Kevin, I've attended both state and private school systems and can assure you that even private schools have some very leftwing teachers.

Rather than parents bailing kids out of "lefty" state schools it could be argued that parents are buying their children into private schools that enjoy higher prestige, better prospects for old boy/old girl career connections, and more recently increased funding from the Federal Government. As an analogy - it has all the gloss of a $4,000 42 inch plasma screen verses a tried and true 68cm TV.

If conservative education departments hold the the purse strings and teachers are often a little to the left, I think that provides a fairly healthy balance. Tipping to one extreme or the the other would provide a lop-sided education.

Speaking of balance, I would argue teachers should be biased to the left in order to combat the massive dose of right-wing bias students receive every time they turn on the tv.

Thats right, I went there.

At the start left and right wing have various meanings.
Let us say that left wing thinks their should be equality whilst the right believes some are born to rule and Creating wealth, which is, good for society. How else could fund education?
The problem is that education; the aim is immaterial for the moment depends on not only the teachers, but also on the social environment of the home. Are their books, is there stress, do the parents aspire to intellectual wondering? Kids from deprived background, cultured in anti school anti learning environment where aims of making money as oon as possible prevail, are more difficult to teach.

If classes have many pupils there is not opportunity for the time required for each individual student to be enthused by learning. Yes superhuman teachers are needed having empathy, patience as well as knowledge. One can train kids like Pavlov’s dogs; they will give the right answers to exam questions and be ranked accordingly. This of course has a price for teacher and kid. The kid does not become a citizen merely a cipher, whilst the teacher has little incentive to do more than prepare the class for testing. Thus if the child not the cipher is the object of attention funding must be such as to enable a child focus. More money devoted to educating future humans or weighted division producing elites and ciphers?
Presumably, if only for reducing the cost of policing, some conception of true and false must be imparted. To point out that the USA indulges in illegal wars is reasonable. To highlight this to the detriment of other examples is a bias.
Yes better teaching if we truly knew how kids learn. Yes better curriculum if we know the aim of education. Here I take it that the aim is defined as servicing the wealth structure with ciphers doing the slave work and the next level up concentrating on business. Mind you he may have been succesful because of the system as Prof. Stiglitz has shown for the world trade organizations, which advantage those already rich.

I commend Robert Thouless' Straight and Crooked Thinking (Pan 1962 and 2/6d then!) to Dr Donnelly (I would even consider breaching copyright, scanning it and e-mailing it to him!). Thouless described 38 dishonest tricks and Dr Donnelly used many in such a short piece.
Much of his argument relies on a most doubtful premise that teachers are influenced by the AEU or, indeed, any other 'great' influence. Most teachers would ask ‘what is the AEU?’
My hypotheses are that teachers come from widespread and probably representative backgrounds; most try to be professional and create discussion and debate where that is possible; and that most emit a sigh of relief when they have survived another day. The influences are the same as those on other citizens: the media (much of it right wing whatever that might mean); colleagues; and maybe a government or two. I am amazed that he thinks that the union views hold much sway at all.
These 'insidious' influences Dr Donnelly implies may even exist—and may even exist from both sides of the social debate—but the ones he has described do not really touch the consciousness of the teachers I know or have known.
Dr Donnelly may one day get tried for voyeurism as he continues to seek reds under beds, misusing history and dragging out quotes almost as old as 'reds under beds'.
Further, I am saddened that the media publishes such specious argument and the editors fail to correct such constructions as ‘Instead of addressing the reasons why …’ Possibly Dr Donnelly could return to basics for some clarification.

I am beginning to think Kevin Donnelly really dislikes teachers!

All the teachers I know really are just trying to do their level best to get the kids interested enough in issues to think about them- yes, that sometimes involves raising political issues, but in doing so, you might just get a spark of "hmm I wonder why its like that? Is it like that?" in a child. And surely that is worthwhile?

Thanks spendocrat, and although I'm not going EXACTLY there, it is a similar tangent I'm interested in...

I attended a public school at both primary and secondary level. I was then (and remain now) on the left side of politics, which is to an extent due to the teachings of my parents. My classmates were, in the main, quite emphatically NOT on the left side of politics, due in part to the teachings of their parents.

In my legal studies, economics and english classes, current affairs topics were canvassed and a range of views were expressed, predominantly by the students. While the students in my classes respected their teachers (for the most part) there weren't many teachers who could claim the kind of influence needed to inculcate their students with a radical Left world view, assuming that had been their intention. My grade four teacher who claimed that I needn't study advanced maths because I was "just going to leave school and marry a farmer", may have had a more sympathetic audience where I grew up.

We need to avoid this constantly floated idea that teachers are the only people "putting ideas in kids' heads", or that teachers exist separate to the communities in which they live and work.

I have to say that I like the idea of kids having their views challenged by a range of people in their lives, and one of the reasons for this is that it is only by challenging our views that we can refine our own value systems and strengthen our principles.

And let's not assume that teenagers aren't sophisticated enough to make their own judgements about issues, informed by a number of factors, just one of which is their teacher's opinion (nevermind the opinion of the teacher's union).