Page 2835 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 24 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
As the more selective schools attract the better students, the better teachers and associated funding, the unpopular schools become the dumping ground for disadvantaged students and demoralised teachers. The result is a two-tier school system: one group of schools for the well-off and the best teachers and another for the least well-off and least qualified and experienced teachers. This has occurred in England, New Zealand and the United States. There is a real risk of this type of divide occurring in a small geographical area like Canberra where travel time and distance from home to preferred schools is seen as achievable.
An extensive review of research studies published last year by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago concluded that the students who exercised choice do not experience achievement gains and that school choice does not induce public schools to improve their performance. Recent research on the impact of greater choice and competition between primary schools in England published by the London School of Economics also shows no effect on the performance of schools or students. Their study concluded that choice and competition does not seem to be generally effective in raising standards.
On the other hand, there is extensive evidence that increasing choice and competition between schools tends to increase social segregation between schools, which exacerbates achievement gaps between rich and poor students. It is argued that like-school comparisons will show which schools are making a difference and help identify good practice.
However, existing models of like-school comparisons used in Australia failed to compare like with like and therefore do not accurately measure schools. They do not distinguish the ethnic profile of a school, they do not consider students of low socioeconomic status and they do not consider minority families. For example, area-based indexes of socioeconomic status used in New South Wales and Western Australia do not distinguish between households with or without children at school and some schools may be classified as in a low socioeconomic status group because there is a large pensioner population in their area, even though families with school-age children may be well off.
This matter needs the urgent attention of the minister to ensure that this information is not used in an inappropriate manner. He should then let the Assembly, concerned parents and teachers know how he will go about this. The Australian Education Union and the ACT Council of Parents and Citizens Associations have called for legislation banning the media publishing league tables. At their meeting on Friday 12 June 2009, the education ministers agreed to develop strategies to manage the risk of third parties producing such tables. We ask that, among other strategies, the ACT education minister and his colleagues around the country at least give strong consideration to adopting the current New South Wales legislation, which prevents the publication of school league tables.
MR BARR (Molonglo—Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Children and Young People, Minister for Planning and Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation) (12.02): The motion before us today does note a number of recent
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .