School Funding, Choice and Equity

Jennifer Buckingham OAMOctober 26, 2011IA126
  • School funding is plagued by inconsistencies and divisiveness. Its complexity has led to widespread misinformation and perceptions of inequity.
  • Existing models of government school funding tend to have historical and political foundations rather than clear objectives or rationales.
  • School funding ought to have three main objectives: equity, efficiency and excellence. These goals are not being achieved in the current system.
  • A new school funding model should be based on the needs of individual students, not on the type of school they attend.
  • A Universal Weighted Student Funding (UWSF) system is a model that is best aligned with the key features of effective funding systems—and maintains school choice.
  • UWSF has three main components: a National Resource Standard, a Guaranteed Student Entitlement, and Equity Weights. It can also be adjusted to take into account private inputs to schools.
  • The issue of private inputs is the most difficult to resolve. The challenge is to design a public funding model that does not exacerbate socio-economic inequities but which also does not create disincentives to private investment in schools.
  • One way to moderate public funding is to vary all students’ public funding entitlements according to their household income or socio-economic status (SES), irrespective of the type of school they attend. This would require some government schools to charge fees and would create an additional means test for families.
  • Another approach (described in detail in this monograph) is to vary public funding entitlements according to the level of tuition fees paid. A student attending any school, government or non-government, which does not charge compulsory fees (or which charges fees up to a certain threshold) would be eligible for the full public funding entitlement. Schools charging fees beyond the threshold would have their public funding discounted gradually until a minimum public funding level is reached..

Jennifer Buckingham is a Research Fellow at The Centre for Independent Studies.

Related Commentary

The mental health system may be making us sicker
Steven SchwartzApril 6, 2026CANBERRA TIMES

Australia has a mental health crisis, but not the one we think. Despite decades of...

Housing negative gearing tax
Reducing the discount would likely not have any lasting impact in lowering house prices
Robert Carling, Michael StutchburyMarch 21, 2026CANBERRA TIMES

Anyone watching the smoke signals from Canberra knows that moves are afoot to try and...

Alarm bells ringing on more interest rate pain
Michael StutchburyMarch 18, 2026DAILY TELEGRAPH
Australians were losing faith that the combination of Labor’s economic policies and the RBA monetary...

• Subscribe

Subscribe now and stay in the loop with our giving appeals, event alerts, newsletters and research updates.

We are always pleased to hear from you. If you have any questions or feedback, please contact us here: