I think that on education neither Rudd or Gillard ever had the plot. Scandinavian countries, particularly Finland, are miles ahead of the USA and Australia.
In successful education systems room is found for Socratic discussion of open ended questions. From these discussions students learn to think and give consideration to alternative views.
Teaching for future employment is short sighted. Who knows what employment opportunities will be even ten years from now let alone in each student's mid life?
Students need maths and langage skills and an understanding of science as basics but they really need to be able to think clearly. But it seems that pollies, business people and religious people really believe that thinking by others is against their own narrow interests.

Not mentioned in this article is why?

Why does Dep. PM Gillard want to reform the school system?

Because it doesn't work for the major stakeholders right now - the parents.

You mention Parents associations are against it - which ones? Every parent I know finds the public school system lacking, and wants this system brought in.

The Unions are against it, and that's all, let's face it. If we left it to the unions and the status quo, nothing would change, ever. The voting block bullies each successive government.

the unions need to join the rest of the modern world where pay is for performance and you are a poor teacher, you are escorted out of the system.

Regardless of how many years you have tried to become a good teacher, so what, if you can't teach why should the nation's children suffer because you pay union dues.

Talk about a privileged society! You guys are like royalty, and we all want a republic.

Australia is riddled with groups who have a sense of entitlement, just like the British royal family.

I'm conservative (surprise!) but whole heartedly support the Dpe. PM on this, even though I would normally cross a street to avoid her.

"The Cambridge Primary Review is supported by Esmée Fairbairn Foundation.

The Review, directed by Robin Alexander, is being undertaken by a team based at Cambridge University, supported by 70 research consultants and a 20-strong Advisory Committee. "

The Esmée Fairbairn Foundation is left wing organisation that would probably view the greens as centrist, and is far from the massive review that Mike Williss tries to punt.

It looks like a policy piece with a firm political agenda, and as such is not an unbiased review.

The easiest way to improve the score of your school is to enroll the brightest kids. What do the school rankings really show? How much is due to teaching and how much is the student's own ability.

Surely the purpose of a school is to get the best educational outcome for their students but nobody wants to know about the under achieving kids. What is the role of the Support Teachers in all this nonsense. Does anyone care if a talented support teacher is able to teach a struggling student to read? Presumably Gillard and co will rate them as dud teachers because the ATARs were below average.

Maybe we should fund schools on need rather than the pork barreling that we call school funding.

The author says “Almost to a person, teachers reject this type of performance pay, trusting in a collegiality and sharing of resources”. They say that, but the evidence says they will take what they can get. Victoria had performance bonuses for principals, assistant principals and leading teachers in the 1990s – yes, the 1990s. I am the only leading teacher of that era I know of who refused to sign up for them. Teachers will fall over each other to get their hands on the cash. The days of professional solidarity have long gone.

Well, Rudd sends his kid to an exclusive private school in the ACT, and Gillard has none, so has never had to try to fathom how schools work, or what they exist for.

The 'edumacation revolution' is a fizzer, even the buildings are imposed poor designs that cost far too much.

But schools are in need of dramatic change, although none will come their way.

One of the problems, is that expectations of what school can achieve is far too high, so, inevitably, they appear to fail.

Of course, if students cannot read or write by the time they get to high school and no one has noticed, there is soemthing wrong.

But now we have exported all the low skill jobs, apart from retail shoppo jobs and food joints serving ones, young people are being force fed rubbish in outdated edu-factories that are run along prison lines.

It's no wonder so many people find them terrible and resent being there.

I've had three children at state schools for 34 student-years. The schools have got worse, not better during that recent time.

The high school expels, bans, stands down students for marginal silliness, and prevents stduents from doing what subjects they want, to protect the 'standards' and keep results higher. The QCS (in Qld) test is practised for nearly 12 months, to ensure a high school, and better results for the school.

The whole edifice of 'education' is crumbling to fit Gillard-Howard type models of constant testing.

Pearson is hailed as a secular saint as he admonishes his own people for not trying hard enough, and insists that they all get shunted off to St. Peters type private schools in capital cities instead of demanding real schools be built where his people live.

And sadly, teachers are not required to do much by way of improving their own skills, even while they admonish students and tell them they'll need more than one degree to live, many teachers only have an aged Dip T to wave around.

Two more years to go, it cannot come fast enough.