The book “”Science 10” (ISBN 086440 426 3) was widely used to teach science to grade 10 students in QLD for many years.

The book does not mention the periodic table, nor does it mention velocity, acceleration or force.

Why is it so?

The situation would have been laughable if it wasn’t so serious.

You claim that Queensland and Australia are behind the rest of the world in maths and science education based on TIMMS and PISA. True. However it's not as black and white and simplistic as you make out. (Shades of grey should be understandable to those of even the meanest of intellects.). To cite Professor Masters' report into literacy, numeracy and science in Queensland:

"In summary, although direct comparisons can be made of students’performances across the Australian states and territories, caution must be exercised in interpreting differences between jurisdictions. In particular, it would be a mistake to draw an inference about the relative quality of education being provided in different jurisdictions on the basis of simple comparisons of state and territory means (whether grade-based or age-based). This is because of differences in structural arrangements in different states and territories, including differences in starting ages and transition points from primary to secondary school, and differences in student demographics, including the proportion of students from Indigenous, rural/remote and low socioeconomic backgrounds."

You cite reports such as TIMMS and PISA. This might sound to some, as if you're scholarly and thorough in your research, and your arguments are based on fact. Yet you just mention the Masters' report in an off handed fashion once?

What is one left to think? Either you have read the Masters' report, but choose to deliberately ignore what it says because you wish to place blame, without any evidence, on the curriculum, which makes you a dogmatic ideologue who we can safely ignore. Or, you didn't know how to find it to read it and just read reports in newspapers, in which case you are a poor scholar, and as such we can also safely ignore you. For future reference, try this: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=review+of+science+education+in+queensland

Allow me to cite relevant bits of Masters for you.

Review:
- 2008 NAPLAN and 2007 TIMSS results
- existing analyses of this and provide further analysis if required
- other research material that provides comment on Queensland’s school performance
- results from Year 2 net 2007 against NAPLAN 2008, best practice from international research and practice

Findings
- Make findings based on the above in relation to curriculum, assessment and teacher quality in Queensland primary schools.
- Identify best practice examples in schools where performance is above expectation and identify reasons for this performance.
- Identify any other themes common to school practice in the lowest performing schools.
- Identify any themes common to student performance in the highest and lowest achievement bands.

Scope
- All primary schools.
- All sectors of education, state and non-state.
- The literacy , numeracy and science curriculum in Queensland’s schools

This manages to look at science education in Queensland, including the curriculum that you so hate. Unlike you, however, Professor Masters doesn't seem to fault the curriculum. This is probably because he does not harbour a strange ideologically driven hatred of the Queensland department of education. Moreover, in his commentary, he forwards some constructive recommendations (none of which refer to the curriculum which is generally recognised to be aligned throughout the country).

Recommendations:
1 - literacy, numeracy and science testing of graduating primary teachers as a condition of teacher registration.

2 - introduce a new structure and program of advanced professional learning in literacy, numeracy and science for primary school teachers.

3 - additional funding for advanced training and employment ‘specialist’ literacy, numeracy and science teachers to work in schools in most need of support.

4 - standard science tests introduced at Years 4, 6, 8 and 10 for school's to identify students who are not meeting year-level expectations and for monitoring student progress over time.

5 - expert review of international best practice in school leadership development.

Note none of the recommendations include scrapping or even changing the curriculum.

<pwn>
You see, it's easy to criticise. It takes only the most mediocre of cognitive capacity to do so (which is why many do so - irony noted). However, to offer constructive criticism and practical alternatives is another mater entirely. You make naive and risible comments, such as: "...unless QSA were concurrently justly dismissed for gross incompetence".

Is this "QSA" you speak of a single person? Is it a monolithic structure that has been made up of the same people since its inception? Or is it an organisation like any other that is made up of people who transfer in and out? If the turnover in Kevin Rudd's office is any guide, I'd say so, and that a variety of people have been employed there over the years and many would have moved on to new positions. Therefore what good would your suggestions do? Any organisation is made up of people, and people come and go.

This opinion piece is nothing than a polemic attempting to disguise itself as well researched commentary. For you to not even mention any of the recommendations of the Masters report shows you are uninterested in getting to the truth of the matter. It is clear you are merely interested in pursuing your own rather odd agenda.
</pwnd>

Well Dur,
It is interesting that although QLD teacher are “highly skilled” and worthy of their recent pay rise (costing the QLD taxpayer $1 Billion over three years), they still can’t teach basic maths and science to grade 4 students.

DETA claims the following.

“Education Queensland delivers high quality education to more than 70 percent of all Queensland school students at prep, primary and secondary levels.”

Unfortunately, QLD students now seem to be below Russian students according to international tests, while in Russia it is estimated that 50% of the population lives below the Russian poverty line, which means that 50% of the students in Russia would also be living below the poverty line.

As well Russia has very high rates of divorce, alcoholism and various other social problems, it has a traditional inability to adequately govern itself, it has major infrastructure problems, and it also has rather severe problems with pollution and environmental degradation. But still it manages to produce students that can out-perform QLD students.

I would think something else is required to re-invigorate QLD education other than teacher re-training.

Perhaps deregulation of the teachers union should be the first step, and its replacement with teacher performance pay.

Well Dur is clearly a partisan player in the fiasco that is Ed Qld.

Our schools are poorly managed, designed, run, funded, oversighted (not at all), and the science maths resource text books are rubbish....with English teaching not far behind, as an overall statement.

Clearly, there are good and solid maths, science and English teachers in many schools, doing what they can to make things work, in spite of the Mary Street party atmosphere, and the poor management of school principals right across the state.

The Maths Teachers Assoc agreed with me a few years ago, and told me they too had many concerns about the quality of the text books used in Maths B and C (I didn't ask about the others).

I even spoke to the publishers, who also agreed they were unable to produce a quality book but had to publish a 'full suite' of books and this was the best they could do.

Astounding, but true. Deplorable.... but no one in schools cares two hoots, or raises any objections.

The QSA fob parents off, saying books are nothing to do with them, as do EQ.

The ACCC were not really interested either.

The Commonwealth Ed Minister (not Gillard) brushed it off as a State issue.

Part 2

The QSA is a closed and darkened shop, with representatives of the churches on it, as well as the QTU and QCPCA and EQ.

Allowing that the QTU rep probably has an understanding of 'education', that leaves questions as to why the churches are there, and the QCPCA, a group of 'lay' parents, most of whom wouldn't be equipped to make decisions on what should go in the curriculum.

The QSA and EQ still allow, indeed even encourage, ID and Creationsim to be taught in Science in public schools.

One has to hope a national plan would outlaw that stupidity, because Geoff Wilson refuses to.... along with the EQ curriculum for Bible Lessons, similar to what Abbott wants to bring in across the nation-state we live in.

Well Dur may need to be told how poor our schools are by Masters, but many parents know this from bitter experience when they try to shake-up the schools lazy thinking on 'extending' studnets.

Welford created some private school look-alikes and called them 'Academies'. These are in Brisbane, so hard luck if you live in RARA land. When these show ponies were getting going, the first item of discussion was 'the uniform'.

Incredible ability to prioritise educational issues- but that is EQ for you.

I have a child doing Maths B at the moment. The teacher is well known to be anti-student, and to send students marks and interest levels to cellar levels of interest. Students try to move out to other classes, or give up and do Maths A instead.

Does the school care? Not at all. The HOD acknowledges the problems and keeps silent, parents get fed up, students give up.

Such is the norm when things go badly wrong within EQ.

Any highlighting of deficiencies is deeply resented, denied, and then ignored.

Whatever might be missing, according to Well Dur, from the authors article, what is undeniable is that EQ needs to be put down, and rebuilt, preferably with people from other states, maybe even countries, to give our students a chance.

@The Blue Cross and vanna. Generally speaking, I find it useful in a debate to respond to the actual points raised, rather than ignore them or dismiss them out of hand and then raise unrelated points. Apparently neither of you adhere to this practice.

E.g. where is the evidence that it is the fault of the curriculum? You ignore the curriculum, which is the central point of Ridd's baseless article. And as with Ridd, you don't cite evidence.

Indeed, The Blue Cross goes further and makes up bizarre and unfounded claims about Intelligent Design and Creationism? On what basis do you make these claims? The curriculum? Which document? What page?

Can't find it? Hmmm. Your research skills are up there with Ridd's... as is you penchant for fantasy.

Well Dur... your sensitivity shows that you are part of EQ, possibly in the ministers office... or lounging around in the QTU offices, presiding over the worst education system in Australia, while kidding yourself that we are 'in pursuit of excellence' up here in 'the smart state'.

ID and Creationism is not in the curriculum.

But ID and Creationism is taught in state schools all over the state.

EQ allows it to be taught, so long as the QSA stuff is taught first.

The minister refuses to tell his staff not to teach this nonsense in Science.

The QSA refuse to rule it out of being taught.

So, the QSA and EQ support and encourage ID and Creationism to be taught in state schools.

Theyn know is is taught, and point blank refuse to ban it in Science.

Oh yes, some poor EQ official in Mackay did do the right-thing and tell a Science teacher there to pull their head in and stick to the actual QSA curriculum, but that was a one-off, and has never happened before, or since.

You need to get out and about a bit in our schools.... you'd be shocked at how poorly run they are.