When Gillard first put forward this Klein model of gathering “rich information” on schools she referred several times (2GB Radio interview with Chris Smith; ABC Brisbane Radio interview with Madonna King) to the fact that “we have a socioeconomic index of private schools…but we don’t have that sort of information available nationally on state schools”. (Of course, the various State and territory education departments do have that information).

In Opposition, however, Gillard was the leading critic of the former Government’s Socio-Economic Status (SES) model, describing it in Parliament as a “flawed index” (Aug 20, 2001) and listing “five flaws” and accusing the Howard government of using it to “create an education market in which the wealthiest have the most choice because they have the ability to buy any of the options on the table (Sep 4, 2000).

She also said that “research is telling us that, even if you look at cohorts of students who all come from financially disadvantaged backgrounds, there are wide variations in the educational attainment within that cohort, which can be explained in part by the cultural foundation of the family- the way in which that family values education- and in part by the educational attainment of the parents.”

Now, however, she proposes to use the SES model to establish which schools are alike, and then to encourage comparison of their student results!

And as Rudd said in reply to a question at the National Press Club, if that results in parents voting with their feet “we’re not going to apologise for it”!

Shades of John Howard and Julie Bishop indeed!

An impressive bit of pollie exposure there, mike STP.

However, given the far more powerful people involved in this - I mean beyond just Bloomberg, for sure - I think we should really be asking ourselves just what kind of implicit threats would compel Kev and Julia to look so dirty on this and other obvious issues.

My bet is the threat of speculator runs on the Oz currency. Or even terrorist attacks to hasten and ensure compliance.

This reminds me of one of my more difficult moments as a principal at a state secondary school in Adelaide.

I had to get the teachers in to discuss their year 12 Chemistry results. We had two classes, one had performed really well – high number of passes, high number of A’s and several perfect scores.

The other was a shocker – just the opposite.

So I got the good teacher in for a praising and, as he went out the door all happiness, I asked him back in and tore strips off him. He was the bad teacher too.

How come? Both classes were “self-selected” by the timetable process. One group did advanced maths and physics. The other self selected against arts subjects.

Their teacher was an excellent all round teacher, and it gives the lie to all these comparisons.

Then we have the common case of social stratification in larger areas where, as in Murray Bridge for example, most of the Aboriginal kids end up at Fraser Park, and most of the business people’s kids end up in the school at the city centre, with a bit of a mix in the remaining primary school. All have the same postcode, therefore all have the same SES according to KRudd. No prizes for guessing the NAPLAN results…

Good points mike STP, mil and greepo.

"And as Rudd said in reply to a question at the National Press Club, if that results in parents voting with their feet “we’re not going to apologise for it”!"

I agree, Mike very much shades of JH and JB. The irony in this statement is that parents of public school children cannot vote with their feet because if all states are like mine, you are only able to attend the school within your zone.

Admittance to schools outside your zone is only through luck where there are limited vacancies in the more 'desirable' public schools. Even if it were possible, it would mean overpopulated schools in some areas and underpopulated schools in others and in many cases the same problems will only be transferred to the new school rather than dealt with in any meaningful way.

What this really means is that parents with the money might be able to vote with their feet to private schools but lets not be confused - within public schools there is no such flexibility or 'choice'.

Rudd has made a mistake by coming across as the 'heavy' on a number of issues. Instead of walking with our feet perhaps more money should be invested in improving those schools that need it most by ensuring there is adequate qualified teaching staff and ancillary staff to provide necessary support and assistance to improve 'outcomes'.

In some schools the improvements might only be small where there are other factors outside the control of teachers and principals. What is important is equality of access and opportunity regardless of demographics.

Mike Williss has recounted some very important information on one of the half dozen most critical issues facing Australia, an issue which unfortunately seems to be approached by a kind of forward to the past strategy! It is a tragedy.

Shadow Minister says “You cannot control what you cannot measure”. This is nonsense. The critical issue is influence, not control. Control has become an article of faith in the managerialist agenda. If we look at the best organisations they are not concerned with control per se. American Airlines is concerned with control and look where they are.

It isn’t that the steps in New York are draconian: it is that they don't work! Like “No child left behind” which was a fraud.

Rpg refers to defending the status quo. It seems impossible for those proposing the kinds of changes that Mr Rudd and Ms Gillard, and Howard’s education ministers before them, are advocating to understand that there are very good pieces of research which show what works and what doesn’t: they involve change. (Surprisingly a lot of the research is being done in the USA: the politicians don't listen to the researchers but instead advocate phony business models, models advocated by the same kinds of people who have given us Fannie May and Enron, etc.)

Successful strategies involve respecting and rewarding teachers, they involve appropriate resourcing of schools. The OECD is about to publish a big report which points that out. Where does this occur? In Scandinavia and some other places. How do those countries perform? They are tops. Foyle makes these points!

What is Australia doing? Persisting with American models, models typical of a country which until recently did not require teachers to have teaching qualifications and a system which produces millions of students who cannot name the country to their south and believe that Intelligent Design is process which has produced life as we see it today.

Many of these issues have been dealt with over at New Matilda. It would be worth having a read of the articles.