In a critical article entitled ‘The State of Decay,’ (Melbourne Age 10/10/05), education journalists, Caroline Milburn and Shane Green, wrote of the declining standard of Victoria’s Government school facilities. Drawing on interviews with Professor Brian Caldwell [immediate past Dean of the Faculty of Education at The University of Melbourne], Andrew Blair [President of the Victorian Secondary Schools Principals’ Association], Brian Henderson [Victorian Branch Secretary of the Education Union] and myself [Victorian President of The Council for Education Facilities Planning International], the article condemned the generally poor standard of Victorian Government school facilities. Professor Caldwell drew on his international travels to comment, ‘I cannot name a developed country where the overall condition of school buildings is as bad as it is in Victoria.’
The reasons for this state of decay are well known. Firstly, schools account for the highest percentage of public building stock. Simply, there are a lot of schools to maintain. Secondly, construction quality fell during the 1950s to 1970s due to the requirement for a greater quantity of schools to house the post-war baby generation. Thirdly, successive governments have failed to allocated sufficient resources for school building maintenance and replacement. The consequence is that the problems persist and only escalate.
And how much of a crisis is this? It is true that the influence of the physical environment is one of the important ingredients of a successful school experience. But how important? Responding to Dr. Kevin Donnelly’s book, ‘Why our Schools are Failing,’ Ian Keese wrote recently that there was no crisis in education. (Professional Educator, Oct. 2005). Teachers were well trained, Australia’s achievement with educational outcomes was well above the OECD average, the increase in private school enrolments was a ‘drift’ and not an ‘exodus,’ and our government schools teach a ‘cross-section of values held in our society.’ Keese made no mention of the failing standard of the physical facilities in government schools.
In contrast to the proceeding thoughts, Caroline Milburn (Melbourne Age, 31/10/05), reported on a survey commissioned by the Australian Council of State School Organisations. In her article, ‘Networking Lures Parents,’ she quoted the author of the survey, Dr. Richard Denniss, as saying that, ‘Parents send children to private schools to ensure their offspring are exposed to better social and job networks. Academic standards and facilities were the second and third most commonly mentioned reasons why parents chose the private option.’ Interestingly, parents whose children remained at government schools also, ‘cited reasons similar to those mentioned by the private school parents, although they nominated academic standards and the provision of facilities as the most important factors.’
So, does the deteriorating standard of our government school buildings represent a crisis? Insofar as poor facilities negatively impact on students’ and teachers’ attitude to school and the process of learning, the answer must be, yes. Obviously parents are cognisant of this. The conventional wisdom still remains that private schools are better than public schools. Increasingly, parents in Victoria are enrolling their students in private schools where the standard of facilities is often much higher than that provided in government schools. One consequence of this is that, ‘the local school is breaking down as the glue that binds local communities.’ The notion of a school being central to the fabric of a community often no longer exists.
Whilst government schools remain as separate institutions, the only remedy for this situation is a significant capital injection by the government and/or utilizing private financing initiatives, as has been done in the UK. Interestingly, unions now see this as a viable way forward in preventing the increasing decay of these institutions.
Dr. Andrew Bunting Director, Architectus Melbourne
