I am always a little annoyed when I read sentences like: “Where religion begins to inform everyday values and practices, and leads believers to impose their beliefs on others, there is an unavoidable tension with principles of democratic government.” It is fanciful to say that any religion in a democratic state could “impose” its belief on anyone. If there were enough Christian members of parliament to pass a ban on abortion, would that not just be democracy in process? The suggestion that the religious want to impose their beliefs on others conjures up images of the inquisition and the burning of witches. This is hardly our situation and is a backdoor denigration of those who believe. The much lauded liberal democracy has its own beliefs that are more often than not imposed on all of us. By slight of hand the tenets of liberal democracy, that originally came from Christianity, like the precious nature of each individual human life, have been secularized and cleansed of their origins. To this has been added the idea of human rights, a completely mythical construct from the 17th century that has replaced the biblical understanding of justice.

I have no problems with the cultural arguements in this article.
what I do find problematic is the assumption that only state schooling can provide these opportunities of cultural awareness.
Schools should be owned and controlled by communities rather than by the state. There is a big difference between independent community owned schools, state schools and private (rich schools).
The model for community owned and controlled schools funded by the state has yet to truly emerge.

If schools are community owned will they take responsibility for compulsory education, Rainier? If they do, no problem, but the weird hybrid we have now means some publicly funded schools shoulder that responsibility and others do not. The reasons public schools are currently owned by the State is because to them falls the responsibility of providing a school place for every child of school age. That includes all the most disadvantaged; the poorest, the neglected, the abused, the learning disabled, the intellectually and physically disabled, the ones with the emotional and behavioural problems. The kids that most privately (could that mean community?) owned schools don't want to know about.
Public schools are a source of public good, that means they do something that is of benefit to everyone (i.e. compulsory education for all kids), private schools, by and large, are for private good, that means they do things that primarily benefit those who purchase their services. Which would your community schools be? The former, hopefully.

It is good to see Mr Altman back in print - I aint seen much of his work of late - maybe thats just me.
I dont know however whether such a homogenious approach to schooling is a good idea. And I dont know if we as a community are mature enough to deal with the tensions that might arise. We've put a lot of energy into creating a separatness and we are suffering as a result.

We raised our kids in an area of high ethnic diversity; Anglo kids were the minority. Some parents went to great lengths to bus their kids to other schools with a different mix of children (more white kids) others were grateful that nearby ethnic schools took the heat out of their own play grounds - and many muslim families sent their offspring to catholic schools seeking a less secular appraoch to education and a stricter environment.

All of these movements within the system were done based on real time preconceptions and prejudices. To attempt to reconstitute the present omelette in order to get the perfect egg is a big ask indeed and a huge responsibilty for teachers - and the responsibility will fall squarely on their shoulders - who seem to get blamed for all manner of behavioural ills and shortcomings as it is these days.
Clearly there has to be a more proactive approach to encouraging broader community interaction, familiarity and connectedness. I just dont think schools today are the best places to do it - yet.

Nice sentiments, but it pretty much is a failure before it gets off the ground. In the UK, a vast majority attend government schools yet they have more problems with ghettos than what is occuring in Australia. Furthermore, is there a guarantee that sending a child to a public school will show all cultures equally? or will there be a 'dominant' cultural exchange like there is now. In any case, it smacks of political correctness in the Paul Keating vein.

I went to both a public school and then to a religious private school. Did I attend the latter because I am religious? No. I went to an Anglican school though one parent is Catholic, the other Jewish and I have two Buddhists in my family. I went to this school because of the excellent education it offered to the students in a safe environment and though it was Christian, there were Muslims, and Hindus and Sikhs all who attended because their parents shared the same belief that their child should receive the best possible education.

Public schools do not attract people, they only make private schools look for attractive for even non-religious people. Will sending children to private schools help in "cultural" understanding? Of course it would not.

I believe in integration, but the idea that it would be helped along by sending kids to public schools is like the idea that if Iraq never occured, terrorism would stop in its entirity.

Most definitely the former. Many community (independent schools) unfortunately get thrown into the 'private schools' basket in debates about public versus private.

Equality of access should be at all times be advocated, but this does not mean access is made to curriculum design and teaching approaches.

These remain the sole responsibility of the State and for good reasons to do with accreditation and quality. But in my opinion, this also locks out innovation and community connectivity in crucial areas of teaching and learning and importantly how schools become a part of the community that surrounds them.

Perhaps it’s because they (State Education departments) are so mono-cultural in how they organize their schools? And whose ‘culture’ is this anyway?

In other words it’s not the cultural difference of students but the cultural background of those administering and teaching in state schools that needs to be given critical consideration. Are they really equipped to teach to an increasingly diverse cultural and religious demography of children? Evidence suggests they are not. Know thyself before teaching to difference - one great educator proclaimed.

Altman also suggests some kind of fundamentalism is at play in community or religious owned schools but shows no evidence of this.

From the evidence of research I've read the evidence suggest there is a 'fundamentalism' operating in public school administration that excludes children from different cultural and lower socially economic backgrounds and who come from all ethnicities. (yep, poor white kids grow up to be poor white adults along with their black and brown mates) But according to Altman - "as long as they are culturally and religiously aware" (then we'll all be safe)..Yeah sure. I thought schooling was also a way of preparing our kids for real jobs and careers? Silly me.

Overall, what he argues for is not new or bad, just badly conceptualized and argued.