Province shouldn't pay for Private Schools

This was written by Kent Hehr who is MLA for Calgary-Buffalo and Liberal education critic in the Alberta Legislature.

by Kent Hehr

The public school system takes all types: it does not exclude on the basis of race, creed, background, language, origin or religion. No one is turned away. No one has to take an intelligence test. No one is refused admittance if they have a disability — unlike what happens in too many private schools.

The public school system is not exclusionary like Strathcona Tweedsmuir, charging their students $20,000 a year to attend high school. Of all the private schools funded in Alberta, roughly 39 per cent are based on elitism (i.e., they charge tuition), while 43 per cent are religious. This supports my position that, in the main, private schools separate children on the basis of wealth and the religion of their parents.

Furthermore, the stats used to support private school choice are questionable at best. If anyone bothered to do their research, they would know there are a wide variety of studies that show public education leads to both better outcomes for individuals and societies.

It is also ludicrous to cite Finland’s education system in support of the position that funding private schools is a good thing. Faith-based schools outside of the public system in Finland are extremely limited, because every school is required to be approved by a vote in their national assembly. Finnish schools cannot charge tuition, and they must accept everyone regardless of ability or faith. Let’s also remember that 97 per cent of the Finnish population are either Lutheran or have no religious affiliation at all — which is quite different compared to the multicultural, multi-ethnic and multi-religious makeup of Alberta.

The Finland voucher system is based upon parents’ ability to select any public school that they want their children to attend in that country. We have the same thing here in Alberta. Parents are allowed to send their children to any public school that they would like (space permitting).

Government resources should be spent on services that move a society forward. A fully funded and properly managed public education system can, does and will provide Albertans with ample amounts of choice to accomplish this goal. Accordingly, there is no need to subsidize elitist education for the wealthy, religious schooling for myriad different belief systems, or any other reason individuals may feel that the public system is not for them.

It is time Albertans decide whether we want to separate our children on the basis of wealth and religion by subsidizing private schools or commit ourselves to the principle of equality of opportunity, which recognizes that whether you were born of a rich family or one that struggles, whether you are Christian or Muslim, whether your child has a physical or learning disability or is the next Albert Einstein, your child is going to get a fair chance to succeed in this province through government-funded world-class public education.

If parents do not feel that the public system is good enough for their children, well, that is in fact their choice — but let them pay for their choice at a private school. Don’t ask other Albertans to fund it.

Private schools should not be publicly funded

The Alberta School Board Association (ASBA) announced a new policy calling for the end of funding private schools with public dollars. 

The Alberta Government funds provides public funds to private schools with 70% of the per student basic education grant that public school boards receive.

Newly-elected president of ASBA Helen Clease made a statement that included:

• We don't have an issue with there being private schools. But we believe that the public dollars should go to public schools where every child can have access to that education.

• At a time where every bit would help in the public education system, whether it's substantial or not, I think we have to support public education.

• We're there to take every child and we have to make sure that we can meet many, many diverse needs with our children in our communities.

We all would like to believe that education is the great equalizer. Some even go so far as to say that the antidote to poverty is education.

However, without mindful and purposeful policies that fund and support public education in pursuit of equity for all, schools will merely perpetuate and reinforce the worst injustices and inequities of our society. Funding private schools with public money is a kind of pyramid scheme that benefits the wealthy few and is ultimately unsustainable.

Too many private schools have selective admissions -- which means private schools get to use public money to select which children will and which children won't attend their private school. In his article Whom We Admit, What We Deny: The Meaning of Selective Admissions, Alfie Kohn explores the ugly truths behind schools with selective admissions. Here are some of Kohn's key points:

• When schools deny a student admission by saying they are "not a good fit", they are really saying that the child is "not good enough for this school."

• There are two assumptions driving the admissions process: (1) Schools falsely believe that they can predict which students will be academically successful in the future -- standardized tests make this assumption even more damaging. (2) Schools come to see their primary role as sifting out all but the most promising children and then persuading their parents to enroll.

• Because accurately predicting a student's future successes can be very difficult to do, schools often end up evaluating children on their past successes which usually is a reflection of the student's affluence and opportunity and the family's socioeconomic status. This is how private schools with select admissions privilege the privileged and reproduce it in another generation.

• The troubling truth is that selective schools help to perpetuate the deep inequities that define our society, not just failing to make things better but actively making them a little worse.

If we are to believe those who like to rank schools according to their standardized test scores, then many private schools that have select admissions are the best schools in Alberta. And if these private schools with select admission are the best schools, why would we only admit the most capable students to these schools? If these private schools with select admissions are the best, shouldn't we populate them with students who need the most help?

The sad irony is that Martin Haberman was right when he said: "The children we teach best are those who need us least." 

David McLelland put it another way: "One would think that the purpose of education is precisely to improve the performance of those who are not doing very well." 

James Moffett coined the (unofficial) mantra of private schools with select admissions to be: "Send us winners and we'll make winners out of them." 

Alfie Kohn puts it this way: "Institutions that get to choose whom to admit tend to look for the applicants who are good bets to succeed: those who seem smart and compliant, will require the least time and effort, and are most likely to make the school look good. And that means those who most need what your school has to offer are turned away."

As bad as schools with select admissions are, I can think of few things more morally bankrupt and intellectually indefensible than publicly funded private schools with select admissions. 

I've been an outspoken critic of the Alberta School Boards Association. Despite my affinity to the idea of locally elected school board trustees, I've often wondered whether the Alberta School Board Association is relevant.

And yet, I'm fully prepared to give credit where credit is due. The Alberta School Boards Association may have just taken a step towards being relevant by rightfully rejecting the idea that private schools should be publicly funded.

Well played, Alberta School Boards Association. 

Well played.