I'm resisting entering the ideological 'debate' and accompanying ideologies/generalisations to correct some inaccuracies in the article and from contributors.

- 'Private' schools in NSW are accountable, reporting in fine detail educationally and financially, including for every govt dollar they receive. They also report to ASIC. Saying they are not as accountable as a government school is a myth. This includes regular inspections to ensure adherence to curriculum, legislative and other educational requirements.
- No individual/church/organisation running a non-government school profits from it. Legislation prohibits for-profit schools receiving state or federal funding.
- There are few academically selective non-government schools in NSW. The vast majority take all-comers regardless of background, disability, academic ability etc.
- Non-govt schools that operate with high resource levels do so because the parents pay fees. These schools receive little govt funding ($700-$800 p.a. from the state and $1,000 - $1,500 p.a. from the federal govt). Parents pay for everything else.
- The notion of 'privilege' doesn't make sense when most non-govt schools have resources that are no better than most government schools. Most parents want their child's educational needs and interests met, not social or business networks.
- Non-govt schools are funded because they provide a public service, which they have done since European settlement (the churches provided education before governments got into education provision). The cost to government is lower because they receive less govt funding per student than any government school - without exception.
- Non-govt schools in NSW received $668m in State Govt funding (2004-05) for educating 34% of the students. Government schools received $7.45bn for 66% of the students. That's 8% of the funds for 1/3rd of the students in non-govt schools. *Productivity Commission Report on Govt Services. Let's show ALL of the funding figures please. Ms Caro included.

All of this information is available from independent sources, let's go beyond the ideology and present facts. There is room in our (excellent) education system for all types of schools that reflect our society.

Malcs:

Most of your “facts” fall short of the whole story.

PRIVATE SCHOOLS ACCOUNTABLE? Yes, but over a far narrower range of OBLIGATIONS. ABS data shows that private schools don’t take on anything like the full range of students. Some actively seek kids who will enhance the school’s profile….and avoid those who won’t. Also, they are not subject to public audit or FOI.

FEW PRIVATE SELECTIVE SCHOOLS? You may be right as far as NSW is concerned, but wrong about the other states. Private schools don’t have to be selective to ensure an academic profile. Fees, combined with scholarships, do the trick. HOWEVER, it is a big leap to say that private schools take all comers. ABS data clearly shows they (collectively) don’t.

HIGH RESOURCES FROM FEES. Partly true: both fees and public funding has created the resource gaps between schools. It is the combination of funding sources available to private schools (some far more than others) which has created our resources gap.

RESOURCES AREN’T DIFFERENT. Even three years ago over half of private schools were resourced at higher levels than government schools. Do you have evidence that the situation has reversed since then?

PRIVATE SCHOOLS PROVIDE A PUBLIC SERVICE. Only for that portion of the public they wish to serve (or end up serving). Public education expanded precisely because church schools wouldn’t serve the WHOLE community; they still don’t. Is the cost to government lower? Don’t forget to add up ALL the public funding. I wish you luck in getting the figures! Of course all students don’t get the same funding; they don’t all have the same needs, never have!

THERE IS ROOM FOR ALL TYPES OF SCHOOLS THAT REFLECT OUR SOCIETY. But the enrolment profile of most private schools does not reflect the demographic profile of their location. Check the aggregated data and then look (for example) at the “low fee” private schools in low income communities. There are exceptions, but the rule remains!

Yes Malcs, the ideological debate often gets in the way of good solutions, but let’s not replace ideology with a set of untested myths.

Bunyip - everything I've said is accurate and I stand by it. You've conveniently (deliberately?) misread much of what I've said and put your own spin/interpretation on it, and indulged in your own subjective, untested myths (to use your own words). Working in media I recognise this approach among ideologues, regardless of the topic, who make their points through headline seeking and absolute statements. We can all find grey when someone else sees black & white, and vice versa, because we all see the world a little differently.

There's little point in my debating this topic with you further because we'll never agree. My objection to ideology (of any sort) is that there's never a valid alternative and a reasonable and rational debate based on fact is not possible so I'm not going to, point by point, waste my breath defending what I've already presented.

Malcs, you came into this debate happy to distance yourself from ideology. So you offered information which you presented as being above reproach (from “independent sources”).

I conceded some of your points – but much of what you said is very challengeable. But when I question your claims with other information, all you can do is spit the dummy?

I can’t see why you need to attack me, rather than try to address the points I have raised.
If I am wrong, spell it out! You really don’t do yourself any great credit unless you do.

There is an alternative to ideology and “a reasonable and rational debate” IS possible, but only if you engage. It isn’t a “waste of breath”, it is the stuff of democracy.

Audits are a waste. Invesigatory bodies are a farce. Rights only exist for criminals and those who abuse.

There is no accountability in the public system and I know because for over 7 years my family have been trying to get serious allegations of bias, victimisation, vilification, bullying, neglect, manipulation of test scores and documents, discrimination and psycholgoical abuse against children, addressed. Allegations that include a conspiracy to cover up and that come supported with huge amounts of documentary evidence. Nobody is required to look at what the parent presents or to believe anything the parent says. Nobody is required to protect the children. Parents are not respected and best interest of the child does not appear to be a concern. The system just takes the word of those responsible on face value and on the basis of that they justify ignoring complaints.

Audits are a joke, policies are not worth the paper that they are written on and the public system's only focus and concern is to present the picture that they want to present being that if a students is not learning it is the parents fault and if a parent complains it is the childs fault and/or the parents fault.

The public system never wants to ever be made to answer or held responsbile - no matter what. There is no way that the Private System would get away with that. At least in the Private system more fellow parents would support a child/family who was being victimised and treated unfairly. The public system doesn't care.

Education - Keeping them HOnest
http://jolandachallita.typepad.com/education/
Our children deserve better

Jolanda, you obviously, like myself, have quite a bit of experience with both the public and private education system. And like myself you are very interested in giving your child the best platform to start off in life as a young adult.

Many parents are actually not motivated by societal justice or left wing/ right wing ideology where the well being of their child’s education is concerned. That’s OK for OLO discussions, not the education of my child.

There are some posters who want to blame a ‘left wing’ conspiracy. If only it were that simple!

Parents aren’t the reason for schools failing either. Liz, if you want to blame bullying parents who ‘frighten’ an administration, then I have to reiterate again, it is the principal. Why is someone a principal if not capable to deal with parents like this? The principal is the one who has the chance of creating the kind of culture between parents and school that is beneficial to school, students AND teachers..

I have no idea how principals are selected in the public school system. All I know is that the most inadequate principals I’ve come across are in public schools. These schools also had a high turn-over of teaching staff, usually the best ones seemed to leave quickly. This is not a reflection on how nice or not nice the person is who happened to be a principal, but on leadership and motivational abilities.

I have a son who did very, very well in a private school. Excellent education, not coaching. The school doesn’t ‘select’ students either. And now I have a daughter in a public high school, also excellent education, not coaching. Both have excellent principals.

With any business or organisation anywhere, private or public, the results and outcomes are a reflection on the capabilities of the management to lead a team, to actually make a group of people a team with common goals. Why would schools be any different