Let's disagree on the drone status of Garrett.

His contribution to government has been nil, which is why he was given DEEWR to mismanage.

I doubt house fires fell as a result of Garrett having dodgy installers work the lofts, that is just wishful thinking.

Ministers are 'responsible' for the wins and losses in their portfolios.

Garrett sidestepped his losses, and has no wins.

We agree on the failure of the AEU though. I do recognise that 'power' comes to the AEU via membership, and that the membership is asleep at the wheel, which rather strangles the AEU ability to do anything at all, but then again, why do unions elect leadership teams if not to lead?

The AEU leads its members into defeat after defeat, like the SDA leads its membership into ever lower pay and conditions.

The AEU has lost the ability, if it ever had it, to 'organise' and 'politicise' its own members, and is hamstrung when representing classroom teachers and school principals at the same time- a recipe for disaster for the classroom teachers.

It's a shame the review is not into how to provide for educating students, instead of schooling them, which is a not-very-impressive exercise.

The most rational model is to fund government schools and not fund private schools at all.

If you are happy with living in a soft theocracy I suppose that is up to you, but there is really no role whatsoever for the state to fund any religious activities at all, be that via tax free status for all religions, or paying for military chaplains, or for school chaplains.

"The extension of the chaplaincy program to include secular welfare workers can hardly be characterised as increasing the amount of Christianity in schools", but Chris, mate, these are not 'secular' workers at all.

It's the exact same job as the chaplains do, including conducting religious rites, prayers and Bible clubs, not to mention the ability to conduct religious instruction too.

How can it be a secular job when groups like 'Campus Crusade for Christ' are trying to supply the 'secular' workers?

A follow up thought Chris.

If the Victorian P&C group oppose chaplains how come they do absolutely nothing to demonstrate that?

Did they contribute to that fellow Williams and his High Court challenge?

Are they helping to fund FIRIS in a grassroots parent battle to see off ACCESS MInistries, plonked into schools with the caring touch of the Vic ALP?

I'd be shocked if they did anything for either effort to curb religiosity in public schools.

TBC,

I gave a link to the discussion of house fire statistics, so if you don’t want to believe them, you don’t have to.

If the membership of the AEU is unhappy with its leadership, it is free to elect another. Surely, among 200,000 teachers there would be an alternative leadership team of some standing.

You say that the SDA has led its members into “ever lower pay and conditions”. Do you have any facts and figures to back that up? In the case of the AEU, I do -http://community.tes.co.uk/forums/t/449991.aspx?PageIndex=31. However, I do not blame the leadership.

I believe that the AEU should represent both principals and teachers. It is destructive of the teaching profession to accept principals as being separate. It is better for principals and teachers to see themselves as members of the same profession, with one group having a different role but not that group being a different class of being.

I’m not living in a soft theocracy. Religion has never been as powerless in our society as it is today.

I have never heard of a secular welfare worker conducting religious rites in a public school. Feel free to give chapter and verse.

The federal chaplaincy program has nothing to do with religious instruction, which is a totally separate issue under the control of state governments.

Chris C

Union members only get to vote for those who stand, as we do with our politicians. Most people do not want to stand, so they have a limited choice and get what is dished up. Sort of a Hobson's Choice.

SDA? Look at their wages and conditions, impressive, eh?

"I believe that the AEU should represent both principals and teachers. It is destructive of the teaching profession to accept principals as being separate." But they are, listen to them blaming classroom teachers for all the ills principals are unable to manage in the schools they run. That's why principals are eager to sack staff, and employ-promote their chosen ones. They know not how to manage, administer or organise a school.

"I’m not living in a soft theocracy," we all are.

"Religion has never been as powerless in our society as it is today", you must be an ACL supporter.

"I have never heard of a secular welfare worker conducting religious rites in a public school. Feel free to give chapter and verse." Read the DEEWR policy on their new welfare workers, with identical PDs to chaplains. DEEWR have yet to finalise the welfare worker suppliers, so there are none employed as yet, hard to find a working one for you, apart from those chaplains who were there last year who have simply swapped their titles.

"The federal chaplaincy program has nothing to do with religious instruction, which is a totally separate issue under the control of state governments," not quite true.

Chaplains and welfare workers are allowed to deliver RI to students. They also work with the Bible Society to hand out Bibles through the RI systems.

You need to read more this issue Chris C.

Whilst agreeing with most of Teese's observations (and the rightness of attention to equity issues) methinks it is not so simple on the ground. I find it alienating, for instance, to see the following as a justification of comprehensive education:

"Public schools must help [children who start at a disadvantage] to go forward, both cognitively and socially, including by enabling stronger students to lead and assist weaker ones.

"Funding arrangements should not support social segregation, but encourage the pooling of both financial and cultural resources. This is an argument, not from social cohesion, important as this is, but from pedagogical effectiveness, without which neither cognitive growth nor social cohesion can be produced."

While it may be pedagogically effective for the weaker students to have access to the sociocultural resource that is the stronger ones, I'm not aware of evidence that it is pedagogically effective for those stronger ones.

The reason many parents opt for schools with a selective intake (private or public) is the tendency for the comprehensive system (in the main) to fail to cater well for "stronger students" (at best) and at worst to value them primarily as a low-cost resource for weaker students or overstretched teachers.

Maybe if the public system provided ALL kids with an education that met them where they were (cognitively) fewer of the abler would feel the need to seek out a more conducive environment for their own educational progress?

But that's a more difficult challenge, isn't it?

TBC,

Union members have the right to stand in the first place. If among the 150,000-200,000 members of the AEU, no one chooses to, collectively the membership has indicated its acceptance of the current leadership and must take responsibility for the state of the union.

Your initial statement was that the SDA had led its members into “ever lower pay and conditions”. I asked you for facts and figures to back that up. You reply with, “SDA? Look at their wages and conditions, impressive, eh?” That’s not an answer. You said that wages had fallen and that conditions had got worse. If this is so, you would be able to quote specific wage rates for different years and condition declines, but you do not do so. If you want to argue that the wages and conditions of shop and warehouse employees are unimpressive, that is a different point, but your initial claim was that they had got worse. So, have you got any specific facts or figures to back that up?

There has been a decline in the ability of principals in Victoria since the Coalition was elected in 1992. Pushing them out of the AEU would do nothing to reverse that decline, but would reinforce it by making them even more likely to think of themselves as higher beings. Besides, there are some very good principals who are AEU members and who ought to be encouraged to maintain their professional connection with other teachers.

There is no logic in the claim that because I say religion has never been a powerless in our society as it is today I must be an ACL (Australian Christian Lobby?) supporter. I am not now nor have I ever been a supporter of the ACL, but, if I were, it would not make any difference to the truth of my statement.

Chaplains may be allowed to deliver RI, but whether or not it can be delivered at all is the responsibility of the state governments.