>
<p>Morrison began the announcement with a repeated phrase: “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/prime-minister-scott-morrison-announces-4-4-billion-school-funding-fix-20180920-p504y6.html">our government believes in choice in education</a>” and again, “our government believes parents should have choice in education”. </p>
<p>In his announcement, the Prime Minister claimed that increased funding will better support parents to choose private schools.</p>
<p>When considering the data on private school enrolment since the 1980s, it’s not true increased government subsidies for private schools better supports parents of all <a href="https://research.acer.edu.au/aje/vol54/iss1/6/">socio-economic status backgrounds to choose private schools</a>. So the claim that this funding boost will improve diversity is ill-informed.</p>
<p>Not surprisingly, the <a href="https://www.ncec.catholic.edu.au/news-events/media-releases/494-school-funding-changes-support-families/file">National Catholic Education Commission</a> and <a href="http://isca.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Media-Statement-20-Sept-2018-Independent-Schools-Welcome-Clarification-of-Future-Funding-Arrangements-2.pdf">Independent School Council of Australia</a> have come out in support of the special deal. The <a href="http://www.tanyaplibersek.com/media_release_scott_morrison_turns_his_back_on_public_schoolkids_thursday_20_september_2018">Labor Party</a> and the <a href="http://www.aeufederal.org.au/news-media/media-releases/2018/september/210918">Australian Education Union</a> have criticised the announcement.</p>
<p>This means we will likely see a continued policy focus on private schools if Morrison remains in office, and a renewed focus on the public sector should Labor be elected. Either way, this issue is set to be an election-year political football.</p>
<h2>Public schools educate the most disadvantaged students</h2>
<p>While many advocates of choice policies argue lower-income students also attend private schools, lower income students <a href="https://www.education.gov.au/review-achieve-educational-excellence-australian-schools">are the minority</a> in these schools. The public sector educates 36% of students who represent the lowest socio-economic status bracket in Australia. This is contrasted to the Independent sector, which educates 13% of the lowest socio-economic status bracket. The proportion is higher in the Catholic sector, at 21%. </p>
<p>The Independent school sector receives <a href="https://research.acer.edu.au/aje/vol54/iss1/6/">a total of 42%</a> of its net recurrent income from both federal and state government. This equals <a href="https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/review-of-funding-for-schooling-final-report-dec-2011.pdf">approximately A$8.2 billion</a> to educate 14% of the population. </p>
<p>In terms of the private sector overall (incorporating both the Independent and Catholic sector) the amount of funding private schools receive annually is approximately A$12.8 billion, according to the <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/research/ongoing/report-on-government-services/2017/child-care-education-and-training/school-education/rogs-2017-volumeb-chapter4.pdf">2017 Productivity Commission Report</a>. The extra injection of funding by the Morrison government (A$4.6 billion for both Independent and Catholic), is a sizeable sum on top of this.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/237413/original/file-20180921-129868-1s8og5y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/237413/original/file-20180921-129868-1s8og5y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/237413/original/file-20180921-129868-1s8og5y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/237413/original/file-20180921-129868-1s8og5y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/237413/original/file-20180921-129868-1s8og5y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/237413/original/file-20180921-129868-1s8og5y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/237413/original/file-20180921-129868-1s8og5y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The special funding deal for Catholic and independent schools will only exacerbate segregation by socio-economic status.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0004944116666519">Research</a> also tells us this funding boost for private schools will not necessarily result in lower school fees. Even though federal government funding of private schools has consistently increased since the 1990s, parent tuition fees for the majority of private schools have increased. </p>
<p>Australian Bureau of Statistics data indicate education costs are outstripping inflation. From December 2014 to December 2015, the <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/second+level+view?ReadForm&prodno=5518.0.55.001&viewtitle=Government%20Finance%20Statistics,%20Education,%20Australia%7E2013-14%7EPrevious%7E13/05/2015&&tabname=Past%20Future%20Issues&prodno=5518.0.55.001&issue=2013-14&num=&view=&">cost of education</a> for consumers increased by 5.5%, compared to general inflation of 1.5%, as measured by the Consumer Price Index.</p>
<h2>Policy should focus on the public sector</h2>
<p>The federal government has historically been the principle funder of private schools. Historically, state governments are responsible for state (public) schools. But this clear delineation of responsibility has been consistently shifting since the Gillard/Labor government.</p>
<p>The federal government needs to take a more proactive role in protecting and supporting public schools, and the majority of the population who attend them. Though the states are typically responsible for schools funding, the federal government offers greater protection and security of funding for schools, primarily due to vertical fiscal imbalance and the greater resources it can draw upon. State governments are frequently held at ransom by the federal government.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/three-charts-on-why-catholic-primary-school-parents-can-afford-to-pay-more-102643">Three charts on: why Catholic primary school parents can afford to pay more</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This special funding deal will only further stimulate the private school sector and exacerbate <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02680939.2016.1263363">segregation by socio-economic status</a> across school sectors. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.education.gov.au/review-achieve-educational-excellence-australian-schools">Review to Achieve Education Excellence in Schools</a> calls for a “sector-blind” approach to education reform, an approach that will “enable all students to achieve educational excellence”, regardless of their school sector. This latest announcement contradicts the prior policy papers from this government.</p>
<p>The public school sector caters for our society’s most disadvantaged. This is the school sector we <em>should</em> be actively celebrating and supporting through bold federal government initiatives.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/103677/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Emma Rowe is a member of a Deakin University team that receives funding from the Victorian Department of Education to design and facilitate the Victorian Graduate Teacher Conferences 2018-2020.</span></em></p>Increased funding to Catholic schools won’t necessarily make them more accessible for low-income families.Emma Rowe, Lecturer in the School of Education, Deakin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1026432018-09-21T01:11:09Z2018-09-21T01:11:09ZThree charts on: why Catholic primary school parents can afford to pay more<p>Dan Tehan’s first major action as federal education minister was <a href="https://www.pm.gov.au/media/more-choice-australian-families">a deal for Catholic and independent schools</a>. From a policy perspective, the pieces were already in place. Tehan’s predecessor, Simon Birmingham, had moved all schools onto <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-passage-of-gonski-2-0-is-a-victory-for-children-over-politics-79828">a consistent funding formula</a>. The <a href="https://internationaleducation.gov.au/International-network/Australia/InternationalStrategy/theCouncilsReport/Documents/Australia%20%E2%80%93%20Educating%20Globally%20FINAL%20REPORT.pdf">National Schools Resourcing Board</a> (NSRB) showed how to use household income to gauge how much parents could pay if they chose a non-government school. </p>
<p>The good news from <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-20/catholic-independent-schools-new-parental-income-funding-model/10285554">yesterday’s announcement</a> is the government accepted all the recommendations of the NSRB’s <a href="https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/national_school_resourcing_board_ses_review_final_report.pdf">Chaney review</a> of how socio-economic score is calculated. By 2029, funding for all non-government schools will be based on the same formula. In my view, this transition process is longer and much more expensive than needed but at least it gets us to the right spot.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/explaining-australias-school-funding-debate-whats-at-stake-100023">Explaining Australia's school funding debate: what's at stake</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The bad news is the new deal undercuts itself. Some A$1.2 billion has been set aside to keep school fees “affordable”, among other priorities. But the fund is only available to Catholic and independent schools. In other words, all schools are equal but some are more equal than others. </p>
<p>This A$1.2 billion slush fund seems to be a political fix to the main Catholic sticking point: the claim parents in advantaged Catholic primary schools can’t afford the increased fees implied by the Gonski/Chaney model. </p>
<p>New analysis shows parents at advantaged Catholic schools can afford to pay their way. </p>
<h2>Few Catholic primary schools need big fee hikes</h2>
<p>There are just over 1,200 Catholic primary schools across Australia. In 2016, all of them had fees below A$4,000. </p>
<p>Under the Gonski/Chaney model, the federal government would reduce funding to schools with high-income parents, meaning fees would need to rise. Fees would not need to rise at schools serving low- to middle-income families because their government funding would continue to grow.</p>
<p>Only about 160 Catholic primary schools (one in eight) would need fee hikes of at least A$2,500 to compensate for their reduced levels of government funding. By contrast, more than 800 (three in five) would need only minimal fee increases or even get more government funding.</p>
<hr>
<p><iframe id="is0rI" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/is0rI/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<hr>
<p>Media stories typically focus on Catholic primary schools where fees might need to rise <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/catholics-declare-war-on-liberals-over-school-funding/news-story/71cd8ec9c08646d856e09172c3097580">by $4,000 or more</a>. These schools are outliers, but they underpinned the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/catholic-schools-consider-a-repeat-of-longman-intervention-20180729-p4zuae.html">Catholic campaign against the government</a>.</p>
<p>Yet under Chaney – when parental capacity to contribute is based on income rather than where parents live – just 36 schools (one in 30) fall into this category. And the reason their fees would rise so much is because the parents can afford it.</p>
<h2>Some Catholic school parents can afford more</h2>
<p>Affordability can be a slippery concept. It can also be remarkably simple. If Jane earns twice as much as Dick, she can afford twice the mortgage. Jane’s taxes will also take up more of her income than Dick’s. Earning more but paying a lower rate of tax would be regressive. But that’s exactly how Catholic primary school fees work.</p>
<p>The next chart shows the ratio of school fees to income, and how that ratio changes as households earn more. </p>
<hr>
<p><iframe id="pli60" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/pli60/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<hr>
<p>In 2016, families on modest incomes (from A$30,000 to A$79,999) had to shell out 2.6% of their pre-tax income to afford one set of Catholic primary school fees. Families on incomes above A$300,000 paid just 1%.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/catholic-schools-arent-all-the-same-and-gonski-2-0-reflects-this-93722">Catholic schools aren't all the same, and Gonski 2.0 reflects this</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>By contrast, school fees at independent primary schools tend to grow in line with household income.</p>
<p>If Catholic primary school fees rose in line with parents’ income, some Catholic schools could afford to charge much higher fees. </p>
<h2>Catholic primary fees would still be relatively low</h2>
<p>What would happen if Catholic primary school fees were a consistent 2.6% of median family income? </p>
<p>Fees would rise substantially at Catholic schools where incomes are high – to nearly A$8,500 at the small number of schools where the average family earns A$300,000. They would still be much lower than fees at independent schools with similar communities.</p>
<hr>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/clqG7/4/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" width="100%" height="549"></iframe>
<hr>
<p>This means the fees implied by Gonski/Chaney are realistic. </p>
<p>First, the ten or so Catholic primary schools where family incomes are more than A$300,000 really can afford to charge fees of more than $8,000. After all, their families can afford it equally as much as a family on A$60,000 can afford fees of A$1,600, which is about what they already pay. </p>
<p>Second, this level of fees is still much lower than what independent school families already choose to pay. In fact, independent school families with incomes of A$120-180,000 already pay fees of about $8,200, about the same as the highest capacity to contribute expected under Gonski 2.0. </p>
<p>Some will argue, faced with fees of A$8,000, Catholic school families will send their children to the free government school down the road. That may well occur. But that is a matter of choice and value, not affordability. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/gonski-2-0-is-this-the-school-funding-plan-we-have-been-looking-for-finally-yes-77081">Gonski 2.0: Is this the school funding plan we have been looking for? Finally, yes</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Tens of thousands of families of modest means already pay 2.6% of their earnings towards a Catholic primary school education. If families earning four or five times more are unwilling to spend an equivalent fraction of their income, government should take it as a sign they don’t value the education on offer, not that a higher subsidy is needed.</p>
<p>These three charts show few Catholic primary schools need big fee hikes under a fair and needs-based funding model. The parents that would have to pay more can afford it. And their fees would still be less than half what independent-school parents typically pay.</p>
<p>Every government dollar should be spent where it will make most difference. The Coalition’s school funding fix is a good deal for Catholic and independent schools. It’s a bad deal for the rest of us.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/102643/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the Federal and Victorian Governments. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and Grattan uses the income to pursue its activities</span></em></p>New analysis shows wealthy parents at advantaged Catholic primary schools could actually afford the increase to school fees under the needs-based model.Peter Goss, School Education Program Director, Grattan InstituteLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/999222018-07-22T14:07:41Z2018-07-22T14:07:41ZIt’s time to merge Ontario’s two school systems<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228249/original/file-20180718-142411-9v3tcf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=175%2C1046%2C1182%2C641&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The era of two school systems in Ontario should be riding into the sunset. There are enormous cost savings and community benefits to be had by merging the public and separate school systems. A school bus is seen here in Markham, Ont.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>There is a pressing need to consolidate Ontario’s separate and public school systems.</p>
<p>Long ignored by most politicians, this controversial idea deserves a fresh and serious policy discussion — especially now, with the new Ontario government contemplating cuts to the education system. School consolidation will result in significant and recurring cost savings, and will do so in an equitable manner that does not threaten existing services or facilities.</p>
<p>Consolidation of school systems will save money by eliminating service duplication, and it will eradicate enrolment competition between the two systems.</p>
<p>And contrary to a widely held perception, denominational schools are not necessarily protected by Canada’s Constitution, as previously demonstrated in the provinces of Manitoba, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Québec. </p>
<h2>Huge potential cost savings</h2>
<p>A <a href="https://urbanneighbourhoods.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/ingsfromthemergerofontariopublicandseparateschoolsystems.pdf">2012 discussion paper</a> from the Federation of Urban Neighbourhoods estimates annual savings of between $1.269 and $1.594 billion by merging the systems. </p>
<p>The organization, a province-wide coalition of community and neighbourhood associations, looked at several factors, including savings from grants for administration, capital costs, reducing under-utilization and transportation costs. </p>
<p>In the Canadian Secular Alliance’s <a href="http://secularalliance.ca/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/CSA-Pre-Budget-Submission-One-School-System-Feb-2015.pdf">2015 pre-budget submission</a> to Ontario’s Ministry of Finance, the organization stated that while “the exact savings realized depend on what the amalgamated school system that would replace the status quo would look like, the savings under any reasonable set of assumptions amount to hundreds of millions of dollars per year.”</p>
<p>The alliance also pointed to the duplication costs arising from “operating schools well below enrolment capacity and otherwise unnecessary student transportation distances.”</p>
<p>While the estimates of cost savings may vary depending on how the consolidation would be implemented, a fiscal analysis needs to be undertaken in a non-partisan and verifiable manner.</p>
<h2>Eliminating competition for students</h2>
<p>There is currently student enrolment competition between the separate and public systems as separate school boards try to woo non-Catholic kids. This competition is unhealthy, inconsistent with the purposes for which denominational schools were first established and a waste of school system resources. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.therecord.com/opinion-story/8129139-it-s-time-for-one-publicly-funded-school-system/">John Hendry</a>, a trustee with the Waterloo Region District School Board, argues that attempts to enrol non-Catholic students show that the separate school system is facing significant difficulty surviving as a “faith-based education system solely with Catholic students.”</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228265/original/file-20180718-142438-1h496r4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228265/original/file-20180718-142438-1h496r4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=453&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228265/original/file-20180718-142438-1h496r4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=453&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228265/original/file-20180718-142438-1h496r4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=453&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228265/original/file-20180718-142438-1h496r4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=570&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228265/original/file-20180718-142438-1h496r4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=570&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228265/original/file-20180718-142438-1h496r4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=570&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Catholic schools in Ontario are trying to attract students who aren’t Catholic for funding purposes.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>These same concerns were discussed in a <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/in-fight-for-funding-ontarios-catholic-school-boards-enrolling-morenon-catholics/article37954552/">2016 <em>Globe and Mail</em></a> report showing that Ontario separate school boards are increasingly enrolling non-Catholic children and “siphoning students from the public stream as the two systems vie for provincial funding.”</p>
<p>Single-school, rural and inner-city communities face particular risk for school closures given Ontario’s current educational funding formula. It has become purely a numbers game when it comes to the continuance and future of many of these schools. </p>
<p>It’s a real challenge to keep a school up and running, and by extension keep a community viable, when students in that community are channelled into competing school systems. While a community or neighbourhood may be able to keep its local school open if all children residing there attend that school, splitting the potential student body into parallel school systems makes the risk for closure of the local school much greater.</p>
<h2>Ontario should follow Québec, NL’s lead</h2>
<p>As mentioned, it’s often argued that consolidation is not permitted because the rights of separate schools to maintain their status are constitutionally protected. While <a href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/30---31-vict-c-3/latest/30---31-vict-c-3.html#sec93">Section 93 of the 1867 Constitution</a> provides for the continuation of the separate schools’ denominational rights, it could be easily amended. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://canlii.ca/t/8q7l">1982 Constitution Act</a>, which included the Charter of Rights, updated the amendment procedure for the 1867 Constitution. <a href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/schedule-b-to-the-canada-act-1982-uk-1982-c-11/latest/schedule-b-to-the-canada-act-1982-uk-1982-c-11.html#sec43">Section 43</a> provides that where a provision applies to one or more, but not all, of the provinces, it can be amended by resolution of the provincial assembly and the federal Parliament. <a href="https://www.sqrc.gouv.qc.ca/documents/positions-historiques/positions-du-qc/part3/Document33_en.pdf">Québec and Newfoundland have already invoked this clause,</a> and Ontario can do the same.</p>
<p>In an <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/catholic-schools-1.4680200">opinion piece for CBC News</a>, Richard Moon, a University of Windsor law professor, writes that Section 93 was drafted at a time when the dominant public or common school system in Ontario had a clear Protestant ethos. The protection for denominational rights ensured that members of the minority Roman Catholic community would not be pressured to send their children to the Protestant schools. </p>
<p>But Moon points out that the “character of the public school system in Ontario has changed dramatically since 1867, a change that has been accelerated by the Charter of Rights in 1982.” </p>
<p>Moon’s analysis of these changing conditions is shared by Queens University law professor Bruce Pardy, who <a href="https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/does-constitutional-protection-prevent-education-reform-in-ontario.pdf">walked through the procedures needed to amend the Constitution</a> to permit consolidation. </p>
<p>Unlike the more complex process for amending other constitutional provisions, consolidation would only require the passage of a resolution by the Ontario legislature and the federal Parliament. Pardy concludes:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Any Ontario politician who claims that there is a Constitutional guarantee to Catholic schools that binds the government is being disingenuous. The only thing that sits in the way of fixing a discriminatory and unfair constitutional anachronism is the reluctance of Ontario political parties to do so.”</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>The time is now</h2>
<p>Before imposing harmful cuts such as the recent <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-ontario-government-abruptly-cancels-series-of-education-related-summer/">suspension of the building repair fund</a> and closing more schools, the Ontario government should initiate a discussion about how consolidation could proceed. </p>
<p>An underlying goal of consolidation should be to minimize the disruption to existing programs and services. While discussions would likely centre on estimating cost savings, the social costs of maintaining separate systems should also be considered. For example, how would consolidation impact the travel times to schools for students, especially in rural areas?</p>
<p>Hopefully the matter of school consolidation will not become yet another partisan issue. All Ontario parties should cooperate, and all levels of government should be considered in the analysis. </p>
<p>It is no longer viable to dismiss the issue on the grounds of Constitutional entrenchment. It is clear that the law can be easily changed through a simple resolution at Queen’s Park and in the Federal Parliament.</p>
<p>All that’s truly needed is the political will to take on a difficult issue and move forward.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/99922/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Samuel Trosowl has held numerous research grants as part of his duties as a Professor at UWO, but none were relevant to this issue.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bill Irwin receives funding from SSHRC. He is currently studying the impact on communities once the local school closes.</span></em></p>The time to consolidate Ontario’s two school systems is long overdue. It’s no longer viable to dismiss the issue on Constitutional grounds. All that’s needed is political will.Samuel E. Trosow, Associate Professor, University of Western Ontario, Faculty of Law and Faculty of Information & Media Studies, Western UniversityBill Irwin, Assistant Professor, Huron University College, Faculty of Arts and Social Science, Department of Management and Organizational Studies, Western UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/937222018-03-22T04:16:52Z2018-03-22T04:16:52ZCatholic schools aren’t all the same, and Gonski 2.0 reflects this<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211483/original/file-20180322-165583-13xaejj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">In the debate about Catholic school funding, it needs to be recognised that not all Catholic schools are the same.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/download/success?src=QED6NQLrTlDywMMEYjb53g-1-13">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Bill Shorten <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/mar/20/public-school-lobby-criticises-labors-arbitrary-250m-for-catholic-schools">is being accused</a> of buying support from the Catholic sector to win the seat of Batman, by appearing to promise Catholic schools A$250 million in the first two years of a Labor government. The Catholic sector says this money goes a way to restoring the funding lost in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-passage-of-gonski-2-0-is-a-victory-for-children-over-politics-79828">Gonski 2.0 reforms</a>. Public and independent schools are outraged at the perceived favouritism.</p>
<p>Part of the key to making sense of this seemingly endless debate is to recognise that Catholic schools are not all the same. Even more important is that government funding, under the Gonski 2.0 model, will reflect the actual socioeconomic mix of each school.</p>
<p>Batman, for instance, is a diverse electorate, which provides an interesting case study. The Catholic schools serving the highest proportion of educationally disadvantaged students will either be unaffected by Gonski 2.0, or will attract more government funding. Those with more students in higher socioeconomic groups will be affected – but this is fair policy.</p>
<h2>How schools funding works</h2>
<p>Under the new schools funding model, often called Gonski 2.0, a <a href="https://www.education.gov.au/what-schooling-resource-standard-and-how-does-it-work">school resourcing standard</a> (SRS) is calculated for each school. This target level of funding incorporates three elements.</p>
<p>The first is a level of base funding per student for all schools. In 2018, this is A$13,764 per secondary school student and A$10,953 per primary student. </p>
<p>The second is additional needs-based funding based mainly on the characteristics of each school’s students. This is measured in terms of low socio-economic status (SES), disability, and language background other than English.</p>
<p>The third element is an estimate of the capacity of parents who send their children to non-government schools to contribute towards the cost of schooling. This ranges from 10% of the base funding for low-SES schools to 80% for high-SES schools. This means Catholic and independent schools with poorer parents get more government funding than those with more affluent parents, even before individual student need is taken into account.</p>
<p>The estimated parental capacity to contribute is based on <a href="https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/2017_and_2018_ses_scores_for_publication_11oct17_-_updated_20.11.17.pdf">each non-government school’s SES score</a>. This is calculated by looking at the <a href="http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/aea2013210/s54.html">average socioeconomic makeup</a> of the areas where a school’s parents live.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211487/original/file-20180322-165550-4elkfw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211487/original/file-20180322-165550-4elkfw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211487/original/file-20180322-165550-4elkfw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211487/original/file-20180322-165550-4elkfw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211487/original/file-20180322-165550-4elkfw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211487/original/file-20180322-165550-4elkfw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211487/original/file-20180322-165550-4elkfw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Catholic schools with an SES score of less than 100 will either be unaffected, or have their funding increased, under Gonski 2.0.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/thoughtful-elementary-students-sitting-classroom-143627596">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A non-government school with students from a mix of average neighbourhoods would have an SES score of 100. In 2018, under Gonski 2.0, parents of a primary student in such a school would be expected to contribute about A$1,750 (16% of the base funding). This would be roughly twice as much for secondary school (A$3,484 or 25%).</p>
<p>A non-government school with students from very affluent neighbourhoods might have an SES score of 120-130. The expected parental contribution would range from A$6,700-A$8,760 for primary schools, and A$9,500-A$11,000 for secondary schools.</p>
<p>A non-government school whose families come from battling neighbourhoods might have an SES score of about 80. For such a school, parents would be expected to contribute the minimum 10% of base funding, or A$1,095 for primary students and A$1,376 for secondary students.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/confused-about-changes-to-school-funding-heres-what-you-need-to-know-78455">Confused about changes to school funding? Here's what you need to know</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>These are huge differences. Changing the SES score of a non-government secondary school by just one point means about A$300 more or less government funding per student. For non-government primary schools, this is worth between A$200 and A$400 per student. </p>
<p>This naturally influences school fees. When government funding is low, fees will typically be high. When government funding is high, schools can afford to set low fees.</p>
<h2>From Gonski 1.0 to Gonski 2.0</h2>
<p>The original Gonski model (in 2013) treated Catholic schools as a homogeneous group. They were allocated a “system-weighted average” score based on the state the school was in, such as <a href="http://www.csnsw.catholic.edu.au/school-funding-explained-in-five-easy-steps-no-really/">a score of 101 in NSW</a>. </p>
<p>Primary schools that came under this score had an expected parental contribution of 13.5%. Regardless of how advantaged a Catholic primary school might be, the formula never expected parents to contribute more than A$1,400. </p>
<p>This enabled all Catholic primary schools to keep their fees low – often in the range of A$2,000-A$3,500 even for the most highly advantaged schools and regardless of parents’ actual ability to pay. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, a highly advantaged independent primary school would need to have fees of at least A$8,000 per year to have adequate resources to educate its students.</p>
<p>Gonski 2.0 removed the system-weighted average. Funding for Catholic schools will still be handed over to each state as a lump sum, and each Catholic diocese will retain the right to allocate funding across its schools. But the calculation of the school resourcing standard for each school will take into account the huge differences in parents’ financial means.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-how-does-funding-work-in-the-catholic-school-system-78469">Explainer: how does funding work in the Catholic school system?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>The Batman case study</h2>
<p>So back to Batman - where this latest funding fight has erupted. The northern part of the electorate is mainly covered by the generally working-class suburb of Reservoir. The middle is split between Preston and Thornbury, both of which have gentrified over recent years.</p>
<p>The southern end includes Northcote, Alphington, Fairfield and Clifton Hill, once home to Italian nonnas but now dominated by professionals keen to live close Melbourne’s centre. There are 13 Catholic primary schools in Batman. The SES scores range from 92 in Reservoir to 117 in Alphington. </p>
<p>Six socially diverse schools in the northern end of Batman have an SES score of less than 100. So their funding is unaffected, or even increased, under Gonski 2.0. Two other schools in the north have an SES score of just over 100. Most of their students (78%) come from families that are more advantaged than average, <a href="http://docs.acara.edu.au/resources/About_icsea_2014.pdf">based on their parents’ education and occupation</a>, and only 4% come from the most disadvantaged quarter of families. Their expected capacity to contribute will increase by less than A$1,000.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-passage-of-gonski-2-0-is-a-victory-for-children-over-politics-79828">The passage of Gonski 2.0 is a victory for children over politics</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Three schools in the middle of the electorate have an SES score of 108 or 109. These will be affected more: their expected capacity to contribute will increase by about A$2,000. </p>
<p>Two small schools at the southern end have an SES score of 115 or above. Their expected capacity to contribute will increase by about A$4,000 per student. But this would have a very different impact across the two schools, because one appears to serve advantaged families (70% of students from the most educationally-advantaged quartile and only 1% from the least), while the other is much more socially diverse (10% from the least advantaged quartile and another 20% from the second-lowest). </p>
<p>This highlights some of the limitations of the current SES score, which is one reason why it is so important to improve it in the <a href="https://www.education.gov.au/review-socio-economic-status-ses-score-methodology">current review</a> by the recently appointed <a href="https://www.education.gov.au/national-school-resourcing-board">National School Resourcing Board</a>.</p>
<h2>A national picture</h2>
<p>The nationwide picture is similar to that of Batman. For Catholic schools with the lowest SES scores, nearly three-quarters of their students come from families that are less advantaged than average. For Catholic schools with the highest SES scores, this proportion is well under 10%.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211498/original/file-20180322-165574-tqdmgb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211498/original/file-20180322-165574-tqdmgb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211498/original/file-20180322-165574-tqdmgb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211498/original/file-20180322-165574-tqdmgb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211498/original/file-20180322-165574-tqdmgb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211498/original/file-20180322-165574-tqdmgb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211498/original/file-20180322-165574-tqdmgb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211498/original/file-20180322-165574-tqdmgb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Educationally disadvantaged students are the bottom two quartiles of the socio-educational advantage (SEA) metric, a student-level measure of parental education and occupation that is reported on MySchool.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Grattan Institute</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Looking at the most educationally disadvantaged quartile of students, Catholic schools look even more similar to independent schools with the same SES score.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211499/original/file-20180322-165564-m0w5tt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211499/original/file-20180322-165564-m0w5tt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211499/original/file-20180322-165564-m0w5tt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211499/original/file-20180322-165564-m0w5tt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211499/original/file-20180322-165564-m0w5tt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211499/original/file-20180322-165564-m0w5tt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=496&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211499/original/file-20180322-165564-m0w5tt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=496&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211499/original/file-20180322-165564-m0w5tt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=496&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Educationally very disadvantaged students are the bottom quartile of the socio-educational advantage (SEA) metric, a student-level measure of parental education and occupation that is reported on MySchool.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Grattan Institute</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In fact, for the 21 Catholic primary schools with an SES score of 125 (where the capacity to contribute curve tops out), only about 20 students out of 5,500 come from the bottom quartile. It is hard to argue these schools are socially diverse, or serving the poorer students, arguments sometimes made to justify the need to keep their fees low. </p>
<p>So, not all Catholic schools are the same, and we should stop talking about them as if they were.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93722/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the Federal and Victorian Governments. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and Grattan uses the income to pursue its activities.</span></em></p>Catholic schools say they’re losing money under Gonski 2.0, but this is only true for schools serving students in affluent areas – those in poorer areas will either be unaffected, or get more.Peter Goss, School Education Program Director, Grattan InstituteLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/834642017-09-17T19:42:08Z2017-09-17T19:42:08ZMale teachers are an endangered species in Australia: new research<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/185018/original/file-20170907-8380-1a21kn0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1%2C0%2C998%2C667&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Both men and women are capable of being excellent teachers, and we want both in our schools.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock/Tyler Olson</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Male teachers may face extinction in Australian primary schools by the year 2067 unless urgent policy action is taken. In government schools, the year is 2054. </p>
<p>This finding comes from <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272775717303278">our analysis</a> of more than 50 years of national annual workplace data – the first of its kind in any country.</p>
<p>We found a sharp decrease in the percentage of male teachers since records of teacher gender began in 1965. This includes classroom teachers, head teachers, and principals.</p>
<p>This rapid decline of men is not limited to primary schools. From 1977, when numbers of primary and secondary teachers were first recorded separately, we find an equally rapid decline of male representation in Australia’s secondary schools. In primary schools, there has been a steady decline from 28.5% to 18.3%; in secondary schools, it has dropped from 53.9% to 40%. </p>
<hr>
<p><iframe id="CWpSK" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/CWpSK/4/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<hr>
<p>Looking at the data by state and school sector, the lowest representation of men in primary schools is just 12.2% in Northern Territory Independent schools and 36.4% in Queensland government secondary schools.</p>
<h2>Causes of the decline</h2>
<p>Factors that deter men from teaching have been discussed in both the media and <a href="https://theconversation.com/primary-schools-are-losing-more-and-more-male-teachers-so-how-can-we-retain-them-82017">research literature</a>. While some men (and women) may be deterred from teaching because it is perceived to have low <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13598660500286176">salary and status</a>, men also face social pressures to conform to particular masculine ideals. And teaching is often seen as “women’s work”. It is unclear if these pressures have intensified over the last 50 years. </p>
<p>There may also be a social stigma in advocating for more male teachers when women still face adversity in many other fields. In this way, policymakers may assume that declining male representation in schools is not a problem, or of less importance compared to other professions.</p>
<p>Alternatively, hiring policies may play a role. </p>
<p>We have little data on the hiring policies of different teacher employers around Australia. When looking at the percentage of male teachers in government, Independent, and Catholic sectors separately, we see that government schools show the sharpest drop over time. Independent primary and secondary schools and Catholic secondary schools also show a drop in male teachers, yet at a less rapid rate.</p>
<h2>The impact on students</h2>
<p>While teacher gender has little effect on <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272775712000209?via%3Dihub">student achievement</a>, and students’ role models are often their <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1468181032000119131">peers</a>, there are important social and psychological reasons for Australian schools to include more male teachers. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09540253.2013.796342?journalCode=cgee20">Students themselves</a> tell us that they want to be taught by both women and men. Just as some boys and girls find it easier to relate to female teachers, others find it easier to relate to male teachers. A teaching workforce that is diverse – in gender, ethnicity, religion, and sexual orientation – is most likely to appeal to diverse groups of students.</p>
<p>The decline in male representation in schools also limits opportunities for students to observe men outside their families who are caring, nurturing, and concerned about education. This may lead students to assume that only women are suited for such work, or that such traits are atypical in men.</p>
<p>Finally, for students with risky home lives, male representation may be particularly important. The presence of male and female teachers within the school environment allows students to see men and women interacting in positive, equal, and <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00131911.2016.1223607">non-violent ways</a>, and to observe men working with female leaders. In this way, male representation in schools may help to challenge misconceptions of what men can and cannot do.</p>
<h2>The impact on schools</h2>
<p>There are also important workplace reasons for Australian schools to include more male teachers.</p>
<p>Across professions, <a href="http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/EDI-03-2015-0020?af=R&">workforce diversity</a> is pursued because it creates an inclusive environment, facilitates multiple perspectives, and ensures that various groups are included in decision-making processes. Importantly, links have also been found to <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.01977.x/abstract;jsessionid=980D497CED4B455C1E319073254A1DBB.f04t03">job satisfaction and performance</a>.</p>
<p>Extending these findings to Australian schools, we suggest benefits for the school community when men and women are more equally represented.</p>
<p>Given the importance of diversity, the <a href="https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/education_and_training_diversity_strategy_20150209.pdf">Australian government</a> has committed to ensuring that the teaching workforce broadly reflects both the student population and Australian community. There are <a href="https://education.nsw.gov.au/policy-library/associated-documents/wdplan2012-17.pdf">policies</a> that aim to increase the representation of Aboriginal people, racial and religious minority groups, people under the age of 25, people with a disability, and women in leadership positions.</p>
<p>But there are no current workforce diversity policies to redress the sharp decline in male teachers.</p>
<h2>What can be done</h2>
<p>We now know where the male teacher population is headed. It is becoming increasingly unlikely that Australian schools will genuinely reflect the student population or broader community. A review of Australian workforce diversity policies is urgently needed.</p>
<p>Fortunately, much can be learned about increasing male representation in schools by looking to professions where the representation of women has been increased. These include STEM and business. As we suggest elsewhere, <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-need-to-rethink-recruitment-for-men-in-primary-schools-66670">targeted scholarships</a> could be used to increase the number of men studying education.</p>
<p>Additionally, increasing teachers’ salaries and permanent teaching positions may benefit the profession more broadly, while also providing incentives for men (and women) who consider a career in teaching later in life. Challenging negative perceptions is also important, and may require large-scale campaigns.</p>
<p>Both men and women are capable of being excellent teachers, and we want both in our schools. A more diverse teaching workforce benefits everyone – students, parents, and teachers alike.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/83464/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Penny Van Bergen has previously received funding from The Australian Research Council. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kevin F. McGrath does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Despite the need for both male and female teachers, male primary school teachers could be extinct by 2067.Kevin F. McGrath, Casual Academic, Department of Educational Studies, Macquarie UniversityPenny Van Bergen, Senior Lecturer in Educational Psychology, Macquarie UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/805882017-07-09T23:46:34Z2017-07-09T23:46:34ZThe Supreme Court, religion and the future of school choice<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177157/original/file-20170706-10491-1qzlnvg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=588%2C109%2C4472%2C3110&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Supreme Court's decision in the Trinity Lutheran case is blurring the lines between church and state.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/chiangmai-thailand-march-222015-two-boys-262562096?src=V_7R_iqvQZsrSIcdYp1ZIA-1-3">aradaphotography/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Supreme Court <a href="https://apnews.com/a494b90c0244404183483df6a8618a66">recently decided</a> that Trinity Lutheran Church should be eligible for a Missouri state grant covering the cost of recycled playground surfaces. Though the state originally rejected the church’s application on grounds of separation of church and state, <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2016/15-577">the Supreme Court ruled</a> that this rejection was, in fact, religious discrimination.</p>
<p>The case’s impact will probably reach well beyond playgrounds.</p>
<p>As a scholar of education law, I’ve been following the Trinity Lutheran case and what it could mean for the hottest issue in education: school choice. Where in the past states have decided for themselves whether religious schools are eligible for <a href="http://www.ncsl.org/research/education/voucher-law-comparison.aspx">school vouchers</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/tax-credits-school-choice-and-neovouchers-what-you-need-to-know-74808">scholarship tax credits</a>, the Trinity Lutheran decision likely signals that the Supreme Court will soon require states to include religious private schools in their programs.</p>
<p>This would be a huge win for school choice advocates and would complete a revolution in the Supreme Court’s understanding of the law on government funding of religious institutions.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177159/original/file-20170706-10491-10ce14v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177159/original/file-20170706-10491-10ce14v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177159/original/file-20170706-10491-10ce14v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177159/original/file-20170706-10491-10ce14v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177159/original/file-20170706-10491-10ce14v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177159/original/file-20170706-10491-10ce14v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177159/original/file-20170706-10491-10ce14v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Activist group Concerned Women for America shows support for Trinity Luthern Church in front of the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Of church playgrounds and discrimination</h2>
<p>In 1995, Missouri established <a href="https://dnr.mo.gov/env/swmp/tires/tirefinassistance.htm">a program offering reimbursement grants</a> to qualifying nonprofits that installed playground surfaces made from recycled tires. Trinity Lutheran Church, which runs a preschool and daycare center, applied for a grant in 2012, but the state rejected the church’s application. Why? The <a href="http://www.moga.mo.gov/mostatutes/ConstArticles/Art01.html">Missouri Constitution</a> states that “no money shall ever be taken from the public treasury, directly or indirectly, in aid of any church, sect or denomination of religion.”</p>
<p>Trinity Lutheran challenged the state’s decision as a violation of <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/free_exercise_clause">the Free Exercise Clause</a>, and in June the U.S. Supreme Court <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/582/15-577/opinion3.html">agreed</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177217/original/file-20170706-23390-q29erx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177217/original/file-20170706-23390-q29erx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177217/original/file-20170706-23390-q29erx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177217/original/file-20170706-23390-q29erx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177217/original/file-20170706-23390-q29erx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177217/original/file-20170706-23390-q29erx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177217/original/file-20170706-23390-q29erx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Scrap Tire Surface Material Grant was awarded to two applicants in the 2017 fiscal year.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/ssedro/384644450/in/photolist-5afdGE-aMshTP-6bUGGs-7qgcDn-6cdYdp-68FByJ-kFYcYp-6ci7wL-kFYe6z-6uUeDY-kGZtwT-6uUeFo-kFYeti-7Yn2fJ-6uUeFY-6uUeRu-6uUeZo-6uQ4w2-6uQ4r2-kFZMmq-6uQ4gv-6uUeN5-6uQ4qF-6uUeKE-6uUeYu-zZpoS-6uQ4k4-6uUeUW">ssedro</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This result will strike many as <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/26/opinions/religious-liberty-battle-shapiro-opinion/index.html">intuitively correct</a>. A playground is a playground whether or not it’s run by a church, so the threat to separation of church and state seems slim, and the cry of religious discrimination seems plausible.</p>
<p>The case’s reasoning, however, may signal a significant shift in how the law views the separation of church and state. To understand why, we need to review some history.</p>
<h2>1784: Three pence to religious education</h2>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177225/original/file-20170706-18401-1n6qfpn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177225/original/file-20170706-18401-1n6qfpn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177225/original/file-20170706-18401-1n6qfpn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=742&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177225/original/file-20170706-18401-1n6qfpn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=742&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177225/original/file-20170706-18401-1n6qfpn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=742&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177225/original/file-20170706-18401-1n6qfpn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=933&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177225/original/file-20170706-18401-1n6qfpn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=933&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177225/original/file-20170706-18401-1n6qfpn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=933&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In 1785, James Madison wrote his ‘Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments,’ asserting that religion should be kept separate from government.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/96522271/">Library of Congress</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In 1784, <a href="https://classroom.monticello.org/media-item/a-bill-establishing-a-provision-for-teachers-of-the-christian-religion/">Patrick Henry proposed a bill</a> in the Virginia legislature that would have levied a tax to support “teachers of the Christian religion” (i.e., ministers). James Madison, however, <a href="https://www.billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/primary-source-documents/memorial-and-remonstrance/">successfully opposed the bill</a>.</p>
<p>On the question of funding religion with tax money, Madison asked: “Who does not see that the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?”</p>
<p>More than 150 years later, in <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1955/330us1">Everson v. Board of Education</a> (1947), this controversy played a prominent role in the Supreme Court’s interpretation of <a href="http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/first-amendment-and-religion">the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177151/original/file-20170706-26461-13r9rs2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177151/original/file-20170706-26461-13r9rs2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=749&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177151/original/file-20170706-26461-13r9rs2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=749&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177151/original/file-20170706-26461-13r9rs2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=749&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177151/original/file-20170706-26461-13r9rs2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=941&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177151/original/file-20170706-26461-13r9rs2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=941&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177151/original/file-20170706-26461-13r9rs2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=941&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Justice Hugo Black in 1937.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/cph.3b00098/">Library of Congress</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In applying the Establishment Clause to states for the first time, the justices in the Everson case emphasized Madison’s objections to the Virginia tax in concluding that the framers of the Constitution had intended to establish “a wall of separation between Church and State.”</p>
<p>In <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/330/1/case.html">the Everson decision</a>, Justice Hugo Black interpreted this “wall” to mean:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion.”</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>The Supreme Court changes its tune</h2>
<p>Until the mid-1980s, the Supreme Court <a href="http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1335&context=ijgls#page=20">mostly adhered</a> to the no-funding mantra announced in the Everson case. Gradually, however, the court’s commitment to such hard-line separation waned.</p>
<p>Much of this came down to a shift in perception: The 21st century is very different from the world of the 1780s, where government was small and taxes relatively rare. Today, government is pervasive, and government money flows to a wide range of institutions. Increasingly, the Supreme Court recognized that allowing some money to flow to religious institutions via general government grant programs was <a href="http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1335&context=ijgls#page=19">quite different</a> from the Virginia tax Madison had opposed.</p>
<p>By <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2001/00-1751">2002</a>, the court had settled on its current approach to the Establishment Clause – an approach <a href="http://www.pewforum.org/2009/05/14/shifting-boundaries-the-establishment-clause-and-government-funding-of-religious-schools-and-other-faith-based-organizations/">much more permissive</a> than what was laid out in the 1947 Everson case.</p>
<p>Fast-forward to 2017, and seven justices agreed that giving Trinity Lutheran Church its playground grant would not violate the federal Establishment Clause. (Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/582/15-577/dissent7.html">dissented</a> on this point.)</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177179/original/file-20170706-18989-16xcvlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177179/original/file-20170706-18989-16xcvlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177179/original/file-20170706-18989-16xcvlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177179/original/file-20170706-18989-16xcvlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=461&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177179/original/file-20170706-18989-16xcvlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=580&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177179/original/file-20170706-18989-16xcvlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=580&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177179/original/file-20170706-18989-16xcvlj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=580&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Ralph Reed, chairman, Faith & Freedom Coalition, pictured at an event in 2014, has spoken in favor of Trinity Lutheran Church.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Molly Riley</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>State bans on funding religion</h2>
<p>So, the Supreme Court now holds a more forgiving position when it comes to separation of church and state. But what about individual states?</p>
<p>Nearly every state has provisions in its constitution that address state support for religion, and many of these provisions (like Missouri’s) are more stringently worded than the federal Establishment Clause. Such a provision is exactly why students in <a href="http://caselaw.findlaw.com/vt-supreme-court/1396322.html">Vermont</a> can’t use state funds to attend religious schools. It’s also, perhaps, why some states have not yet adopted voucher policies: Voucher advocates tend to want religious schools to be eligible, but <a href="http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/charterschoice/2017/01/why_michigan_doesnt_have_school_vouchers_and_probably_never_will.html">state constitutions often stand in the way</a>.</p>
<p>So, what happens if state constitutional law is more separationist than the Supreme Court’s current reading of the Establishment Clause?</p>
<p>The Supreme Court faced this question once before in <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2003/02-1315">Locke v. Davey</a> (2004). The state of Washington offered “Promise Scholarships” to students meeting certain academic and income criteria, and college student Joshua Davey met those criteria. He lost the scholarship, however, when he declared a major in “pastoral ministries” because Washington understood its state constitution to ban the use of public money to support the pursuit of any degree in “devotional theology.” In other words, Washington was taking a stringent view on separation of church and state.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177165/original/file-20170706-13395-1qn3hn5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177165/original/file-20170706-13395-1qn3hn5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=417&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177165/original/file-20170706-13395-1qn3hn5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=417&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177165/original/file-20170706-13395-1qn3hn5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=417&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177165/original/file-20170706-13395-1qn3hn5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=524&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177165/original/file-20170706-13395-1qn3hn5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=524&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177165/original/file-20170706-13395-1qn3hn5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=524&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Joshua Davey speaks to reporters outside the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. in 2003.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Dennis Cook</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Davey argued that excluding ministry students from the scholarship opportunity was a kind of religious discrimination, violating his right to freely exercise his religion. </p>
<p>The Supreme Court ruled 7 to 2 against Davey. <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/540/712/opinion.html">Chief Justice William Rehnquist explained</a> that in a federal system, states should have the right to insist on greater separation of church and state than the federal Establishment Clause requires.</p>
<p>While federal law would not prevent Washington from giving Davey a scholarship, the state could also choose to uphold its stricter separation – without violating the Free Exercise Clause. In other words, just because Washington could fund Davey didn’t mean that it had to.</p>
<h2>Does separationism equal discrimination?</h2>
<p>Since 2004, lower courts have generally interpreted Locke v. Davey to say that states <a href="http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-1st-circuit/1459164.html">may choose</a> to exclude religious applicants from public funding programs. Trinity Lutheran will change that.</p>
<p>At least six justices agreed that Missouri’s exclusion of the church from its grant program was religious discrimination, pure and simple – and that this trumps the state’s desire to enforce a strict separation of church and state. <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/582/15-577/opinion3.html">Justice Roberts</a> determined that the judgment in Locke did not apply here, as the discrimination alleged in the two cases was different. Justices <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/582/15-577/concur4.html">Thomas</a> and <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/582/15-577/concur5.html">Gorsuch</a> suggested that there was improper religious discrimination in both cases. </p>
<p>Despite their different views of Locke, these justices agreed that the court was required to analyze Missouri’s grant denial under “<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/strict_scrutiny">strict scrutiny</a>.” This is the same level of review the court would give to, for instance, an express ban on Muslims entering the country.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177166/original/file-20170706-26461-1j76yqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/177166/original/file-20170706-26461-1j76yqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177166/original/file-20170706-26461-1j76yqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177166/original/file-20170706-26461-1j76yqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177166/original/file-20170706-26461-1j76yqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177166/original/file-20170706-26461-1j76yqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/177166/original/file-20170706-26461-1j76yqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In his opinion in the case, Justice Roberts stressed the differences between Locke v. Davey and Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Stephan Savoia</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This is remarkable. Though Joshua Davey had asked the court to review Washington’s scholarship policy under strict scrutiny, the court declined to do so. In that decision, the justices determined that separation of church and state and religious discrimination were horses of a different color. The Trinity Lutheran decision suggests that, at least in the context of general funding programs, the court will now view separation of church and state – a position the court once wholeheartedly embraced – as a kind of religious discrimination.</p>
<h2>What happens next?</h2>
<p>Standing against this reading of the Trinity Lutheran decision is… well, a footnote. Footnote 3 in Justice Roberts’ opinion reads:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“This case involves express discrimination based on religious identity with respect to playground resurfacing. We do not address religious uses of funding or other forms of discrimination.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The footnote suggests that the implications of the decision are narrow and shouldn’t be applied to, say, school vouchers. But it’s hard to reconcile the footnote with the seemingly widespread ramifications of the opinion’s text.</p>
<p>Indeed, the day after deciding the Trinity Lutheran case, the Supreme Court <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/062717zr_6537.pdf">vacated</a> four lower court decisions in <a href="https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court...Court/Opinions/.../13SC233.pdf">Colorado</a> and <a href="http://www.nmcompcomm.us/nmcases/nmsc/slips/SC34,974.pdf">New Mexico</a> that allowed the exclusion of religious schools from general aid programs. The state courts had based their rulings on separationist language in their state constitutions, but the Supreme Court asked the states to reexamine those decisions in light of Trinity Lutheran. Given the Supreme Court’s treatment of these cases, Footnote 3 may not be much of a limitation after all.</p>
<p>The Colorado and New Mexico courts will have the first shot at deciding what Trinity Lutheran means for school choice. In my view, though, the Trinity Lutheran case signals that the Supreme Court will now generally treat separationist exclusions of religious institutions from government funding as religious discrimination.</p>
<p>If that’s right, we’ll soon have completely flipped the law on government funding of religious schools. Where it had once seemed fairly clear that government money could not be used to support religious instruction at all, it may be only a matter of time before the Supreme Court requires voucher programs to treat religious schools the same as their secular peers.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/80588/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John E. Taylor does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Trinity Lutheran case signals the Supreme Court’s willingness to interpret separation of church and state as religious discrimination. What will this mean for the future of vouchers and school choice?John E. Taylor, Professor of Law, West Virginia UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/798282017-06-23T00:13:29Z2017-06-23T00:13:29ZThe passage of Gonski 2.0 is a victory for children over politics<p>In the early hours of this morning, the Senate did something profound. It voted to improve the way we fund our schools. This is a victory for the children of Australia.</p>
<p>A Senate packed with cross-benchers and minor parties was supposed to make political compromise harder, and good policy all but impossible. </p>
<p>But the cross-benchers have proved the naysayers wrong. Not only did they pass Education Minister <a href="https://theconversation.com/turnbull-announces-schools-funding-and-a-new-gonski-review-77011?sa=pg1&sq=gonski&sr=13">Simon Birmingham’s needs-based funding plan</a> – an olive branch <a href="https://theconversation.com/giving-a-gonski-will-be-torrid-test-for-the-greens-77593">summarily dismissed by Labor</a> – but they negotiated amendments to improve the plan.</p>
<h2>What will change with the passage of Gonski 2.0?</h2>
<p>Birmingham’s original package, the so-called Gonski 2.0, makes key improvements to the national school funding framework established by the Gillard government in the 2013 Education Act (explained further in our <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Grattan-Institute-Submission-to-the-Senate-Inquiry-into-the-Australian-Education-Bill-2017.pdf">Senate Inquiry submission</a>).</p>
<p>First, Commonwealth funding of schools increases and is also more consistent across all states and sectors. </p>
<p>Commonwealth funding to government schools will rise from an average of 17% of their needs in 2017 to 20% by 2023. Funding to non-government schools will rise from an average of 77% to 80%. </p>
<p>Second, Gonski 2.0 removes some of the special deals so that underfunded schools will get the Commonwealth share of their target funding within six years – much sooner than under the 2013 Act. Many overfunded schools will have their funding growth rates slowed, and a small number of the most overfunded schools will have their funding cut over the next ten years. This is an important break from the former Labor government’s promise, embedded in the 2013 Act, that “no school will lose a dollar”. </p>
<p>Third, it makes several changes to the funding formula. One big change is a revised parental “capacity to contribute” measure, which removes the “system weighted average” approach for non-government systemic schools. The Catholic schools hate this change, because it overturns a generous funding arrangement that enabled them to keep primary school fees low regardless of how wealthy the parents are. </p>
<p>Fourth, Gonski 2.0 reduces the indexation rate for school funding in line with low wages growth. It will remain at 3.56% a year until 2020, but from 2021 a new and lower floating indexation rate will apply, based on the wage price index and CPI. (A minimum floor of 3%, added at the urging of stakeholders, is problematic but far from a deal-breaker.) </p>
<p>Lastly, Gonski 2.0 creates a stronger link between Commonwealth funding and agreed national initiatives to improve student performance.</p>
<h2>What tweaks were made at the 11th hour?</h2>
<p>A number of <a href="http://wbfinancial.feedsynews.com/govt-reaches-deal-on-schools-funding/?utm_content=buffer3b596&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer">last-minute “tweaks”</a> were made to secure the required Senate votes.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Underfunded schools will get much-needed extra money more quickly – over six years rather than ten. This change means an extra $4.9 billion will be provided on top of the $18.6 billion in the May budget. </p></li>
<li><p>A 12-month “transition package” of $50 million will be provided to systemic schools, whether Catholic or independent, and there will be an (overdue) review of the parental “capacity to contribute” measure. </p></li>
<li><p>State government funding appears to be subject to a “clawback” mechanism, similar to what we proposed in our <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Grattan-Institute-Submission-to-the-Senate-Inquiry-into-the-Australian-Education-Bill-2017.pdf">Senate inquiry submission</a>. This is designed to ensure state governments step up. It is not clear exactly how it will work, but if a state fails to provide at least 75% of the target funding to government schools, or 15% of the target for non-government schools, the federal government will withhold some funding to that state.</p></li>
<li><p>A body will be established to conduct independent reviews of the school funding formula and ensure transparency on the distribution of funds.</p></li>
</ul>
<h2>What this means for schools</h2>
<p>Schools will now have more certainty on how they will be funded – at least from the Commonwealth. </p>
<p>The concept of needs-based funding now has across-the-board support, even if there are differences on the details and how much money each party is promising. Importantly, Commonwealth funding to disadvantaged schools will be delivered a lot faster. </p>
<p>Attention will now turn to the states, given that they provide most of the funding for government schools, which educate the bulk of Australia’s disadvantaged students. Further questions will continue to be raised about the impact on students with disabilities.</p>
<h2>Winners and losers</h2>
<p>The only way to determine which schools are “winners” and which are “losers” is by looking at what would have happened if the Senate had voted down Gonski 2.0. So,
here’s the “scoreboard” under Gonski 2.0 compared to the 2013 Education Act.</p>
<p><strong>Government schools are (mostly) winners</strong></p>
<p>Government schools in all states, and in the ACT, will get more Commonwealth funding. </p>
<p>Based on the new six-year timeframe for underfunded schools, our latest modelling suggests government schools in NSW will get between $200 million and $300 million more federal funding over the next four years. For Victoria, the boost is between $300 million and $400 million. Both Queensland and South Australia appear to get between $100 and $200 million extra. The boosts for government schools in Tasmania and the ACT are smaller in dollar terms, but still substantial per student. </p>
<p>The biggest winners are state schools in Western Australia, which will get about $500 million more over four years, and at least $2 billion more over a decade.</p>
<p>Government schools in the Northern Territory will lose compared to their current level of Commonwealth funding, which is higher than other jurisdictions – but a transition package has been provided.</p>
<p><strong>Catholic schools will lose</strong> </p>
<p>Catholic schools are right to say they will be worse off than under the 2013 Act. Their federal funding is projected to be $3.1 billion less over the next ten years. </p>
<p>This loss arises mainly from the interaction of two changes to the capacity-to-pay measure. The first is the removal of the generous “system weighted average” in the capacity-to-pay measure, which treated all Catholic schools as average rather than basing their funding on each school’s parent body. The second change is to the curve used to calculate parents’ capacity to contribute in primary schools. The previous curve had limited how much parents were expected to contribute in even quite advantaged primary schools.</p>
<p>The loss is biggest for ACT Catholic schools, which will see virtually no funding growth for a decade. </p>
<p>A core complaint from the Catholic leadership is that the socioeconomic status (SES) score disadvantages Catholic schools. Accordingly, one of the first jobs of the new National Schools Resourcing Board will be to review the SES scores. The final impact on Catholic schools will depend on the findings of that review.</p>
<p>In the meantime, a one-off transition package of around $50 million over the next year will be delivered to help “vulnerable” Catholic and independent schools adjust to the new arrangements.</p>
<p><strong>Independent schools have mixed outcomes</strong></p>
<p>The impact on independent schools is mixed. Those serving low socioeconomic communities are winners. A handful of (mostly wealthy) private schools will have their overly generous funding arrangements whittled back.</p>
<h2>The Senate has done its job today</h2>
<p>It is worth celebrating a day when the Australian system of democracy did its job well. </p>
<p>With a better model of school funding approved, policymakers can shift their focus to the harder job of finding ways to lift the performance of Australian students.</p>
<p>Federal Education Minister Simon Birmingham deserves credit for Gonski 2.0: he originated the plan and stared down the scaremongers. The 11th-hour amendments improve the package, and there are no special deals of the type that infected every previous funding settlement for decades.</p>
<p>In light of the opposition from Labor, the fate of Gonski 2.0 came down to the supportive cross-benchers: The Nick Xenophon Team, Pauline Hanson’s One Nation, Derryn Hinch, Lucy Gichuhi and Jacqui Lambie. The Greens, having done good work to secure the key amendments, succumbed at the last to the pressure of the Australian Education Union. </p>
<p>Paul Keating once memorably dismissed the Senate as unrepresentative swill. If that epithet was ever fair, it is not fair today. Because early today, the Senate cross-benchers stood up for Australia’s children and passed a package that, while it may not be perfect, might just help us move on from Australia’s <a href="http://insidestory.org.au/the-educational-consequences-of-the-peace">oldest, deepest and most poisonous debate</a> – how to fund our schools.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/79828/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the Federal and Victorian Governments. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and Grattan uses the income to pursue its activities.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Julie Sonnemann does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The passage of the new schools funding program is a big win for Australian children.Peter Goss, School Education Program Director, Grattan InstituteJulie Sonnemann, Research Fellow, Grattan InstituteLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/798712017-06-21T14:04:29Z2017-06-21T14:04:29ZA Labor government would boost schools’ money but how much would it unpick Gonski 2.0?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/174995/original/file-20170621-4662-87f132.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Labor has been steadfast in its opposition to the government's school funding plan.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Malcolm Turnbull is on the brink of a major policy victory after the government mustered 10 of the 12 non-Green crossbenchers behind its Gonski 2.0 policy.</p>
<p>The outcome of a week of intense negotiation by Education minister Simon Birmingham means, barring mishap, the government is set to end this parliamentary sitting on a strong note, at least in policy terms. The Coalition remains in a bad place in the polls.</p>
<p>The new model for schools funding will be much closer to the original needs-based one recommended by the Gonski review, the implementation of which was compromised by a plethora of special deals.</p>
<p>In electoral terms, Turnbull hopes the schools policy will at least partly offset Labor’s usual strong advantage in education but the fight over schools will still be on because Labor will be promising a big extra boost to funding.</p>
<p>To get its legislation through, the government has shortened the time frame for delivering funding targets from 10 to six years; boosted by $A4.9 billion to $23.5 billion the amount of money that will be spent over a decade (including $1.4 billion over the next four years); agreed to establish an independent body to oversee the funding; and endorsed a tight arrangement to prevent states lowering their share of school funding.</p>
<p>In a gesture to a deeply-agitated Catholic sector, the government will provide transitional money for it next year, while a review is undertaken of the basis for calculating how much parents should be expected to contribute. Some money will also be available for schools that are part of systems in the independent sector.</p>
<p>This is being couched as transition money so that all systems will come under the new model from the 2018 start. The transition money will amount to $46 million, $38 million for the Catholics.</p>
<p>But the Catholics, who benefited from the previous special arrangements, remain angry. The future political implications of this is yet to be seen.</p>
<p>On Wednesday night National Catholic Education Commission executive director Christian Zahra said that commission representatives had just met with Birmingham who “set out the minor changes” he proposed in response to the Catholics’ “very serious concerns”. But the commission’s position hadn’t changed: the bill “still poses an unacceptable risk to the 1737 Catholic schools across the country” and should be defeated.</p>
<p>The outcome has left the Greens caught badly short, exposed as under the thumb of the powerful teachers union, the Australian Education Union (AEU).</p>
<p>The government negotiated simultaneously with the Greens and the other crossbenchers. But the Greens were split, unable to finalise a deal even though they did most of the heavy lifting in extracting some major changes and additions.</p>
<p>The result is they’re in the worst of positions. They are unable to claim victory in delivering the more needs-based system. But they have raised the ire of some of their supporters for attempting to reach agreement with the government.</p>
<p>As soon as it knew it had the numbers with the other crossbenchers, the government – unsurprisingly - brought on the second reading vote on the legislation in the Senate.</p>
<p>Greens leader Richard Di Natale said he was disappointed the government had stitched up the deal with the other crossbenchers. The Greens had still been negotiating when the second reading vote was called. “We thought those talks were progressing really well when out of the blue, the bells rang,” he told reporters.</p>
<p>He said the Greens were proud that what they did through their negotiations “was to raise the bar”. But they could not support the “special deal” for the Catholic sector, and had wanted more money for disabled children.</p>
<p>The government is relying on getting the votes of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation, the Nick Xenophon Team, Jacqui Lambie, Derryn Hinch and Lucy Gichuhi.</p>
<p>Labor has trenchantly opposed the government’s package, saying the $18.6 billion is $22 billion short of what schools would have received under the ALP’s policy.</p>
<p>The opposition’s schools spokeswoman, Tanya Plibersek, says a Labor government would keep the parts of the package that “are practical, like an independent schooling resource body”. It would also retain the cuts to elite private schools.</p>
<p>But Labor has not spelled out how a Shorten government would alter the new model it would inherit and fund more generously.</p>
<p>It says Gonski 2.0 is flawed because it entrenches a skew in federal funding towards non-government schools (traditionally funded by the federal government, which is only the minor funder, compared to the states, of government schools). But that doesn’t deal with the issue of how a Labor government would handle the Catholics.</p>
<p>Labor has taken advantage of the Catholic rebellion. The Catholic sector, having lost the old special deals, would be anxious to extract some new ones from an ALP government that had extra dollars to put around.</p>
<p>So will Labor give the Catholics any undertakings that in power it would rectify the wrongs it alleges the government will do to the Catholic system? If it won’t, what will be the response of the Catholics?</p>
<p>If, after the dust settles from the Turnbull government making the tough changes, Labor broadly accepts the new model as a basis for its own planned funding, it will have a sound policy position but questions to answer about disingenuous claims we have heard from it in this debate.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/79871/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
The Catholic sector, having lost the old special deals, would be anxious to extract some new ones from an ALP government that had extra dollars to put around.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/787442017-06-02T04:05:41Z2017-06-02T04:05:41ZCatholic schools’ ‘alternative’ to Safe Schools isn’t all that alternative<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/171946/original/file-20170602-25697-1o1bgzw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Some in the Catholic community previously labeled the Safe Schools program as 'controversial'.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mal Fairclough/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A Catholic school network’s <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/were-not-trying-to-be-provocative-catholic-schools-to-fight-homophobia-20170531-gwhdhf.html">launch of an “alternative”</a> to <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-safe-schools-coalition-55018">Safe Schools Coalition</a> - an anti-bullying program – is based on the same research and approaches. </p>
<p>This alternative program bears remarkable similarities in both its research base and the conclusions it draws for best practice. This demonstrates that when the <a href="http://www.glhv.org.au/files/wti3_web_sml.pdf">research</a> is taken into account, the Safe Schools approach perhaps wasn’t part of a <a href="http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/miranda-devine-marxist-agenda-a-red-flag-for-not-so-safe-schools/news-story/7e1ee74bd8b682f188333828ce5e374e">“Marxist agenda”</a> after all. </p>
<p>The materials available draw on the same statistics about the prevalence of sexual and gender diversity among young people as Safe Schools. </p>
<p>These are the same stats that proved so <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/school-standards-drop-as-government-pushes-a-politically-correct-program/news-story/1d8ee8085c93ae14df39ea8613e40863">controversial</a> and were contested as “misleading” when used by Safe Schools Victoria. </p>
<p>Established by <a href="http://www.erea.edu.au/about-us/safe-and-inclusive-learning-communities">Edmund Rice Education Australia</a> (EREA), these materials have been developed as a response to EREA’s “Safe and inclusive learning communities” report.</p>
<p>EREA is providing resources and training for the Australian Catholic schools under their governance as part of an approach to provide:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>safe and inclusive learning environments for all students, in particular for same-sex attracted and gender diverse young people.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>But weren’t Catholic schools against Safe schools Coalition?</h2>
<p>Safe Schools recently <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-16/safe-schools-program-ditched-in-nsw/8446680">lost its federal funding</a> after being labelled as <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-23/turnbull-requests-investigation-into-safe-schools-program/7192374">“inappropriate”</a> by critics. </p>
<p>Much of this criticism came from <a href="https://www.catholicweekly.com.au/safe-schools-coalition-not-so-safe/">members of the Catholic Community</a> who, along with the <a href="http://www.safeschools.acl.org.au/">Australian Christian Lobby</a> and <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/search-results?q=safe+schools+rebecca+urban+roz+ward">particular media outlets</a>, succeeded in framing the approach as “controversial” and “ideological”.</p>
<p>The program had also been accused of <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/comment/government-and-teacher-union-hypocrisy-as-lgbti-agenda-plugged-in-schools-20160208-gmp18h.html">“promoting a radical view of gender and sexuality”</a>, and foisting it on schools through <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2015/03/24/4204018.htm">“indoctrination”, “enforcement”, and “induction”</a>.</p>
<p>The Victoria government was the only state to agree to keep funding the Safe Schools program. But in doing do, it decided to cut ties with its co-founder, Roz Ward – terminating the roles of Ward and the three other staff members – after a <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/safe-schools-program-to-be-overhauled-and-founder-roz-ward-removed-20161216-gtctgs.html">public backlash</a> about Ward’s personal political views.</p>
<h2>So why do Catholic schools now want to teach this?</h2>
<p>This proposal is certainly promising. </p>
<p>EREA represent a <a href="http://www.erea.edu.au/about-us/vision-and-mission">progressive strain</a> of Catholicism. Edmund Rice is cited in EREA material as inspiring Catholic schools “to give particular care to young people who might otherwise be excluded or rejected”.</p>
<p>EREA has a publicly available <a href="http://www.erea.edu.au/docs/default-source/about-erea/safe-and-inclusive-learning-communities/erea_safe_and_inclusive_statement.pdf?sfvrsn=4">Safe and Inclusive Learning Communities Statement</a> and a document offering <a href="http://www.erea.edu.au/docs/default-source/about-erea/safe-and-inclusive-learning-communities/erea_safe_and_inclusive_faq.pdf?sfvrsn=4">resources for principals, school leaders and teachers</a>. These outline an approach based on safety, wellbeing and positive affirmation, with an aim of students “feeling good” about their sexual and gender identity. </p>
<p>EREA directly tackles the possibility of its approach being received as controversial by teachers and parents by making some effort to frame its guidelines as an issue of awareness, education and safety. </p>
<h2>What is being taught - and is it any different to Safe Schools?</h2>
<p>Like Safe Schools, EREA recommends whole-school approaches that openly acknowledge the awareness of sexually and gender diverse members of the student community in both primary and secondary schools.</p>
<p><a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10560-007-0091-z">Affirmative approaches</a> have long been best-practice, demanding cultural competence from teachers or practitioners and framing queer identity as equally valid and positive as heterosexual identity. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.erea.edu.au/docs/default-source/about-erea/safe-and-inclusive-learning-communities/erea_safe_and_inclusive_faq.pdf?sfvrsn=4">resources also state</a> that in primary schools:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It is also important for students who come from LGBTI families or who have LGBTI siblings to feel that their families and identities are a valued and visible part of the school community.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The document for teachers is careful to emphasise that sexual identity does not automatically equate with sexual practice. It says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>because a student is an LGBTI person does not automatically mean that they are or will be sexually active.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is perhaps a response to charges of Safe Schools <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/inquiry-told-safe-schools-sexualising-kids/news-story/ff033cd6f1c00f0f4221a9679a672b15">“sexualising”</a> young people. But it also may well be an allusion to the standard Catholic practice of distinguishing between having desires and acting on them as a way to appease those for whom affirmation of queer “acts” may be too far. </p>
<p>The key difference from Safe Schools is that, as well as appealing to the wellbeing of young people, affirmation is framed as a Catholic virtue, with quotations from the Bible, Pope Francis and the Catholic Church as evidence. </p>
<p>The statement, for example, leads with the emphasis that: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Our sacred scripture reminds us (Genesis 1) that each and every person is made in the image and likeness of God.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In particular, both documents finish with a quotation from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons. </p>
<p>The research-based, whole-school nature of this proposal is promising. However, it remains to be seen how it plays out in practice, and whether an approach backed by a Catholic School Network will experience the same level of vitriol as Safe Schools. </p>
<p>While moves to manage sexual and gender affirmation in-house are commendable, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20593304">research</a> shows that “sexuality support” can be more effective and better contribute to queer young people’s health and wellbeing when provided by people who are themselves from sexual minorities. </p>
<p>It is <a href="https://www.stonewall.org.uk/sites/default/files/role_models.pdf">widely noted</a> that <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1054139X11002813">role models</a> play an important part of LGBT people’s wellbeing. Therefore it is a shame that the queer role models championing these affirmative approaches have been pushed out of the picture.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/78744/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lucy Nicholas does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The new program for Catholic schools draws on the same research as Safe Schools (so perhaps it wasn’t part of a ‘Marxist agenda’ after all).Lucy Nicholas, Discipline Co-ordinator and Senior Lecturer in Sociology, Swinburne University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/786692017-06-02T02:01:43Z2017-06-02T02:01:43ZEven for those who believe in ‘the full Gonski’, Labor’s $22 billion figure makes no sense<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/171936/original/file-20170602-25700-mizves.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Labor must explain how its additional funding will benefit students.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>School education funding is once again <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/school-funding-557">front and centre</a> of Australian politics. Despite historic bipartisan agreement on the concept of needs-based funding, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/gonski-2.0-a-$22-billion-cut-to-labors-plan-plibersek/8491960">Labor is throwing</a> Gonski 2.0 back in the Coalition’s face.</p>
<p>Labor, backed up by the Australian Education Union, insists that nothing less than “the full Gonski” is worth contemplating. Further, they claim that this requires an extra A$22 billion over the next decade. </p>
<p>Surely more money is a good thing? </p>
<p>Not so fast. Money can’t be spent twice, so funds must be directed where they will have the most impact. Thus, we must analyse why Labor’s plan is so much more expensive than the Coalition’s. Each component can then be considered on its merits.</p>
<p>To save you the trouble, I crunched the numbers. My estimates are necessarily rough, given that the different components cannot always be cleanly separated. But the overall picture is clear. Most of Labor’s extra $22 billion is not directed according to student need, and would have little impact on outcomes.</p>
<h2>Over-funded schools – $2 billion wasted</h2>
<p>Every school has a target level of government funding, called its Schooling Resource Standard (SRS). Under Labor’s plan, the combined Commonwealth and state funding for nearly all schools would reach at least 95% of target by 2019. (A side deal means that Victorian government schools would get there in 2021). </p>
<p>But about 1% of schools already receive well more than their target, costing about $200 million each year. Under Labor’s model, these schools would get funding increases of 3%, per student, per year. </p>
<p>Separately, Australian Capital Territory (ACT) Catholic schools are over-funded to the tune of about $45 million a year, courtesy of a special deal that treats them as comparable to Catholic schools across the nation, despite the fact that they are considerably more advantaged. </p>
<p>Added together, over-funding schools wastes roughly $2-2.5 billion over a decade.</p>
<h2>Indexation is too high – another $2 billion</h2>
<p>Every year, per-student costs go up, largely driven by teacher wages. To account for this, both Labor’s plan and Gonski 2.0 include annual indexation of the SRS target. </p>
<p>The problem with Labor’s plan is that the indexation rate was fixed at 3.6% in the 2013 Education Act. As Grattan Institute’s <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/circuit-breaker/">Circuit Breaker</a> report shows, this rate is now too high given historically low wages growth. </p>
<p>Gonski 2.0 removes the fixed indexation rate in 2021, replacing it with a floating indexation rate that is more in line with school costs.</p>
<p>Compared to this, Labor’s plan costs $2-2.5 billion more over a decade. This is enough to hurt government budgets, but the extra money is spread so thinly that it would have minimal impact on student outcomes. </p>
<p>Better than both parties’ approaches is to apply the floating indexation rate from 2018 or 2019. This would save billions, which could be used to fully fund schools more quickly.</p>
<h2>Sweetheart deals waste at least $2 billion</h2>
<p>Parents who send their kids to non-government schools are expected to pay school fees. Parental capacity to contribute is estimated based on where they live. </p>
<p>Under the current legislation, however, all schools within an education system (for example, Catholic, Anglican or Lutheran schools) are rated as having the same capacity to contribute. This means - for the purposes of calculation - that the parents are treated equally, whether they live in Toorak or Toowoomba.</p>
<p>This “system-weighted average” costs the Commonwealth about $300 million per year. A related quirk in the calculation of capacity to contribute for primary schools adds another $200 million per year. </p>
<p>The main beneficiaries are Catholic primary schools in affluent neighbourhoods, which use the funds to keep their fees artificially low. </p>
<p>Gonski 2.0 removes these sweetheart deals; Labor, <a href="https://theconversation.com/gonski-model-was-corrupted-but-labor-and-coalition-are-both-to-blame-65875">which put them in there in the first place</a>, would keep them. </p>
<p>Catholic school leaders say these features are needed to compensate for flaws in the SES score, and the formula does need to be reviewed. But even if they are half right, Labor is wasting about $2 billion over a decade. </p>
<h2>Labor’s cash splash puts about $2 billion at risk</h2>
<p>Labor back-ended its Gonski funding so heavily that some disadvantaged schools would get huge funding increases in 2018 and 2019. </p>
<p>But much of this money will be wasted if schools chase the same limited pool of resources - speech therapists, instructional leaders etc - without the market having time to adjust. </p>
<p>Delaying by just two years, to 2021, would save about $2 billion, and give schools time to plan how to get the most out of the extra cash. </p>
<p>By contrast, however, the Coalition’s 2027 target is too far away. If Labor wants to invest the extra $7 billion needed to deliver Gonski 2.0 in four years rather than ten, that would be a solid policy argument. Even then, nearly half of this amount could be funded by moving to a floating indexation rate two years sooner. </p>
<h2>Commonwealth generosity is a two-edged sword</h2>
<p>The last component of Labor’s high-cost model is more subtle. Back in 2013, federal Labor offered to pick up the lion’s share of whatever money was needed to get schools to their target. </p>
<p>This generous approach has perverse impacts. Western Australia, which funds its government schools well, gets nothing extra from the Commonwealth. Victoria, which does not, gets rewarded. </p>
<p>By 2027, these differences are stark. Victoria would get a two-thirds boost in its Commonwealth funding (on top of enrolments and indexation), such that its students get 28% of their SRS target from Canberra. WA students are left languishing at a paltry 13%. These huge differences are not driven by student need, but by discrepancies in state funding.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/171930/original/file-20170602-25673-4ks5to.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/171930/original/file-20170602-25673-4ks5to.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=351&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171930/original/file-20170602-25673-4ks5to.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=351&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171930/original/file-20170602-25673-4ks5to.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=351&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171930/original/file-20170602-25673-4ks5to.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=441&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171930/original/file-20170602-25673-4ks5to.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=441&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171930/original/file-20170602-25673-4ks5to.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=441&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Commonwealth government funding as a proportion of SRS, by state, government schools, if Commonwealth picks up 65% of the needs-based funding gap in each state.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Source: Grattan school funding model, based on analysis of data from the Commonwealth Department of Education and Training</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Removing this inequity is a central element of Gonski 2.0: once fully implemented, all government schools will get 20% of their target from the Commonwealth, and all non-government schools 80%.</p>
<p>Labor’s model adds about $8 billion to the Commonwealth’s tab over a decade, money that should be stumped up by states.</p>
<h2>Where to from here?</h2>
<p>If Labor believes Australian schools need $22 billion more than the Coalition is offering, ambit claims won’t cut it. It must explain how its additional funding will benefit students. And soon.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/78669/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the Federal and Victorian Governments. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and Grattan uses the income to pursue its activities.
</span></em></p>Here’s why Labor’s figure for school funding is too high.Peter Goss, School Education Program Director, Grattan InstituteLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/784692017-06-01T20:08:11Z2017-06-01T20:08:11ZExplainer: how does funding work in the Catholic school system?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/171371/original/file-20170529-25201-12jbkv7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Catholic schools haven't always received government funding.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from shutterstock.com </span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Gonski 2.0 has provoked substantial debate about how much money schools get, who gets too much, and how the money will be distributed. </p>
<p>Catholic schools in particular have <a href="http://www.skynews.com.au/news/politics/federal/2017/05/20/catholic-schools-to-challenge-gonski-2-0.html">expressed concern</a> about the impact of Gonski 2.0, with many Catholic schools <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/may/03/gonski-20-catholic-schools-not-singled-out-for-funding-cuts-minister-says">facing potential funding cuts</a>. </p>
<p>In response, the Catholic Education Commission Victoria (CECV) <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/catholics-declare-war-on-liberals-over-school-funding/news-story/71cd8ec9c08646d856e09172c3097580">claims</a> some schools may have to increase their fees by as much as A$5,000 per year. </p>
<p>The federal Education Minister <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-03/minister-hits-back-at-catholic-sector-school-funding-outcry/8492890">Simon Birmingham has hit back</a>, accusing the Catholic sector of “exaggerating” claims of potential cuts and their impact. He has defended Gonski 2.0 stating that it will treat all schools - government and non-government - consistently. </p>
<p>Amid all of these debates is a lot of confusion about how and why the federal government funds Catholic schools. Catholic schools, like all non-government schools, receive their primary government funding from the federal government. However, there is not necessarily a direct funding flow from the government to schools. </p>
<p>Most Catholic schools are systemic schools, situated within the Catholic system across the states and territories, and these systems make their own decisions about school funding. </p>
<p>So how does government funding of Catholic schools actually work? </p>
<h2>Government hasn’t always funded Catholic schools</h2>
<p>In the current context, it’s perhaps easy to take for granted that Catholic and other non-government schools receive government funds. However, this was not always the case. The market-based system we have today has been encouraged by a number of key policy decisions. </p>
<p>This all began in the late 1960s and 1970s when, in response to a struggling Catholic sector, the federal government decided to provide school funding. </p>
<p>Up until then, the federal government had little involvement in the funding of Australian schooling (with the exception of the Australian Capital Territory and Northern Territory). </p>
<p><a href="https://www.education.gov.au/funding-schools">Constitutionally</a>, it is the states and territories – not the Australian government – that have legislative authority to regulate, register, and deliver schooling. Therefore, it was really the states that funded schools. Indeed, it is still the state and territory governments that primarily fund government schools. </p>
<p>It started in earnest with capital funding for schools <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/binaries/library/pubs/bn/sp/schoolsfunding.pdf">introduced in the 1960s</a>. The <em>States Grants (Science Laboratories and Technical Training) Act 1964</em> funded science laboratories in both government and non-government schools. </p>
<p>Federal funding for non-government schools was then cemented in 1970 with the <em>States Grants (Independent Schools) Act 1969</em>. This provided non-government schools with a flat rate of federal government money per student. </p>
<p>Yet, it wasn’t until 1973 that an ongoing and systematic approach to federal funding of schools was enshrined. Then, the Whitlam-appointed <a href="http://dehanz.net.au/entries/karmel-report-schools-australia/">Karmel Report</a> introduced a “needs-based” school funding approach from the federal government. </p>
<p>The significance of the Karmel Report cannot be understated. Based on a “needs-based” formula, it provided <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/rearvision/education-religion-and-the-state-in-australia/5546816">much needed funding for the struggling Catholic system</a>, and in many ways cemented reliance on - and expectation of - federal funding across the non-government sector. </p>
<p>Since the Karmel Report, successive governments have retained federal funding, albeit with a range of policy changes to the funding formula over the years. </p>
<p>School funding has also become a lever for the federal government to intervene into schooling policy (while constitutional authority is retained with the states and territories). This includes, for instance, the buttressing of a market-based system premised on the existence of the three sectors – government, Catholic and independent. </p>
<p>For instance, non-government schools <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/children-of-the-whitlam-education-revolution/news-story/0e11f930d82c700dcd706c847d0d6e51">fared particularly well under</a> the Howard government’s SES model. At this time, federal education policy became pinned to the notions of marketisation and the rhetoric of “<a href="https://www.allenandunwin.com/browse/books/academic-professional/education/School-Choice-Craig-Campbell-Helen-Proctor-Geoffrey-Sherington-9781741756562">school choice</a>”. </p>
<p>Importantly, over the years the trend has been for a <a href="http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1024&context=aer">higher increase</a> in federal funds for the non-government sector than the government sector. </p>
<p>Now, after over 40 years, it is taken for granted that in addition to state and territory funding (which is primarily targeted at government schools), the federal government funds schools and that it does so inequitably, funding non-government schools at a higher rate than government schools. This is despite the fact that it is government schools, far more than non-government schools, that cater for disadvantaged students (as noted in <a href="https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/review-of-funding-for-schooling-final-report-dec-2011.pdf">Gonski 1.0</a>).</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/171740/original/file-20170601-25684-5diu00.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/171740/original/file-20170601-25684-5diu00.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171740/original/file-20170601-25684-5diu00.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171740/original/file-20170601-25684-5diu00.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171740/original/file-20170601-25684-5diu00.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171740/original/file-20170601-25684-5diu00.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/171740/original/file-20170601-25684-5diu00.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Catholic schools receive most of their government funding from the federal government.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>How does government funding for Catholic schools work now?</h2>
<p>Catholic and other non-government schools receive the bulk of their government funding from the federal government. </p>
<p>Yet, they also receive funding from the state governments. This is because of the legislative authority that states and territories have in relation to schooling. Thus, each state and territory has its own arrangements for funding non-government (and government) schools. </p>
<p>In Victoria, for example, the state government in 2016 provided over <a href="http://www.cecv.catholic.edu.au/getmedia/12cc6732-290d-47cd-8d79-d3c1d6eabf3f/CECV-Annual-Report-2015.aspx">A$440 million funding</a> to Catholic schools. </p>
<p>This recurrent funding was calculated as a part of the <a href="http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/Domino/Web_Notes/LDMS/PubStatbook.nsf/f932b66241ecf1b7ca256e92000e23be/938886C085A1A9A5CA257E0400099911/$FILE/15-001aa%20authorised.pdf">Education and Training Reform Amendment (Funding of Non-Government Schools) Act 2015</a>, which sets out the arrangements for the Victorian state government to fund non-government schools at 25% the rate of government school funding per student. </p>
<p>State funding of non-government schools can also include targeted special grants, such as the Victorian government’s <a href="http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/funding-boost-for-victorian-independent-schools/">$32.8 million facilities funding announced in December 2016</a>.</p>
<p>Gonski 2.0 represents another iteration of federal funding policies in schooling. In this model, the <a href="http://www.budget.gov.au/2013-14/content/glossy/gonski_policy/html/gonski_overview_06.htm">Schooling Resource Standard</a>, as set out in Gonski 1.0, is retained. This formula produces a base rate for the cost of schooling. </p>
<p><a href="https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/new_fairer_school_funding_from_2018.pdf">Gonski 2.0</a> sets out that by 2027 the federal government will fund non-government schools 80% of the SRS, with government schools receiving 20%. </p>
<p>The bulk of funding for the Catholic system comes from the government. For example, the CECV <a href="http://www.cecv.catholic.edu.au/getmedia/12cc6732-290d-47cd-8d79-d3c1d6eabf3f/CECV-Annual-Report-2015.aspx">reported</a> that in 2015 it received: </p>
<ul>
<li><p>$440 million recurrent and $9.2 million targeted state government funding</p></li>
<li><p>$1.6 billion recurrent and $7.5 million targeted federal government funding</p></li>
<li><p>$96 million in school levies and almost $11 million from bank deposit interest and other income streams. </p></li>
</ul>
<h2>How does the Catholic system fund its schools?</h2>
<p>When funding flows from the federal and state governments to the Catholic and independent sector it does not necessarily flow straight to the school. </p>
<p>For schools that exist within a system (such as most Catholic schools) government funding is managed and allocated by the system. This is different to the many schools within the independent sector that are not organised within a system. </p>
<p>Importantly, a <a href="http://www.audit.vic.gov.au/publications/20160309-Grants-to-NG-schools/20160309-Grants-to-NG-schools.pdf">recent report</a> from the Victorian Auditor-General suggested there was a lack of transparency and accountability within the Catholic (and other non-goverment) system’s allocation of government funds. </p>
<p>To continue with the Victorian example, Catholic schools in Victoria are managed through the CECV. Similar systems exist for Lutheran, Ecumenical and Seventh-Day Adventist schools. Independent non-government schools that do not belong to a system receive government funds directly. </p>
<p>The CECV manages all but two of the 493 Catholic schools in Victoria and the <a href="http://www.cecv.catholic.edu.au/getmedia/71d7f374-228e-44ab-839c-d0f69cd8e4ca/Allocating-govt-grants.aspx?ext=.pdf">combined $2.1 billion in funds from both the federal and state government</a>. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.cecv.catholic.edu.au/getmedia/71d7f374-228e-44ab-839c-d0f69cd8e4ca/Allocating-govt-grants.aspx?ext=.pdf">According to the CECV,</a> funding allocation is decided through a number of committees. </p>
<p>For primary schools, the CECV decides on the share of funding that each of the four Victorian diocese will receive (the Archdiocese of Melbourne, the Diocese of Ballarat, the Diocese of Sandhurst and the Diocese of Sale). </p>
<p>The CECV uses its own <a href="http://www.cecv.catholic.edu.au/getmedia/71d7f374-228e-44ab-839c-d0f69cd8e4ca/Allocating-govt-grants.aspx?ext=.pdf">funding model,</a> which - among other things - takes into account each schools “capacity to contribute” based on the school’s SES scores. </p>
<p>According to the CECV, once the funding flows to the diocese each diocese has their own funding model they use to decide funding allocation. For secondary and combined schools, funding decisions of the CECV flow straight to the school. </p>
<p>The question, therefore, of how particular Catholic schools will fare under Gonski 2.0 is a complex one. There are layers of decision making, within multiple funding models, which occur before funding reaches each school. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, as with the first Gonski report, Gonski 2.0 is supportive of our current market-based model. </p>
<p>Despite particular “winners” and “losers”, <a href="https://thewest.com.au/news/education/funding-surge-for-high-fee-schools-ng-b88491810z">government funding of highly resourced and elite schools</a> remains intact. Arguably, then, it will also do little to address the rising inequalities that are entrenched within our market-based education system.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/78469/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jessica Gerrard does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Federal and state government funding to the Catholic sector does not necessarily then flow straight to the school.Jessica Gerrard, Senior Lecturer in Education, Equity and Politics, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/770812017-05-03T01:55:44Z2017-05-03T01:55:44ZGonski 2.0: Is this the school funding plan we have been looking for? Finally, yes<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/167624/original/file-20170503-4096-nbi5nv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Catholic schools and over-funded schools will lose out the most.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from shutterstock.com </span></span></figcaption></figure><p>They used to say that a week is a long time in politics. How last century! Now a day is a long time in politics, or at least the politics of school funding.</p>
<p>Just yesterday morning, I was arguing that school funding was at an impasse. By early afternoon that had all changed, along with the federal government’s rhetoric on school funding. Instead, we were introduced to Gonski 2.0. </p>
<p>For the first time, Education Minister Simon Birmingham has <a href="https://theconversation.com/turnbull-announces-schools-funding-and-a-new-gonski-review-77011">proposed a credible plan</a> to deliver needs-based funding. </p>
<p>But is this the plan we have been looking for?</p>
<h2>Where we were at before the announcement</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/review-of-funding-for-schooling-final-report-dec-2011.pdf">Gonksi report in 2011</a> was an inspired attempt to move past decades of funding wars. </p>
<p>Negotiated or bastardised (depending on your point of view) in its implementation <a href="https://theconversation.com/gonski-model-was-corrupted-but-labor-and-coalition-are-both-to-blame-65875">by the last Labor government</a>, it was at first derided, then supported, then buried by the Coalition under Tony Abbott.</p>
<p>The re-boot of leadership under Malcolm Turnbull left school funding in limbo. The resulting policy vacuum led to a messy and unfocused debate. </p>
<p>Labor continued to claim that the only true path was to add billions of dollars to school funding. But Labor’s figures are greatly inflated because of its unwillingness to make tough decisions – or recognise the benefits of historically low wages growth.</p>
<p>At one point, Turnbull suggested to the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) that funding should be split, with the Commonwealth paying for non-government schools and states paying for government schools. But this is a terrible idea with <a href="https://theconversation.com/split-funding-idea-for-schools-has-big-risks-and-few-clear-benefits-57102">big risks and few benefits</a>.</p>
<p>Birmingham then publicly supported needs-based funding, but could not explain how we would get there. </p>
<p>Grattan Institute <a href="https://theconversation.com/new-model-for-school-funding-that-wont-break-the-budget-69406">published our own plan last November</a>, arguing that the Coalition could deliver Gonski-style needs-based funding without more money, if it made some tough decisions about indexation and over-funded schools. </p>
<h2>What has now changed?</h2>
<p>Flanked by the big-Gonski himself, Turnbull and Birmingham finally announced the Coalition’s plan.</p>
<p>1) They recommitted to the principles of Gonski, which they referred to as genuine needs-based funding and branded as <em>Gonski 2.0</em>. </p>
<p>2) They promised not to tinker with the overall design of the funding formula for each school, called the “Schooling Resource Standard” or SRS. (The details of the SRS formula should be reviewed, since there are flaws and the original analysis was done with too little evidence. But the formula follows the core design suggested by Gonski, and makes sense.)</p>
<p>3) They disentangled Commonwealth and state funding, arguing that Commonwealth funding should depend on need, not on where students live. </p>
<p>So now, for the first time, the Commonwealth will have a simple and transparent way to explain how it funds schools:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Every school has a target level of funding, the SRS</p></li>
<li><p>Government schools receive Commonwealth funding equal to 20% of SRS (up from 17% on average today)</p></li>
<li><p>Non-government schools receive Commonwealth funding equal to 80% of SRS (up from 77%).</p></li>
</ul>
<p>This is a big change from the current model, under which comparable students in similar schools could receive thousands of dollars more or less from the Commonwealth depending on which state or territory they live in.</p>
<p>States and territories will be expected to maintain their real level of funding, but will not otherwise be tied to the SRS formula. </p>
<p>This gives states some flexibility in how much they invest in schools, a good idea in a federal system. </p>
<p>So far so good. But for the numbers to add up, five more changes were needed.</p>
<p>4) Turnbull and Birmingham reduced the long-term indexation rate so that school funding will grow in line with a blend of wages and CPI after 2021. </p>
<p>This change will save billions of dollars over the long term compared to the current legislation. </p>
<p>5) They extended the timeline out to 10 years, giving the power of compound interest more time to do its magic. </p>
<p>6) They tweaked some of the special deals Julia Gillard struck with the Catholic school system. These tweaks will have the effect of expecting parents to contribute more, especially in Catholic primary schools.</p>
<p>7) They finally overturned the mantra of “no school will lose a dollar”, thereby saving maybe $1.5 billion over the next decade.</p>
<p>8) They added new money to the pot compared to the 2016 budget – $2.2 billion over the next four years, substantially more over the long term.</p>
<h2>Who are the big winners and losers?</h2>
<p>Compared to the Labor proposal, most schools, sectors and states will feel like losers. But taxpayers are big winners. </p>
<p><a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/circuit-breaker/">Grattan’s analysis shows</a> that Labor’s plan is far more expensive than required, a huge problem given the state of the federal budget.</p>
<p>Compared to the 2016 budget, the big winners are:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Government schools in states that are currently underfunded, especially New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland</p></li>
<li><p>Western Australia, which receives much less from the Commonwealth for its government schools</p></li>
<li><p>Underfunded independent schools (especially the lower-fee schools, some of which are the most underfunded schools in the entire country). </p></li>
</ul>
<p>Compared to the 2016 budget, the big losers are:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Catholic schools, which will lose a number of special deals (especially for the Australian Capital Territory which had a special deal all of its own); more analysis is needed to understand whether they will be worse off overall</p></li>
<li><p>24 highly over-funded schools that will have their per-student funding cut</p></li>
<li><p>About 300 slightly over-funded schools that will have their funding slowed or frozen. It is not entirely clear who these schools are at this stage. </p></li>
</ul>
<h2>Where does this all leave us?</h2>
<p>We can now move on from the phoney war to a genuine debate about a concrete and credible proposal. Three things should happen now.</p>
<p>First, there will need to be much broader consultation than has occurred so far. The multitude of states, sectors and other stakeholders in schooling will need to mollified, even if some will never be fully satisfied.</p>
<p>Second, the federal government needs to pass legislation to give effect to the new funding arrangements. This is a big task: timing is tight, given the current deal runs out before the start of the 2018 school year. The senate will be a challenge. </p>
<p>Third, Gonski himself will lead an expert review, to report by the end of this year. His task is to synthesise the evidence on what works and provide advice on how the extra funding should be spent.</p>
<p>Many shots are still to be fired. But this clear, positive approach could be just what we need to get us past the squabbling on funding – a key hurdle so that we can move on to the issues that will really drive improvements in school education.</p>
<p>If that happens, everyone will be a winner, especially Australia’s students. </p>
<p>Well, maybe not everyone. If Gonski 2.0 sticks, the Labor party will need to find a new signature issue to take to the next election.</p>
<hr>
<p><strong>• This piece was amended on 3 May to correct a point that was made. The piece suggested that the 300+ schools that will have their funding cut will “probably include government schools in the ACT that are currently funded well above target”. However it is not yet clear who these schools are. The sentence has been amended to reflect this.</strong> </p>
<hr>
<p>•<em>Do you have a question about school policy and recent education announcements? Leave your questions in the comments and we’ll pass them on to an expert.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/77081/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the Federal and Victorian Governments. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and Grattan uses the income to pursue its activities.</span></em></p>For the first time, Education Minister Simon Birmingham has proposed a credible plan to deliver needs-based funding.Peter Goss, School Education Program Director, Grattan InstituteLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/748082017-04-14T13:56:25Z2017-04-14T13:56:25ZTax credits, school choice and ‘neovouchers’: What you need to know<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165293/original/image-20170413-25898-14wcw52.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Should taxpayer dollars fund private education?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/elementary-school-pupils-running-playground-284501777?src=-7i_gVOjcgfbUP4mAhpK9Q-1-1">Monkey Business Images / Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>As Republican lawmakers craft a <a href="http://www.providencejournal.com/news/20170325/trump-gop-turn-to-tax-overhaul">tax reform bill</a>, there’s <a href="http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TRUMP_TAXES">speculation</a> on the import taxes, value-added taxes and tax cuts it may usher in. Meanwhile, it’s likely that the bill will also include a major education policy initiative from the Trump administration: a <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/trump-schools-tax-credit-public-private-235228">tax credit designed to fund private school vouchers</a>.</p>
<p>A decade ago I started researching this <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?282880-1/tuition-tax-credits">new kind of voucher</a> – funded through a somewhat convoluted tax credit mechanism – that appears to have particular appeal to <a href="http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/national-international/Experts-Talk-Education-Under-Trump-DeVos--416373583.html">President Trump and other Republicans</a>.</p>
<p>These new vouchers (or “neovouchers”) are similar to conventional vouchers in many ways, but there are some important differences. It’s those differences that neovoucher advocates most care about and that everyone should understand.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165292/original/image-20170413-25898-1dhmkx1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165292/original/image-20170413-25898-1dhmkx1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165292/original/image-20170413-25898-1dhmkx1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165292/original/image-20170413-25898-1dhmkx1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165292/original/image-20170413-25898-1dhmkx1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165292/original/image-20170413-25898-1dhmkx1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165292/original/image-20170413-25898-1dhmkx1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165292/original/image-20170413-25898-1dhmkx1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">President Donald Trump and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos tour Saint Andrew Catholic School in Orlando, Florida.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Alex Brandon</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Conventional vouchers</h2>
<p>What exactly is a school voucher? Typically, a voucher is direct financial support that helps families pay for the cost of private K-12 schooling. Proponents see vouchers as a way to <a href="https://www.federationforchildren.org/school-choice-america/programs-qualifications/">help children attend nonpublic schools</a>. Detractors see vouchers as <a href="https://theconversation.com/do-school-vouchers-improve-results-it-depends-on-what-we-ask-55003">undermining funding and support needed by public education</a>.</p>
<p>All vouchers subsidize tuition with tax dollars. This can be accomplished in many ways, and the nuances matter.</p>
<p>Conventional voucher policies use the relatively straightforward method of allocating state money to give vouchers directly to eligible parents. The parents, in turn, give the vouchers to a private school of their choice. These schools are sometimes secular, but are <a href="https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgc.asp">usually religious</a>.</p>
<p>The private schools then redeem these vouchers to obtain money from the state. In the <a href="https://www.edchoice.org/school-choice/school-choice-in-america/">16 states</a> where conventional voucher policies exist, they produce about 175,000 vouchers annually. This amounts to 3.3 percent of the nation’s private school population.</p>
<p>Yet, these direct vouchering programs present four major problems for school choice advocates.</p>
<p>First, they’re typically available only to <a href="https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737024002145">lower-income families</a>; wealthier families are usually not eligible.</p>
<p>Second, when governments directly provide voucher money, participating schools are generally required to comply with <a href="https://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/publication/pdfs/20130129-School-Choice-Regulations-Red-Tape-or-Red-Herring-FINAL_7.pdf">a variety of guidelines</a>, such as accreditation requirements, anti-discrimination regulation, minimum teacher qualifications, financial reporting and/or the administration of a standardized test to students receiving the voucher.</p>
<p>Third, vouchers are <a href="http://www.shankerinstitute.org/sites/shanker/files/pdkpoll47_2015.pdf#page=18">simply not politically popular</a> – which is why the more palatable term “<a href="http://schoolsites.schoolworld.com/schools/Cheltenham/webpages/rwilman/files/article-lemann-the%20word%20lab.pdf">opportunity scholarships</a>” (courtesy of messaging guru <a href="http://www.luntzglobal.com/team/frank-luntz/">Frank Luntz</a>) has become increasingly popular.</p>
<p>Finally – and importantly – <a href="https://comm.ncsl.org/productfiles/82733543/Session_Powerpoint.pdf">state constitutions</a> often prohibit the channeling of state money to religious institutions. In many states, this means that conventional voucher programs cannot exist if the program includes religious schools. Although the Supreme Court has ruled that <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/536/639/case.html">vouchers don’t violate federal law</a>, state constitutions can create <a href="http://law.justia.com/constitution/colorado/cnart9.html">legal obstacles</a> that are more formidable than those under the U.S. Constitution.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165299/original/image-20170413-25886-1qah0et.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165299/original/image-20170413-25886-1qah0et.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165299/original/image-20170413-25886-1qah0et.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165299/original/image-20170413-25886-1qah0et.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165299/original/image-20170413-25886-1qah0et.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165299/original/image-20170413-25886-1qah0et.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165299/original/image-20170413-25886-1qah0et.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">St. Joseph Academy, a Catholic school in Cleveland, is one of the top three schools to benefit from Ohio voucher dollars. Ohio’s conventional vouchers can be applied to secular and nonsecular schools alike, but 97 percent go to religious schools.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Saint_Joseph_Academy_Campus.jpg">Oarbogast / Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Vouchers on steroids</h2>
<p>To sidestep these issues, many state lawmakers have embraced a new kind of voucher policy that gets essentially the same result but changes the state’s role from paying for vouchers to issuing tax credits.</p>
<p>This approach was first adopted in Arizona, in 1997, where the legislature <a href="https://www.azleg.gov/ars/43/01089.htm">passed a law</a> setting up a system in which any taxpayer could “donate” money to a special, private nonprofit corporation. That corporation then issues vouchers to parents, who use them to pay for private school tuition. The taxpayers then get the money back from the state in the form of a tax credit.</p>
<p><a href="http://law.justia.com/constitution/arizona/2/12.htm">Arizona’s constitution</a> – typical of language in state constitutions – requires that “No public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise, or instruction, or to the support of any religious establishment.” But Arizona’s elaborate mechanism keeps the specific dollars out of state coffers. Consequently, state funding only indirectly supports religious institutions. The <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v8n36.2000">Arizona Supreme Court</a> found this distinction sufficient, ruling that the tax credits did not violate the state’s constitutional prohibition against spending public money for religious support.</p>
<p>Beyond this legal advantage, advocates favor this sort of tax-credit-voucher method because it appears <a href="https://www.cato.org/education-wiki/scholarship-tax-credits-vouchers">less likely to be regulated</a>. It’s also likely to be open to a wider range of parents – not just lower-income or special needs families. And the complexity of the neovoucher approach <a href="http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/09/03/02welner.h28.html">obscures the fact that it’s really a voucher program</a>, making it less of a political lightning rod.</p>
<p>Some wealthy taxpayers can even receive tax benefits exceeding the <a href="http://itep.org/itep_reports/2016/10/state-tax-subsidies-for-private-k-12-education.php#.WM1mZUffuOw">value of their donations</a>. This baffling outcome is because of a loophole tied to the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), an extra tax imposed on some wealthier taxpayers to ensure that they pay their fair share. The AMT limits certain tax breaks, such as the ability to deduct state tax payments from federal taxes. However – and here’s the twist – these AMT taxpayers can deduct charitable contributions. And so, these wealthier taxpayers can shift their state tax payment into a “charitable” contribution and instantly transform the payment into a federal deduction. In the six states that give a full tax credit for voucher donations, those taxpayers can get back the full value of their voucher plus a deduction for the donation.</p>
<p>A decade ago when I wrote a book explaining these tax credit policies and labeling them “<a href="https://rowman.com/ISBN/9780742540804">neovouchers</a>,” they existed in only six states and generated about 100,000 vouchers. Today, <a href="https://www.edchoice.org/school-choice/school-choice-in-america/">17 states</a> have tax-credit policies similar to Arizona’s on their books, generating a quarter-million vouchers and growing every year.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165287/original/image-20170413-10077-jto263.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165287/original/image-20170413-10077-jto263.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165287/original/image-20170413-10077-jto263.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=314&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165287/original/image-20170413-10077-jto263.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=314&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165287/original/image-20170413-10077-jto263.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=314&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165287/original/image-20170413-10077-jto263.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=394&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165287/original/image-20170413-10077-jto263.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=394&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165287/original/image-20170413-10077-jto263.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=394&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Students at The King’s Academy in West Palm Beach, Florida. Florida is one of the states that issues tax-credit-style vouchers.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_King%27s_Academy_Campus_-.jpg_M._Nelson_Loveland.jpg">Randal Martin / Wikipedia</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>These new vouchers aren’t likely to help kids</h2>
<p>Do these vouchers improve student achievement? The research suggests that we shouldn’t expect children’s learning to be affected.</p>
<p>An <a href="http://www.floridaschoolchoice.org/pdf/FTC_Research_2012-13_report.pdf">evaluation of Florida’s neovoucher law</a> – which <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-devos-florida-school-choice-20170409-story.html">the Trump administration appears to be using as its model</a> – found that students receiving these neovouchers had a nonsignificant (-0.7 percentile points) loss in math and nonsignificant (+0.1 percentile points) gain in reading on standardized test scores. </p>
<p>Similarly, research focused on conventional vouchers has tended to reach this <a href="http://www.epi.org/publication/school-vouchers-are-not-a-proven-strategy-for-improving-student-achievement">same conclusion</a>, finding no significant change in student test scores. More recent studies, looking at conventional vouchers in <a href="http://migrationcluster.ucdavis.edu/events/past-events/events_2015-2016/conf_assets/aclec/papers_and_slides/paper_walters.pdf">Louisiana</a>, <a href="https://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/publication/pdfs/FORDHAM%20Ed%20Choice%20Evaluation%20Report_online%20edition.pdf">Ohio</a> and <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/research/on-negative-effects-of-vouchers/">Indiana</a> actually find that test scores have declined – in some cases, by surprisingly large margins.</p>
<h2>What to expect</h2>
<p>While, thus far, neovoucher policies have existed only on the state level, proposals are now appearing at a federal level.</p>
<p>In February of 2017, Rep. Todd Rokita of Indiana and three Republican colleagues introduced a bill (<a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/895">H.B. 895</a>) that sets forth the basic structure for a federal neovoucher policy.</p>
<p>But the particulars of the neovoucher policy that ultimately emerges in the Republicans’ tax reform bill are up for grabs. Based on the wide variety of existing state neovoucher policies, it is possible that the federal proposal will provide a full 100 percent credit (as does H.B. 895) or a credit of only 50 or 65 percent. It might limit eligibility to children in families at the poverty level, or it might have expanded or even universal eligibility.</p>
<p>It also remains to be seen whether federal neovouchers would be allocated only in states with existing programs or might be distributed in all states, including those with no such laws.</p>
<p>Interestingly, some of the staunchest advocates of state-level neovouchers have expressed <a href="http://www.heritage.org/education/event/school-choice-and-national-education-policy-options-advancing-education-choice">concern and even opposition</a> to a federal initiative. Beyond general conservative resistance to federal overreach in education policy, they voice <a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2017-03-24/liberals-conservatives-agree-big-mistake-for-white-house-to-push-private-school-choice">familiar concerns</a> about the likelihood of regulations following money, particularly from future Democratic leadership in Washington, D.C.</p>
<p>And, of course, a federal neovoucher program would face significant fiscal obstacles as well. Absent large cuts elsewhere, these policies would strain the federal budget, requiring some creative work on the part of lawmakers – particularly since the tax reform bill will have to be <a href="http://www.tpctax.com/washington-tax-insight-february-2017/">revenue neutral</a>. The cost of vouchers for even a fraction of the nation’s 57 million K-12 students could easily cost tens of billions.</p>
<p>This daunting price tag, however, probably won’t deter President Trump or Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, who have stated their opposition to the “public” part of public schools, with Trump even denigrating them as socialistic “<a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/11/trump-betsy-devos-overton-window">government schools</a>” that are part of the “<a href="https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/american-carnage-a-close-reading-of-president-trumps-first-speech">American carnage</a>” that “leaves our young and beautiful students deprived of all knowledge.”</p>
<p>It seems unlikely that they will forego their chance to give tax dollars to private education.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/74808/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Research for Kevin Welner's "NeoVouchers" book received support from the Rockefeller Foundation, through its Bellagio Center Residency Program.</span></em></p>As school choice advocates attempt to garner more widespread support for vouchers, a new kind of voucher system is growing: one that uses tax credits to subsidize private education.Kevin Welner, Professor, Education Policy & Law; Director, National Education Policy Center, University of Colorado BoulderLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/665192016-10-10T16:41:24Z2016-10-10T16:41:24ZTheresa May’s plans to relax faith school admissions will do nothing for social justice<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140888/original/image-20161007-21447-1kanoz7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Mixed response to May's faith school plan.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>With competition for school places set to <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/national-pupil-projections-trends-in-pupil-numbers-july-2015">intensify over the next decade</a>, the government’s recent <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/schools-that-work-for-everyone/supporting_documents/SCHOOLS%20THAT%20WORK%20FOR%20EVERYONE%20FINAL.pdf">proposal</a> to relax admissions rules for new faith schools has been met with mixed responses. While the move to allow new faith schools to select all of their pupils by religion has been <a href="http://schoolsweek.co.uk/faith-schools-welcome-100-faith-based-admissions/">welcomed by many religious schools</a>, others have expressed fears that allowing schools to select their entire intake by faith will lead to <a href="http://schoolsweek.co.uk/removing-faith-selection-cap-will-increase-segregation-say-humanists/">increased segregation</a>.</p>
<p>The 50% cap on religious admissions was introduced in 2010, and has led to a situation where new faith schools (post 2010) can only select half of their pupils based on religion, whereas established faith schools (pre 2010) have continued to be able to religiously select up to 100% of their intake. Although not all of the schools that are still able to religiously choose all of their pupils actually do so. </p>
<p>In her “<a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/britain-the-great-meritocracy-prime-ministers-speech">great meritocracy</a>” speech, Theresa May argued that the current 50% cap on these new faith schools “is failing in its objective to promote integration” because minority faith schools do not attract pupils of other or no faith.</p>
<p>And in one sense, this is correct. Data from the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/schools-that-work-for-everyone/supporting_documents/SCHOOLS%20THAT%20WORK%20FOR%20EVERYONE%20FINAL.pdf">School Census</a> shows there is little ethnic mixing in minority religious free schools. These are schools for groups that tend to experience high levels of societal discrimination – such as Muslim or Jewish schools. The communities these schools serve are often stigmatised by society – so it is foolish to think that a cap alone could solve problems faced by these groups.</p>
<p>This said, <a href="https://humanism.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016-09-15-FINAL-Ethnic-diversity-in-religious-Free-Schools.pdf">data</a> from religiously selective secondary schools shows that Christian free schools which have the 50% cap in place actually have greater levels of ethnic diversity than fully selective Christian schools.</p>
<h2>Religious selection</h2>
<p>To allow new schools to religiously select 100% of their pupils is not only problematic in terms of social integration, it is also unfair. Particularly given that faith schools claim to offer <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/leaguetables/12043152/Primary-School-league-tables-Faith-schools-have-tight-grip-on-rankings.html">better quality education</a> and <a href="http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ioep/clre/2005/00000003/00000001/art00005?crawler=true">higher attainment levels</a>.</p>
<p>What’s more, the way in which faith schools deliver the religious aspect of the curriculum has started to change. Although faith schools aim to provide a good general education and introduce children to the beliefs and practices of a particular faith, many opponents claim that the second aim is “<a href="http://tre.sagepub.com/content/1/1/89">indoctrinatory</a>”. To try and address this, <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13617672.2016.1141532?journalCode=cjbv20">faith educators</a> have increasingly turned away from traditional “confessional” <a href="http://ice.sagepub.com/content/17/2/285.abstract">religious instruction</a> and have instead moved towards an education that considers religion from a more open perspective – allowing children to make up their own minds. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140894/original/image-20161007-21423-jxmzjr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140894/original/image-20161007-21423-jxmzjr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140894/original/image-20161007-21423-jxmzjr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140894/original/image-20161007-21423-jxmzjr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140894/original/image-20161007-21423-jxmzjr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140894/original/image-20161007-21423-jxmzjr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140894/original/image-20161007-21423-jxmzjr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The government’s decision to lift the 50% cap on faith-based admissions to new free schools prompted differing reactions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This means the education that many faith schools now offer is more accessible to pupils with other religions, or to those with no faith. And <a href="http://faithdebates.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/WFD-Faith-Schools-Press-Release.pdf">recent research</a> shows that the “faith aspect” of faith schooling matters far less to those contemplating school choice than academic standards, location or discipline.</p>
<h2>Priority pupils</h2>
<p>The prime minister has failed to notice this change in attitudes towards faith education and has even cited the Catholic Church’s view on the cap as another reason to abandon it. The church argues that not prioritising children from Catholic backgrounds contravenes the rules of the church – known as “<a href="http://www.catholiceducation.org.uk/news/ces-news/item/1003609-catholic-church-welcomes-prime-minister-s-removal-of-the-cap-on-faith-admissions">Canon law</a>”. </p>
<p>The church’s position eventually led to <a href="http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/st-marys-college-crosby-abandons-7116064">the abandonment of a free school application</a> from a fee paying school – St Mary’s College in Crosby. In this case, the Archdiocese of Liverpool refused to support a bid because of the cap.</p>
<p>But the <a href="http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/religionpublicsphere/2016/09/the-governments-changes-to-faith-schools-sides-with-hardline-religion/">claim about Canon law is disputed</a> – with critics noting there are many <a href="http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/5k9fq23507vc.pdf?expires=1475767680&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=05CD7293462499EE1976CDFB3C74EE50">non-selective Catholic schools elsewhere</a> in the world. <a href="https://humanism.org.uk/2016/09/09/exposed-catholic-hypocrisy-in-calls-for-end-to-restrictions-on-religious-selection-in-schools/">Private Catholic schools</a> are also far less likely to select on religious grounds than those in the state sector.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140895/original/image-20161007-21458-1yr68i2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140895/original/image-20161007-21458-1yr68i2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140895/original/image-20161007-21458-1yr68i2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140895/original/image-20161007-21458-1yr68i2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140895/original/image-20161007-21458-1yr68i2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140895/original/image-20161007-21458-1yr68i2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140895/original/image-20161007-21458-1yr68i2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">May made the announcement as part of a major overhaul of secondary education.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The abandonment of the cap is based on a concern to meet a need for additional school places, but the logic is flawed. This is because the school places the policy will provide will only be available to a small subset of pupils – and the families who need the places most will probably not benefit from these new schools at all. </p>
<p><a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03054980903072611">Evidence</a> suggests that – despite the Catholic Church’s claim its schools are more <a href="http://www.catholiceducation.org.uk/news/ces-news/item/1002818-new-research-shows-catholic-schools-are-more-ethnically-diverse-and-higher-performing-than-national-averages">socially and ethnically diverse</a> than the national average – faith schools are more likely to admit pupils from <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezproxyd.bham.ac.uk/doi/10.1080/01411926.2010.489145/epdf">affluent families</a> or with <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezproxyd.bham.ac.uk/doi/10.1080/01411926.2010.489145/epdf">higher levels of prior attainment</a> than <a href="http://www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Caught-Out_Research-brief_April-16.pdf">nondenominational schools</a>. </p>
<h2>Exclusive education</h2>
<p>It is clear that advocates of faith based education now face a dilemma. Either they maintain that faith schools can provide “non-indoctrinatory” education – which is accessible, attractive and valuable to families of all denominations. Or they argue for a distinctive form of religious instruction – which would only be suitable for children of faith. Only schools of the second sort can adequately justify religiously selective admissions. But given that public attitudes to the funding of separate schools <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/jun/14/taxpayers-should-not-fund-faith-schools">have hardened in recent years</a>– and the extent to which indoctrination is considered “morally unacceptable” – such schools would be unlikely to win public support.</p>
<p>Admissions policies fundamentally determine who becomes part of a school’s student body. So the role that higher levels of religious selection could play in worsening social injustice – by “creaming off” the best, most motivated or wealthiest pupils – should not be underestimated.</p>
<p>If the positive outcomes associated with faith schools could be directly linked to the religiosity of pupils, it might be possible to defend the policy to admit higher proportions of children from faith backgrounds. </p>
<p>But, in the absence of compelling evidence to support this, the only other way to justify religious selection is to show there is something distinctive about faith education – something which makes it exclusively of worth to pupils from religious families. Unfortunately for supporters of fully religiously selective schools, it’s difficult to show this is the case.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/66519/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ruth Wareham is a Researcher at the University of Warwick where her current academic post is funded by the Spencer Foundation. She is a member of the Labour Party.</span></em></p>Allowing new faith schools to religiously select 100% of their pupils is not only problematic in terms of social integration, it is simply unfair.Ruth Wareham, Research Assistant, Faith Schooling: Principles & Policies, University of WarwickLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/425432015-06-01T20:07:59Z2015-06-01T20:07:59ZPrivate, Catholic schools do add value to students’ results<p>Over the last few years <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/thirty-studies-and-15--years-later-review-shows-public-schools-produce-same-results-20150419-1mlrvg.touch.html">several studies have concluded</a> there are no differences in academic outcomes for students from government, independent or Catholic schools once statistical adjustments are made for students’ socioeconomic status and other factors.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.acer.edu.au/documents/PISA-2012-Report.pdf">Studies</a> based the on 2009 and 2012 Australian component of the (<a href="http://www.oecd.org/pisa/">PISA</a>) international student tests found the large differences in student performance between school sectors were reduced when students’ socioeconomic background was taken into account. The differences disappeared when the schools’ average socioeconomic status was taken into account.</p>
<p>A <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092753711500024X">recent study</a> on Year 5 performance in the National Assessments of Performance — Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) found the higher scores of students from Catholic and independent schools disappear with a comprehensive set of controls, which includes prior achievement (such as Year 3 NAPLAN performance). Other statistical approaches led to the same conclusion. </p>
<p>The authors attribute much of the differences between school sectors in NAPLAN to “previous cognitive attainments” or natural ability rather than socioeconomic status.</p>
<h2>Previous studies on school sector differences</h2>
<p>Despite these studies, it would be wrong to conclude there are no school sector differences in student performance in Australia. School sector differences are well established for students’ Australian Tertiary Admission Ranks (ATARs). </p>
<p>This conclusion is based on <a href="http://aed.sagepub.com/content/53/1/19.abstract">a number</a> of <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13803611003711310?journalCode=nere20">studies</a> of <a href="http://www.lsay.edu.au/publications/2541.html">cohorts</a> participating in the <a href="http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=lsay_research">Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth</a> study (between 1998 and 2009) and <a href="https://www.training.nsw.gov.au/forms_documents/vet/bvet/research/vet_planning/career_moves_acer.pdf">a study of 2010 school leavers in New South Wales</a>. </p>
<p>Generally, the unadjusted gap (not taking into account other influences on student performance) in tertiary entrance rank between Catholic and government school students is about five ATAR points and the gap between independent and government school students is around 11 ATAR points. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/83469/original/image-20150601-15250-1fb5r4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/83469/original/image-20150601-15250-1fb5r4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/83469/original/image-20150601-15250-1fb5r4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83469/original/image-20150601-15250-1fb5r4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83469/original/image-20150601-15250-1fb5r4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83469/original/image-20150601-15250-1fb5r4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83469/original/image-20150601-15250-1fb5r4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83469/original/image-20150601-15250-1fb5r4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Catholic schools have higher ATARs than government schools.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com.au</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>When controlling for students’ socioeconomic status, the Catholic-government school sector gap declines marginally, whereas the independent-government school sector gap declines by about one-third from about 11 to seven ATAR points. </p>
<p>School sector differences decline much more substantially when taking into account students’ prior achievement. On average, when taking into account socioeconomic status and prior achievement, the Catholic-government school sector gap is three to six ATAR points and the independent-government school sector gap six to eight points.</p>
<h2>New study confirms sector differences</h2>
<p>I recently undertook the <a href="http://aed.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/05/29/0004944115586658.abstract">most comprehensive study of school sector differences</a> to date. This study is more robust than previous studies based on survey data, since the data is both 100% accurate and complete. I analysed NAPLAN and tertiary entrance performance data obtained from administrative sources for all students (over 40,000) attending all Victorian schools who obtained an ATAR in 2011.</p>
<p>For ATAR, Catholic school students scored, on average, nine ATAR points higher than government school students. Independent school students scored 17 ATAR points higher. </p>
<p>The increments associated with the Catholic and independent school sectors were reduced to six and eight ranks, controlling for socioeconomic status, prior achievement (Year 9 NAPLAN performance), gender and language background.</p>
<p>Analysis of students’ Tertiary Entrance Aggregate, from which ATAR is derived, revealed substantial effects of school sector. Students from Catholic and independent schools performed at 0.24 and 0.38 standard deviations higher than their peers in the government sector, again once accounting for the effects of socioeconomic status, prior achievement, gender and language background.</p>
<p>The study included analysis of students who changed school sectors between Years 9 and 12. It concluded that the Catholic and independent school sectors were associated with increases in academic performance of six and eight percentiles, respectively, compared with the government sector. </p>
<p>Therefore the higher tertiary entrance performance of students attending Catholic and independent schools cannot be attributed to the differences in the social and academic profiles of each sector’s students.</p>
<h2>Socioeconomic background not as important as thought</h2>
<p>This study also demonstrates that students’ socioeconomic background is not nearly as important as often claimed. Student socioeconomic status is a weak predictor of students’ ATARs. The very much stronger effects of prior achievement (Year 9 NAPLAN performance) on tertiary entrance performance cannot (at all) be attributed to socioeconomic status. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/83471/original/image-20150601-27771-12fwltz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/83471/original/image-20150601-27771-12fwltz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/83471/original/image-20150601-27771-12fwltz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83471/original/image-20150601-27771-12fwltz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83471/original/image-20150601-27771-12fwltz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83471/original/image-20150601-27771-12fwltz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83471/original/image-20150601-27771-12fwltz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/83471/original/image-20150601-27771-12fwltz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A students’ socioeconomic background is a poor predictor of results.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com.au</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The absence of strong effects of socioeconomic background on tertiary entrance performance makes theoretical sense. The knowledge and skills assessed during and before Year 12 are overwhelmingly taught in schools; even the most highly educated, wealthiest, or most cultured parent would have great difficulty with the depth and breadth of a typical Year 12 student’s subjects.</p>
<p>These findings show that Catholic and independent schools “add value” to students’ tertiary entrance performance in Victoria in terms of higher scores. Here “value adding” is defined as increasing student performance beyond that expected by students’ prior achievement. </p>
<p>This conclusion of substantial sector differences in ATAR does not necessarily contradict studies that show small or no sector differences in NAPLAN. It may be the case that school sector differences in student performance are trivial in primary school but increase over the school career and are sizeable in senior secondary school. At least this seems to be the case for Victoria. </p>
<p>Alternatively, Year 12 assessments are “high stakes” tests, whereas NAPLAN and PISA are “low stakes” tests in that there are no consequences for students for excellent or poor performance. Schools are more likely to devote much greater resources to “high stakes” tests. </p>
<p>Since the early 2000s Victoria has been a leader in allowing analysis of administrative data on student performance in Year 12. It is hoped that analysis of similar data of senior secondary students from other states and territories will help us understand the extent and nature of school sector differences in Australia.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/42543/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gary N. Marks does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>New research has concluded Catholic and Independent schools do add value to students’ tertiary scores.Gary N. Marks, Adjunct Professor, School of Sociology and Political Science, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/305462014-08-18T10:31:09Z2014-08-18T10:31:09ZNorthern Ireland’s stellar exam results mask underlying gap between rich and poor<p>As students across the UK and Ireland consider their next steps following publication of this year’s exam results, news outlets have been quick to <a href="http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/education/northern-ireland-students-a-class-apart-as-results-eclipse-rest-of-uk-30510153.html">produce whimsical comparisons</a> to determine the top performing devolved region. </p>
<p>Students in Northern Ireland continue to outperform their counterparts across the UK, as has been the case for some years. <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-28780966">The BBC highlighted</a> that students from the North of Ireland have more A-level A* and A grades than those taking similar subjects in England and Wales. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/56604/original/r3hz9gfm-1408099162.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/56604/original/r3hz9gfm-1408099162.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/56604/original/r3hz9gfm-1408099162.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/56604/original/r3hz9gfm-1408099162.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/56604/original/r3hz9gfm-1408099162.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/56604/original/r3hz9gfm-1408099162.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/56604/original/r3hz9gfm-1408099162.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In a 2013 speech made at the Northern Ireland Investment Conference, <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/david-camerons-speech-at-the-northern-ireland-investment-conference">David Cameron was quick to champion</a> the successes of the Northern Irish education system. He stated emphatically that it had “the highest rankings for reading and numeracy of any English speaking part of the world”. </p>
<p>Not a bad achievement for a region which has a <a href="http://www.nisra.gov.uk/demography/default.asp47.htm">combined childhood population of less</a> than 500,000, according to the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency.</p>
<h2>Achievements of the elite</h2>
<p>This educational achievement is something to be proud of. But this form of reporting only serves to highlight the achievements of the privileged without appreciating the links between lower socioeconomic position and education across the region. In order to level the pedagogical playing field, instead of rushing to give Northern Ireland’s education system a collective “pat on the back,” educationalists should dig deeper into the dynamics of which children are doing well. </p>
<p>In forthcoming research with my colleague Clare Dwyer, we found that in terms of educational attainment, children and young people in Northern Ireland generally outperform their counterparts in England, Scotland, and Wales in terms of academic achievement overall (including GCSE and A Level results). </p>
<p>But when we looked at the link between socioeconomic status and school results, a more worrying trend emerged. We found that those children eligible for free school meals (a commonly used poverty indicator), underperformed those who are not eligible, and by some distance. Put simply, those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds consistently fail to do well at school.</p>
<p>Up-to date research on social exclusion in Northern Ireland conducted by the NGO <a href="http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/where-we-work/united-kingdom/northern-ireland#sthash.CyDhtfYh.dpuf">Save the Children has revealed</a> that more than one in four children and young people live in poverty, with almost a tenth in severe poverty. </p>
<p>Save the Children found that in areas with the highest levels of childhood depletion, such as Ballymurphy ward in Belfast, more than 80% of people have no or low qualifications. </p>
<p>So although students across the North of Ireland are collectively outperforming their UK counterparts in exams, there is a growing disparity between those who have the opportunity, financial security and stable family environment in which to achieve their academic potential, and those who don’t.</p>
<h2>Catholic schools do better</h2>
<p>Further <a href="http://www.community-relations.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Peace-Monitoring-Report-2014.pdf">research in the 2013 Northern Ireland Peace Monitoring Report</a> reveals that this disparity is linked to both gender and community background. Almost half of all catholic girls growing up in lower socioeconomic backgrounds are likely to go on to higher education, in contrast to less than a third of protestant boys from similar backgrounds.</p>
<p>As the GCSE and A Level results in Northern Ireland are analysed further, statisticians will further reveal that the top-performing schools across the region are either catholic or state-sponsored (predominantly protestant).</p>
<p>With catholic schools <a href="http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/education/every-one-of-northern-irelands-top-five-schools-is-a-catholic-grammar-30140937.html">already performing better</a> than their state-sponsored counterparts, there will be the predictable clamour of support for integrated schooling between the catholic and protestant communities.</p>
<h2>Time to reinterpret integrated education</h2>
<p>The issue of integrated education continues to be an area that stirs up the strongest feelings of support in terms of post-conflict reconstruction among the Northern Irish population. <a href="http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2008/Community_Relations/PROTRCMX.html">A survey</a> carried out in 2008 on behalf of the Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education found that 84% of respondents who had children or grandchildren of school age or younger thought that integrated education was “very important” or “fairly important”.</p>
<p>Critics of the Northern Irish education system vehemently champion educational integration between catholic and protestant children as a central issue of concern. But there really ought to be a greater emphasis on addressing the attainment gap between rich and poor. </p>
<p>Lost behind the tribalism of “us” and “them” politics is the alarming rate of educational underachievement in areas of the highest levels of childhood poverty. </p>
<p>Instead of rushing to highlight the successes of elite student performance across Northern Ireland as media outlets do <em>ad nauseam</em>, we need a more rigorous and dedicated focus on safeguarding the opportunity for all children and young people, regardless of their position within society. Only then can Northern Ireland properly address the blatant disparity between the privileged few and those who are left behind. </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/30546/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brendan Ciarán Browne does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>As students across the UK and Ireland consider their next steps following publication of this year’s exam results, news outlets have been quick to produce whimsical comparisons to determine the top performing…Brendan Ciarán Browne, Research Fellow, Queen's University BelfastLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/304782014-08-14T06:52:58Z2014-08-14T06:52:58ZThe strengths and benefits of Catholic and independent schools<p>Two recent pieces published on The Conversation (by <a href="https://theconversation.com/state-school-kids-do-better-at-uni-29155">Barbara Preston</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/private-schooling-has-little-long-term-pay-off-30303">Jennifer Chesters</a>) argue that parents might be wasting their money paying for a non-government school education. They contend that government school students do better at university and, especially when compared to students from independent schools, have similar labour market outcomes.</p>
<p>Defining the value of a school education in terms of tertiary performance and employment outcomes ignores the fact that there are many other less utilitarian reasons why parents might choose a Catholic or independent school.</p>
<p>The faith-based nature of many non-government schools; that most have extensive co-curricula activities such as Saturday sport; and that such schools have a school culture that parents support are also important considerations.</p>
<p>There is also a considerable amount of research suggesting that non-government schools, compared to many government schools, achieve stronger educational outcomes in areas like completion rates, academic results, success at the tertiary level and promoting social cohesion. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.melbourneinstitute.com/miaesr/publications/working-paper-series/wps2013.html">2013 Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series</a> No. 39/13 investigating the impact of Catholic schooling on wages concluded: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>… during the prime time of a career, wage rates for Catholic school graduates progress with labour market experience at a greater rate, on average, than wage rates for public school graduates.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The paper, after 15 to 25 years of labour market experience, put the benefit for Catholic school graduates at:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… around 12% higher growth in real hourly wages compared to wage projections for those who attended government schools.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>American education academic Francis Vella reached a similar conclusion in a <a href="http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/146308?uid=3737536&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21104520542457">1999 paper</a>. He wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We also find that individuals from Catholic schools are more likely to find employment and are paid higher wages in addition to the effects operating through the higher levels of achieved education.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In relation to tertiary studies, the first thing to note is that non-government school students, on average and even after adjusting for socioeconomic status (SES), are more successful at gaining entry as they achieve stronger Year 12 results compared to many government school students.</p>
<p>In a 2010 paper, University of Melbourne researcher Gary Marks <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13803611003711310?journalCode=nere20#.U-xISGSSyCU">concluded</a> that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… attendance at a Catholic or independent school significantly increased the odds of university participation, net of socio-economic background and prior achievement.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Contrary to the argument that independent school students have a higher drop out rate compared to government school students, Marks <a href="http://www.lsay.edu.au/publications/1835.html">also argued</a> in 2007 that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… students who had attended an independent school were no less likely to complete their course than students who had attended a government school.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>While, as cited by Barbara Preston, there are a number of English studies concluding that state school students, compared to non-government school students, achieve stronger tertiary results, the research is not all in agreement. In a 2004 <a href="http://www.buckingham.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/univadmiss.pdf">paper</a>, British education academic Alan Smithers argued:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>However, the difference is small and is not consistent. In addition, there are differences with university, the schools, the subjects studied and gender.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A 2013 <a href="http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/year/2013/201315/">research paper</a> by the Higher Education Funding Council for England concluded that students from independent schools outperform students from government schools in terms of:</p>
<ol>
<li>completing a degree;</li>
<li>achieving a first or upper second; and</li>
<li>gaining employment; or</li>
<li>undertaking further study.</li>
</ol>
<p>The research paper stated:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The sector-adjusted averages, like the raw data, show that a greater percentage of students from independent schools can be expected to achieve each of the four outcomes than those from state schools.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>One of the criticisms often directed at non-government schools is that they undermine a commitment to the common good and lead to social fragmentation. Once again, the evidence is far from consistent. A second Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth (LSAY) <a href="http://www.lsay.edu.au/publications/1858.html">report</a> investigating volunteering as an essential aspect of active citizenship stated:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Students at government schools did less volunteering (in frequency and hours) than students in either Catholic or independent schools.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The LSAY report also cited US research showing that compared to government school students, Catholic school students are more likely to volunteer to perform community service. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.tpcs.org/about-us/Cardus-Cardus_Education_Survey_Phase_I_Report.pdf">Research</a> carried out by the Canadian-based Cardus think-tank also concludes that students from faith-based schools contribute in a positive way to social stability and social cohesion.</p>
<p>Australian research comparing the incidence of racism in Catholic and government schools also concludes that religious schools are beneficial. The <a href="http://www.fya.org.au/app/theme/default/design/assets/publications/Impact_of_Racism_FYA_report.pdf">report</a>, commissioned by the Foundation for Young Australians in 2009, concluded: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Those students who attend a Catholic school are 1.7 times less likely to report experiences of racism than students attending government schools.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Contrary to the impression that parents choosing Catholic and independent schools are wrong to expect strong outcomes for their children, it’s clear that there is a good deal of research supporting the belief that the impact of such schools is beneficial.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/30478/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kevin Donnelly does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Two recent pieces published on The Conversation (by Barbara Preston and Jennifer Chesters) argue that parents might be wasting their money paying for a non-government school education. They contend that…Kevin Donnelly, Senior Research Fellow - School of Education, Australian Catholic UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/94732012-09-11T04:35:07Z2012-09-11T04:35:07ZNew revelations of church abuse must bring justice for victims<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/15310/original/jsympr96-1347324112.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C500%2C2529%2C1512&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The church must be held to account.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">just.Luc</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>As the Victorian Parliamentary Inquiry into child abuse looms, Archbishop Denis Hart and three of his bishops <a href="http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/article/14606936/catholics-warned-ahead-of-disturbing-abuse-cases/">have forewarned</a> their Victorian flock of imminent disturbing reports about past failures of the Catholic church in responding to clergy sexual abuse.</p>
<p>His Grace and their Excellencies need to be brought up to date with the <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/national/they-survived-clergy-abuse-but-are-still-paying-a-price-20120910-25oi1.html#ixzz266vyxmE7">latest evidence from my research</a> which shows that the “failures” of the church to respond to sexual assaults do not attract the past tense alone – they remain palpably current.</p>
<p>There has been an equally inadequate response by the Catholic church to the brutal physical assaults on children, which continue to be a source of distress for victims to this day.</p>
<h2>Horrifying testimony</h2>
<p>A few weeks ago in Ballarat, eight men gathered to get help with writing a group submission to the Victorian Inquiry. The issue of physical assaults was aired and it was distressing.</p>
<p>One man said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>He used to push my head down the toilet and hold it there by force until the toilet finished flushing.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The others nodded their heads in acknowledgement of this example of brutal physical assaults by Christian Brothers at St Alipius primary school in the 1970s and 1980s.</p>
<p>Another man revealed:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I had the bones around my eye and jaw fractured when I was beaten on the face and head by a ball-peen hammer. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Once again there was group recognition of this brutal attack by, or <em>modus operandi</em> of, the particular Christian Brother.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I recall being terrified when I was locked up in this very small storage room, more like a cupboard, and just left there.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>One man, with a hearing disability, was strapped regularly on the buttocks, never knowing what he had done to deserve this torture. When this same 9-year-old boy was eventually anally raped by a Christian Brother, he assumed it was a more serious form of punishment, was terrified and thought he was going to die. When he complained about the rape to another Brother, he was repeatedly and viciously beaten until he complied and said that nothing had happened to him.</p>
<p>Another man recalled:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>When I protested by pushing his hand off my genitals, he proceeded to march me to the back of the classroom saying to me ‘How dare you lay a hand on me’. I was then brutally beaten.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Another victim at the meeting said he was put into a mental asylum for two weeks because he told other clergy about the sex crimes and had physically fought off the offending Christian Brother.</p>
<p>There were many other forms of physical assaults including repeated bashing, whipping, kicking and punching. All victims described much of this treatment as torture. The mental anguish remains to this day.</p>
<h2>A culture of fear</h2>
<p>It is little wonder these men find it very traumatic and stressful trying to put a complex submission together. A further 20 or so men who, because of those past traumas, could not even make it to the meeting, want to be part of this group submission – they want to be able to tell their truth.</p>
<p>It seems the sex abuse was but one element of a school environment and culture that formed an amalgam of physical assault, torture, sexual assault and rape, all accompanied by constant fear, terror, confusion and bewilderment.</p>
<p>But where do the physical and sexual assaults begin and end? Were the physical assaults an insidious precursor to the sexual assaults? One man at this meeting told of being bashed and reduced to tears, comforted and then raped. Sadly, this was a recurring sequence of events. The Parliamentary Committee needs this information.</p>
<h2>Working with what we have</h2>
<p>The terms of reference for this inquiry are silent on the matter of suicides and premature deaths. Family members and friends of someone with a history of clergy sex crimes and who has died prematurely, can lodge a submission.</p>
<p>With an extended closing date of 21 September for submissions, there is still time for people to tell their story – to tell the truth.</p>
<p>Guidelines from the committee clearly indicate any interested party can make a submission and there is an array of issues about which to inform the committee from whether victims were in any way discouraged from reporting and, if such abuse were reported, how such reporting was handled, and, importantly, the consequences of abuse, including the effect on the victims and others.</p>
<p>All we have at the moment is this Parliamentary Inquiry. We need to work with it. Despite its many limitations, the community must inform the inquiry of the vast breadth and severity of the decades of sex crimes, devastating suicides and premature deaths, the ongoing concealment and cover-up by the church and the physical assaults.</p>
<p>This inquiry is the first step.</p>
<p>The second step must be an uncompromising, independent and legally and forensically sound Royal Commission.</p>
<p>Those revealing cracks in the church’s marble façade are now well beyond repair.</p>
<p>Justice must be attained.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/9473/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Judy Courtin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>As the Victorian Parliamentary Inquiry into child abuse looms, Archbishop Denis Hart and three of his bishops have forewarned their Victorian flock of imminent disturbing reports about past failures of…Judy Courtin, PhD Student, Faculty of Law, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/88452012-08-20T20:15:05Z2012-08-20T20:15:05ZDo all independent schools need a funding increase?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/14423/original/twgj32wp-1345438720.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C186%2C4980%2C2900&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The government needs to do the maths on school funding and look at which schools need money most.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Schools image from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In the lead up to the government’s response to the Gonski reforms, Prime Minister Julia Gillard has <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/abbott-says-gonski-reforms-unaffordable-20120819-24glu.html">promised</a> no school will lose funding under the new arrangements.</p>
<p>In fact, “every independent school in Australia will see their funding increase under our plan,” Gillard said yesterday at a meeting of Independent Schools.</p>
<p>The promise comes after independent and Catholic education systems raised concerns that <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/schools-face-funding-cuts-but-julia-gillard-stands-firm-on-pledge/story-fndo3ewo-1226453273590">modelling</a> showed one in three schools would be worse off if the Gonski reforms were applied.</p>
<p>But if the government sticks to its promise and leaves no schools worse off, it would be perpetuating an unfair system and undermine some of the good work in the Gonski reforms.</p>
<h2>Two worlds</h2>
<p>The Catholic school system is diverse. In fact you could argue there are two distinct systems – low-fee parochial schools catering to a low-socioeconomic status (SES) and culturally diverse student cohort and those schools that serve students in the same socio-economic group as high-end private schools.</p>
<p>That these schools are funded equally and not on the basis of need, comes from the Howard government dispensing with the logic of its own socio-economically differentiated policy to create a category of Catholic grant-maintained schools. </p>
<p>These high-SES Catholic schools are substantially over-funded in comparison with both state and non-Catholic independent schools.</p>
<p>While it is true that the Catholic authorities can redistribute funds to educate more low-SES students, Gonski himself has remarked on the lack of transparency and consistency in such arrangements. In essence, under the current system taxpayers are unable to see where their money goes and why it is given to one Catholic school over another.</p>
<h2>Over a barrel</h2>
<p>The power of the Catholic lobby to hold both Catholic parochial schools as well as non-Catholic independent schools to ransom is clear. <a href="http://www.saveourschools.com.au/file_download/98">Research</a> has shown that despite claims by the Catholic authorities that they re-distribute the money fairly from high-income to disadvantaged Catholic schools, the high-income schools remain over-funded.</p>
<p>This comes from a carefully-crafted strategy that properly overturned Labor objections to the funding of religious schools in the 1960s, and then rejected the Susan Ryan federal education ministry offer to integrate Catholic schools serving similar demographics to state-schools into the public system.</p>
<p>This opened the way for the dramatic increase in the Australian private-school sector, but now has become a double-edged sword. The system as it currently stands goes against the idea that all schools should be funded equitably, whether public or private, religious or secular.</p>
<p>Given Labor’s history with <a href="http://home.alphalink.com.au/%7Eloge27/lab_history/lab_hist_labor_split.htm">Catholic backlash</a> though, the government is clearly reluctant to take on the supposed might of the Catholic Church in favour of advancing equity.</p>
<p>Equally, few in the Coalition ranks, are keen to close-off the Catholic schools funding advantage loop-hole.</p>
<h2>Catholic schools in the public sector</h2>
<p>The government should consider not sanctioning a blanket increase for all independent schools. Instead, during its re-evaluation of schools funding, it should integrate low-SES Catholic and similar other denominational schools within a devolved public-sector, as is the case in New Zealand, Britain, Europe and some Canadian provinces.</p>
<p>This would mean that the Catholic schools with a low-SES student cohort would sit within the public system while Catholic schools with high-SES students remain private.</p>
<p>If Gonski’s recommendations were implemented fully, this would then mean that funding would be delivered to all schools, whether Catholic or otherwise, on the basis of need with additional money for disadvantaged and indigenous students.</p>
<p>And instead of money redistributed by the Catholic authorities behind closed doors, funding arrangements would be more transparent.</p>
<p>Integration would also enable Catholic schools to fulfil their mission – to educate the poor – rather than take on the characteristics of private schooling. This has created a vast Catholic educational bureaucracy of its own and resulted in the largest private-school sector in the world. </p>
<p>New Zealand, for example, has no private Catholic schools and in Europe they can be counted on the fingers of one hand.</p>
<h2>A fairer system</h2>
<p>If low-SES Catholic schools were funded on the same, transparent basis as equivalent state-schools it would enable choice and competition within this palpably disadvantaged end of the education sector.</p>
<p>School results would also automatically improve, thereby redressing Gonski’s concerns about the depressing “long-tail” of Australian low-SES under-achievement. </p>
<p>And, it would release the resources of parents in both private and public schools to contribute more equitably, through tax imposts or fees commensurate with their socio-economic means, to building Gonski’s proposed more equitable, transparent, accountable and choice-driven school
reforms.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/8845/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>I have no affiliations, be they religious, party-political or financial, that impact on this policy opinion.</span></em></p>In the lead up to the government’s response to the Gonski reforms, Prime Minister Julia Gillard has promised no school will lose funding under the new arrangements. In fact, “every independent school in…Michael Leonard Furtado, Doctor , The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/74102012-07-05T00:49:36Z2012-07-05T00:49:36ZGonski but not forgotten: schools don’t just need funding<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/12180/original/xnwx346w-1340667202.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=57%2C63%2C4198%2C2720&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">David Gonski's review is starting to fade into the background, but there are a growing number of calls to implement the review's recommendations.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP Image/Alan Porritt</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The last time school funding occupied so much public and political attention was during the Whitlam years.</p>
<p>Policy makers with long memories will recall that the gestation period for the <a href="http://karmel.report.com/">Karmel report</a> was well over a century – from turning off the tap of state aid to denominational schools to redirecting it towards a uniform, free, secular and compulsory state school system.</p>
<p>But now the Gonski review has re-ignited the debate, and many are asking what the government means to do with the review’s recommendations - especially the issue of funding. </p>
<p>Former federal minister and Gonski review panel member Carmen Lawrence <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/gonski-panellist-slams-school-funding-neglect/story-fn59nlz9-1226417262101">has criticised</a> the government’s slow movement, saying they have turned their backs on public education. </p>
<p>She <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/expremier-fires-up-over-canberras-gonski-snub-20120525-1za3c.htm">joins</a> a growing coalition of government and non-government school interests has expressed impatience at the reluctance to commit to the annual extra $5 billion in school funding that Gonski recommends. The Australian Education Union has <a href="http://igiveagonski.com.au/">launched a campaign</a> this month too, focusing on the funding issue.</p>
<p>But curiously, the largest non-government provider, the National Catholic Education Commission, has remained aloof. Moreover Professor Peter Tannock, who represented the Catholic sector on the <a href="http://www.deewr.gov.au/Schooling/ReviewofFunding/Pages/ReviewPanel.aspx">Gonski Review panel</a>, has maintained an astute silence on the issue. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, the pressure on the Minister to cave into the clamour for an unconditional commitment of an extra $5 billion funding per year is intense. But funding is not the only issue here. Structural reforms and an expectation of improved educational outcomes, especially for the disadvantaged are needed just as much.</p>
<p>After all, a budget blow-out was not all that Gonski intended to achieve. When hard times reassert themselves, it is the other reforms that will be important.</p>
<h2>Deep-rooted dilemma</h2>
<p>In the 1960s, the battle was underway for state aid. The Catholics had for nearly a century reluctantly chosen to “go it alone”, operating their schools for a pittance with the unpaid labour of many religious orders and congregations. </p>
<p>The solution was to invoke <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/coaca430/s96.html">Sections 96</a> and <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/coaca430/s51.html">51 of the Constitution</a> enabling the Commonwealth to grant money to any state, “on such terms and conditions as the Parliament thinks fit”.</p>
<p>In effect, the Commonwealth could make grants subject to states implementing particular policies in their fields of legislative responsibility. </p>
<p>The Commonwealth has subsequently withstood a <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1981/2.html">High Court challenge</a> relating to its influence over state policy matters on hospitals and schools.</p>
<p>The history of resolving the state-aid issue in Australia has, therefore, arguably created as many problems as it has solved, mainly relating to the increasingly different social demographics that attend public and private schools. </p>
<p>This accounts for Australia having the largest (and growing) publicly-funded private school system in the world, simply because all non-government schools must charge fees to break even.</p>
<h2>Solving one problem, causing another</h2>
<p>In resolving the state-aid issue, the 1973 settlement perversely created a new problem about inequity in school education. In acknowledging supplementary research on these issues, the Gonski Review has wisely focused on school reform with additional implications for funding and equity policy.</p>
<p>In the current tight fiscal climate, there is considerable pressure to reduce Gonski to its annual extra $5 billion funding investment recommendation. While temporarily solving the capital investment issue, this would reopen the war on who should get the money. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Sn1xjVBYS1c?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The AEU and others are fighting to get Gonski back on the agenda.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p><span>AEU/Youtube</span></p>
<p>Fortunately David Gonski has provided a <a href="http://www.deewr.gov.au/Schooling/ReviewofFunding/Documents/Review-of-Funding-for-Schooling-Final-Report-Dec-2011.pdf">strategy</a> to address this problem through his other recommendations.</p>
<p>First, he has called for school reform initiatives to reflect much closer Commonwealth-state ties.</p>
<p>Second, he has called for a much closer systemic integration within and between various school providers so that public funding more efficiently reflects national education reform agenda.</p>
<p>Third, he has identified what those targets should be, which, apart from allocating a fixed entitlement per student across all systems and providers, assigns additional funding in respect of disadvantaged groups, including indigenous students, rural and remote schools and students with disabilities.</p>
<h2>What next?</h2>
<p>An opportunity now arises for the Government to respond by outlining additional terms and conditions linking funding increases with a commitment to enrolling disadvantaged students. </p>
<p>While some independent providers may reject this as undue interference, others will welcome the challenge to show that their success is a direct consequence of better teaching and not a commitment to excluding those low-socioeconomic status (SES) learners who fall into the too-hard basket.</p>
<p>Rejecting such new conditions would then justifiably result in increased costs being passed onto parents through fee increases. </p>
<p>A further condition for such enrolment should be that low-SES and disadvantaged enrolments would have any additional fees met from the public purse.</p>
<p>The biggest opportunity here will be for low-fee schools, especially the Catholic diocesan systems, who teach that their schools are “first and foremost” for the poor, but who, because of the need to bridge the shortfall between costs and funding, currently fill a cheap private school niche in the school market.</p>
<p>The benefit to state schools lies in the opportunity to win back the unconscionably large numbers of aspirational middle-class students they have lost to the burgeoning private secondary sector, while having to unjustifiably cope with the responsibility of educating a disproportionately large number of low-SES and disadvantaged enrolments.</p>
<p>I do not foresee a successful constitutional challenge to such policy tweaking, since state governments already fund some aspects of private school provision.</p>
<p>Moreover, the Australian Education Union, which opposes funding for non-government schools, would have its most damning criticism of private schools – that they are exclusive - met and rectified.</p>
<p>Finally, the fallacy that differentiated teacher salaries trigger improved school results would make way for a more substantial discussion about more equitable and diverse school provision, resulting in improved outcomes, reflecting factors such as community values, teacher attitude, school climate and parent choice, instead of regarding better outcomes as the dubious and short-term consequence of more unconditional and potentially wasteful public spending.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/7410/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>I am an independent researcher and have no university or other sectoral interests to advance other than the common good of all. </span></em></p>The last time school funding occupied so much public and political attention was during the Whitlam years. Policy makers with long memories will recall that the gestation period for the Karmel report was…Michael Leonard Furtado, Doctor , The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.