So much empty rhetoric; the author bandies about the usual mantra of "more accountability" as if schools in Australia have been a black hole from which information on scholastic performance had never escaped. (I find it puzzling that in articles of this ilk, the term "accountability" always gets a mention, yet references to "pedagogy" are nowhere to be found.) In the same breath, Mr Prasser also champions the cause of flexibility, yet fails to explain how in the era of standardised testing -- in the form of NAPLAN -- and the public naming and shaming of schools, teachers in low performing schools will be able to do anything other than focus on teaching to the test.

Mr Prasser proclaims that "[w]e know that works" when it comes to improving quality in schools; but fails to produce a single real-life example of what actually works. He would have done well here to talk about the success of the Finnish school system. But as there are few private schools in Finland, such an example would have contradicted his belief in "doing a lot what the non-government sector [in Australia] is doing" to improve our schools.

Mr Prasser also plays fast and loose with the factual content of his article. In his reference to Australia's performance in the latest OECD PISA results, he has obviously isolated maths scores to show Australia's "significant decline", as we ranked in the top 10 for reading and science.

I wonder if Mr Prasser would at all be interesting in re-producing this article to show some semblance of balance and understanding of a topic that should not be reduced to a simplistic mouthing of the usual "more accountability"?

There is a notion aboard that claims that giving extra money to those in need is wasted and is a drain on society, weakening those who the4 money is taken off.

I can remember when my children were young, the pet dog gave birth to a large litter of beautiful pups except for one that was a runt. My father, an ex farmer suggested that it would be humane to put it down, as it would not be able to thrive or compete with the rest of the litter.

My eldest daughter at about age ten would have nothing of this. Many times a day for weeks, she pushed the other pups out of the way, giving the runt access to the nipple. The result was that pup developed into a healthy and strong dog. Not one of the rest of the litter showed that they were harmed in any way.

The moral is that assistance given when needed will not be wasted. Assistance not given or given too late, leads to waste.

Interestingly, it was the Catholic Church that pioneered free education in Australia. Systemic Catholic Schools are still the cheapest non-government schools, because they are designed to offer an alternative to state education for the generally working class Catholics. Check out the funding arrangements on MySchool, as well. You'll see that they produce comparable (and generally a little better) results than their nearest state schools, with less per capita funding. The figures for funding include parent contributions. In short, each student in a Catholic school costs the taxpayer less than his/her counterpart in a state school. Even if the product isn't markedly better, it still offers greater value for money.

Foyle says -
"The best and least costly improvement in our education system would be to introduce one hour per week of philosophical discussion of open ended questions in every class from kindergarten to Year-6.

This class should exclude any teacher who allows his or her personal views or the views of the institution running the school to intrude into this one hour period. It has been shown that this one hour per week will improve each student cognitive ability, reduce adverse behaviour and make each hour of other school time more effective."

Some great thoughts but a few problems.

The main problem is that I am yet to meet any teachers (of which I am one), or any person for that matter, who can sustain a lengthy philosophical discussion without their own prejudices coming through. Not always intentional, not always obvious, but pretty much always there. Sure it's stereotypical, so I won't attach labels, but it is widely accepted that certain faculties in High Schools can be identified by their political/philosophical leanings.

Open ended questioning and discussion are equally useful regardless of what subject they are used for. Certainly some subjects lend themselves more to this style of teaching but in reality it should be there in all. It doesn't need to be philosophy.

Finally, to be effective, philosophy must be taught very well. Few are up to this challenge.

What school is that, individual?

I did some googling, and found that a School of Dentistry is being built at James Cook University for $33,000,000; I also found a Special Education School being built for the same sum in Currumbin, but that isn't in FNQ. The former has funding for only 60 places, and isn't part of school education. The latter ... well, to demand geniuses from a school that caters exclusively for the needs of students so profoundly impaired that they cannot be integrated into regular classrooms is a bit unrealistic.

If funding was the reason for the dismal failure of secular schooling then aboriginals would all be doctors. The flawed philosophy and lack of morals can not be changed by more money. The flawed dogmas will continue to be ignored and lies made up about how much more private schools get in order to disguise the real reasons for failure.