Interesting that the same article said high choice systems had no overall achievement advantage over low choice systems and that SES is the driver of gaps in achievement.

I disagreed with the arguments used to support the premise of the more savvy, educated parents will take advantage of using their social-economic status as the main cause of inequitable schooling.

Inequitable schooling is a result of preventing parents no matter what income level, to addressed the education needs of their children, over the professional expertise within the public education system. When parents are prevented to act on their best interests of children, parents will work the system to their advantage.

Just like I did, when I decided to withdraw support for my child in grade 3, resulting in her failing all core subjects and the school finally agreeing to have my child assess, to determined what were her learning problems.

The less resources and options parents has, the more apt parents will work the system on the political and social relationships within the school, using their knowledge, abilities and skills to execute a goal, in seeking out the best interests of their children. Parents have no choice to, in the typical models of public education system, that systematically block all choice options of parents seeking the best interests of their children.

Parents with the means, would never have to go as far as I did, by withdrawing their support for their children, in order to obtain an assessment. They simply can opt out of using the assessment services that the education system offers, and go to the private sector, for assessments. No need to argued with the education officials no need to put their kids on waiting lists, and no need to deal with the social implications that always comes when accessing education services beyond the classroom.

At the end of the Globe article: “, Fair choice: The report recommends that school transfers be controlled by a central authority, so that parents who “know the system” don’t have an unfair advantage, and that poor-performing schools losing students should receive more funding and support.”

Nothing fair about it, nor is it fair choice, that seeks out to control the abilities, knowledge, experience of parents at all levels. All it will do at the end, reinforce the class structure, and limit social mobility of the lower income groups.

School boards should expand the range and alternative schooling formats, if they truly want to addressed inequitable schooling, by elimination of barriers, that stops all parents acting on their behalf of their children’s best interests.

This isn`t exactly hitting the substance of your article-rather it speaks to what we are up against in trying to help the clients of the public education sector-

http://www.ednetinsight.com/news-alerts/world-headlines/c21-canada-to-host-21st-century-learning-summit.html

A collaboration from the Universities,Publishers and government.
If we are daunted in our task and strategy,let`s start there.