thinks4self (but not very well)

There is one good reason why parents are prepared to put their own money into their children's education. The amount the government spends per child is pathetic and education is important. Its not just wealthy people who send their kids to private schools so why shouldnt the government contribute as much for a child at a private school as they do for a child in a state school. The logic behind your insane post is that parents should be punished for trying to give their children's school more resources.
I agree that the level of funding to state schools is disgusting but there is no logical reason why private schools should be denied funding at the same level per child as a state school unless they are failing to comply with DOE standards. There IS a Marxist view to that effect but one wouldnt call that logical.

thinks4self,

The government ultimately funds the Australian student per capita. In this sense,the funding is for the student, not the school. Perhaps, there is an argument that some free private places be set aside for promising limited means students: I thing some Catholic (CEO) schools migh already do this?

Oz has adopted more the British "old school tie" tradition over the
American, what university did you go to? Mediocre students with a Kings or Tara pedigree will be fast tracked by employers more so than the dux of Bidwell [poor area in Sydney. In the UK, Eton is preparation for Oxford or Cambridge. It is a matter of champion caste over education. In the US, 15% of applicants to Harvard are accepted. An average applicant would not achieve the minimum standards [circa 90th percentile] to enter the Business faculty of UTS. [of course, poor performers would not even try for Harvard].

To be eligible for a Rhodes Scholarship one needs a good credit average and to be reasonable sports player. A basic good all rounder, not acadenically brilliant,as is often thought. Mintors in private schools know this sort of thg; in a public school Rhodes Scholarships [at university] are less tangible.

In sum, with private schools, parents are buying entry into a class and opportunity, perhaps, more so than a good education.

Oliver,

Even the 'old school tie' doesnt count for much any more. The only obvious advantages (some) private schools have over state schools is infrastructure, discipline and some special programs.. more expensive excursions etc.
We've come across about 4 really exceptional teachers in the process of educating our children and ALL 4 were teaching in state schools. By and large, private school teachers are of a more even standard but not particularly higher than the state schools we have experienced.
I think the point of Dale Spender's article was that technology is going to bring about a paradigm shift in education and that this is starting to happen. Private schools are really taking the lead in this regard. Some have even built their programs around the assumption that all students have notebooks and access to internet. This is the beginning but imho the real change comes with the virtual school concept which is starting to occur in the USA... and possibly elsewhere. I think virtual schools will be able to offer personalised programs and degrees of flexibilty that are quite impossible in the conventional, 19th Century approach of our present state school systems. Obviously they dont offer infrastructure like science labs, swimming pools and sports fields and those things are valuable.
Sounds to me like you value education... what do you think of virtual schools?

Sadly like most proponents of the private school funding rort Waterboy, because of an not surprising common ignorance of the funding system or a bias towards private schools, misses the point that the $370 million government funding to the high fee paying independent schools raised their average resource level to 62% above the average resource level of government schools. Why should my taxes go to enhancing a private system to a point where it can charge still higher fees as an exclusivity marketing tool over the public system and yet still be non accountable to the public as to use of funds, be exclusive as to enrolments and increase fees to customers at will? Where is the common good to Australia when as even Waterboy himself states funding to the public is so inadequate?

The real degradation of education is slow and almost imperceptible
The net affect of Howard’s private enhancement policy is a growing differentiation between those govt and non govt schools that serve the families on high incomes and those who are not well off

Now public schools get 31% of Fed funds where as private get 69% a total reversal since the 1980’s The funding is skewed toward those least in need.

"Even the 'old school tie' doesnt count for much any more." - waterboy

I have been offshore for ten years and not in a good position to dispute what you say. That said, in the 70s-90s, going to a private school was a real plus, even if the academic standards were below top public schools like North Sydney Boys. When I worked with a Bank, I noted several capable, but not particularly outstanding Kings' students promoted faster than equally capable age peers. Correspondingly, these ex- private school students didn't start their first rung in the mail room or the voucher department, like many others.

In Hong Kong, my neigher is a Lawyer. He is in the process of enrolling his son in Eton. He is a pragmatic guy. I don't see him doing this, without him seeing a benefit.

Virtual school programmes, like CBT [Computer Based Learning,to work, have to be well designed. Perhaps, like AI it has potential, but,technically, we might not be there yet. Interaction, assessment and delivery should not be impeded by a [virtual] programme, which might need to be more inclined to stay on the rails of its environment. At this time, I see vitual ed. delivery best managed, as a complementary aspect to overall education.

On the other hand, I have an other friend very happy with her online course taken from Cornell University. She is mature aged and has a garden variety Stanford Masters, already. It suits her life style.