IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/auu/dpaper/479.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Drift to Private Schools in Australia: Understanding its Features

Author

Listed:
  • Chris Ryan
  • Louise Watson

Abstract

Government subsidies have provided a major source of funds to private schools in Australia for three decades. The increasing level of private school subsidies since the mid-1970s has contributed to a steady increase in the proportion of students enrolled in private schools. This growth in the private school share of enrolments was not inevitable, but has been the outcome of government policies. We use an economic framework that focuses jointly on the price and quality of schooling and find that private schools have used government subsidies to increase the quality of their services (ie. to reduce staff: student ratios) rather than to reduce their fees. This strategy has ensured that the 10 percentage point increase in the enrolment share of private schools since 1975 has not substantially altered the socio-economic composition of their student body. One consequence is that a higher proportion of government school students now come from low socio-economic status (SES) backgrounds than 30 years ago. Therefore, schools in the government sector now educate more students from lower SES backgrounds than in 1975. The implications for public policy of these phenomena are discussed and directions for future research identified.

Suggested Citation

  • Chris Ryan & Louise Watson, 2004. "The Drift to Private Schools in Australia: Understanding its Features," CEPR Discussion Papers 479, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Economics, Australian National University.
  • Handle: RePEc:auu:dpaper:479
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cbe.anu.edu.au/researchpapers/CEPR/DP479.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alan B. Krueger, 2003. "Economic Considerations and Class Size," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(485), pages 34-63, February.
    2. Anh T. Le & Paul W. Miller, 2003. "Choice of School in Australia: Determinants and Consequences," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 36(1), pages 55-78, March.
    3. Williams, Ross A, 1985. "The Economic Determinants of Private Schooling in Australia," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 61(174), pages 622-628, September.
    4. Francis Vella, 1999. "Do Catholic Schools Make a Difference? Evidence from Australia," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 34(1), pages 208-224.
    5. Summers, Anita A & Wolfe, Barbara L, 1977. "Do Schools Make a Difference?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(4), pages 639-652, September.
    6. Henderson, Vernon & Mieszkowski, Peter & Sauvageau, Yvon, 1978. "Peer group effects and educational production functions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 97-106, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sharmila Vaz & Richard Parsons & Torbjörn Falkmer & Anne Elizabeth Passmore & Marita Falkmer, 2014. "The Impact of Personal Background and School Contextual Factors on Academic Competence and Mental Health Functioning across the Primary-Secondary School Transition," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-13, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ma, Lingjie & Koenker, Roger, 2006. "Quantile regression methods for recursive structural equation models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 134(2), pages 471-506, October.
    2. Jacob M. Markman & Eric A. Hanushek & John F. Kain & Steven G. Rivkin, 2003. "Does peer ability affect student achievement?," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(5), pages 527-544.
    3. Iversen, Jon Marius Vaag & Bonesrønning, Hans, 2015. "Conditional gender peer effects?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 19-28.
    4. Kang, Changhui, 2007. "Classroom peer effects and academic achievement: Quasi-randomization evidence from South Korea," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 458-495, May.
    5. David Brasington & Don Haurin, 2005. "Capitalization of Parent, School, and Peer Group Components of School Quality into House Price," Departmental Working Papers 2005-04, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    6. Betts, Julian R. & Fairlie, Robert W., 2001. "Explaining Ethnic, Racial, and Immigrant Differences in Private School Attendance," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 26-51, July.
    7. De Fraja, Gianni & Landeras, Pedro, 2006. "Could do better: The effectiveness of incentives and competition in schools," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1-2), pages 189-213, January.
    8. Marisa Hidalgo-Hidalgo, 2007. "On the optimal allocation of students when peer effect works: Tracking vs Mixing," Working Papers 07.14, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    9. L Feinstein & James Symons, 1997. "Attainment in Secondary School," CEP Discussion Papers dp0341, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    10. Dennis N. Epple & Richard Romano, 2003. "Neighborhood Schools, Choice, and the Distribution of Educational Benefits," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of School Choice, pages 227-286, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Epple, Dennis & Figlio, David & Romano, Richard, 2004. "Competition between private and public schools: testing stratification and pricing predictions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(7-8), pages 1215-1245, July.
    12. Bala, Venkatesh & Sorger, Gerhard, 1998. "The evolution of human capital in an interacting agent economy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 85-108, July.
    13. Don J Webber, 2004. "Gender Specific Peer Groups and Choice at 16," Working Papers 0403, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    14. Epple, Dennis & Newlon, Elizabeth & Romano, Richard, 2002. "Ability tracking, school competition, and the distribution of educational benefits," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 1-48, January.
    15. Bala, Venkatesh & Sorger, Gerhard, 2001. "A Spatial-Temporal Model of Human Capital Accumulation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 96(1-2), pages 153-179, January.
    16. Francis Kramarz & Stephen Machin & Amine Ouazad, 2008. "What Makes a Test Score ? The Respective Contributions of Pupils, Schools and Peers in Achievement in English Primary Education," Working Papers 2008-21, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    17. Stephen Gibbons & Shqiponja Telhaj, 2016. "Peer Effects: Evidence from Secondary School Transition in England," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 78(4), pages 548-575, August.
    18. Roland Benabou, 1993. "Workings of a City: Location, Education, and Production," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 108(3), pages 619-652.
    19. Takii, Katsuya & Tanaka, Ryuichi, 2009. "Does the diversity of human capital increase GDP? A comparison of education systems," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(7-8), pages 998-1007, August.
    20. Petra E. Todd & Kenneth I. Wolpin, 2007. "The Production of Cognitive Achievement in Children: Home, School, and Racial Test Score Gaps," Journal of Human Capital, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 91-136.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    private schooling; choice; government subsidies; student background;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy
    • H52 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Education

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:auu:dpaper:479. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cpanuau.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.