Filip,

By deriding me, your define yourself as a loser!

By your self contradiction I guess that makes you an oxy moron.

Sorry to disillusion you, Shadow Minister, but my step daughter went to Ascham in Sydney some years ago (it is is very highly ranked in MySchool and is considered to be one of the top private schools), and she was telling me today that she plans for her children to attend a school where they can do the International Bacaleaureat. Why - because her last two years at Ascham were spent doing test HSC papers and she thinks the HSC merely shows how well you can exploit the system, not how well educated you are. While it may be 'rubbish to think that the top private schools teach to solely to the curriculum', it is much of what they do, and the 'extras' come at considerable cost.

I think you'll find your stepdaughter will have many to choose from, Candide.

>>she plans for her children to attend a school where they can do the International Bacaleaureat<<

There is a growing list.

http://www.ibo.org/school/search/index.cfm?programmes=DIPLOMA&country=AU&region=&find_schools=Find

From what I hear it is far more "rounded" in its approach, and well worth considering. My son's school is looking at it right now.

Does the teaching body have a view on IB vs HSC? I have only heard parents' views, all of which are pretty positive.

Vanna,I agree the differences in educational acheivement at the end of high school between boys and girls are not the result of socioeconomic status, but nor are they the result of differences in teaching (in co-ed schools kids are taught by the same teachers).
They are the result of differences in boys and girls - most particularly in their level of maturity when they finish high school (girls doing better because they start puberty earlier and therefore also reach maturity earlier). There have been studies done looking historically at end of high school results for boys and girls in NSW going back to the 1920s, and girls always achieved better educational results than boys (and still do). It's immaterial, however, as boys still end up earning more in the workforce, so don't feel sorry for boys if they don't get HSC marks as high as their sister's.
I am astonished however, at posters here who maintain that its some kind of teachers union plot when its pointed out that the majority of differences in school results are due to socio-economic status differences.
How do you explain then that comprehensive high schools in middle class areas that are doing so well as opposed to the comprehensive high schools in suburbs with large numbers of Housing Dept dwellings? Are we expected to believe this difference is entirely (or even primarily) due to differences in the quality of teachers at these schools? Various studies have concluded that having either good or bad teachers makes a difference of about 5% in final educational achievement of children.
Myschool is a whole lot of fuss about next to nothing. Real estate agents will be happy, however, as it will lead to more parents in Sydney moving into the areas of "good" comprehensive public schools which have to take everyone in their catchment (which was already happening, but will now accelerate).

Johnj

Re: Girls and boys marks

I can’t find any scientific evidence that girls are more mature than boys, and I once looked at a considerable number of research papers on the subject.

However, I have heard this excuse directly from teachers, and they stated that it was what they were taught at teacher’s college (although there appears to be no scientific evidence for what they were taught at teacher's college).

They also said that boys “do all right” later on, which meant they couldn’t care less in the interim. It was a cop out by these teachers, as is the cop out that socio-economic backgrounds affect student marks.

Teachers taught earlier generations, and if socio-economic levels have fallen, then the education system only has itself to blame for the decline in socio-economic levels.

Unfortunately, I don’t know any teacher who understands this piece of logic. In all, I think teachers should be putting aside their excuse manuals, stop hiding behind the skirts of the teacher’s union, and start and concentrate on teaching.

I’m more used to working in companies where you were paid to solve problems and meet required targets, and not paid to whinge and whine and make excuses.