Thanks for the clear writing and hard numbers Crawford

As a teacher in public education, I have a hard time explaining to others exactly how we are facing serious cuts while the BC Liberals boast of increased education funding. Crawford, you could not have made the case more clear.

One of the situations that I find hard to take as both a teacher and a parent, is the laying off of all of the newer teachers at the end of each year. This has disrupted the lives of my younger colleagues, and the education of my own children, who have had to deal with a revolving door of temporary and part-time teachers.

I will be forwarding this article, first to the head of my union.

Make the Rich Pay Their Full Private School Shot

If you want to fly First Class, you pay for it all yourself.
If you want to jump the queue for hip and knee surgery, go to a U.S. or Mexican clinic and pay for it yourself.
If you want your child in a school ranked high by the Fraser Institute, some would say a First Class education, PAY FOR IT YOURSELF.
Maybe after the HST petition Mr. Vander Zalm can tackle private school funding.

the education ministry has some nerve

to imply that private schools are actually saving us money by educating students at a discount to taxpayers. I teach alternative school; my 26 students face the possibility of losing their school next year because we are outside of core funding. Most of these kids will simply drop out. I suppose the ministry spin on this would be: "Look at the cost savings we've made by moving all these students to the corrections and welfare systems!"

If education is just a numbers game, then who wins?

Firstly, to explain....a brownout is an incomplete blackout.
As I have a preschooler, I have been agonizing over what my options for Kindergarten are. It seems to me that the same battle of numbers is occurring in British Columbia at the level of education funding as it is at the level of skills testing of public and private school students. The BC Liberals would like us to believe that the system is working to serve the needs of our children so as to raise them for the future demands of a changing socioeconomic milieu. When parents and school trustees are asked to wholeheartedly accept the truth of hard numbers of skills tests to evaluate school performance, it is a tough pill to swallow seeing the financial state of affairs of the Ministry of Education which, by all accounts made here, is in shambles. I don't know if the public school system can be trusted given this embarrassing chasm between numbers used to rate education performance for parents and teachers and the financial record used to rate education performance for taxpayers. Aren't they one in the same? If public education keeps it up, we can expect a lot more independent schooling and even more of a dilution of services that the Ministry of Education can offer to the public.

Taxes funding private schools is a joke!

If you want my money for education you have to send your kids to the same classrooms as mine!

And if you don't want your kids mixing with the 'peasants' kids you can pay for it yourself!

$$$

Private education provides enriched learning opportunities for children and that is why well-to-do parents, who can afford it, opt for private school. However, when you have a child with genius, there is nothing that the private or public system can do to squelch it. The main problem with public education is an unwillingness to build on its strengths and the constant rumination over its weaknesses. Divisiveness is not the effect of money well spent.... after all! We live in an age of instant gratification where kids are driven to school instead of having to cycle 10 miles to and from school in Canadian weather. There is no way in this new world of expecting something for nothing that we are teaching our children well by refusing to be resourceful ourselves, by complaining at the associated costs of sacrifice and hard work for the promise of a bright future. Money is too easy to get and too easy to loose. What is frightening about the current political scenario is the way that change doesn't seem to be forthcoming and when changes are promised, somehow nothing happens. Everything is hunky dory.

arbitrary formulas

It has never made sense to me when the Minister or a School District says that "declining enrolment" is to blame for lower funding or the need for cuts.

If children are our future and are a priority (at least this is the kind of platitude that precedes the big "But..." from ministers and bureaucrats), why not just pledge more $$ for the quality of education they deserve?

what they mean:

"Your children are OUR future!" (and we like 'em dumb, compliant and poor enough to work like hell in fear of their miserable jobs)

Can Someone Tell Me

What is "quality" education?
Does quality necessarily have to cost more?
Gordon Brown got crucified in Britain yesterday for calling a spade a spade when he called a bigoted woman a "bigoted woman."
Why can't we shuck the political correctness and really start to address what the problems in the school system are?
Do we need to go back to the 3 Rs and not spend money on technology that requires constant ugrading?
Are schools responsible for teaching manners?
What do you do with burned-out teachers?
I guess the final question is what kind of citizens will schools produce. I know private school grads who are the most self-absorbed kids going and I know kids who attend inner-city schools who go to school each day hungry.
It's a big problem fraught with reams of self-interest groups.

Excellent job Crawford!

I would have expected Wilfred, who on an earlier article repeatedly demanded proof that educational funding had really been cut, to have made an appearance here long before now. What is clear is that when a new government takes over from these socred/liberals there will again be a deficit in education funding that will take years from which to recover. There will be a great outcry that recovery isn't fast enough and any attempt to transfer resources away for the private schools will be met with the usual outrage from the purveyors of educational privatization.

The liberals are going to be leaving a whole quagmire of neglect which will bedevil and entangle any new government for years to come. It was all part of the strategy to prevent any reversal of the destructive course we have been on for the last nine years.

Life or Monopoly?

Is it any wonder attendance in schools is dropping? Dual income families struggle to pay their mortgages, survive inflation and tax hikes and have next to no help with childcare costs. The obvious decline in the birthrate is a direct function of the difficulties of making a living in today's socioeconomic framework. However, this phenomenon is NOT limited to the "upper" classes. Families in all tax brackets are electing to have fewer kids and many more well-educated professionals are opting out of the game of life altogether in favour of playing the game of monopoly instead. Therefore funding education isn't only a matter of balancing budgets, it is also a predictor of how many families will risk growing the size of their families to hold up and protect our culture from the future challenges that lay ahead. Go ahead and immigrate previously educated souls into Canada and then forbid them from using their credentials upon arrival making them compete for the shrinking number of service sector jobs requiring minimal education OR educate our own well enough so that we can supply ourselves with enough innovation to advance our own prospects to propell renewal and growth.

Okay... ONE Q and only 1 Q

I'm just going to ask this and move forward.

How much would you pay for education per student?

Thanks.

Polakite

If the student attended a private school or lived near Gordon Campbell, I'd opt to pay ZERO.
If a student lived in social housing, had a single parent, no music lessons or hockey school, didn't go to a library, at least $15,000 per student.
Not an easy answer unless we're looking at the upper class.

Ramona777

You're absolutely correct. Scratch back the 200 million per annum that's going from taxpayers to independent schools this year - add it to what we've been paying in tax savings to the parents who get deductions for the tuition their kids pay at these schools and there is more than enough to cover the needs of pubic education very nicely.

But, it we don't do it soon, there won't be enough left of the public sector to be worth saving.

Aboriginal students

Here's another factoid as well surrounding Aboriginal graduation rates.

Those stats do not draw out actual dogwood diplomas and also include school leaving certificates, which you just as well use as toilet paper.

Jon Ferry from The Province

Jon Ferry from The Province wrote:
" The fact is, parents who send their kids to these independent schools (most of which are religion-based) already pay twice.
They fork over their full load of public school taxes, then pay extra for the private school of their choice. So jacking up their education costs is not only cruel and unnecessary punishment, it'll simply force many of them to put their children back into the public school system, driving up its cost accordingly."

The reality is that 11% of schooling is done independently and those numbers are rising as a tell tale sign that the public system is failing.

If Parents choose religious-based schools...

...then that is their choice. They should not expect to be subsidized by the rest of the taxpayers. The Public school system exists for a purpose. It is available to all regardless of race, creed, colour etc. The only reason private schools are on the increase is that they charge for attendance as well as get money form the state. They generally offer fewer choices to students and do not have to accept any student who will cost them more to educated that the normal. It is selective, relious-based and should not access state funds. Period.

Referendum?

Why don't we focus attention on this critical topic by calling for a referendum to determine once and for all if the majority of citizens want proper education spending or not. We need to possibly create social media first. We need to pool the possible question(s) to ask for this referendum. Mr. Campbell of the BC liberals has experience with referendums, i'm sure he'll see it our way.

Katie

If you want your kids to have a religious-based curriculum, do it at home. Don't expect the taxpayer to pay for a very specialized program.

It's nothing personal

It's nothing personal Ramona777. The fact is that if it ain't broke then don't fix it. It's all hunky dory! I have friends whose children need to go to French schools and others whose children need to go to Muslim schools and natives whose children need culturally-sensitive schooling. So much for tolerance eh? I guess the better Canadian way is to prohibit special education and become the next State of the United States of America.

Katie ...

I guess if we all are making demands outside of the ordinary, should we pay more? You say they "need to go to French school" or "need to go to Muslim schools." Why to they "need" to go?
I'm an aboriginal and if I want cultural schooling I do it myself or my father should have done it. I can't expect the school system to be everything to everyone.
There has to be a cap on demands but with a caveat. I am all for poor kids getting more than the rest. It breaks my heart to see children who miss out on many things other children take for granted. if anything, more money should be going to schools those children attend, not to private schools where the kids' biggest worry is which Ipod they'll take to school that day.

Is the Budget for Public Education......

....inclusive of the capital and operational costs of the school buildings themselves? Or is that completely separate from the cost per student?

what is a Canadian?

Do we have a vision of what we are/want to be? Our children to be? Or is Canada a mere staging ground for somewhere else? Something else?

Never forget: schools are in very large part there to make "Canadians".

Equanimity

I went to public and private school. I think parents make the real difference for their children's experience of life and work. If demands are to be made of the BC Fiberals, I think that there should be equanimity between the cut of spending per kid per system (public or private). If the public system is going to take a bigger hit than the private system it is almost an advertisement for parents to dodge public education. Therefore, whatever cutbacks need to be made should be done with favour given to the system's students over independent school's students.

I can't believe....

I can't believe sometimes, how differently I see things at this end of my life, than I did the other. And not like you might think.

While I certainly don't want to "overly" belittle the importance of "what passes for education", in the formal sense, 'cause there is a "formal" level at which it is important, I suppose... And I support the view that The Rich, if we are going to continue to have the blighters as a separate class, should certainly not require or have the working and underclass subsidizing their privatge schools, like we do their "private" businesses in many more and less subtle ways... as the recent and ongoing period within capitalism has helped make clear. ...still, "the formal education system's" value is as often over-rated. It's main role, or at least an important role assigned to it, in my experience of it, is as another one of the gate keepers in entrenching, fueling and maintaining the class stratification of society and its social order.

To say nothing of the way in which it starves, in a manner that bloats, the "physical" experience of life, other than through the straightjacket of the again formal "elite" sport system. One of the results which is observable all around us, in all these "chubby" adults and kids, of course, but also in the mass separation of the populace from the basic, physical, sustenance activity on which their lives are maintained and depend. With the further result of an air of unreality in the mass understanding of the world amd nature, real life, and the gut activity and skills by which we sprang from the primordial goo.

Like I say, it's not all negative, I assume at least, but it ain't all what its cracked up to be either.... on many very important levels. Coming from a virtual illiterate, in terms of "formal education", with nary a piece of "formal" paper. Which if I had, I'd at this point in my life, use for asswipe anyway.

At one time, I thought it was centrally what life was all about. Only now do I realize that I haven't missed a goddamn thing, except maybe a waddle on my neck, a roll around my gut and the capacity to talk in infinite circles.

The System sucks, including its claims to the importance of "education". Pretty much. :-)

Schools Make Canadians....

"Never forget: schools are in very large part there to make "Canadians"

ROFLMAO!!

Nahhh!

When I was in school, schools were there to make loyal "British" citizens of us: supporters of the British Empire. Likewise later in the Navy I "served"..

Now, schools are part of the system, which includes the CBC, making loyal US citizens of us: supporters of the US Empire.

And the "educated" sheeple there folled hither, and now, here in this time, thither.

Population Increase?

I thought part of Gordo's logic for Site C was that BC's population was going to increase by one million by 2020 - if so, then surely enrollment in education will increase too. Therefore public education should be strengthened in view of increased numbers in ten years?

Also, public funding of private religious education to which ALL the public is not allowed to attend is a joke. Society's children should be educated together, religious schooling will cause problems of integration in the long term - just see other countries for examples, e.g. the Netherlands.

And the private economic schools, well if you can afford $12k per year to send your child to private school, an extra $4k surely won't hurt. Roughly, it appears that each BC student gets around $8k per year funding. So a private school charges $12k and gets $4k from the government, then at $16k per student per year which is double the average public funding per student. Comparing a public and private school of 500 would mean that the private school operates with $4 million extra compared to a similar sized public school. Imagine a public school getting that cash injection!!!

We should be educating for the future with equality of opportunity at the forefront. Instead, the Liberals are destroying public education to boost consumer choice. Disappointing.

no

"the Liberals are destroying public education to boost consumer choice."

no.

They are ultimately REDUCING consumer choice.
When will people understand: we are AT WAR here!

well...

The Liberals are shifting funds to an increased array of private education providers. While many are out of the reach of "normal" citizens, there is increased choice. That's how I would view it, but as you say yourself, we are in the middle of a WAR, an ideological war to be precise. Anyway, "spiritlifter's" referendum suggestion was a good idea.

united we fall in our ignorance

together we stand alone

I won a partial scholarship

I won a partial scholarship to Brentwood College and a full scholarship to Shawnigan Lake School based on an aptidtude test I had written in grade 6, I scored 7th of all people in canada based on the english comprehension portion of the test. I say this not to tout my excellence but to state that I am intelligent enough to discern the problems our school systems face.

In a weird way i'm glad I never went to those institutions.

My schooling was weird. I went to uppity uppity schools like Shaughnessy Elementary and Prince of Wales and then went to alternative programs after that (which had terrible infrastructures while primarily teaching both low IQ dropouts and highly intelligent youth that did not do well in the public systems). Talk about night and day.

I am of the opinion that if private schools were banned entirely we would have a far more effective public system as the private school subsidies would stop and as well parents and companies that normally provide donations/grants/bursaries to the private institutions would have no alternative (especially if their looking for a tax break) but to give that funding to the public schools.

The big problem, schools are a union/socialist domain while our current government is on the other side of the fence.

Our future needs to be non-partisan to ensure we can gain enough educated workers that will drive our future economy out of the massive amount of social service expenditures we are about to undertake due to the boomers retiring over the next decade. That means removing business interests and Union employee memberships respectively.

The only solution I can see anyway.

poor education

a poorly funded public education system makes dumbed down citizens that are easily manipulated. then their only choice is slave jobs to serve the rich

gordo and gang don't want well educated people
Its a sin to see public funds go to private schools
Parents need to be actively involved in the education system to protect the kids and our future

New Math

Sanich school board is facing costs of HST at $102,000, carbon offset tax at $83,000 and B.C. Hydro rate increases of $26,000, please excuse my ignorance but why is the government giving the school districts tax payers money to pay taxes and Hydro with? Why do the schools pay taxes and Hydro, this is silly

we dont need no educashun,

we dont need no educashun, cuz in 20 years, welall be workun for 8 bucs an our

mary jane

But to what end? Without an education, there are few jobs beyond the minimum wage (and part-time hours) that anyone can do anymore. That means subsistence level existence, which doesn't do the rich any good at all.

Not to say you are wrong, but what is the purpose of this "race to the bottom"? This is in fact, the only way out, if people are pushed hard enough:
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/events/?fa=eventDetail&id=1119
With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the deregulation of international financial markets in 1989, governments and entrepreneurs alike became intoxicated by forecasts of limitless expansion into newly open markets. No one would foresee that the greatest success story to arise from these events would be the globalization of organized crime. Current estimates suggest that illegal trade accounts for nearly one-fifth of global GDP
Indeed, it has all ready begun in British Columbia:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/books/2004356099_mcmafia20.html
Perhaps the most surprising is British Columbia, where the large-scale growing and smuggling of cannabis is beyond the control of law enforcement

Thank you

to the one of you w/ a number.

The problem of killing the private subsidy is you'll get more students in the system in the end and end up back here w/ the same problem.

Better to just privatize the entire system and let the provincial subsidy follow the student.

actually polakite

The public school system would become more manageable with a higher percentage of non-special needs students being in the system. Private schools cherry-pick, therefore public schools are left with what is left. Further, as privae school parents would no longer have tax write-offs for sending their kids to private schools, the tax base would increase, especially if this pushes some of the private school parents into higher tax brackets. And finally, the private school children attending public school would reverse many of the the downsizing problems/costs associated with declining enrollments. Public school buildings would, once again, be more fully utilized, and we would have fewer split classes. This could also save many public school children from having to be bused long distances due to school closures.

Obviously, the BC Liberal experiment with BC public schools has been a disaster. The BC Liberals have proven themselves to be incompetent in virtually every area of governance on behalf of the young, the old, the weak the working class, the middle class - the electorate as a whole.

The projected influx of private school students

"The problem of killing the private subsidy is you'll get more students in the system in the end and end up back here w/ the same problem."

This supposition is countered by the side bar to Mr Killian's article.

re-educating Polakite

Actually, Polakite, the greatest factors related to school success of children once all of the necessary tolls and support people are in place in a school, is the education level and the wealth of the parents. If you want schools to do well, it is not just a matter of supporting the schools, you have to make sure that parents and children are not living in poverty.

Here's a link to help you.

http://education-portal.com/articles/Public_Schools_vs._Private_Schools:_New_Study_Says_There_is_No_Difference.html

erratum

My humble apologies:
tolls = tools

Wages and benefits

Start cutting wages and benefits of teachers and all you will do is provide more ammo for your employer to refuse you a wage increase or better benefits. You will also drive away the good teachers. All you will have left are the 'hacks'.

Wealthy Teachers?

My bifurcated fundament!

JIm and Ramona777, if you are going to make such outrageous claims about the supposed wealth of teachers, please post some facts and figures.

Furthermore, just how low would you propose a teacher's salary should be? Put your yourself on the line.

Illegal strikes?

From a government that thinks tearing up contracts and refusing to comply with binding arbitration such an accusation is a little rich, don't you think?

http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=604f4aed-91d9-4981-bbb8-2f96f2525093&sponsor=

Here's One Salary Fact Mr. Greg

The following is from the BCTF website:
"The average annual teacher salary in B.C. is approximately $60,000. However, salaries vary from district to district."
I have a four-year university degree and I don't anywhere near that nor do I have benefits, which that salary figure DOES NOT include.
My previous comments, RE: teachers' holidays and private school education were based on FACT not FICTION.

Ramona777

Having worked closely with educators for years, I have learned a good deal about what it takes to become a teacher.

The minimum number of years that a teacher with a degree attends university is 5 years. That is for a bachelor of elementary education.

Most have attended 6 years: For intance, B.Ed. degree plus various diplomas or a BA English plus a 2 years of courses and practica to get a certificate.

Many others (with M.A.; M.Ed; Ph.D. Ed. D. ) have attended 6.5-9 years.

1 in 5 teachers burns out in the first 5 years.

Many teachers float as temporaries or substitutes for quite a number of years before a position becomes available. In most districts, teachers cannot get a continuing contract without being on the temporary list.

If you have a 4 year degree that is transferable toward a valid teaching certificate, and you believe that teaching 100-120 adolescents per day (while talking with their frazzled parents at night) is an easy job that you would be good at and pays better than what you currently make, I suggest you go for it. Within 5 years, there will be teacher shortages everywhere. The baby-boom teachers are beginning to retire, and the demographic figures show that more young people are poised to be entering the system.

The teachers with whom I speak love what they do, but I have never heard any of them say that teaching is an easy job.

Ramona777 said

"The average annual teacher salary in B.C. is approximately $60,000. However, salaries vary from district to district."
Yes, some will below that and some will be above that figure. Now they must go to university for 6 years to get a teaching certificate. In the past they could teach with a diploma after 3 years of university training. Mind you they didn't make as much. And in this day and age $60 000 is not that much. Not as much as a politician and they work many more hours in the day and many more days in the year than our Liberal MLAs. And they do have benefits that they have negotiated as well, but they are not rich. And sometimes they will teach the politicians a lesson about bullying when the BC Liberals get full of themselves. And they had incredible public support when they stood up the Campbell's bullying tactics.
And they still aren't rich nor overpaid.

A quick google produced this

A quick google produced this BC stats page that shows where teachers stand in relation to other professionals/workers. It shows teachers making the same as people in the goods producing areas of the economy. They make less than bankers, lawyers, nurses, and transportation and warehouse people.

http://www.vancouverisland.com/information/details.asp?id=40

Teacher salaries

http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/famil21a-eng.htm

According to StatsCan, the average income of a single earner two person family in 2007 was $56,400.
That would put teachers only a few thousand dollars above average. I wouldn't exactly classify that as an outrageous salary. As for their benefits being superior to yours, I think you would be better served by trying to improve yours to their level instead of dragging theirs down to yours.

teachers are an easy target

Everyone has had at least one really bad one in their experience and because you are vulnerable when young, any offense marks deeply. Most adults forget the details over time and it devolves to a vague feeling of unrequitted injustice, easy for the unscrupulous to play to. I think people should stop and reflect a moment that if all teachers were bad, or even a significant number, the schools would have burnt down years ago.

Instead of punishing bad teachers why not think in terms of rewarding the good ones for what they did for you by supporting the profession? If teachers were very highly paid, the talent would flock that way.

for real world instance:

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wherewestand/reports/globalization/finland-whats-the-secret-to-its-success/206/

"Of those countries, Finland placed first overall on the 2006 tests, which focused on science, compared with the U.S.’s position in the middle of the pack. Finland has maintained this lead since the test was first administered in 2000, ranking first in that year’s reading assessment. In addition, Finland has a high-school dropout rate of less than 1 percent – compared with roughly 25 percent in the U.S. And in tertiary education, the World Economic Forum ranks Finland first in the world in enrollment and quality.

When asked about their ranking, Finnish educators and experts consistently cite the country’s teachers. In Finland, they say, teaching is considered one of the most highly esteemed professions – hardly a surprise, considering the fact that all of the country’s teachers must hold master’s degrees, and the profession is highly competitive. Even though the salaries of Finnish teachers are comparable to those in the U.S., a job opening in a Finnish classroom typically attracts more than 40 applicants.

The job’s popularity can be partly attributed to the country’s liberal approach to its curriculum. In Finland, teachers are allowed to choose their own textbooks and customize their lesson plans. They aren’t required to administer standardized tests, and assign little homework."

And one more thing.....

Our soon to be son in law, who is an automotive technician, pulls down close to $100,000 a year. Our son makes around $46,000 as a second year electrical apprentice. What would you propose we pay our teachers, minimum wage?

But ******

I don't want you to misread my quotation. I wasn't trying to flaunt the guy who wrote that article.....however, you LEARN in well, school, that sources for information are required. Therefore, if you were interested in the topic here, you'd see that it is the kids who are on the line. Teacher's clearly aren't the primary focus of the above said article. The values of funding are a mixed bag because everyone wants something different.

I like the comment about how schools are being asked to pay taxes with taxpayers money. This has to be the most beaurocratic ideosyncracy of the entire education system! Trim THAT filet-O-fishy-fat and put those dollars back into the students!

Here's an idea...

While we're at it, why don't we stop requiring all government employees and contractors (including teachers) pay taxes? After all, what sense does it make to pay people with taxpayers money only to turn around and make them give some of it back in the form of taxes? :)

taxpayers money

How would teachers conscionable send their own children to school without putting out a dime to pay for the roads they would travel on, the vaccines they would be immunized with or the books they would read from? You've got to be kidding!

Are school's charities?

Charities don't pay taxes because they are not-for-profit. If schools are not-for-profit organizations then I don't see why:

" Sanich school board is facing costs of HST at $102,000, carbon offset tax at $83,000 and B.C. Hydro rate increases of $26,000"

Schools shouldn't have to pay taxes and ought to be able to retain the savings for operating budgets. Afterall, corporations are fully refunded HST. It seems counterproductive to tax schools.

What is the answer?

Upon returning to BC after some varied teaching experiences, I have discovered two things.

Firstly, the government is failing our students, and particularly our First Nations students. The majority of teachers remain passionate about their profession even though it is being attacked on all fronts. However, we are working with limited resources in classrooms full of high needs students without adequate support. In fact, in one of my classes, 60% of my students are designated with a variety of special needs, but I have inadequate support in the classroom and am given no time to meet with special education teachers and workers to develop adequate strategies to try and meet the needs of my students. This is not what I have experienced while working in other provinces.

Secondly, while I have long been a champion of public education, I find myself considering employment in the private school sector because working in a public school is slowly destroying my passion for education. I grew up in a lower income family and attended a wonderful public school. I have always thought that every student deserves an education... not a minimal education, but a strong education that can rival anything in a private school. However, the reality is that it is nearly impossible given the current state of affairs in BC public education. Private school students have access to resources, advanced programs, and global educational trips that develop their understanding of the world to a much greater degree than the their public school counterparts, and will be much further ahead upon graduation.

The BC Ministry of Education values mediocrity in its students and educators. Teachers who have higher levels of education or greater degrees of experience find it challenging to find work because the districts do not have the resources to pay for them. You would think that of all professions, education would value life-long learning! As a result, there is a BC brain drain of educators who are opting to seek employment within private schools or out of province. That is a sad fact for the future of education in BC.

Question ?

Are the earnings & benefits of a private school teacher lower than public school?

coyoteman, etc

I simply cannot see the point of "dumbing down" the population, in order to make slaves out of them (us). Without an education, most of the functions required of this society cannot be performed. We don't live in an agricultural society anymore, where a "strong back and weak mind" are sufficient.

What am I missing from this equation?

Ramona 777

$60 G/yr for an approximate 60 hour week doesn't sound so bad - because that is what many teachers put in with extracurriclar activities......which parents seem to expect.

Let's break that down. Say teachers work for "only" 40 weeks out of the year. That's 2400 hours/year. Divide that into $60G comes out to $25/hr.

I'm self-employed and I work for $50/hr (when I can get it). Teachers have "cushy" pensions and benefits, whereas I have to provide for my own retirement, etc.

Now granted, we are talking averages -- but I'd rather take the pressure of what I do over the pressures of the teaching trade, any day.

The fact that our standards of education are following the LCD slide have little to do with the teachers, and much to do with parent apathy/distractions, political football-ism, and (that old well-trotted-out truism) school-as-drop-in-centre and babysitting service.

John Greg states,"if you are

John Greg states,"if you are going to make such outrageous claims about the supposed wealth of teachers, please post some facts and figures."

How are my claims outrageous? The article, if you read it, STATES that 67.6% of next years cost increases are directly related to INCREASES in teacher compensation. That is by far the single largest contributor to next years budget short fall. That is a FACT made clear by the CUPE analysis. Read the article.

Dear RickW

the American business model has taken firm root here, imported mostly by socred standards. In that model the employee is deemed almost uselesss, the least asset a company might have. ALl jobs are reduced to the simnplest components, removing any need for training or even understanding of what they do. Unions are broken and banished, people are tethered to their jobs by fear of losing what little medical insurance they imagine they might have.

All relations between owners and workers is conducted as ongoing warfare, with the advantage havily to management. The idea that all workers are easily replaceable cogs is reinforced at all times at all levels. Computers enable the ultimate time-clock work environment where every keystroke is logged and every human weakness viciously attacked at first sight. The mantra is always "Plenty more where YOU came from, boy!"

That is what we have built in BC. As I have said before, I have no quarrel with multi-millionaires voting socred, like attracts like of course. What I do grieve for is that an imbecile electorate grew to to point where its neglect of duty allowed the bandits total power. Lee Atwater explaind how to do it long ago and America now lies in near-ruins.

Read the Article, please, the problem is clear

Funding for Saanich schools cost increases are falling short by more than $1500 per pupil per year.

It doesn't matter where the money is going - the fact that taxpayers are subsidizing independent schools to the tune of $200,000,000.00 per year while public schools are falling apart and failing in their objectives is a moral and financial crime.

Teachers' salaries

JIm, teaching by definition is a labour-intensive activity; of course paying for that labour is going to be a big part of any education budget.

Salary increases are a big proportion of the shortfall precisely because so much else has been cut from the budget. Those increases are mandated, so boards can't do anything about them except pay the increase out of money taken from something else...like turning down the thermostats or cutting back on maintenance, or laying off younger teachers, or simply shutting schools down.

Noggy, I believe salaries and benefits for private-school teachers are generally below the level in the public schools. I don't have any recent documentation about it, but years ago I read somewhere that a sizable proportion of private-school teachers migrate to the public system because the pay is better.

Takuan

Strange, isn't it? Without employees, a company would cease to function, and there would be no shareholder dividends. Employees are the single most valuable asset a company could have. Perhaps the "American business model" desparately does NOT want the workers to realize this.......

JIm

It's irrelevant. Labour ultimately comprises the cost of EVERYTHING, regardless of trade, profession, or business.

Getting it

I think I'm starting to get it.
Say you get married and 50% of your wedding gifts go towards a house that was bought for you. The rest you can spend how you like.
Alternatively, you get a house with 100% of your wedding money, with no choice on how to spend it.
This is what's going on in the Education System. Private schools get paid 1/2 the funds per student as public schools with NO STRINGS ATTACHED. Spend it how you damn well choose. Public schools on the other hand have to follow a strict set of procedures and formulas on how 100% of the money is spent with no diversions from the institutional rule book.
It's not fair that Private Schools get funding without any conditions on how it is spent while Public Schools get funding with no freedom of choice on how to utilize the funds.
But, it is pretty much universally recognized that if you leave your estate up to the state, they will choose FOR YOU. So, banning private school funding is a way of limiting choice because it will make specialized and enriched education even further from reach for ordinary people...... just as it is in the US of A. Good luck with that because that's what this post is all about!

Rick W

The Head Girl of my graduating class at Branksome Hall in Toronto was a black lesbian, so No I Disagree that Private Schools represent intolerance any more than Public Schools do. The highest scholarship from U of T in 1994 was awarded to a lesbian also who attended my private school. However, from my experience going to Shaughnessy Elementary and Prince of Wales, Little Flower Girls were very repressed. That doesn't stop the fact that there are lesbians who are very successful, look at Ellen and KD Lang.

I pay taxes

to fund public schools, not private schools that cherry pick and the parents get to deduct the tuition from their income tax.

Stop funding private schools. Period. Use the money to fund the public system.

I have no kids. I've always paid my taxes and have never minded, except for funding private schools. I don't want to subsidize someone's religious beliefs out of my pocketbook.

Universities and Penitentiaries

Universities also cherry pick and they too are funded by private and public funds. Should your taxes not pay for higher education then? Some universities are military colleges. How do you feel about that? Public funds pay almost totally for military educations. Carla Homolka, a convicted rapist and murderer in the Kingston Penitentiary received a Queen's Law Degree for free. She, since being released, has changed her name and is likely practicing law somewhere. Should our children be no better off than ex-convicts because they choose to believe in something ethical and pay more for it?

The purpose is indoctrination rather than education

quote from maryjane

"a poorly funded public education system makes dumbed down citizens that are easily manipulated. then their only choice is slave jobs to serve the rich"

Yup. John Taylor Gatto wrote a book "The Underground History of American Education" about the origins of the American education system that supports this hypothesis.

The complete book can be read online at
"http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/"

Or google John Gatto for utubes, essays and reviews.

Katie ...

Bringing in Karla Homolka is a faulty comparison, and thus, illogical.
The point is, if a parent wants their child to attend private school they should pay the FULL cost, not be subsidized.
As I said earlier, if I want to fly First Class, I pay the full amount.
University, like flying, is a choice.
Primary schooling is not a choice.