Upload
veronica-holmes
View
214
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
STRATEGIC BRIEFINGFOR SCHOOLS
Independent Schools Queensland
July 2010
Strategic Issues
• The environment– Enrolments– Community Support– Federal Election
• Funding
- Funding Review
- State funding• Transparency and
accountability
• National Initiatives
- Australian
Curriculum
- BER• Green Paper
- Kindergartens
- Year 7
- Standards Authority• Other Issues
Enrolments
• 2010 – February Census – 105,546 students
• Enrolment growth slower than average (2009 – 3.2%; 2010 – 2.7%)
• Impact of – Global financial crisis– Restricted capacity– Other local considerations
Students Primary Secondary Total
Independent 105,202 12.0% 18.8% 14.7%
Catholic 128,170 17.2% 18.8% 17.8%
Government 484,615 70.8% 62.4% 67.5%
2009 Enrolments - Queensland
Enrolments in Queensland - 2009
Primary Enrolments
Secondary Enrolments
Independent Sector Enrolments - Queensland
Projected Queensland Enrolment Change 2009 to 2022
Source: DEEWR Enrolment Projections 2010 and ABS Schools Australia 2009
2009 2022 Change (no.) Change (%)
Government Schools Primary 310,327 461,753 151,426 49%Secondary 174,288 212,439 38,151 22%Total 484,615 674,192 189,577 39%
Catholic Schools Primary 75,539 119,182 43,643 58%Secondary 52,631 79,116 26,487 50%Total 128,170 198,298 70,128 55%
Independent Schools* Primary 52,665 79,228 26,561 50%Secondary 52,537 72,979 20,442 39%Total 105,202 152,206 47,004 33%
Enrolments
• An additional 47,000 enrolments through to 2022
• Up to 100 new schools required?
• Think Tank –– School Infrastructure Planning & Provision
Community Attitudes
Independent schools carry a very positive image across the population
7 in 10 indicate that in general they support independent schools
This support has increased from 54% in 2001 to 70% in 2009
13
13
Support for independent schools has increased since 2001…..
Base: Colmar Brunton 2001 nationwide n=905; UMR Dec 2009 n = 1000 nationwide [used slight variation in question wording and methodology]
22%24%24%
5%
54%
70%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Colmar Brunton 2001 UMR Dec 2009
Disagree Neither agree/ disagree Agree
I’m going to read some statements about education. Tell me whether you agree or disagree with each one.“In general I support independent or private schools”
Community Attitudes
Community attitudes towards independent schools: a nationwide survey (February 2010)
Positive Attitudes towards Independent Schools in Queensland (March 2010)
Federal Election
• Education (particularly schools funding) has featured in past Federal elections
• Funding issues “neutralised” for 2010 because of Review of Schools Funding
Seat Held By Margin No of independent
schools in electorate
Participation Rate in
independent schooling (%)
Bonner ALP 4.53 6 17.7Bowman LP 0 4 23.3Brisbane ALP 4.6 8 21.8Dawson ALP 2.59 7 10.7Dickson# LP -2.97 6 16.0Fairfax LP 2.97 11 22.7Fisher LP 3.53 7 19.1Flynn ALP 2.24 7 5.7Forde ALP 3.36 9 19.2Herbert# LP -.03 7 10.8Hinkler NP 1.52 9 12.4Leichhardt ALP 4.06 6 7.5Longman ALP 1.87 6 10.7Petrie ALP 4.21 7 13.6Ryan LP 1.21 4 22.8Wright LP/NP 3.79 6 15.9
Queensland Marginal Seats
Legislation Timeline
Jan 2007 Dec 2007
Jan 2008 Dec 2008
Jan 2009 Dec 2009
Jan 2010 Dec 2010
Jan 2011 Dec 2011
Jan 2012 Dec 2012
Jan 2013 Dec 2013
Jan 2014 Dec 2014
Jan 2015 Dec 2015
Jan 2016 Dec 2016
FEDERAL ELECTION
FEDERAL ELECTION
FEDERAL ELECTION
LEGISLATION FOR NEW QUADRENNIUM INTRODUCED
LEGISLATION FOR NEW QUADRENNIUM INTRODUCED
LEGISLATION FOR NEW QUADRENNIUM INTRODUCED FEDERAL
ELECTION
Review of Schools Funding
Review of Schools Funding
Federal election
Federal election materials
• Alerts
• Fact Sheets
• Independent Updates
• Electorate Information
• Policy updates
• Electorate forums
Julia Gillard’s view – “Australia’s school funding system is one of the most complex, most opaque, and most confusing in the developed world.”
• Review commenced -– Review Panel– Terms of Reference– Discussion Paperhttp://www.deewr.gov.au/Schooling/Programs/Pages/FundingReview.aspx
Schools Funding Review
Schools Funding Review
Minister’s Message (in Discussion Paper / Terms of Reference):
This review marks an important milestone in schooling for this country...I think the time is right to have this discussion in a constructive and open manner. The review of funding for schooling will be open and transparent. It will be consultative, wide ranging and comprehensiveThe review is not about taking money away from schools... This review is about the best allocation of resources to all schools — government and non-government — and directing funds to where they are needed most.
Minister Crean
• ‘this is not about taking money away from schools”
• “No school will be worse off – not a dollar will be taken away”
• If Labor re-elected, schools funding overhaul would be his biggest priority
Opposition
• “we are committed to SES funding model”
• Funding model would be “enhanced”
• Fully committed to funding maintained and guaranteed
• Fully committed to indexation
• Will look at “sensible” recommendations from the Funding Review
Schools Funding Review
ISQ will contribute to the review through:•direct submissions to the Review Secretariat; •input to submissions made by other authorities such as the Independent Schools Council of Australia (a lead role for Independent sector)•informing member schools through memoranda and website resources -
http://www.aisq.qld.edu.au/Page.aspx?element=271&category=1
•An ISQ Review Reference Group with representatives of the ISQ Board, Independent school systems, principals, bursars and other relevant experts.
Schools Funding Review
• June 2010 - Finalisation of Terms of Reference
• Second half of 2010 - Consultations
• By the end of 2011 - Review Report
• Decisions announced in 2012 Federal Budget?
Funding Models for Non Government Schools
1973 Schools Recurrent Resources Index (SRRI)Expenditure of each school measured against a standard of government costs for schooling
1985 Education Resources Index (ERI)School resources and expenditure compared with the costs of educating a child in a government school
2001 Socio-Economic Status (SES) Student focused proxy measure of the capacity of a school’s community to support it
Schools Funding Review
Some key issues:
• SES model
• Funding Maintenance/Guarantee
• AGSRC as the base
• Indexation
• Targeted programs
• Commonwealth/State relations
• Students with disabilities
Review Outcomes
• Impact of Federal election
• New model
• ICSEA
• Resources Index
• Change in indexation
• National Partnerships
• National Education Agreement
• More funding for schools?
Schools Recurrent Funding 2007-08 ($billions)
SOURCE: Productivity Commission Report on Government Services 2010 and ANR 2007 and 2008 (latest available data)
2.5 3.82.1
26.3
1.4
0.8
1.2
2.04.0
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
Government Catholic Independent
$ b
illio
ns
Australian Government State/territory governments Parents
(estimated)
Independent Sector Income 2008
SOURCE: MCEECDYA Annual National Report on Schooling 2008
State Governments11%
Commonwealth Government
31%
Parents58%
Sources of funding for capital development
Total Government Recurrent Funding Per Student – Government and Independent
Schools 2007-08
SOURCE: Productivity Commission Report on Government Services 2010, DEEWR 2008 SES data and 2008 State/Territory funding data.
$12,639
$6,080
$8,150
$2,600
$-
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
$14,000
Per student average -Government schools
Independent school A Independent school B Independent school C
The SES SystemSliding Scale of Funding Entitlement According to SES Status
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140
SES Score
% o
f A
GS
RC
SES score 85
SES score 130
Final 2009 AGSRC Primary $8,380; secondary $10,646
SES score 85Primary $5,866; secondary $7,453
SES score 130Primary $1,149; secondary $1,459
The SES System
Australian Government general recurrent funding for non-government schools - per student grants by SES score 2009
$5,339
$4,291
$3,244
$2,196
$6,782
$5,451
$4,121
$2,790
$1,149$1,149
$5,866$5,866
$1,459$1,459
$7,453$7,453
$-
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
$7,000
$8,000
$9,000
80 85 90 100 110 120 130 135
SES Score
Fund
ing
per s
tude
nt
Primary Secondary
Final 2009 AGSRC Primary $8,380; secondary $10,646
Funding Maintenance 2009
1,631 Catholic systemic schools
• 55% funding maintained
• 11% funding guarantee
• 34% on SES score
1,096 independent schools
• 17% funding maintained
• 28% funding guarantee
• 55% on SES score
Number of Funding Maintained Schools by Sector and SES Score 2009
Distribution of Funding Maintained Independent Schools 2009
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135
% o
f AGS
RC
SES score
Current SES model
SES + 10%
Distribution of Independent schools by SES Score 2009 (Australia)
104
67
181
236
169
89
63
84
52
32
8
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Nu
mb
er o
f sc
ho
ols
=<85 86-89 90-94 95-99 100-104 105-109 110-114 115-119 120-124 125-129 =>130
SES score range
Distribution of Non-government schools by SES Score 2009
1.2%
14.6%
38.4%
23.8%
13.5%
7.7%
0.7%0.7%
16.1%
42.7%
23.2%
12.7%
4.2%
0.4%0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
<80 80 - 89 90 - 99 100 - 109 110 - 119 120 -129 =>130
SES Score
% o
f sch
oo
ls
Independent Catholic systemic
Distribution of Queensland independent and Catholic Schools by SES
Non-systemic School Funding Sources, by School SES Scores, 2006
Systemic School Funding Sources, by School SES Scores 2006
Per capita government recurrent expenditure (FTE) by sector 2007-08
Difference in per capita government recurrent expenditure (FTE) between
government and non-government schools 2007-08
NSW Vic Qld WA SA Tas ACT NT Australia
$ 5,531 $ 5,352 $ 5,532 $ 8,945 $ 6,071 $ 5,512 $ 10,133 $ 9,789 $ 6,032
Total Government Recurrent Expenditure Per FTE Student in Government Schools (FTE) 2007-08 ($)
Savings from students attending non-government schools 2007-08 ($ billion)*
NSW Vic Qld WA SA Tas ACT NT Australia
2.1 1.6 1.2 1.0 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.1 7.0
*Recurrent expenditure only – excludes capital
Movement in the AGSRC
Average Annual Increase 1994 to 2009:Primary 5.6%; Secondary 4.8%
Primary AGSRC Secondary AGSRC
1994 4.6% 5.9%
1995 2.4% 3.5%
1996 2.8% -0.3%
1997 6.2% 5.2%
1998 5.1% 5.2%
1999 7.3% 4.0%
2000 8.2% 5.2%
2001 6.4% 7.2%
2002 5.2% 5.2%
2003 7.1% 7.4%
2004 8.7% 7.2%
2005 3.1% 4.6%
2006 6.3% 3.6%
2007 5.5% 4.3%
2008 5.6% 3.5%
2009 4.2% 5.8%
AGSRC, CPI and Average Weekly Earnings
100.00
110.00
120.00
130.00
140.00
150.00
160.00
1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
Gro
wth
Ind
ex
Comparison of growth in AGSRC, CPI and AWE 1990-91 to 2007-08
Primary AGSRC Secondary AGSRC AWE CPI
State Funding
• Education spending has declined from 23.8% to 23.4% of State expenditure.
• Very few new initiatives for schools.
• Continuing significant capital expenditure on state schools
State Funding
• There has been a significant decline in per capita funding support in real terms over recent years
• However, a 7.2% increase in funding for non-state schools in 2010/11 – about 4.3% increase after taking enrolment growth into account
• Driven by teacher salaries in state schools
State Budget
General Recurrent Grants
2009/10 2010/11Increase
(Actual) (Estimated)
435.7mill 467.1mill 7.2%
Students 241,670 249,380 3.2%
Per Student 1,803 1,873 3.9%
State Recurrent Grants
• Increase in the needs component of the distribution formula from the current 22.5% to 40% (commenced 2009)
• This will have a significant impact for many schools – winners and losers
• Also higher volatility in individual school rates from year to year
Transparency
Gillard’s view on transparency• “Very early in the Government, the Prime Minister and I
signaled that a new era of transparency was integral to the Education Revolution”.
• “Parents want more information. Teachers want better feedback. Policymakers need reliable intelligence to know where to best direct resources”.
• “the full power of transparency helps to reveal where there is need and where there are schools that can make a great difference even in the face of disadvantage”.
• “rather than suppressing debate about the performance of schools, we need to encourage it”
Transparency
• My School
• NAPLAN
• Year 12 Outcomes
• Right to Information legislation
Income
Government funding (excl. capital income) 15
Fees (gross amount) 100
Other private sources (e.g. voluntary fees, donations etc) 10
Total gross income (recurrent and fee income) 125
* Current year fee income allocated to current and future capital projects (30)
** Total recurrent current year income 95
* allocated at the discretion of the School
** this figure is exclusive of income associated with depreciation, interest and principal repayments
Capital Expenditure (including source of funding)
Government capital funding 10
* Current year fee income allocated to capital projects 30
Loans 50
Carried forward retained earnings previously allocated to capital projects 150
Capital Donations/Capital Income specifically billed as such 10
Total capital expenditure for the year 250
* this would not necessarily be equal to the 30 shown above under Income.
My School - Reporting School Income
My School - Enhancements
Proposed Enhancements
• Nationally comparable senior secondary information
• Satisfaction with schooling
• Student population indicators
• Growth data on literacy and numeracy achievement
• Teaching staff levels of expertise
My School - Enhancements
• Using student level data to compute ICSEA
• Other enhancements to ICSEA
• Reports of results
• Action to minimise misuse of My School data
NAPLAN
NAPLAN testing– Queensland Govt aims to lift overall performance
– NAPLAN based on National Curriculum from 2012
– “high stakes” issues for schools - possible narrowing of the curriculum, teaching to the test, provision for disadvantaged students, “league tables”
– Qld, WA and Tas have now all published NAPLAN results by school
Year 12 Outcomes
Reporting OP results (bands)
Issues
• percentage of students rather than numbers
• IB students
• Other issues
Impact of Right to Know legislation
Data demands on non-state schools
Australian Curriculum
• Proceeding at pace
• Politics/state issues
• Flexibility
• Assessment issues
Timeframes
• 2010 – release of final version of Phase 1 Australian Curriculum for P – Year 10• 2011 – release of final version of Phase 2 Australian Curriculum for P – Year 10• 2012 – release of final version of Phase 3 Australian Curriculum for P – Year 10• 2013 – significant progress in implementation of Phase 1 for P – Year 10• 2014 – significant progress in implementation of Phase 2 for P – Year 10• 2014 – earliest possible date for implementation of Phase 1 for Year 11• 2015 – significant progress in implementation of Phase 3 for P – Year 10• 2015 – earliest possible date for Year 12 graduates of Phase 1
Development and Implementation Timeline for K-10
Australian CurriculumLearning Area (K-10) Development Started Development
CompletedImplementation from
Substantial implementation by
English 2008 2010 2011 2013
Mathematics 2008 2010 2011 2013
Science 2008 2010 2011 2013
Humanities and social sciences
History 2008 2010 2011 2013
Geography 2010 2011 2012 2014
Business / economics 2011
2012 2013 2015
Civics and citizenship 2011
2012 2013 2015
Arts 2010 2011 2012 2014
Languages* 2010 2011 2012 2014
Health and Physical Education
2011 2012 2013 2015
Technologies Design and technology 2011
2012 2013 2015
ICT 2011 2012 2013 2015
Learning Area Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Notes
English English K-10
Mathematics Mathematics K-10
Science Science K-10
Humanities and social sciences
History K-10
Geography K-10
Economics / business 5-10
Civics and citizenship
To include attention to financial literacy requirements; optional 9-10
The Civics and Citizenship curriculum will be conceptualised with reference to the existing national statement of learning for civics and citizenship; optional 9-10
Languages Languages Consideration will be given to developing the languages curriculum around standards of language proficiency, rather than curriculum content organised by years of schooling
Arts Arts K-10 Providing for learning in Dance, Drama, Media, Music and Visual Arts K-8; option 9-10
Health and physical education
Health and physical education K-10
Technologies Design and technology 5-10
ICT 3-10
Option 9-10
Subject to development of ICT general capability continuum and how best to provide for the teaching of specific ICT knowledge, skill and understanding; option 9-10
Years Prep–7 Years 8–10
English Maths Science History English Maths Science History
2011
2012
2013
Implement i.e. to teach, assess and report on the Australian Curriculum.Introduce the Australian Curriculum - awareness raising, engagement and understanding.
Queensland Implementation Plan – Phase 1
Building the Education Revolution (BER)
Consists of three main programs:
• Renewing Australia’s Schools – every Aust eligible school for maintenance and renewal of school buildings and minor building works.
• Primary Schools for the 21st Century – to build or upgrade large scale infrastructure
• Science and Language Centres for 21st Century Secondary Schools – to build around 500 new science laboratories and language learning centres in high schools
The BER: $14.7 billion over three years aimed at school capital funding projects. Independent sector $1.5 billion
Part of the federal government’s economic stimulus strategy
Building the Education Revolution
• Political implications• More inquiries• Implementation in the independent
sector – strong model for future funding
Green Paper - Flying Start
• Consolidation of ‘accrediting’ bodies– Queensland College of Teachers– Queensland Studies Authority– Non-State Schools Accreditation Board (and
Eligibility for Govt Funding Committee)
• Year 7 to be the first year of secondary
• Early Childhood
• Review of Teacher Education
Early Childhood
• Commonwealth and Queensland Government policy – universal access to kindergarten for all children in the year before prep
• 15 hours a week/40 weeks a year (600 hrs / yr)
• Qualified teacher
• Approved education program
Early Childhood
• In Queensland only about 29% of children currently access a kindergarten program
• This compares to other major states where it is up to 90%
• Outcomes of Australian Early Development Index
Kindergartens
• Qld Gov – additional 240 new kindergartens by 2014 – to be located on school sites
• Qld Government – new recurrent funding model for kindergarten provision
• Qld Government – new kindergarten curriculum
Kindergartens
• Child care/long day care centres (mainly for-profit, privately run)
• Community kindergartens (not-for-profit)
• C & K provision
• Independent schools – a variety of provision including long day care and stand alone kindergartens
Kindergartens
• New kindergartens announced for 2010/2011/2012 (40 more to be announced for 2012)
• To date 6 independent schools – 8 units
• Another 15/20 for 2012/13/14
• Government funding up to 75% of the capital costs
Kindergartens
• DECKAS is the current funding scheme – must be affiliated with C & K for funding
• DECKAS will be abolished and replaced by a recurrent funding model as from 2011
• $2,100 per student for stand alone kindergartens
• Funding through Central Governing Bodies• Funding also available for kindergartens
within LDC – at a lesser rate
Year 7
Issues
• 2014?
• Primary schools
• Boarding
• Facilities – capital assistance
• Professional assistance
Prep Year
• Compulsory?
• More flexible entry?
Standards Authority
• Registration of teachers
• Minimum standards for schools
• Quality assurance and improvement processes
• Student outcomes
Other Issues
• Queensland Schools Alliance Against Violence
• Queensland Education Leadership Institute
• National Professional Standards for Teachers
• Consumer Protection Legislation
Discussion and questions
Thank you
Contacts