Is Private School Worth It?

There is an article in The Age Magazine (26/08/11, Page 37, by Lucinda Schmidt) about parents angry over their children's private school fees, which have increased significantly over the last ten years. Furthermore, these parents are demanding more transparency, claiming that they don't know how the money is spent.

While reading this article, I couldn't help thinking, "What do these parents expect?" It is no surprise that there are some very expensive private schools out there, some charging over $20,000 per year. If these parents were complaining about a government school, it would make sense. However, they have already signed on the bottom line and agreed to pay the fees. This is how things work in the private sector (i.e. the seller sets the prices and the buyer accepts it by entering into an agreement or rejects it by walking away). These are private schools that set their own prices. I would have thought that private enterprises have the right to set their own prices. If parents believes these fees are too high, they could demant that the government intervene to set prices. But if government sets prices, these private schools wouldn't really be private.

Would I send my children to a private school? The answer to that is yes. There is one private school that I consider to be a good school mainly because I spent eight years in there as a student. I then spent five years in a Catholic school and noticed a drop in quality. The quality of the first private school is not really in terms of good teachers or good methods of teaching. Rather, the original school had better facilities and students engaged in much more extra-curricular activities. Some people argue that it would be cheaper to bring your child to a government school and, with the savings, get the child to do these extra-curricular activities outside of school hours. This is not practical as there is limited time outside of school to do these activities and, secondly, the child would be performing these activities with his school colleagues, which is a missed opportunity in terms of building social skills.

But of course I don't have children yet and maybe I won't ever have children. The reasons why I would put my own child through a private school was because of positive experience that I myself had in the school. But I do believe that in terms of academic performance, much of it has to do with the talent of the child himself and furthermore how much support the parents give the child.

University Not Worth It?

The video above questions the common wisdom that you will get ahead if you go to university. Going to university normally leaves the student will massive debts that need to be paid off upon graduation, and going ot university simply does not guarantee that your pay will even be much better than that of someone who never went to university.

I have spent a long time in university, completely believing the common wisdom that you must go to university and that only losers became construction workers, plumbers, or carpenters. My parents would look down upon these tradies, commenting that they are uneducated people who got where they are because they lack university education. But after graduation I found myself with a fairly average job that the typical university graduate would get, but look over at the tradies and they are earning big bucks (see cashed up bogans).

I don't see anything wrong with going to university to get knowledge for its own sake, but if that is what you want then going to an expensive and elite university is not necessary as you can effectively get the same knowledge in libraries or even online. The university degree not only gives you the knowledge but it also gives the piece of paper that brands you, and that piece of paper is used by the graduate to secure himself or herself a better job. University was and is mainly a snob tool.

Even if I were in high school again and thought about what I wanted to do for a living, I would probably still go to university mainly because I don't think I'd be a good plumber, but young people out there ought to think twice before going to university. It may not be worth it.

Rising Private School Costs

I went to private schools when I was a kid and from what I saw there did seem to be a correlation between how much parents paid and the quality of the education. That more expensive schools provide better education should not be surprising since schools that are driven by profit have more incentive to provide better education. However, even though the environment may be right for a kid to succeed in school, ultimately it depends on the determination and work ethic of the kid himself. I have heard many stories of kids going to expensive schools but failed because they were distracted by parties, alcohol, or sports.

A recent article in The Age states that private school fees are rising greater than the rate of inflation in Melbourne (See High Price of Staying Private).

The private schools are blaming this rise in private school fees on reducations in government funding and the rising costs of teachers (driven mainly by rising teacher salaries in public schools). Many parents I know who bring their children to private schools are up in arms about the price rising, claiming that the government should provide more funding to private schools. One particular parent said, "If I choose to send my child to a private school, why should I have to pay more?"

I personally don't see why these parents are complaining. A private school is a private school, and hence government ideally should not be interfering with it. A private school is allowed to set whatever fee it wants simply because it is private. If the government were to dictate prices, then it would hardly be a private school. Can you image if the government suddenly raided the boardroom of BHP and demanded that they change the price of their iron ore exports? Could you imagine if government took control of all private enterprise and ran them? It has happened before in many countries and it has not worked well. When government controls private enterprise, it is called communism.

Why Wouldn't a Capitalist Support Public Schools?

I speak to many people who call themselves capitalists and many of them say they are against public schools. Many capitalists believe that vouchers should be given to parents and parents themselves choose which school they send their children to.

Let us define capitalism as a system whereby individual rights are protected. Capitalism ensures that nobody has the right to coerce others to do anything they don't want to do. Capitalism ensures freedom.

The problem with the voucher system is that parents choose for their children. The child does not choose himself. Already, the child is denied freedom and is coerced into a school by his or her parents. This lack of choice and obvious coercion already goes against the principles of capitalism.

However, many believe children are an exception because they do not have the ability to decide what is best for themselves. Hence parents make decisions for them. The child is the property of the parents.

The problem here is that parents can make poor decisions because e.g. they are lazy, unintelligent, or they don't care about their children. Let us assume that a particular parent wants to teach his child sex education and the way he teaches this child is to bring this child to a hands-on sex school that encourages the child to actually have sex with a prostitute. This would be fully legitimate under a pure capitalist system since the child is the property of the parent and the parent makes the decision of what is best for his or her child regardless of social or collective morality. Thus capitalists support child rape. If someone were to say that a particular capitalist who wants to send his child to a sex school is wrong, then the accuser can be labeled as a socialist who wants to impose his morality on others. According to capitalist principles, the father choose what he wants to do with his own property and therefore he choose how he wants to educated his son or daughter, which means he can have sex with them if he wants to educate them about sex.

If we assume that a child is better off being reared according to the morality of the community rather than the morality of whatever pervert parent he might have, then we must have public schools. Public school curriculum can be set democratically.

Uni Student Cultural Divide

There is an article in The Age today called Backlash Feared Over Uni Students' Culture Divide. The article claims that many Australian universities are dependent on funding from international students and that there is segregation within universities between international students and domestic students.

I have finished university now but while I was there I did indeed notice that international students stuck around with other international students. But that is what was expected. Many of these international students may have been to the same schools together and therefore they know each other well. It makes sense for people who know each other well to continue to be together.

I came from a high school that is under-represented in the tertiary sector, so when I was at university I didn't see anyone who went to the same school as I did. This meant I had to make new friends. Roughly half were international and half were domestic. The main problem with some international students was shyness.

The article claims the following: "Local students tended to work off campus and were not active in student life, while international students spent most of their time on campus, generally in the library, Professor Simon Marginson, of Melbourne University's Centre for Higher Education, told The Age." So then the problem may not be a conflict between international students and domestic students but a conflict between those who study a lot in library versus those who spend much time working off campus.

The article also talks briefly about Voluntary Student Unionism (VSU). It claims that student union groups could organize events that attempt to bring students together but they simply don't have any funding because, when students have the option not to pay student union fees, many choose not to. If students unions are not organizing events then the university administration itself could organize events. If student do indeed want to be involved in social activities then universities can generate more demand for their services by providing these activities. More demand means they can increase prices and get more revenue.

What I really suspect however--and my suspicions are based on observations of other uni students--is that most students nowadays don't care about social activities. They just want to go to university, get their degrees, get out, and get a job. This seems to be the behavior of just about all students, both international and domestic students.

What's With All the Money-Hungry Students?

This may be an unfounded generalization, but I find that science students tend to be more materialistic than average. I get this impression from witnessing the behavior of science students because I myself am a science student. I am doing a double degree, which means I study two Bachelors degrees at once, both a commerce degree and a science degree.

In a recent mathematics class I overheard one guy saying, “I used to study genetics but I quit it and did math because there's no money in genetics. At least, that's what I think. I'm just in it for the money.”

Another female friend of mine who is doing a double degree is arts and science is the most materialistic girl I've ever seen. She claims that the only point of university is to earn money and that her dream was to marry a rich man and get a giant engagement diamond. She told me she would then spend all day shopping and playing with the kids. Sometimes I wonder what kind of man would be naïve enough to let his spouse stay at home and leech of his money, but when I think about it many men do this, and many men will probably be unaware of the spouse's underlying motives. Her ostensible motive will be romantic love but her real motive will just be resource acquisition. I live with the hope that not all women are like this, but the whole issue of heterosexual relationships and marriage is something I've postponed till I'm older. I therefore have no girlfriend at the moment. Anyway, this female friend at university is materialistic, yet I sometimes wonder why a materialistic student would study an arts degree. I also wonder why she would study science and especially I wonder why she would major in pathology. Majoring in a life science would likely set her up as a medical researcher. According to an interview with Dr Sabine Piller at the Australian Academy of Sciences, "The very most important thing for a career in science is to just have a love for it. You have to have a passion for the job, because there is not much funding for science and not much money in it. So you really have to love what you’re doing – you have to be curious about what you’re doing. That, I think, is what gets you there."

So then if scientific research doesn't pay much, as Dr Piller says, why would my female friend do it? Perhaps she mistakenly thought that a major in pathology would make her a licensed pathologist. Pathologists who make diagnoses on blood samples etcetera are licensed medical practitioners and they are certainly paid a lot. However, to become a licensed pathologist you need a medical degree, not a science degree. This may be the mistake my female friend made. I know of another friend who did a course at Victoria University called Legal Studies and expected to become a lawyer. Legal studies is not the same as law, the latter gives you a license to practice law while the former doesn't, yet this friend honestly thought she was going to be a lawyer.

Why I Don't Pay Off HECS Upfront

I have been reading Am I Better Off Paying HECS Upfront? and I will give the reasons why I don't pay any HECS upfront.

What is HECS? Only those in Australia would know. HECS is a student loan provided by the Australian Government. The Government subsidizes certain university degrees and gives students an interest-free loan that needs to be paid off only when the student graduates and gets a job. I know someone who, after graduating from university with a science degree, decided to live in a Catholic monastery, and so she wouldn't need to pay off any HECS.

Students can elect to pay off part of their debt while they study instead of having the debt paid off when they work. If they do this they get a discount.

Because HECS works in the background and only affects my earnings if I get a full-time job, then I choose to ignore it and treat it as if it were an additional tax.

I do not pay off HECS upfront because there is no guarantee I will get a full-time job after I graduate. If I paid my debt upfront and then decide to live in a monastery for the rest of my life or if I decide to live in the wilderness or even if I find it too difficult to get a job, then I will have paid off the debt for nothing.

Melbourne University Student Union Elections 2007

At Uni today the student politicians were out trying to get students to vote for a particular party. One left-wing guy came up to me near the library and told me not to vote for the right-wing party because they were pro-war and were racists. I told him whether he thought that the left-right political spectrum was too simplistic. He said no it wasn't. If you're pro-war and racist then you're right wing, he said. But then I asked him, "What if you're a racist who is anti-war? Would you be described as left-wing or right-wing?" He thought I was being silly and so just walked away.

Some right-wing guy came up to me and told me to vote because his party was an "apolitical party." I asked him how in the world a student political party can be apolitical. By definition a student political party is political since it is involved in student politics. To label his party an apolitical party is like saying that you can have a non-spherical sphere. He corrected himself and said, "We don't care about things like the Iraq war and racism." I was disturbed about the fact that he didn't care about racism. What if a gang of Nazi thugs start raping Jewish girls on campus? The guy claimed that his party will focus on giving students rebates on textbooks. The whole project smells of voter bribery. It is surprising to see a right-wing party giving subsidies. I fear that if the plan to give textbook subsidies goes ahead and textbook prices go down by 25 per cent then quite simply people will buy the cheaper textbooks in the bookshop and then sell it on Ebay, Amazon, or elsewhere for a higher price. They will pocket the difference in price. All this arbitrage will create a shortage of textbooks in the university and students will be forced to look outside the university for textbooks. The price will be the same but now students don't have the convenience of buying from the University's bookshop. This sort of centralized control in the university will generate shortages in the same way that Communist Russia created shortages of food. Yet the people who are establishing this policy are right-wing people who slur against their opposing parties by calling them Communists! Simply stupid.

Australia's Ivy League

The Ivy League is a collection of American universities that compete with each other in football. Today they are recognized as premier universities in America and the world, and usually membership into an Ivy League gives prestige and status. Here in Australia the equivalent is the Group of Eight universities. Since most Australians watch American TV, it's likely that your average Australian will not know anything about the Group of Eight yet know what the Ivy League is. Some people believe that Australian GO8 universities are not up there with the Ivy League universities, but according to the 2006 THES rankings, ANU in Camberra in 2006 was ranked 16th globally and Melbourne University was ranked 22nd globally. These two Australian universities, ANU and Melbourne, are consistently ranked in the global top 25. In fact, if you take the top global universities and mark those that belong to the Ivy League, many Australian universities are up there with the Ivy Leagues. This is illustrated in the figure above.

Below is a piece from Encarta questioning the value of Ivy League universities.

Is the Ivy League "Worth It"?

by Donald Asher

Right now, all over the country, high school students and their parents are scheming to get into the Ivy League. Young people are groomed practically from birth to be attractive to mysterious and all-powerful admissions committees guarding the gates of the eight universities that comprise the Ivies. Articles and books are written on packaging strategies, which classes and activities are "in" and which are now "passé," which provide an edge, and which might harm a student's chances.

There is even a psychological malady known as The Yale Syndrome, a sort of obsession with college admission that creates an unusually proximate time horizon for a young person, the moment of college admission. Students who suffer from this affliction do not develop a plan for success in college, or in any aspect of their lives, beyond the arrival of that "fat envelope" detailing their acceptance. Oddly, they share many of the same concepts of time as terminally ill cancer patients.

Parents view admission to one of these schools as a high grade on their parenting skills, and correspondingly view rejection as a low or failing grade. There is a great gnashing of teeth about the whole endeavor. But seldom does anyone really ask the question: Is the Ivy League "worth it"?

More from http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/Departments/...

Fight Recognition Software to Stop Bullying

Bullying is a problem in many schools. One solution I have to this problem is to install surveillance cameras all over the school. The school can employ a security guy to watch the school with these surveillance cameras, responding to any cases of bullying as they happen. Another idea is to have some sort of software that is able to recognize when a fight begins and then warn security about it. Facial recognition software exists, so I don't see why fight recognition software can't exist.

Of course, bullying can be about so much more than fighting. E.g. it can be about verbal abuse, e.g. calling a child ugly or fat.

Australian Graduate Survey 2007 Results

The Australian Graduate Survey collected 110,707 responses from a total of 198,003 new graduates.

The survey of starting salaries, graduate destinations and attitudes found the median starting salary for bachelor degree graduates aged under 25 last year was $40,000. The starting salary for females, at $39,000, was 97.5 per cent of males" earnings.

The 2005 study found that the fields of university study which produced the lowest proportion of graduates in full-time employment were the humanities (70.7 per cent), languages (74.9 per cent), visual and performing arts (60.3 per cent), social sciences (67.2 per cent), computer science (73.7 per cent), life sciences (71.3 per cent) and psychology (70.5 per cent).

The fields with the highest proportion of graduates in full-time jobs were mining engineering (98.8 per cent), pharmacy (98.7 per cent), nursing (96.2 per cent), civil engineering (95.7 per cent), veterinary science (94 per cent), building and planning (91 per cent).

Alumni from the elite research universities were more likely to be in full-time employment than those from new-generation, technology or regional universities. In 2005 some 84.8 per cent of graduates from the universities of Sydney, Melbourne, Monash, Queensland, Adelaide, Western Australia, New South Wales, and the Australian National University - the so-called group of eight - were in full-time employment.

This compares with 77.7 per cent of graduates from the Innovative Research Universities of Flinders (South Australia), Griffith (Queensland), La Trobe (Victoria), Macquarie (NSW), Murdoch (Western Australia) and the University of Newcastle. Meanwhile 78.9 per cent of graduates from new-generation universities such as the University of Central Queensland, and 80.1 per cent of regional university graduates, were in full-time employment.

Source: http://content.mycareer.com.au/advice-research/salary/grads-pay-lagging.aspx

Generalist v. Vocational Degrees

Which is better in terms of profitability. Most people tell me that vocational degrees are good if you want a high paying job, but strangely most people who tell me this tend to be lower paid people, so perhaps their word is not credible. The link below from ANU says that generalist degrees are good:

http://info.anu.edu.au/mac/Newsletters_and_Journals/ANU_Reporter/_pdf/vol_28_no_05/McCalman.html

Vocational degrees are more specialized, e.g. but some argue because of this specialization the knowledge can too quickly become irrelevant. This is apparently the case in competitive industries like engineering and marketing, but not so in the government protected ones e.g. medicine.

Another friend of mine is trying to decide whether to do a specialist course like a Masters in Marketing or whether he should do an MBA, which is more generalist as he'll be learning from a variety of disciplines. He told me that he is thinking of doing an MBA because narrow degrees only get you to middle management. It's the generalist degrees that bring you to CEO, etc.

Melbourne University Dreamlarge Ads

On a lazy Saturday one day I was watching TV with my family, getting ready for another episode of Funniest Home Video Shows, and then I saw an ad that asked "Do you see abundance?" and displayed a picture of dry land. It asked "Do you see peace?" and showed images of tanks being blown up. At the end it says, "We can" and then the Melbourne University logo showed up. I was quite impressed with this ad, so I checked out the website http://www.dreamlarge.edu.au/ and looked at the other ads in the Dreamlarge series. I especially liked the music, which was made by a student at the Victorian College of the Arts.

Melbourne University is starting an ambitious transition into US-style broad education. Some critics call it elitist because it will make the degrees longer and more expensive. Although Melbourne University is not up there with Harvard, Cambridge, or Oxford, the University of Melbourne is number one in Australia and its global rank in recent years has fluctuated between 19 to 22. Either way it is usually consistently in the global top 25.

In the US, most of the elite universities only offer two undergraduate degrees, Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Science. If you want to do law, medicine, business, etcetera you have to study these in graduate school. In Australia it usually doesn't work like this. If you want to become a physician you get the MBBS undergraduate degree, if you want to become a lawyer you get the LLB, and so on. One extreme example of this is La Trobe University. With the Melbourne Model, the number of undergraduate degrees will drop from 96 to 6. However, La Trobe has over 200 undergraduate degrees. Normally, if you want to study, say, accounting, you study a Bachelor of Commerce and major in accounting. At La Trobe, each major is its own course. There is a Bachelor of Accounting, a Bachelor of Economics, and so forth. These changes are supposed to align Melbourne University with the best in Europe and America.