Education survey
I’ve appreciated hearing from hundreds of Canberrans about your views on childcare and migration. Since education is a passion of mine, I’m now running a survey on schooling. It should take about 3 minutes if you don’t have schoolchildren, or 5 minutes if you do. I look forward to hearing your views. For those on a mobile device, you can find the survey here
I hope Gonski reforms are implemented. It is as much an economic issue for the future as education policy
Completely agree Laurie – implementing the Gonski reforms to schools funding is definitely the most urgent priority in education policy at the moment. It’s odd a survey on education at this time doesn’t include a specific reference to it.
It’s also disappointing that Dr Leigh didn’t ask his constituents whether they support the Government’s recent commitment to use scarce resources to deliver a funding boost to the wealthiest private schools in the land (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-20/gillard-announces-more-cash-for-private-schools/4209166).
I don’t work in your electorate Andrew – but I’m very disappointed that a Labor member can have such a poor attitude to public education. It is what made Australia the classless society it is (well was until Howard did a great job of building a great divide). I fear for the future of the lower classes of this society – already well entrenched in Canberra where we already have several generations who have never held jobs and can’t access the education they need and deserve. They just don’t believe it’s for them. I believe the whole Labor Party should be ashamed of who they have become. My strong Mining Union grandfather would turn in his grave as the rights he fought for are increasingly lost.
Sorry – but I just don’t think it’s good enough. Are you sure you didn’t mean to join the Liberals?
What did I miss? How do you perceive that Andrew has a poor attitude to publication?
Thanks.
Ooops! That should read ‘public education’, not publication.
It makes me very sad that I will be unable to vote ALP at the next election because I am not happy with the ALP’s Education policy. Julia Gillard, even as Education Minister has followed the ridiculous USA path of testing and competition even though the US level of Literacy and Numeracy is very poor.
The ALP should consult with the experienced classroom teachers of the Teacher’s unions rather than academic educators. It is very disappointing that an ALP government does not respect the advice of Teacher’s unions who have a history of always representing the best interests of the students. NAPLAN testing can be very helpful for teachers, but the way the results are used can be damaging to morale in schools in low socioeconomic areas.
Hi Di
Totally agree with you. But then who do we vote for – it’s going to be tricky because I think things could be much worse under a coalition government. particularly with T Abbott at the helm. Interesting times.
I hope that my doing the survey does not affect ypour feedback, Andrew. I wanted to have the experience so that we might do something similar in The Glebe, Sydney. As a retired teacher I did have difficulty understanding what each thing meant. eg attractng and retaining great teachers, when of my teaching interest areas those of Maths, Science and Rural (&R) it has increasingly become a question of whether any teachers will be able to retain more than a few for the education of those who already have ample subsidised provision.
Then, with reflection, I was able to discern the snapshot of responses to topical discussion points in a locality and the provoking of comments like mine. The discussion of the existential questions faced by many small and large national populations across the globe; the physical and biological environment of the ten billion or so souls who will seek to inhabit Earth with my grandchildren; questions about their freedom and democracy; along with the mind numbing geopolitical economic and security issues; have long been recognised as neeeding the best education we can provide. (What was it I said about having “difficulty understanding what … thing(s) meant?”)
In a sentence, for me, education has not just been my vocation; education has not just been a passion; education has been fundamental for the future of social justice and democracy.
More power to you, Andrew, as you engage your community in dealing with difficult political issues more effectively. Let us know, in Sydney and in the Bush, what you learn about facilitating that engagement.
When European countries such as Sweeden began concentrating on making education equitable outcomes for children improved, instead of basing education decisions on next to useless NAPLAN results.
Couldn’t agree with Jacqui more. Finish schools are a prime example of how well a country can perform when their teachers are recognised as highly valued professionals. Many teachers in Finland are trained at the Masters level and above and entry into the profession is highly desirable as it is deservedly recognised as a highly valued career. It is legislated that no fees are charged so it is a truly equitable system as no one is excluded from accessing a quality education system. There is also no focus on snap shot sytem testing results such as NAPLAN. As a teacher working in our sytem my experiences have been quite the contrary. I have been trained to the Masters level, work in special education, have been discriminated against when applying for promotional positions and have been disiplined for voicing my experiences. The level to which you are trained to provide best practice, how that training is paid for and then how you are remunerated particularly as a special education specialist leaves no incentive for attracting top professionals to education.
Hi Andrew. It is interesting the topics covered here and the way the wuestions are phrased. Do I consider my child’s school a safe place? How could current models of schooling (infrastructure, teaching models, rules and safety standards) allow for a school not to be safe? In a time and place that is one of the safest in history for children, the question we need to be asking is: have we taken the concept of safety to the point where our children are growing up with no sense of, or skill in, risk assessment?
I believe we are creating schools where this is the case. Our children (we only found out this week after the stupidity of Mt Druitt banning carwheels and handstands) are not allowed to use play equipment before school, even though there is at least one teacher on duty from 8.40am onwards. They are allowed to after school, because it is assumed that parents are there to supervise the use after school (even though my child is often on the playground before I get to her class to pick her up.
Our kids are priviledged to go to a very well resourced school that has great support from the P&C, which raises tens of thousands of dollars each year to provide resources that the school cannot afford out of its operating budget. However, who is helping other schools in areas not full of highly paid public servants? Who is helping schools in areas with higher levels of unemployed, low income, immigrant and student families with these extra resources?
My concerns are not for the kids in our school who, for the most part, are from families with high levels of Social Capital and who are likely to succeed regardless. My concern is for the other kids from lower SES schools.
Thanks for taking an interest, though.
Hi Andrew,
I second the thoughts offered by Roseanne Byrne above. I grew up in an Australia where the vast majority of students were educated in a publicly funded tertiary education system. After completing 20 years of (almost fully) government funded education in Australia I spent the next 17 years working at MIT in USA. My children all attended public school over there (as do ~90% of US school children). While I will not attempt to defend the quality of the US school and education system, I would like however, to acknowledge their commitment to classless system (at least to a secondary level of education). Very little public money is spent supporting non-government schools, in the US you are free to choose a non-government school, but that is your choice and you are free to pay the full cost of this choice. Upon returning to Australia I was horrified to discover that it was essentially expected that I would send my children to a private school. The essence of the advice I received can be paraphrased politely this way; “the public system is inferior, your kids will get a better education, by better teachers and mix with better student peers at an independent school”. In my opinion, the government sanctioned/organized stratification of Australian society through the current biased education funding model is morally abhorrent. I will vote for any politician or political party that proposes to amend this amazing social injustice. Making the highest quality education we, as a society can afford and provide, available and accessible to every Australian child no matter who they are or where they come from or how much their parent can afford to pay is a moral imperative….
well said Simon
My kids are at a mixture of government and non-government schools.
I am under no illusions that the non-government school some of my kids attend is superior to any of the other government schools in our area; it was a choice based on other factors.
I don’t agree that non-government schools provide so-called ‘better’ student peers, particularly in a place like Canberra where most parents value education. There is diversity within my children’s non-government school, and behavioural issues, and I challenge the view that non-government schools do not accept children from diverse or low-SES backgrounds (perhaps some elite non-government schools do, but most do not).
Simon McClusky raises an important point regarding the stratification of society. Like Andrew Wright, I am concerned for the government schools where there is disadvantage. It is easier to obtain parental ‘buy in’ to the school community where they have made a choice – either public or non-government school. Many government schools in high SES areas benefit from such parental support. My concern also lies with the government schools where there is little parental engagement or support.
Well said, Simon. I grew up in the USA and went to public schools there. I find the Australian system both baffling and offensive. The only children I knew who did not attend public schools were a few who went to Catholic schools. The US ‘separation between Church and State’ensures that no public money goes towards church-run schools, and I do not believe there is any justification for public money going to support private schools of any type. Public schools serve an important function in terms of providing a setting in which children of all faiths, backgrounds, and socio-economic levels learn about each other and learn to co-exist and even to like and respect each other. It is those sorts of environments which provide opportunities for children to learn about what they have in common — which should be a greater priority than creating walls which highlight differences.
What about where a government school lets a student down?
I’ve taught in Government and private schools. Funding so that “no school will be disadvantaged” does not address the inequity in the system. Parents should be free to send their children to private schools but should bear the costs for the privilege. Government schools desperately need the funds and produce outstanding results given the lack of resources and socio-economic disadvantage they work with. There should be rigorous teacher training, strong support for teachers facing poor student behaviour, and no performance pay – I’ve worked to teach talented classes = great outcomes, I’ve worked harder to teach struggling classes = mediocre outcomes. Result-oriented pay is insulting to teachers (pay level helps you feel valued but is not the motivation to do a good job) and impossible to measure and justify.
Teachers need:
Much higher pay.
Smaller classes.
Higher standard of training entry.
Better training.
More encouragement for higher levels of training/research.
Freed from the highly restrictive, largely boring, outcomes based national curriculum, where it is believed that doling out worksheets, and ticking outcomes boxes is all that is required. Where literacy outcomes would class Tolkien, Shakespeare, Dickens, JK Rowling, etc as all the same as any newspaper hack. Compare how with its national curriculum imposition in the UK, public education has fallen from 4th in the world to below 27th. Look at the approach of the top rated country – Finland!
Where is motivation, inspiration, curiosity, confidence boosting, etc?
From Robert Hayes, M.Ed. Dip.E.C.E, Dip.S.E. P.G.C.E. + 45 years teaching experience – and still working!
I think much of the Gonski report reccommendations should be implemented. I have just started the process of becoming a teacher and despite the value I see in resources such as computers and buildings, the most important and valuable resource is the teachers. Fund them and train them as professionals and respect their expertise. After all they have our children for a lot longer than we do and they shape our nations future leaders.