No need to reject competition as a driving force in schooling outcomes

· Ending the role of some service providers (government) as regulators;

· Placing all suppliers on a more level playing field in terms of funding and regulation; and

· Having transparency in relation to information concerning performance.

According to Gabriela Schütz and colleagues (School Accountability, Autonomy, Choice, and the Equity of Student Achievement: International Evidence from PISA, OECD Education, Working Paper No, 14, Paris: OECD 2007) there is evidence that "national features of accountability, autonomy, and choice are related to the equality of opportunity across countries".

In fact, the main empirical result of their research is that "rather than harming disadvantaged students, accountability, autonomy and choice appear to be tides that lift all boats. The additional choice created by public funding for private schools in particular is associated with a strong reduction in the dependence of student achievement on SES".

The options for reform are many, but at its heart an emphasis on quality has the potential to provide improved direction and policy coherence, promote efficiencies and make significant impacts on overall education performance in our classrooms.

The support for more competition in schooling as suggested by the Harper review might just provide the catalyst that is required.

The goals of the Queensland Plan are within reach if we embrace deregulation to a more "self-adjusting" model of policy development and service delivery and hence be more responsive to consumer demands.