Funding is essential for schools to properly manage
the schools where formal education is learnt and taught. It is a vehicle to
mobilize basic education for social, economic and technological development.
Also, funding is needed to tackle the reforms and challenges facing the schools.
Therefore, school funding is a primary source for education which plays a vital
role in the rapidly changing environment of our daily lifestyle. Education is
part of a very crucial engine for the mobility of the today fast-paced
advancement. It is also known as a driving-force in building and shaping a
nation. For it is the pillar of the holistic growth. With that being mentioned,
the education sector in Victoria accounts for over 5% of the State’s GDP and
education services are Victoria’s strongest export according to the State of
Victoria Economic Review1. Having acknowledged the importance of its
economic output, it is likely impossible for Victoria to continue running the
state schools by the state capacity alone without the funding supported by the
federal government. In a political sense, school funding is always and
everywhere already a political project2 because it is the political
agenda. This essay, however, will seek to weighing out the policies relating to
the school funding from both of the Liberal and Labor parties, media reports
and assessment reviews in ways that which party has better policy, including
polls collected.
This November election will be slightly different from
the previous years as a funding issue, it is guessed, might have a big say in
the final account, not because of the state government’s failure to increase
funding, but the controversial budget cuts by the federal Coalition government.
For this reason, it is a high time for Victorians to drum up the political
anxiety while the election is underway. So, the public debate and argument over
who, the Liberal or the ALP parties are more credible to take up the role of
education in the state, are heating up.
Necessarily going back to the pre-election periods in
2013, the Coalition government of Victoria vowed to uphold commitment to school
funding sticking to the Gonski reform introduced by the then-Labor government.
But, the political storm was soon changed when announced the federal budget
reform in May, particularly, for higher education. That it instills the public
perception with a wider complex scenario of concern is increasingly growing for
the fact that the cuts might bring about a massive negative impact on the
future educational opportunities available to all students irrespective of
their backgrounds. For a repercussion, the budget cut is heralding a wide array
of resistances from the opposition party, other organizations across the
country, including university students. Besides, the added media coverage and
educational expert comments on the issue is a surplus.
Napthine government in Victoria appears to get
inclined to the policy guidelines outlined by the Coalition during the
pre-election era in 20133. There are no significant changes
afterward, even at the high drama of
post election. In the message recently written by Martin Dixon, minister for
education in August, 2014 on the report of Professional
Practice and Performance for Improved Learning: School governance reflects
the position of the Liberal party for school funding4. Mr Martin
Dixon contends that his government is focusing on how high each individual
student can be improved by mounting the funding. Regardless, the funding is
also meant for expanded areas that include the quality of school governance, greater
autonomy and other practices. Highly focused on the stimulus of student
performance appears to be single-minded while many yearn for holistic progress.
In a much-anticipated Victorian budget reply towards
budget cutting that the federal government claimed as reform, Daniel Andrew clearly
fell short of either delivering strategic platforms or a reliable policy in such
a way that people are convinced for a better change, instead his reply is
narrowly focused upon upgrading school facilities rather than how the school system
needs to be restructured through the funding5.
Amidst the opposition attack on the budget, the
Coalition has frequently boosted an additional school funding in several areas
across the state with policies criticizing the failed policy of former Labor
government. The Coalition’s policy laid out is to have long-term commitment in
the case of restructuring education6. As such, they emphasize on
schools to have greater autonomy in terms of governance, enhancing school
performance and students’ outcomes. On this basis, the Coalition seems to have
a clearer clue of what it takes to a nationwide educational reform in an
attempt to create the best possible opportunity for all students with less
bureaucratic control from Canberra paving ways for self-management and
administration. Because an increased funding without the clear strategy and
policy would not make sense for all, but a disaster for all.
What is certain at this point in time is that Victoria
like other states in Australia can not survive, manage themselves without the
influx of the funding from the federal government. Given that assumption, Victoria
state, under Gonski funding program in 2013, had an agreement signed with the
federal government while Labor was in power to seal school funding for the next
six years. Nonetheless, Mr Pyne, federal minister for education, dwindled the
commitment to only four years. Although Pyne repeatedly reaffirmed to provide a
new alternative model of school funding at the end of four year commitment to
Gonski funding model, he is still suspected to work on decreasing fundings. Yet,
for Victorians, it is relaxed getting reassurance from the state minister, Martin
Dixon on this matter, claiming that the Liberal party has negotiated $ 12.2
billion school funding for over the next six years (Preiss Benjamin, 2013)7.
In this regard, it is good to note that the same party with the same principle
will surely have the same kind of policy interest.
In a recent development, there have been reports
suggesting that the Liberal is intensifying to increase funding for which it
can be said for election purpose8. Central to their ideological
campaign, “The Better Schools Plan” is a policy branded for the Liberal-led
Napthine government in the lead-up to November election. Technically speaking,
Liberal has superiority in strategy than by Labor because the Labor’s policy is
less convincing. In a media release from state education minister, the Napthine
government is building a better education system, with a record of 9.2 billion
for school education in 2014-15, 1 billion up more than in Labor’s last budget10.
However, one of the most viable strategies currently
used by Labor in the fight of the Liberal is budget scrapping, a policy by
which they draw public attention to some extent. The budget cuts that Labor
believes have a knock-on effect on educational programs ranging from Reading recovery to the School Start bonus11.
James Merlino, a Shadow minister for education accused of the Napthine
government for failing to abide in Labor’s educational reform which means
Gonski funding model. School funding is apparently a critical component of the
election as is echoed in the campaign of James Merlino pledging further 10
million funding upgrade for Daylesford if won the November election12.
In addressing the specific details of what the Labor
committed to the funding, the following two standpoints can be summed up as the
core strategy of Labor party13;
·
Committed to continue to fund government school via the student resource
package (base, per capita and disadvantage amounts)
·
Committed to continue to fund government school in accordance with the
financial assistance model.
The advantage that the Labor enjoys is that Labor
party has a history of popularity in Victoria.
But in respect of making strong policy over school
funding, Labor is somehow weaker as it is suspected that they fail to set out
new ideology in challenging the Liberal, but too much credit is given to Gonski
model. Even so, Meredith Peace, Victorian branch president of the Australian
Education Union, is apparently sided with Labor on the ground of decrying for
increased funding in line with the AEU’s assessment14. The notion is
that even if both parties are willing to double up the school funding, the
question of how the funding will be spent is far more important to determine
voting. That is why Labor policy makers are in need of a much stronger policy
structured in order to sway the public, knowing that it is hard to be a winner
without it.
Assessing the policies of both parties, which is
thought to have done consultation with stakeholders across the state, the
Liberal party is construed to have better policy so far. To be true, school
funding, by all accounts so far, is a highly contested issue between the two
parties. Though being armed with technical superiority, the latest polls
indicate that the Napthine government is facing the daunting task14.
Therefore, it is the Liberal that may lead again in this election. At last not
the least, to compete in the globalized education market, there is a massive
need for the bipartisan support in the making of educational reform as a whole.
In conclusion, the November election will be critical to
both of the contesting parties as their policies and strategies are displayed
as much possible as they could through the electronic media and their official
websites. And the recent high drama of political campaigns shows that school funding
is highly politicized. The two parties seem to have the same passion in terms
of increasing funding, but what matters in the final is always about how much
their displayed policy win over the public. Therefore, a party with the ability
to organize stronger policy would have merit. Thus, it is a good time for the
state to invest in the education and construct the long-term feasible policy
for a state education system with a purpose of getting on top of the world in
the future.
Reference
:
1. Morsy Leila, Gulson K; Clarke, Mathew 2013, ‘Democracy,
sector-blindness and the Deletigimation of dissent in neoliberal education policy:
a response to 34(2) May 2013’, Discourse: studies in the cultural politics of
education, School of Education, University of New South Wales, Sydney, vol. 35,
no. 3, pp 444-461.
2. Review of Higher Education in Regional and City
Development 2012, OECD Australia, viewed 27 August 2014, <http://www.oecd.org/edu/imhe/40139266.pdf>
3. The Coalition’s Policy for schools 2013, Liberal party,
viewed 27 August 2014 <http://www.liberal.org.au/latest-news/2013/08/29/coalitions-policy-schools-putting-students-first>
4. Report of Department of Education for Early Childhood
Development 2014, ‘Professional Practice and Performance for Improved Learning:
School governance’, State Government of Victoria, viewed 28 August 2014, <http://www.education.vic.gov.au/Documents/about/department/professionalpractice.pdf>
5. Daniel Andrew 2014, ‘Victorian Budget Reply’, Labor
Party, viewed 28 August 2014 <http://www.danielandrews.com.au/news/2014-victorian-budget-reply>
6. Dannis Napthine 2014, ‘Andrew tries to take Victorian
for mug on School’, Liberal party, viewed 28 August 2014 <http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/media-centre/media-releases/10565-andrews-tries-to-take-victorians-for-mugs-on-schools>
7.
Benjamin Preiss 2014, The Age, ‘State schools set to struggle in 2014 as
principals brand additional funding ‘inadequate’’, The Age, viewed 28 August
2014.
8.
Benjamin Preiss 2013, Sydney Morning Herald, ‘States furious over double
backlip on Gonski funding’, Sydney Morning Herald, viewed 28 August 2014, <http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/states-furious-over-double-backflip-on-gonski-funding-20131126-2y881.html>
9.
James Merlino 2014, ‘Napthine’s Budget wont’s fix our schools’, Labor
Party, Daniel Andrew, viewed 28 August 2014 <http://www.danielandrews.com.au/media/releases/napthine%E2%80%99s-budget-won%E2%80%99t-fix-our-schools/>
10.Premier of
Victoria, Media release, viewed 29 August 2014, <http://www.appa.asn.au/president/Win-for-Victorian-schools.pdf>
11. Australian
Broadcasting Corporation 2014, ALP pledges $ 10m for Daylesford school revamp,
Australian Broadcasting Corporation, viewed 29 August 2014, <http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-16/alp-pledges-10m-for-daylesford-school-revamp/5600098>
12. Victorian
Labor Platform 2014, Policy Paper, Victorian Labor, viewed 29 August 2014, <
http://www.viclabor.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Victorian-Labor-Platform-2014.pdf>
13. The
Poll Bludger 2014, Crikey, Viewed 06 September 2014, http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2014/08/24/newspoll-55-45-to-labor-in-victoria-5/
14. Meredith
Peace 2014, The Sydney Morning Herald ‘ALP must program for success in
schools’, Sydney Morning Herald, viewed 03 September 2014, <http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/alp-must-program-for-success-in-schools-20140728-zxm2p.html>
No comments:
Post a Comment