Construction begins on $5.9m Centre for Innovation and Learning at Caroline Chisholm School

bj_ACT said :

dungfungus said :

bj_ACT said :

Good to see the Government start to take some action to help struggling students in the outer burbs.

The NAPLAN (link below) PISA & TIMSS (not publically published) results have been nosediving over the last decade for schools in the outer Canberra suburbs (results have been increasingly bad for Tuggeranong Schools in particular which basically fill all the places for bottom performing Canberra schools (excl Charnwood).

The ACT Government has been actively ignoring the issue and hiding behind some Low Socio Economic Student excuses which do not hold any water in Canberra where not a single Suburb (except Symonston) is in the bottom 25% of Socio Economic Disadvantage for Australia.

I really hope the government starts to properly fund some of the struggling schools in Canberra at both a student, site and teacher level. Instead of using the current funding model which is more suited to funding the socio economic differences between Western Sydney and the North Shore or the differences between Moree and Lennox Head.

The current model is not adequately designed to properly fund the differences between students down in Banks or the rich kids from Forrest which are both in the highest quintile for least Socio Economic disadvantaged in Australia. But you tell me if you think the students in Banks in the far south of Tuggeranong are the same economically as the students from Forrest.

Adoption of the Gonski model will not help target struggling schools in Canberra due to the high overall Socio Economic scoring that groups all Canberra Suburbs roughly together. Note that the ABS Statistical Area 1 SES used for individually scoring students covers very few parts of Canberra (unlike the rest of Australia). In short the ACT Government should target the bottom 25% of Canberra Students not the very few who fall into the bottom 25% of Australian students.

This table shows just how poorly the Caroline Chisolm School is performing and why its good that Joy Birch has made a very small start to address the inequities in Public education across Canberra.
https://myschool.edu.au/ResultsInNumbers/Index/103922/CarolineChisholmSchool/40328/2016

Why are you using “students at Forrest” to countermine your argument? Last time I looked there were no public secondary schools in that suburb, so what is your point?

You don’t seem to be aware of how the Funding system works and/or didn’t read my response properly.

The funding isn’t based on where the School itself is located, but based on the address of the Student who attends the school.

According to the most recent CENSUS there are 142 Students who live in Forrest and 207 Students who live in Banks. The issue I was raising is that the Government gives per student funding based on the SEIFA Disadvantage score of the area where the “Student lives”. The issue is that no Address in Banks or in Forrest is in the bottom 25% of Australia cut off, so school students from both Suburbs get exactly the same funding.

This is the crux of my point about the school funding model being flawed in the ACT. The ACT Government needs to re-balance their funding model to ensure more targeted school funding and improved educational performance in the outer Suburbs of Tuggeranong and Belconnen in particular.

Fair comment – I guess I am out of my depth on the NAPALM stuff. Why did the government adopt such a complex and expensive model is beyond me. Maybe because it had the most acronyms?
Once you started drawing comparisons between Banks and Forrest I immediately thought that it was the usual debate that goes with Gonski namely public funding versus private funding.
I thank you for explaining exactly what was meant and I believe it means that because Canberrans have higher incomes than the rest of Australia the ACT government has to subsidise the scheme to achieve national parity.
Would it be correct then to say it would appear that the ACT government signed up for Gonski without doing the modelling?

dungfungus said :

bj_ACT said :

Good to see the Government start to take some action to help struggling students in the outer burbs.

The NAPLAN (link below) PISA & TIMSS (not publically published) results have been nosediving over the last decade for schools in the outer Canberra suburbs (results have been increasingly bad for Tuggeranong Schools in particular which basically fill all the places for bottom performing Canberra schools (excl Charnwood).

The ACT Government has been actively ignoring the issue and hiding behind some Low Socio Economic Student excuses which do not hold any water in Canberra where not a single Suburb (except Symonston) is in the bottom 25% of Socio Economic Disadvantage for Australia.

I really hope the government starts to properly fund some of the struggling schools in Canberra at both a student, site and teacher level. Instead of using the current funding model which is more suited to funding the socio economic differences between Western Sydney and the North Shore or the differences between Moree and Lennox Head.

The current model is not adequately designed to properly fund the differences between students down in Banks or the rich kids from Forrest which are both in the highest quintile for least Socio Economic disadvantaged in Australia. But you tell me if you think the students in Banks in the far south of Tuggeranong are the same economically as the students from Forrest.

Adoption of the Gonski model will not help target struggling schools in Canberra due to the high overall Socio Economic scoring that groups all Canberra Suburbs roughly together. Note that the ABS Statistical Area 1 SES used for individually scoring students covers very few parts of Canberra (unlike the rest of Australia). In short the ACT Government should target the bottom 25% of Canberra Students not the very few who fall into the bottom 25% of Australian students.

This table shows just how poorly the Caroline Chisolm School is performing and why its good that Joy Birch has made a very small start to address the inequities in Public education across Canberra.
https://myschool.edu.au/ResultsInNumbers/Index/103922/CarolineChisholmSchool/40328/2016

Why are you using “students at Forrest” to countermine your argument? Last time I looked there were no public secondary schools in that suburb, so what is your point?

You don’t seem to be aware of how the Funding system works and/or didn’t read my response properly.

The funding isn’t based on where the School itself is located, but based on the address of the Student who attends the school.

According to the most recent CENSUS there are 142 Students who live in Forrest and 207 Students who live in Banks. The issue I was raising is that the Government gives per student funding based on the SEIFA Disadvantage score of the area where the “Student lives”. The issue is that no Address in Banks or in Forrest is in the bottom 25% of Australia cut off, so school students from both Suburbs get exactly the same funding.

This is the crux of my point about the school funding model being flawed in the ACT. The ACT Government needs to re-balance their funding model to ensure more targeted school funding and improved educational performance in the outer Suburbs of Tuggeranong and Belconnen in particular.

bj_ACT said :

Good to see the Government start to take some action to help struggling students in the outer burbs.

The NAPLAN (link below) PISA & TIMSS (not publically published) results have been nosediving over the last decade for schools in the outer Canberra suburbs (results have been increasingly bad for Tuggeranong Schools in particular which basically fill all the places for bottom performing Canberra schools (excl Charnwood).

The ACT Government has been actively ignoring the issue and hiding behind some Low Socio Economic Student excuses which do not hold any water in Canberra where not a single Suburb (except Symonston) is in the bottom 25% of Socio Economic Disadvantage for Australia.

I really hope the government starts to properly fund some of the struggling schools in Canberra at both a student, site and teacher level. Instead of using the current funding model which is more suited to funding the socio economic differences between Western Sydney and the North Shore or the differences between Moree and Lennox Head.

The current model is not adequately designed to properly fund the differences between students down in Banks or the rich kids from Forrest which are both in the highest quintile for least Socio Economic disadvantaged in Australia. But you tell me if you think the students in Banks in the far south of Tuggeranong are the same economically as the students from Forrest.

Adoption of the Gonski model will not help target struggling schools in Canberra due to the high overall Socio Economic scoring that groups all Canberra Suburbs roughly together. Note that the ABS Statistical Area 1 SES used for individually scoring students covers very few parts of Canberra (unlike the rest of Australia). In short the ACT Government should target the bottom 25% of Canberra Students not the very few who fall into the bottom 25% of Australian students.

This table shows just how poorly the Caroline Chisolm School is performing and why its good that Joy Birch has made a very small start to address the inequities in Public education across Canberra.
https://myschool.edu.au/ResultsInNumbers/Index/103922/CarolineChisholmSchool/40328/2016

Why are you using “students at Forrest” to countermine your argument? Last time I looked there were no public secondary schools in that suburb, so what is your point?

This will definitely be a game changer! So refreshing to see the ACT Government commit to such a large and valuable futuristic project. My daughter starts there next year, and is very excited to be able to be one of the first students given these opportunities.

Good to see the Government start to take some action to help struggling students in the outer burbs.

The NAPLAN (link below) PISA & TIMSS (not publically published) results have been nosediving over the last decade for schools in the outer Canberra suburbs (results have been increasingly bad for Tuggeranong Schools in particular which basically fill all the places for bottom performing Canberra schools (excl Charnwood).

The ACT Government has been actively ignoring the issue and hiding behind some Low Socio Economic Student excuses which do not hold any water in Canberra where not a single Suburb (except Symonston) is in the bottom 25% of Socio Economic Disadvantage for Australia.

I really hope the government starts to properly fund some of the struggling schools in Canberra at both a student, site and teacher level. Instead of using the current funding model which is more suited to funding the socio economic differences between Western Sydney and the North Shore or the differences between Moree and Lennox Head.

The current model is not adequately designed to properly fund the differences between students down in Banks or the rich kids from Forrest which are both in the highest quintile for least Socio Economic disadvantaged in Australia. But you tell me if you think the students in Banks in the far south of Tuggeranong are the same economically as the students from Forrest.

Adoption of the Gonski model will not help target struggling schools in Canberra due to the high overall Socio Economic scoring that groups all Canberra Suburbs roughly together. Note that the ABS Statistical Area 1 SES used for individually scoring students covers very few parts of Canberra (unlike the rest of Australia). In short the ACT Government should target the bottom 25% of Canberra Students not the very few who fall into the bottom 25% of Australian students.

This table shows just how poorly the Caroline Chisolm School is performing and why its good that Joy Birch has made a very small start to address the inequities in Public education across Canberra.
https://myschool.edu.au/ResultsInNumbers/Index/103922/CarolineChisholmSchool/40328/2016