palimpsest asks: "Linda and FrankGol, do you really believe equality of outcomes can be legislated into existence?"

My answer: No, and I've never said so. If you mean equality of outcomes for each individual, that is an impossibility .

However, we can and should aspire to EQUALITY OF OUTCOMES for groups of people (eg girls and boys, English-speaking and non-English-speaking, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, children from low-income families etc). To have anything other than that as an aim is to have an unjustifiably discriminatory education system.

Governments can certainly legislate for a pre-requisite EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY which entails at least three other concepts:
EQUALITY OF ACCESS to a comprehensive high quality curriculum,
EQUALITY OF PROVISION of resources, and
EQUALITY OF PARTICIPATION rates and RETENTION rates for all groups of students.

A government that consciously sets out to give one group of kids an advantage over another in education is immoral and undemocratic. There can be no other ethically responsible AIM in education than EQUALITY OF OUTCOMES for identifiable groups of
students. That's why I oppose the Howard government's discriminatory policies that favour students from high-income families.

The Howard notion of 'choice' in education is a sham when only a minoirty have the wherewithall and the government support to exercise a dinkum choice.

Posted by FrankGol, Tuesday, 29 May 2007 1:07:15 PM

Very well put. I totally agree.

Frankgol, totally agree with your discussion points re basis of inequality in the the system and its causes. My observation is that state high schools are mirrors of the increasing gheottisation that is occuring in Australian cities. If you look at almost every economic indicator including income, educational level of parents, social capital-the inner and mid suburbs are increasingly concentrations of high achievement, job opportunities, educational opportunity. The outer suburbs are increasinly made up of families with low incomes,high unemployment, social issues. Any discussion of why high schools are seen as underperforming must include analysis of this process.

FrankGol and Pdev, hear, hear.

It is becoming unbelievably tiresome to suffer through the rants of 'left wing conspiracy' whenever issues of equality of opportunity and access is raised. I fail to see what 'left wing' or 'right wing' political views have to do with the issues FrankGol raised.

What is left wing in wanting public schools in socio-economic disadvantaged areas delivering the same outcomes as in affluent private schools?

As a parent, who is struggling to provide for my children, I'm sick to death of the left wing right wing rhetoric. Entry to public schools are determined by your address. So much for parental 'choice'.

Opportunities provided through education is the surest way any child has to break a cycle of familial poverty and disadvantage. Keeping people disenfranchised from mainstream opportunities is the surest way to create a class of 'social activists' who will want to upset the apple cart. Why not if it is out of reach?

We keep on waffling about how 'merit' ought to be the deciding factor in accessing university and trade opportunities. How is that possible if there is an increasing number of children unable to develop their merit because their parents haven't got the financial wherewithal or lack any determination to assist this?

Spot on Pdev!

The Educations system has the capacity to segregate. They have the power to do whatever they want with students scores and marks without question or challenge.

The Selective Schools Unit and Education Measurement Directorate in NSW have had serious allegations made against them of systematic bias, victimisation, manipulation of test scores/documents and discrimination. Allegations that are being ignored and covered up. There is no accountability or transparency.

If they can manipulate scores just by entering their password on a computer, they can do whatever they want. Education - Keeping them Honest - http://jolandachallita.typepad.com/education/

In order to appear that the public system provides and show that they are performing as well as private schools the public system has developed Selective Schools. These schools allow those that are in a better learning environment to have an even greater advantage as entry is determined by an academic competition. Those who get the highest marks win. The Education system knows that groups of parents train their kids for years to master these entry tests so as to gain access to these schools, yet on the application form for Selective School placement it clearly state that coaching does not make a difference as it is an ability test and they say that ability is something that is developed and not taught!!. Somehow the Department of Education doesn’t seem to believe that if you are taught to take tests and given strategies to deal with common questions that are repeated in these type tests you will perform better than those who are not taught.

How can it possibly be seen as equitable and fair to provide disadvantaged schools for some and then expect them to compete in academic competition for access to Selective Schools against those that are in optimal learning environments and/or are coached?