It appears we are all in agreement that it's a contentious issue, and likely to remain so for some time to come. Our closest friends and ourselves are split 50/50 - two couples sending their kids to private schools in Brisbane and Gold Coast, and two couples sending their kids to state schools in Toowoomba and Gold Coast. Ironically, one of the couples whose older daughter went through the state system is having her uni fees paid by her parents, whereas our oldest who attended private school from prep is funding his uni fees via hecs. We've often had the public/private school debate - generally resulting in an agreement to disagree. Personally, I don't think there's any clear right or wrong answer as it depends upon what schools are available to you, how much financial hardship can be tolerated and the needs of the individual child. Some children will flourish no matter where they go, but some need that extra something that some private schools can provide. Friends of ours had a daughter do very well in the state system, but their son has fallen through the cracks and is underperforming and lacks any motivation. Would a different school have made a difference? - it's very hard to say one way or the other. My nieces went to a catholic school in Adelaide and were bored, showed little ambition and were beginning to head down a worrying path. Their parents enrolled them into a private school with an excellent reputation, at a much higher cost, and the difference in their outlooks, behaviour and general self-esteem and aspirations in life has been remarkable.
1)
State schools do suffer when parents withdraw their children to take them to private schools.
This is undoubtedly true. I've often heard teachers say that children learn as much from class discussions as from the teacher, and having "higher order thinkers" to lead group discussions can be invaluable. I've no doubt that when the higher performing children are taken out of the public system, the remaining children lose the ability to learn from peers. If I were the mother of one of the remaining children I would feel resentful, no doubt. But if I were the mother of the high performer who felt the school was not meeting his needs, and a private school would, then I'm unlikely to put the needs of other people's children before those of my own. That may not be a palatable fact, it may not be community-minded, public-spirited or laudable in any way - but most parents are pretty single-minded when making choices for their children - they want to give them the best opportunities they can. If leaving your child in a state school is better for the school, but will hold back your child, it's a no-brainer for me.
2)
Selective state schools are very, very good. .
Absolutely. And if you're lucky enough to live in the region of one it would probably be a waste of money to go private instead. Sadly, the very word "selective" underlines the fact that this is the exception, rather than the rule. It's no surprise to me that often the state schools in regional areas are far superior to those in metropolitan areas - probably because there are far fewer options for parents and the mix of children is more representative of general society. See no 1) above.
3)
Private schools offer scholarships to make the schools look good
Of course they do - it's sound business sense. It also gives an opportunity to children whose parents would not otherwise be able to send them to a private school, so although it's good for future enrolments, it's also giving back to the community in a way. Is it fair? - well I guess that depends upon your own personal bias. There are quite a few state schools that will poach kids due to their sporting or academic or musical ability too.
4)
(Some) Private schools bump non winners
Sadly, this is also true. My child's school will strongly persuade lower performing students to do a tertiary ranking, rather than an OP score.
(Qld system, not sure what the equivalent is in other states. Stupid that it's not a national system, but that's a whole other topic....) Generally this is also in the child's best interest. Naturally, when advertising their academic success rates the school only publishes the % of OP eligible students that outperform the state average etc, rather than the % of the entire student body, so you could say that their records are somewhat artfully manipulated.
I'm aware though that some private schools will "invite you to leave", which I think is very poor form if based only on academic non-performance.
5)
There is a cost to driving students to achieve outstanding results
Absolutely. Again, this is where parenting skills can make such a difference - there's no one-size-fits-all recipe for getting your child through school with the best outcome for them, and I don't mean just the best academic outcome. A good school will also help shape strong ethics, morals, character and community spirit. Some schools push their students too hard, no doubt. As do some parents. Some students need a bit of a push, some are already pushing themselves too hard and extra "motivation" from the school can tip them over the edge. If you're lucky, your school ensures its teachers have a very sound knowledge of the individual students and will tailor their approach on that basis. Tutor groups and a strong school spirit and cohesive year-group cohort greatly help in this area. I was so impressed by the level of caring, support and encouragement shown by the students for each other in my son's year 12 group last year. I never thought I'd have much good to say about Facebook, but the kids really did seem to use it to great effect.
To get back to the original title of the thread - it's probably true that
all parents, not just "middle-class" ones, should choose public schools to improve equity - but until parents can see equity in the outcomes for their children I just can't see that happening any time soon. In some areas the gap between the two systems is pronounced and while it remains so parents will vote with their feet.