School Choice

For those who follow the blog, you may have noticed that my posts have become less frequent. They started out at one per week, which was just a little too ambitious and then settled at one per fortnight. That is, until October when I went silent. Well, that silence was due to a new addition to the family, my fourth child and second daughter. While not all that relevant to a blog on education and teaching, it brings me to the reason for this post – school choice.  The schools we choose for our children – the schools that students go to, should be based on good and reasonable decisions, right?

Well, I’ve heard a lot about school choice recently and thought I should clear up some myths and misconceptions about the idea of school choice – an idea I was quite fascinated with when I first came to Australia. As the loyal reader would know, I have an opinion on almost everything education related, but this topic wasn’t really on my radar until an acquaintance from the dog park, who also had a new baby in recent months, mentioned that he put his daughter on the waiting list for two independent schools – she was 2 months old at the time.

This got me thinking, not only about the value of independent schools in Australia, but about the nature of school choice and what that actually means. Full disclosure – I went to public school in the USA; have mostly taught in independent schools in Sydney; and, my three children who were/are school-aged have been mostly educated in Catholic systemic schools So, while I am not overly familiar with the public system here in Sydney, I have done some teaching in public high schools and my wife is a public primary school teacher and attended public schools in Sydney. I should also note, on the whole, I am an advocate for public education and what it stands for. No matter what one believes about school choice, and I’ll get into that in a minute, great nations are built around their public-school systems; they are undoubtedly one of, if not the most important public institutions in any country.

As mentioned, I was initially enamoured by school choice when I first moved to Australia. I first lived in the Sutherland Shire in Sydney, where I saw a lot of school choice. Each suburb along the train line from Sutherland to Cronulla had a high-school offering that was a little different and could cater to different aspects of specialty learning. From Gymea Technology High School to Endeavour Sports and Caringbah Selective high schools in Caringbah and Port Hacking High in Miranda, which is, or was, known for performing arts.  This to me seemed like a great alternative to what I was used to in New York, where wealthy areas went to good schools and not-so-wealthy areas went to not-so-nice schools. In other words, it seemed great that your post code didn’t determine your quality of education – how naïve was I?

Once I realised how determinant socio-economic status was when it came to school results, I started to look into it more and only became more and more disheartened, but that is not what this post is about, it is about choice. In Australia, similar to the US, you go to the school in your local catchment, but you can apply to go to a different school, and if they have capacity, you may be permitted to attend; however, there is also the choice of Catholic-systemic schools and independent schools, both of which you can attend for a fee, but are subsidised by the government. While the Catholic school system in NSW is relatively low-cost, a few thousand a year for tuition and then some other costs, independent schools, especially those in and around capital cities range from anywhere from $7-8000/yr in primary school up to $40,000 for the senior years of high school in some schools.

So, let’s just say, for argument’s sake, a student starts out in the independent school sector from kindergarten/foundation. According to the Futurity Investment Group’s Planning for Education Index (SMH, 2021) the cost of 13 years of independent schooling in Sydney is $448,035.  Yes, you read that right – almost half a million dollars. Obviously, if you have more than 1 child (as previously mentioned – I have 4) – that cost goes up – it would cost me almost $2m.  So, what does one really get for their half a million-dollar investment, per child?

I was talking to another friend who I know from education circles about the prospect of independent schools and the overall cost of those schools. He is in a different position as his two kids went to a combination of public schools (primary school) then independent high schools. One of his kids was on a full scholarship to one school, while his other child first went to a selective public high school and then to an alternative school for his last few years of high school. We were talking about the value, both real and perceived, of these schools and he said something that really struck me – that those not in education circles believe that teachers in independent schools make a lot more money than teachers in independent schools. As teachers and educators, we know this to be untrue. While some independent schools pay slightly more (<5%), teacher salaries are pretty much on par throughout the state, in all schools. So, I decided to ask around – just what people thought. While not rigorous research, I found that he was right, most people I asked figured that since independent schools cost so much, and get roughly the same amount of government money per student, that the ‘extra’ money went to resources (such as buildings, pools, gyms etc) and to pay the best teachers to work there.

Ok you say, they might not pay the teachers more, but surely the education provided is a better quality, right? Well, bad news on that front too. While it is quite difficult to actually assess the quality of teaching in any particular school, which is probably how and why these expensive independent schools stay in business, standardised tests have become the standard by which schools and teachers are assessed.  According to the Grattan Institute, while a cursory look at average NAPLAN results between the public and private sector show a slight achievement gap, one can’t really assess teaching on the basis of NAPLAN scores. Firstly, teachers aren’t supposed to teach to the NAPLAN, it is supposed to reflect a moment in time. But even if we were to look at that test, is it the teaching that is reflected in those scores or the student’s privilege? The truth is parents who send their kids to $30,000/yr schools are, for the most part, better educated and have higher incomes than their public-sector parent counterparts, which likely accounts for the slight achievement gap more so than the quality of teaching.  

In the same paper by the Grattan Institute, when PISA (Program for International Student Assessment) results are examined and that, “once student and school-level socio-economic background are considered, there is little discernible difference between the achievement of private school students and government school students.” This is based on results from PISA 2009, 2012 and 2015. For those not familiar, PISA is a worldwide study of 15yr old students by the OECD that measures cognitive ability in reading, mathematics and science. Growth over time is a more sensible measure of student success, and arguably, teacher performance. However, when the Grattan Institute looked at improvement over time, using NAPLAN results, they did not find much difference in sectors. Between years 3 and 5 students in the independent sector have similar achievement growth to students in the public sector and between years 7 and 9 do “very slightly better’ than government schools.

So, what does all this mean? Does it mean that parents who send their children to independent schools are wasting their money? Well, it really depends on why they are sending their children to these schools. The Grattan Institute studies are only looking at literacy and numeracy (and science in the case of PISA results), but as we all know, this does not account for the full spectrum of what schools do. That said, if parents think that their school fees are going towards paying the highest quality teachers for the highest academic outcomes or the biggest achievement growth, the data doesn’t support those contentions. If however, they are looking for more subject choices, facilities, and after-school and co-curricular programs, then those are seemingly more valid reasons to decide on a particular school. The high cost of these schools come down to the running of these schools. The school executives in these schools are highly paid and because of their independence don’t have the benefit of a bureaucracy that can manage much of the administrative function that most independent schools have to do for themselves.

It shouldn’t be surprising that these schools are more expensive, they are inefficient when compared to the public sector, which can combine resources and provide services for large number of schools centrally, rather than having to do it on a per-school basis. What needs to be considered to the discerning parent trying to decide where to send their child to school is to understand where those school fees go. While a portion likely goes towards new buildings, pool maintenance and the rugby field, for example, a similar amount likely goes towards marketing and advertising; a facilities manager and team; a highly paid head-mistress or head-master; a finance department; advisory board; old-boy/old-girl activities; vehicles/buses; and a myriad of other administrative/functionary things that institutions require to operate. The myth that these schools have the best quality teachers or provide a higher-quality academic experience simply are not supported by the evidence.