Confusion reigns over how education is being funded in the ACT as parents and principals question why neighbouring schools receive different shares.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Speaking in response to the federal government's new school funding policy, Blue Gum Community School executive director Maureen Hartung questioned the fairness of needs-based funding in the ACT, arguing demographic quirks can hide disadvantage.
"Despite two government funding inquiries identifying our school as being funded unfairly ... we now have to wait another 10 years before our school gets the same funding rate as neighbouring schools," she said of her independent school.
"How do we explain this mathematical logic to our students and their families? Is anyone seriously suggesting this is a fair and equitable school funding model?"
The federal government funds schools according to assessed need, or a school resourcing standard, which includes a base amount applicable to all students.
Extra money is then allocated for disadvantage, which may include indigeneity, disability, low English proficiency and school location and size.
For non-government schools the base figure is discounted by the school community's capacity to contribute. This means schools with a higher socioeconomic score will receive less money from the government while lower socioeconomic schools will receive more.
A federal education department spokesman said a school's socioeconomic score was determined by Census data based on the catchment area in which students live, measuring income, education and occupation characteristics.
"The current SES method uses ABS data that was designed to be less likely to mask socioeconomic diversity," he said.
But the Catholic Education Office and some independent schools have argued this is not a fair assessment in the ACT because of the mix of housing and the potential for Census data to be several years behind.
Previous funding models have acknowledged this by funding ACT Catholic schools to an SES of 101, despite many schools recording much higher scores.
The government's new policy, dubbed Gonski 2.0, dictates that all schools will be funded on a case-by-case basis, though the bucket of funds will continue to be given to the Catholic Education Office for distribution.
The change means that significantly less money will be handed to Catholic systemic schools.
Independent schools are directly funded by the federal government. Some are over-funded according to the school resourcing standard because of historic funding deals and an unwillingness from successive governments to implement cuts.
Others, including Blue Gum, are behind because of previous funding models and a paired slow increase in funds that would bring them up to standard.
"The schools that are the furthest behind will receive the fastest increase in funding," a federal education department spokeswoman said.
The Grattan Institute school education program director Pete Goss said projected increases in school fees were likely necessary for schools to maintain resources.
"Catholic schools genuinely will get a lot less money than they would have done than if the status quo had continued, genuinely that means fees are likely to rise because they'll want to maintain their level of resources," he said.
"The question is 'is that appropriate' and I would argue broadly yes - if they are generally comparable to high SES schools, most of them, then those parents who choose to go into the non-government system ... the cost of that is paying more.
"There are a few that are not more advantaged and they won't suffer in the same way."
The federal government has pledged to fund 80 per cent of the non-government sector's school resourcing standard and 20 per cent of government schools' standard.
By 2027, the ACT's Catholic sector is estimated to receive per student funding of $7,279, while the independent sector in the ACT is estimated to receive per student funding of $5,664, the federal education department spokesman said.
