Hasbeen,

I'm not silly enough to suggest that the industrial paradigm can do away with schools....although there are probably myriad ways we could do better. As you note, things are souring in that respect in the late capitalist era.

By "academic autonomy", I mean concentrating on instilling in children the ability to self-direct their learning. Most kids are curious and they learn without trying. If they are stimulated to see learning as something that is within their control and not just something that is foisted upon them, then even the recalcitrant kids would respond in a positive way.

I can imagine being a little dyslexic is frustrating, so I understand what you are saying about rote learning. I remember when I started primary school that I was frustrated that I couldn't read, and I learned to read at school. My son, on the other hand, began reading fluently while still in kindy before he turned five (he only began talking at three, so we were surprised) We can't take any credit (apart from providing a reading friendly environment at home), he just started reading.

So a little hypolexia, and bingo he's reading and spelling - he has trouble with maths though, unless he's dealing with dates. He's a whiz with arithmetic and dates.

My point being that all kids have different strengths, and a one-size-fits-all arrangement often stifles the will to learn and create.

Rhrosty,

You say, “The states have by and large, failed to fulfil the arrangement/agreement that gave them access to the GST anyway?
“Stamp duties have not disappeared, but remain or have morphed into other fees and charges…”

There was never any promise to remove stamp duties with the introduction of the GST. This is just another of the myths (John Howard changed the definition unemployment, the 1967 referendum gave Aborigines the vote, the states have collected rivers of gold in GST revenue, teachers have it easy) that infest the internet and the old media.

Here is the relevant part of the GST agreement, (Reform_of_comm-state_financial_relations.rtf):
‘The States and Territories will cease to apply the taxes referred to in Appendix A from the dates outlined below and will not reintroduce them or similar taxes in the future.
· Bed taxes, from 1 July 2000;
· Financial Institutions Duty, from 1 July 2001;
· Stamp duties on quoted marketable securities from 1 July 2001;
· Debits tax by 1 July 2005, subject to review by the Ministerial Council;
That’s the full list, and they have all gone. The only stamp duty on it is that on quotable market securities. Some of the taxes to be reviewed have also now been abolished.

I see this is one of those discussions in which evidence is irrelevant, but to those who say class size is irrelevant, I say look up the results of the Tennessee STAR study, the Glass and Glass’s meta-analysis and the work of John Hattie. To those who say that students were better educated in the past, I say look up the results of the ABS Life Skills Survey. To those who say principals cannot hire teachers, I say look up the Victorian DEECD website. To those who say principals cannot fire teachers, I say they can initiate the process – they just have to follow the rules.

The Gonksi report is about funding, not every educational issue under the sun. It has diagnosed the problem well, but its solutions would create a serious problem, which is concealed from the public by the poor reporting on the issue.

The words WE CANT SPEND MONEY WE DONT HAVE should be inserted on the top of every single memo, letterhead and direction sent out by labor, to any minister, or staffer,

In any case, it is quite obvious that labor considered education as less important than the environment.

I say this because they took a minister, Garret, who resided over what must be one of labor's worst cases of miss management (insulation of houses) and assigned him to education.

Whereas, in the real world, he would have been sacked, if not galled.

So in essense, what do they expect to achieve, with the wrong people and money they don't have to spend.

As the thread so rightly implies, Gillards education PIPE DREAM.

It's so simple. Increase class sizes. After all the author wants to create education factories. Free market strategies = free market outcomes. Just produce more widgets per hour.
It is obvious that the author has never taught. If he had he would realise that you can't run an education system like a factory.

The corollory of those who can't - teach; is that those who can't teach write incoherent treatises on how to run an education system.