The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Setting ambitious education goals is great – but what do they mean? > Comments

Setting ambitious education goals is great – but what do they mean? : Comments

By Katrina Brink, published 2/2/2011

You can make 90% of Australian secondary school students stay to year 12, but how do you keep them engaged?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All
vanna
I am not going to be drawn in to a debate about feminism in this important conversation about education. Australia is not a "feminist" country unless by that you mean both men and women now have access to opportunities. That is true, after that it is up to individual skill, determination and a bit of luck thrown in.

I agree with you that poverty and single income families do worse. Many Hispanic and African American families in the US have their men incarcerated, some have also abandoned their responsibilities and there are a high proportion of those women escaping domestic violence. There are also many single fathers in those communities (compared to others) where mothers have done a runner or have drug issues.

Not sure how to fix those problems, indeed improving support and access to training/education, child care (if required) and housing for at-risk families might go some way to reducing disadvantage.

Part of the problem as I see it, is the idea of 'aspirational' education. One does not need a Degree for many occupations but now it has become the 'standard' measure which places pressure on students and has meant a lowering of standards overall. Even a Barista (coffee maker) now needs a diploma when these sorts of jobs were all on-the-job training. Sometimes on-the-job is the best way to learn.

Some high schools now have a trade stream which encourages boys in particular who are good with their hands (and would otherwise not remain in school) to continue to at least Yr11.

I am all for 'educated' societies but education is also about life experience and hard work. It is not just about gaining a Degree or finishing Yr12.
Posted by pelican, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 9:17:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pelican
Many jobs now require multi-skilling, and in fact the lat manufacturing company I worked in, you were required to have everything for a forklift ticket to clerical skills, and required to carry out breakdown maintenance and routine maintenance on the equipment you were operating.

As equipment becomes more high tech, more diverse skills are required, and you may be required to program that equipment if it is PLC driven, and also maintain that equipment.

I personally object to schools pushing boys into trade work at an early age, as I know that it is best for students to go as far as possible in their education before they get a job.

As for wealth and education, they are very much related, and someone who is poor and living in poverty does not have much chance for a good education.

You will note that about 50% of children born in the UK are now born outside of marriage, (something feminists must be ecstatic about), but estimates are that about 30% of children in the UK are now living in poverty.

In Australia about 30% of children are born outside of marriage, and the % is increasing, with about 20% of children now living in poverty.

It is unlikely that schools for disadvantaged children will turn that tide.
Posted by vanna, Thursday, 3 February 2011 7:00:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
vanna
There is no doubt there is a connection between poverty and access to education.

Children might be born outside of marriage but that does not mean they do not have two loving parents who care for them in many cases. I know a few long term defacto couples who have never married (one couple did much later) who have successfully raised children, but of course most people do still get married.

I am not sure why you think feminists would applaud the idea of children being born outside or inside marriage. It is a personal choice, nothing to do with feminism.

What is a woman to do if she finds herself pregnant and the father wants nothing to do with her or the child? Not much she can do about it, and she will still have to endure the censure of others for being a single mother or demonised by others if she chooses abortion. No win situation really, but it has to be her choice. Same for a man who might find himself a single father if the mother does a runner, he won't be castigated or 'blamed' for lack of a partner in the same way but it is hard work raising a child on your own.

The issue is how does society support those families to ensure the kids don't become too disadvantaged? The most disadvantaged kids at the school my daughter went to were not from single parent families. They were from lower socio-economic families with one or two 'problem' parents ie. dysfunctional. Marriage is no guarantee of perfect parenting.
Posted by pelican, Sunday, 6 February 2011 6:35:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy