Otokonoko,
At every election we hear the education for everyone catch-cry. This has become a real bandwagon thing. It's always about University this & University that. Everyone should have the right to University educations etc etc.
I have nothing against young people going to University, my kid's going too. What I vehemently oppose is this constant reference to education for all when we full well know that only a handful have the brains to get through Uni & be of benefit to society & Nation building.
Instead of striving for higher standards in education the opposite has happened. We now have people with degrees but with less knowledge & competence than a first year trades apprentice of years ago as Hasbeen pointed out. Who is responsible for this severe decline ? I put the blame at Academia & Unions who only have their own interests at heart rather than the country's..
They told us we were wrong even on this forum over the years. It'll be interesting to read their excuses.

Hasbeen makes important points. The quality of education of our teachers. This is one area where the Finnish system is different to ours, not the left vs right politics, but the fact that the smartest people go into education. That is not the case in Australia. Why one needs high scores to get into medicine but not into teaching is a mystery to me.

Just to touch on one issue: the number of primary school teachers who are uncomfortable with primary school maths is, from my limited personal experience through my children, truly scary. How on earth can that be?

Then there is the curriculum and how it is taught. My eldest could do the IB and I'm thankful for that. It relieved a lot of pressure on me to supplement the lack of education.

I get monumentally frustrated whenever we try and discuss education in Australia it turns into a left vs right politics, public vs private school bun fight. Ideas get discounted, not because there is lack in merit, but because it comes from a certain quarter.

Why do private schools in Australia generally have better outcomes? They teach exactly the same curriculum. I know, I've had children in both systems. Private school teachers are taught in the same universities as are public school teachers. There are exceptional teachers and poor teachers in both. So, apart from the swanky school grounds and overpriced school uniforms, wherein lies the difference?

Yvonne,

The difference probably emanates from attitudes within the child's home. Education is not something that only happens in school, it is occurring every waking moment. Parental attitudes and their ability to encourage a child's natural curiosities, facilitate a genuine love of learning and a self-directed discipline in educational pursuits and interests, are perhaps the markers between those who succeed and those who merely go along for the ride.

emanates from attitudes within the child's home.
Poirot,
Yes, definitely. The same however goes for the mentality of the majority of teachers. You see, many teachers get into the profession for the great lurks & perks. I have witnessed this first hand when sharing teachers accommodation for nine months many years ago. All their conversations centred around getting blotto & rave on about how much they can save & how many more days till the next holidays. Never once could I induce them to discuss issues of society with them. I realised 30 years ago that education was de-railing. When I did remark so I copped ridicule & was called a redneck. I'd dearly love to bail these very people up now & tell me again how wrong I was.

Otokonoko,

Could not agree more. The questions you ask are tough ones but it is so important we have these debates. The testing nonsense is just that, nonsense. It's worth mulling where most of the current education practices came from, like age-based classes, the 'disciplines', standardised testing etc. All of these things were developed a very, very long time ago. It was a different world. These practices were developed for very different purposes and, in the case of testing, way back then, they had a very clear sense of how limited testing is. So we have a system designed for a totally different era, run by career bureaucrats whose job is to protect their Minister's butt. It could easily be mistaken for organised child abuse.

The challenges the current cohorts of kids will face in their lifetime will make the challenges of previous generations look like child's play. It would be nice to think that we were doing something that helped prepare them to do life well

Well, Shanghai are doing better than the Finnish?
Really?
Look at the hours spent in classrooms and the Fins are still miles in front?
Look at the rigid discipline and of the school hours of Asians; and ask yourself, if that system would transfer here?
Of course religion and education ought to be kept completely separate, with critical thinking coming first?
The privileged elite can and do hire private tutors for falling behind students? And the better off schools have superior facilities; and, are able to offer higher salaries and better conditions to/for more capable teachers?
I mean, why should we entrench and enshrine privilege, when our finest interests as a nation, are best served, by finding and advancing our best and brightest, rather than the most privileged.
I believe the article was full of, fundamentally flawed thinking or argument?
As if the east Asian system could ever transfer here!?
We punch above our weight in so many areas, but pound for pound, the Fins, a much smaller nation with far fewer resources, outperform us in almost every area of education, and spend far fewer hours doing it!
What the privileged really object to, I believe, is the universalistic reality of the Finnish system, with every student given the same resources and or, the same chance to succeed!
Success should never ever be the result of your socio starting point or circumstances, just the brain you were born with!
The best teachers are the ones that can take something as boring as maths and turn it into an stimulating and interesting fun time, where time simply flies, and no one drops out or skips school!
This is where we should be heading with our curriculum and positive benchmarking for success!
By all means let's study who does what and how well? But, let's not follow anyone, but have them turn and say, let's copy Australia?
Why? Because we can and should set aside all the bete noire rhetoric, and simply focus on better outcomes/improvements for the student body, across the board?
And what could be possibly wrong with that?
Rhrosty.