The Rudd "education revolution" is bound to fail unless the Prime Minister is willing and prepared to overthrow the COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARY force of the teaching unions that will not allow any changes to the status quo of the educational system, especially the one that is deeply entrenched in government schools.

See for more:http://kotzabasis3.wordpress.com

Yindin,

The attitude you express is just one more reason I am pleased to no longer be a teacher. Please try to understand that the drop in teacher pay has led to a fall in the ability of the people entering teacher training. If you want children to have able and independent-minded teachers, you need to reverse the 30-year pay decline that teachers have suffered.

Victorian male average weekly ordinary time earnings were $1107.30 ($57,777 pa) in November last year (ABS 6302.0, November 2006).

In 1975, a beginning teacher was paid 118.8 percent of MAOTE. That equates to $68,639. A beginning teacher started this year on $46,127 - a relative cut of $22,512 or 32.8 per cent.

In 1975, after seven years a teacher reached the top of the scale and was paid 166.6 per cent. That would be $96,256 at the start of this year, compared with an actual $57,775 - a relative cut of $38,481 or 40 per cent.

The new top level for most teachers, which now takes eleven years to reach, paid $65,414 – a relative cut of $30,842 or 32 per cent.

In 1975, a senior teacher was paid 189.8 per cent. That would be $109,660 for the highest paid leading teacher today, who was actually paid $78,675 at the start of this year – a relative cut of $30,985 or 28.3 per cent.

The school day is fixed. Teachers’ hours are not. Teachers spend evenings, weekends and holidays on schoolwork. Their conditions are in Victoria worse now than they were 20 years ago. Staffing in secondary schools is worse now than it was way back in 1981.

Performance pay was tried in the 1890s and abandoned as a failure. It was tried again in the 1990s and abandoned as a failure. It proved to be a device for bullying and exploitation by principals.

Society will not get better results from schooling until it lifts teacher pay and returns the stolen conditions to attract and retain the best people in the classroom.

In this country to solve the problem of literacy and numeracy, we have allowed to develop, is going to require some thinking ‘outside the square’. That is something most of the academics and professionals involved in education are just not trained to do. It is an impossibility for bureaucrats and politicians.

I’d suggest the following for consideration.

Ensure the emphasis for admission to any University Degree Course to be based on an assessment of the achievements of year 12 students in the following subjects only:

English, Maths B, Maths C, Physics, Chemistry and Latin. (Or French or German.)

That emphasis would ensure a number of things:

1. Matriculation requires a very high standard.
2. Matriculation would be limited to students who have been trained to think and who can communicate more than capably.
3. As the emphasis in recent years has been for everyone to graduate University, because of the first requirement, we would see the emphasis, automatically throughout all levels of education up to Year 10, change to be on teaching students to ensure they can meet the requirements of matriculation. That automatically would translate into emphasis on arithmetic skill, reading and comprehension skills and a skilling in an ability to learn to think. An ability to communicate effectively would be a natural result of these. The greatest benefit would accrue to those who eventually decided not to matriculate, either through limited intellectual ability or a desire to follow other career paths. They would at least leave the existing formal education system highly skilled in arithmetic, reading, writing, comprehension and communication. They’d also be able to continue to apply those skills and develop intellect outside the formal higher education system and in their desired area of expertise.

Too simple eh?

No! I don’t have a degree, but I do know through my reading, my intellect would challenge a great many of today’s graduates.

To those of you grizzling about teachers pay.

KISS

Simply limit cirriculums.

Under the guise of an "education revolution" that 'hints' at redressing education standards, without the double talk, it is in reality an agenda to facilliate further cuts to funding whilst blaming individual schools and teachers for the deteriorating state of the school system. It also seeks to narrow the education curriculum and run government schools along corporate lines and privatise the public education system in favor of the profiteers. The government also wants to cut teacher time, use more contract casual teachers, use tapes and computors wherever possible. Since the mid 1980's Education budgets have been systematically cut in all Australian states, including NSW. Rudds Labor government in the recent election sought to make mileage over the disgraceful state of the public education system. A wretched condition Labor and Liberal governments precisely created. Now a milion parents are expecting the Labor leaders to redress these problems and they will see their hopes misplaced and dashed.

Ms Julia Gillard has a "whole" of approach to a Education Revolution. The plan I believe goes farther and beyond the boundries you set Peter West although yes, you make many valid points.

Ten more Red Roses says that "If" education is to work and innovation is to be mobilised than it is the our cultural view of education that needs expanding. It is about how we inter-connect education to stimulate a "whole" society that is and will be the Revolution.

Once upon a time in Australia, Australian's were seen as broad minded, Engaging as a nation and people good to talk and "applied" about things real. Down to Earth we might say. "Aussie Aussie Aussie" meant something telling about fairness, about sticking ya neck out and not being afraid to stand on shared moral ground. Our greatest credit as a young nation was expressed in the image we appreciate of our sport-person-ships.

By contrast, we are also a national bunch of baggers. We are many bullies, and we can be quite gutless when it comes to standing up for others, or getting involved in sharing our politics in the "reality" of everyday life. We many, gang up on people...be it within the community, at school or the workpace. Many discriminate against outsiders or those who think differently... just because they can. Some even bother to phoo-hoo an idea just because it is a new idea,

As consumers, regarding the economic things, we are gizmo gadget savy. We have made war about meaningful issues around health, crime, the value of developing real business enterprise connectivity and politics. For this reason we suffer a decline in areas moral. Areas that matter, especially in our politic's.

This education revolution will unleash energy dead, idle or repressed throughout the system (community, business and government) I hope. Education means learning together to listen to one-and-other, discuss, share and exchange our knowledge. The revolution is the unity approach toward life. Aim healthy - Aussie attitude. A renewal in our individual thinking - need I say more?

http://www.miacat.com
.

On the whole an excellent article. At last it is actually dawning that parents and extra curricular activities such as libraries, are the key. The work of Hart and Risley and others however has really not penetrated. Australia spends very little on early childhood. Perhaps Finland's schools are post hoc ergo proctor hoc. Just say it is not their schools but the expectations of the society on parents and the programs in the community that count. Could it be the very different attitude? In Australian we hope that a good private school will sort the kids out and give them discipline (preferably in a uniform).

I am always disturbed by school comparisons as from the point of view of chosing a school it is useless. Schools change, teaching staff change and anyway school factors are almost insignificant besides other factors. Over the lifetime at school a child has the average teacher. Parents have no idea of how your child will react to the environment over twelve years. Perhaps parents are better investing directly in their children so they can actually thrive in any school?

Why is it that some kids start on the same day in the same class and have the same teachers throughout their school life but have such different result? Why is it that differences within schools are much greater than between schools?

Another question is, and I am not picking on Catholic Schools but it a good metaphor. Why if Catholic schools are full their churches are empty? If schools were able to do what we claim they should, why the lack of effectiveness in Catholic School primary aim of "instilling Catholic virtues"?