Financing state schools
Who should fund our schools? The question has resurfaced once again with the current controversy over admission fees now being charged by government-run junior and senior high schools. Parents have a valid complaint. These schools are charging fees far above those announced by the government. They use various pretexts for their action, from charges for uniforms and books, to financing for the upkeep of school buildings. But essentially, the money is needed to run the schools. School administrators could not be entirely faulted. They need the extra money to supplement the meager annual government subsidy which, as everyone knows, is barely enough to pay for the school's upkeep, let alone for new equipment and expansion, which most schools desperately need.
The row between school administrators and parents has always cropped up during the admission period each year. Usually, the conflict is settled once the academic year begins, after school administrators and parents meet and work out a compromise. The complaints ebb, the administrators return to teaching and everyone is happy. But one can bet that the problem will return next year, because we have not yet found a more lasting solution to the dilemma of how best to finance state-run schools.
In the meantime, the problem appears to be compounding. How many times have we heard of people complaining about the poor quality of education at government-run schools? What about the eroding discipline of pupils, as reflected by student brawls, which mostly involved state schools rather than private schools?
The concerns about the poor state of government-run schools have also driven many parents to send their children to private schools, where the fees are much higher. The emergence of new private schools, some of them claiming to be superschools to justify their exorbitant fees, is simply exploiting these concerns. This trend shows that some parents are willing to pay a lot more for quality education for their children. Unfortunately, though with good reason, they are putting their trust and money in private, not state schools.
With this financial drain, the condition of state-run schools will further deteriorate. If they barely make ends meet for the upkeep, how can we expect them to build much-needed new laboratory rooms and facilities, buy computer equipment and introduce computer lessons? All this has now become necessary, and is something that private schools have already tapped. If we continue to neglect the financial needs of state schools, the end result will only be a polarization between state and private schools, between their graduates, and eventually -- in society -- between rich and poor.
Given these trends, it is clear that the current mechanism of funding the operation of government-run junior and senior high schools can no longer be defended. The current system allows schools to charge wealthier parents more in the "voluntary contribution", making it look equitable through the cross-subsidy mechanism. But it is obvious the mechanism is not working. How would one know that these parents are declaring their real income to schools, when most are not even declaring it to the tax office. Given the constraints on the government budget, it is also difficult to expect an increase in the annual subsidy.
A breakthrough is desperately needed now to finance the operation of these state schools. A new system which is more effective and fair must be found. A greater autonomy in how these schools are managed would be a start. They could also be encouraged to find initiatives in raising funds.
The time has come for the nation to shift from simply providing access to education for everyone, to providing access to good quality education for all. This means reviewing the way the nation is financing state schools.