|
PPTA believes, and all sector groups are of the common opinion, that the current funding level of the operations grant for secondary and area schools is seriously inadequate. This applies despite the 1.9% real terms increase in the operations grant in the 2008 budget. Recommendations to Government- That significant real term improvement in the operations grant funding is required as a matter of urgency. It is suggested that the level of locally raised funding reflects the level of additional funding required from the state.
- That there should be the centralised funding of ancillary staff through the provision of a number of hours to schools on a formula basis that can be allocated at the school level with central funding of wages generated by the support staff employed.
- That there is a minimum code for IT in secondary schools and the provision of one-off funding to bring all schools up to that code and ongoing additional operations funding for schools to maintain their IT at the minimum level, the
suggested minimum level includes having the capacity for future connectivity to KAREN or a similar high capacity regional / national network. It is recommended that an independent organisation with in-depth knowledge of the IT sector undertake an assessment of these requirements in consultation with the sector groups. - That contestable funding should be abandoned. It is unfair and administratively inefficient use of school time. Small-scale trials and subsequent national rollout of successful initiatives with appropriate additional funding should be the model adopted. (This view is shared with most other sector organisations.)
- That there should be a full implementation of the 2000 School Staffing Review Group Report recommendation 3.6 to remove the pressure on secondary schools to hire additional teaching staff from operations grant funding.
- That there be a review of the appropriate mechanisms for adjusting operations grant funding to reflect actual future changes in costs to schools is undertaken by an independent body in consultation with the sector groups.
Current IssuesThe Ministry of Education focuses on the measure of the number of schools that have balanced budgets and appropriate systems for managing funding decisions as measures of adequacy of funding. This leads to misplaced complacence because: - Schools balance their budgets using significant levels of locally raised funds, school ‘fees’ and commercially raised income. Reliance on these income streams to maintain basic education delivery leaves the State’s esponsibility to ensure a free secondary school education for all unfulfilled; and
- It fails to take into consideration the compromises that schools are forced to make in order to operate with balanced budgets when the income they have is inadequate for their operational costs. This undermines the state’s responsibility to ensure the delivery of quality education to all.
- Appropriate and adequate systems do not in themselves reflect adequate levels of resourcing, nor compensate for inadequate levels.
Major pressure points on the operations grants of secondary schools include:
- Provision of ICT and the associated technologies and technical support;
- Ancillary staffing numbers and costs;
- Additional, i.e. above entitlement, teaching staff required to deliver the curriculum and meet the administrative and pastoral demands on 21st century schools;
- Costs associated with new assessment and moderation demands.
The funding level established for bulk funding operations grants in 1991 was inadequate at the time. Subsequent new cost centres have not been adequately resourced, or not resourced at all. Schools are encountering increasing difficulty in raising funds locally and this suggests that the under-funding of the grant from central funds will increasingly erode the capacity of boards to meet the educational needs of students and the employer responsibilities to their staff.
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/hide comment form