<i>when what we really need is to bring our children together into a place that lets each learn, participate and express their identity without leaving their religion, language or culture at the front door. At stake is a socially cohesive future for this country.</i>

Ah yes, some good old-fashioned 1980s identity politics indoctrinated into our eight and fourteen year olds? But what “identity” do children have? Of course. “Religion, language, or cultural.” No mention of “Australian” we see. So you think the way to restore public confidence in public schools is to encourage children not to think of themselves as Australians, but as what their parents and grandparents left behind? But the money-shot is surely your claim this deliberate and evil inflaming of balkanisation somehow is the holy grail of achieving “a socially cohesive future?” A quick review of the dictionary on “cohesive” would have helped this article immensely.

So you think not being able to write or spell is a fart-in-the-bath? A beat up by “conservative cultural warriors” and the Murdoch press? What are you trying to say? That these unidentified “critics” are wrong, disingenuous, or irrelevant?

<i>And doubtless today’s Year 6 class will fulminate in 2050 that the youth of tomorrow can’t compose a Flash animation, program a Facebook application, or write a blog to save their lives.</i>

But wait, there’s more! Now, you are truly psychic. Flash animation and Facebook in 2050? ROFL!

While the US has a much greater left-tail of educational disadvantage which reflects great economic disparities and the depletion of social capital that attends high levels of multiculturalism/racialism, the US education system is far less sympathetic to your Freiresque Critical Pedagogy nonsense.

All that aside, you are clearly passionate about education and have achieved great successes. I hope you knock ‘em dead in the US and please keep us posted on your progress!

Good luck Mercurious. I oft thought you were a twat, but after reading your last post I stand corrected. I feel your intent was pure. I hope that in time you will work here with us.

Mercurius,

It was nice to read a post where you haven't belittled and poured invective on a critic.

You confirmed two points for me:

Firstly, you qualified with honours, won the uni medal and yet didn't get a job? If honours in education and the uni medal aren't even valued by the education profession then how do you expect the general population to value education? A common canard of mine is that education is run by feminists who see all men as a threat to women and children, hence the falling number of men in the profession. You seem to be a perfect example of this. Educationalists constantly say they want more men in the profession yet when they have a supposedly perfect candidate they won't employ him.

Secondly, it appears you're doing a PhD. I thought by now you would have worked out that qualifications in Education don’t get you anywhere. But it seems you're determined. As an experienced teacher I will tell you what other should have but haven't. A PhD without classroom experience is absolutely worthless. Teaching is not a pure science: it is a mix of theory and skill. Even a uni that employed you as an academic would be grossly out of order. You cannot teacher teachers unless you have taught. A policy role in government would be an even bigger disaster. A major criticism of teacher ed courses is that they're out of touch with reality in the classroom. Your opinions support this criticism.

You have a lot of theory, and have heaped scorn on critics of your ideological view, yet as far as I know haven’t set foot in the classroom as a professional teacher. To point this out is not the tall poppy syndrome: it is a reality check. Your opinions will change as you develop as a teacher. As all of us have, you will find reality conflicts will theory and you will have to find a way to reconcile them to your particular circumstances.