Andrew Leigh has again managed to reduce complex social interactions to simple economic formulas. He seems to not understand that inequity is rooted in history and the hegemonic nature of the curriculum schools deliver. He would be well advised to look at the work of Barry McGaw http://www.unisa.edu.au/hawkecentre/events/2006events/education_McGaw.asp

or Richard Teese http://www.mup.unimelb.edu.au/catalogue/0-522-85048-0.html

and others such as http://www.educationfoundation.org.au/downloads/equity%20&%20excellence%20June06.pdf

these all show us that Australia has the unenviable position of having the most direct correlation between class and educational outcomes. Andrew Leigh's solution would do no more than condem a group of students to failure and a life of hardship simple due to the condition and circumstance of their birth. I thought in our country we were beyong class replication.

In the North Carolina study what was the SES of those that were able to access the 'choice' did they have higher literacy? were they able to afford the travel?

Democracy is more than this!

Voice should read the words he has just typed, because then he would realise how inane his argument is. Read Leigh's article then tell us, how on earth would allowing parents access to more information create an inflexible class system? His article actually produced evidence and sound logic to suggest that it creates more opportunity for the poor.

As for choice, Voice, the answer is to implement a voucher system. Only then will parents be truly free to choose, as opposed to the current system that makes choice the preserve of those who can find the money to pay for it, which in reality Voice, means the public education system and the teacher unions are the ones condemning the poor to failure.

“Despite a significant increase in funding, literacy and numeracy scores of Australian teenagers have failed to rise over recent decades. On average, new teachers are less academically talented today than they were two decades ago.”
• Laws of diminishing returns
• Naturally up to 10% of students will struggle no matter how much input of funding and of personalised learning programs.
• There is a huge difference between social expectations and attitudes today compared with a few decades ago. We now have very high numbers of children from families that have gone through generational unemployment and poverty resulting in debilitating damage to social aspirations.
• What is the data that backs up the second claim?

“Such a reform would bring us into line with Britain and the United States, where policymakers across the board take the view that a school’s test scores are quintessentially public information.”
• I have not seen any data to substantiate that British and USA education is superior to Australian education.
• The debate about whether schools’ test scores should be public information or not is not about quality education.

"Others will claim that raw test scores don’t provide useful information. The simple answer to this critique is to produce what Bill Louden of the University of Western Australia calls “smart” league tables, which are adjusted to account for socio-economic status, or which measure value-added."
• Schools’ test scores are not comparable, because all schools are operating in unique circumstances with unique human beings. Schools are not production lines.
• No amount of modification will produce accurate ‘league tables’ out of unique schools

“....making test score data readily available may well benefit the underprivileged most of all.”
• “There is growing empirical evidence that low-income parents place lower weights on academics when choosing schools.” – National Bureau of Economic Research

“School league tables are no magic bullet, but you can’t have a revolution without information.”
• It is the accuracy of RELEVANT information about real educational issues that will make or break the educational revolution.

Thanks Andrew, interesting article!

For the commenters Voice and Ron H above, a question: How can you improve what you cannot measure? It is question-begging to spout platitudes about how you cannot compare results because people and situations are unique. Peoples test scores are not unique, and to the extent that students share a learning environment, a teacher and a curriculum, their test scores are measuring similar things.

To use the word 'hegemonic' is to signal an argument to be examined with deep suspicion. A correlation between class and educational outcomes is perhaps an appropriate outcome, because our society has only SES as a marker, and the definition of class, SES and educational outcomes is rather circular - they are not independent variables in any way. If education does not raise the poorest and weakest from life traps, perhaps it is appropriate to examine why not and whether we should expect that outcome.

Some of the brightest people I know have come from working-class backgrounds and it is laughable that our education system 'condemned them to failure and a life of hardship'. Their now-high SES reflects both their abilities and their life choices, not some dark machinations of an oppressor class.

It is always insightful when we enter an argument with a predetermined conclusion. As the links I highlighted show, if the respondents read them, is that it is not the SES of the students as defined by similar educational context (in fact that is not SES) it is parental income, education and employment. Many countries, especially in northern Europe successfully mitigate this influence. The continued evidence from PISA, TIMMS etc is that Australia DOES NOT! why not? because we have a belief in choice and vouchers which have failed the very people they are aimed at in both the USA and the UK. They are merely more middle class welfare.

Consider the perquisite to exercise this 'choice'. Firstly one must be able to access the information and then act upon it through appropriate transport to the new location. This is a significant hurdle for far to many people. Then what about those living in communities where there is no other school nearby and / or the nearest town is 50 to 100Km away. do we just say 'too bad' or was it their choice to live in their community with their family and friends?

Voice has a sure fire way of preventing the inequality of some kids being subjected to an inferior education.

It goes like this " Lets provide an inferior education to all the kids, & we can be sure of no Inequality".

I hate the education loby