I think everyone who posted comments totally missed the point. The author is clearly stating that comparison between schools is not possible because the students, their backgrounds, the level of family involvement, the range and depth of resources are not comparible, regardless of the data produced from tests, however well scrutinised.

Apples and oranges are clearly comparable on certain criterium, they are both round, they both grow on trees, they both belong to the citrus family, they may even be made similar colours. Regardless, an apple remains and apple and will never become an orange, genetic engineering aside. Schools can be compared as to size, building material, teaching staff size, amenities, including computer terminals ad infinitum, but students are humans and each one is an individual. Test scores will vary from day to day depending on a whole range of variables, so how can test scores become the only criterium to determine which school ranks better than another?

Jayare - it is called statistics. As long as the population is large enough (which may preclude some smaller schools from a representative sample) then it is possible to draw comparisons between schools so long as confounding factors are taken into account. This is why there is an attempt to group the schools according to demographics etc. It is never going to be perfect but it is accepted practice in just about every other situation. Obviously the quality of the data is going to affect the outcome and for this reason an estimate of the degree of error is important. Teachers may have a point if the confounding factors are not being correctly accounted for but I believe the main reason is that they are just trying to isolate themselves from prying eyes.

Sajo, just on your previous point re teacher's children - my mother was/is a teacher in the public primary school system. She deliberately refused to have her children at the school she was teaching at (despite the handiness of pickup/dropoff!), as she felt this was unfair to both her and to us (my brother and I) - teacher's kids are often picked on/or left out as they are seen as 'too close' to authority. And teachers often feel they have to be extra firm with their child so as not to be accused of favouratism. My mother even made sure she was not teaching the same grade as myself or my brother were in, so that she could relate to our teachers as a parent, rather than as someone directly 'competing'.

In many ways I think this was the best possible choice for all of us - so don't just look for schools where teachers have their kids there. There are often very good reasons why they do not, rather than a lack of faith in what they are doing.

Jayare

Not quite sure what to make of your post, but I do know a thing or two about botany.

Apples: from the genus: Malus, Family: Rosaceae (includes pears, roses and blackberries)

Oranges: from the genus: Citrus, Family: Citrus (includes cumquats, grapefruit and lemons)

Hence the expression 'comparing apples and oranges' - both fruit grow on trees but there the similarities end.

I know this sounds pedantic but I didn't spend 3 years at Uni just to see someone call an apple an orange - which is what you did.

Back on topic

Is it fair to pit schools against one another?

If private - yes.

If public - no; should be providing top quality education to all.

The thing is that school data should be comparable because all public schools should provide students with equal access to opportunity and high level education.

Students should be tested on what they are taught at school, not what they learn from home or at tutoring colleges. To do otherwise is grossly unfair to those that are from disadvantaged environments.

Everybody knows that in Selective Schools students are going to function higher, parents are not stupid. Parents also know that there are smart kids living in the west, south, north and east and intellectual potential isn’t just something that just those with money have. What those with money have is the ability to place their children in better learning environments so as to develop their abilities.

It shouldn’t make a difference. In every school there should be a percentage functioning at the highest levels, the majority of students usually come in around average to above average and there are always those that struggle. Nobody expects everybody to be achieving at the highest of levels but there should be a percentage at each level, otherwise the balance is out and questions need to be asked!

The Department of Education is segregating as it provides ‘Disadvantaged schools’ for some and then judges and provides our children with educational and even career opportunities based on test marks! It is grossly unfair.

The first thing the DET needs to do is dismantle Selective Schools. Every school should be able to cater for all their students educational needs and that includes those that struggle, those that are average, those that are above average, high achievers and those that are gifted. To do otherwise is grossly unfair to those that are being brought up in a disadvantaged environments as they have no hope of winning academic competitions against those that are in optimal learning environments. Equal access to opportunities for all in local schools allocated on the basis of motivation, interest and need will make things fairer and better for all.

We need to stop making our children compete for access to education and hold schools accountable..

Laurie – good point. It would have to be a fairly large school to get round the problem. I meant to say that the schools where teachers do send their children are likely to be the better ones – not necessarily the same schools they teach at. Teachers often have little choice where they are posted anyhow.

I like the idea of having some concrete data to identify good schools although lots more information would be required to make a proper assessment. I do admit some skepticism as to whether the government is capable of doing this properly however. I would prefer an accreditation system rather than ranking as someone will always be at the bottom even if all meet required standards. Either way schools will put in a lot more effort promoting their strengths which will be a good thing for everyone. It will force schools to face up to problems and do something about it rather than just making excuses eg. introduce vocational subjects or gifted and talented programs, remove ineffective teachers or increase ESL assistance.

My local high school once had a bad reputation so local private schools were thriving. A new Principal is turning the school around and is getting great results. However I only know this because of local gossip – anyone outside the loop will still be under the wrong impression which includes future employers.

The best way for public schools to improve their image is to determine what factors are driving parents to private schooling – and accountability of schools and teachers is a major factor.

Scout – I share your ideals (and degree subject it appears) but we are a long way from achieving top level public education. First we need to improve standards and then maintain them which require some means of measuring performance. Using different criteria for private and public schools will just widen the gap.

Jolanda - I agree with you regarding getting rid of selective schools.