David,

Neither the US or UK subsidize independent schools. This means that about 10% of pupils are privately educated, and only the rich can afford it. Here about 40% are privately educated, 30% in low fee schools which will close without subsidies which you advocate, which in spite of insignificant difference in funds from public schools out perform them.

Removing the subsidy puts hundreds of thousands of pupils back in to the public system at a massive cost to the state with zero improvement to the disadvantaged schools.

This is an economically idiotic policy that is so far left of reality that not even labor is stupid enough to implement it, and remains in the Greens fluffy bunny realm.

What has rung truest for me is RandomGuy's statement "I think if you can get the parents to care more about educating their children it will make more of a difference than throwing more money at the schools. The school education should be secondary to the teaching and attitude that comes from the home. If the parents dont care about school or education or learning or growing then the kids wont. Fix the parents, fix the kids."

The largest reason, I believe, for the drift to private schooling is public school culture as it is perceived by the parents who do care. They are at loggerheads with families that don't care, whose children create the greatest headaches in school classrooms and affect the learning and attitude of all.

Public schools are powerless to eliminate disruptive behaviour because of their revolving door policy on discipline, which emanates from the top and leaves teachers to fend for themselves. Teachers already preparing quality lessons which are trampled over by unruly students are then charged with insufficiently engaging them. Private schools often move their most problematic children on, protecting their teachers and making them appear superior to their public school counterparts. There are poor teachers in public (and private) schools but this is not the root problem.

Parents that don't care enough about their children's academic progress or their behaviour to strongly intercede are the problem and no amount of money will fix this. Good things happen in good schools through parental care, regardless of monetary investment. Listening to Noel Pearson recently reminded me of that fact when he said "What does matter is that if you have parents, who will look after you, who will give you whatever Vegemite there is and whatever Vita Brits there might be in the cupboard and send you off to school and teach you to have respect for your elders and your teachers and so on and never countenance you spending a day away from school, then magic happens." http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3737632.htm

LF,

I'm stunned. I am put in the position where I have to agree with you. This will not do!!

Dear LF,

I agree with you. Parents who care sacrifice to send their children to private schools thereby removing them from public schools. Therefore there is not the pressure to bring public schools up to snuff since those parents who care are not involved in the public schools. So the children in public schools get a second-hand education. Those children are shortchanged but few care. Children are entitled to a good education whether or not their parents care about it. That makes a case for stopping the funding of the private schools. If funding for private schools stops that makes the situation better in two ways. Parents who care are more liable to put pressure to make the public schools better, and children of parents who don't care will mix with children of parents who do care. That can inspire them to care themselves and to improve.

David f.,

"....Children are entitled to a good education whether or not their parents care about it..."

I put it to you that it is nigh on impossible for a child to receive a good education (meaning "well rounded, relevant and comprehensive") if their parents "don't care about it"...regardless of the quality of school or its facilities.

"Education, as we know, is not something that "just" happens in school. It's born of myriad experiences, attitudes and exposures, of which school is but one important facet.

Hi Poirot,

As usual, I agree with you completely on this point.

So that's the problem:

* how to get - what's the word ? - useless parents to care enough about their kids to care about their education ?

In the olden days, we used to have truant officers, who could force children to school, and fine their parents. That might be a start.

Is this sort of parental irresponsibility a form of child neglect ? Of child abuse ?

Are children the property of parents, to do as they wish ? Or is the satisfaction of their health and educational needs an obligation on parents ?

Hey, thanks, Poirot, i think we may be getting somewhere :)

Cheers,

Joe