Thanks Romany I am on this issue a New Socialist.
Hold on! its not a dirty word.
We are already Socialist in our attitude to Welfare.
What do I mean?
Not truly sure its a plan in development, what we do now is not working.
I offer jobs, yes real jobs, in country towns at double the SS rates triple them in fact, some, maybe are just afraid of change some truly work shy but its hard to give some away.
We need to ask can we look at new jobs for mutual benefit.
Bogan, I have seen 5 different views of what it means, remember we Aussies have different meanings for most nick names state to state city to city.
I do not think Bogan has anything to do with income, it was used in Sydney to describe well, Kath and Kim types.

Bronwyn, belly, Romany and others
We agree about the importance of school and other factors.
At the next level down I am concerned that because of PERCEIVED necessity the nature of education it is unnecessarily, standardized, impersonalized, pressurized and I think unnecessarily competitive.

If we experience ‘indigenous’ education what we find is that by and large it is relevant to the individual, and is largely non competitive in our sense. This knowledge involve many ‘scientific’ fields including functional, biology, zoology, animal husbandry, Botany, weather, genetics, morality etc. In fact a child at initiation knows more useful and relevant facts that the average ‘Caucasian’. Yet our ‘ized’ culture teaches these people that their knowledge is no more than a curiosity. Are our children with their wii and videos any more prepared for life, I put it not! The problems in indigenous communities occur where white meets black and the subsequent deculturing without a meaningful replacement. No I’m not into the ‘noble savage’ routine only that they show the real purpose of education.

In truth no matter how hard one tries some children are never going to achieve academically yet we insist with our aggregated standardized indoctrination. I have NEVER been able to grasp Maths thinking. I’ve seen countless intelligent children either treated as substandard or their innate difficulties ignored. It is more than special Ed. It’s more fundamental.
The net result is lack of attendance and application. No matter which way you cut it statistical reasoning is always going to leave a sizable minority in the ‘lesser’ world either as sub achievers (failures) or also rans (great for perpetuating a negative self image).
If one thinks about it this negative self image has side effects ‘school gangs’ (of which I was always a victim), eating disorders, and antisocial behaviours and yes school killings.

Those that will achieve will achieve but those who don’t need to learn useful skills like how to think and make informed decisions, good for them...good for us.

Is this socialism … no just observation/reasoning.

Examinator,

Yes, I agree with the growing body of people worldwide calling for educational reform.

When the Nineteenth century reformers fought for education to be compulsory their aim was to build a society where each person had at least a practical base upon which to build knowledge and to enable all to be able to find work commensurate with their abilities. Our current system fails to achieve this.

The world has changed rapidly since compulsory education was brought in and the meaning/role of education has changed too. Just as the meaning of the word Democracy has not so much changed as been corrupted.

The role of politicians should be as mouthpieces of the people. Their job, in a democracy, should be to carry out the wishes of the people, something which can only be done if one listens to and understands what the will of the people is. Our system has done a 360 where the pollies dictate to the people, and are so far removed from their lives that they have little conception of what their real needs are.

I talk about educational needs with my students constantly. Their ideas are sound, fair, practical and often reveal flaws even I was unaware of. But who is willing seriously to listen to them?

Valuable input comes from professional educators, academics and political advisors. But it concerns only one aspect of educational needs - those that apply to the privileged, to "those like us". It’s based on an ideal: the nuclear family where well-educated parents ensure that scholastic education is only one facet of giving their child/ren the best start in life.

Whether people squabble about whether it's religion, feminism, capitalism or media dominance which is responsible for the different meanings of "family" which apply to-day, or for the changing standards of society, they are united in their recognition that change has occurred.

Those who dictate education policy however, are not sufficiently aware of just how these changes impact on the people whom they are elected to represent.

My “Life Among the Bogans” was an integral part of my education.

Dear Romany,

Thank You for another insightful post.

I hesitate in expressing my opinion because
you as a teacher know much more about
this subject.

However, for what it's worth, I believe that
societies, together with all the social
institutions and social behaviour they contain,
are continuously created and re-created by the
acts of countless individuals, whether these
individuals realize their role in the grand
sweep of history or not.

If a modern society goes to war, it's not
just because the leaders have opted for war,
but because the people have implicitly or
explicitly done so also, or at least, they
haven't opted for peace.

The Vietnam war came to an end largely because
of the antiwar movement, a social movement that
consisted disproportionately of young people,
including many university students. When the
antiwar movement first challenged the war, it
received little support from politicians or the
press, and its goals seemed hopeless.

But the tide of public opinion gradually began to shift.

The point that I'm making is that through
collective action, ordinary people with few
resources other than their own determination can
change things.

Not only universities but TAFE colleges have
student organisations that can influence
policies. Traditionally, university and college
campuses are places that encourage discussion,
and debates.

But it doesn't stop there. People from all walks
of life are letting politicians know how they
feel about things, and the changes they want
made. People are no longer satisfied with
only the 'elite' being served. Howard would still
be in power if that were the case.

The disgruntled do have a voice - from pensioners,
working mothers, young families, students,
to the unemployed. They can make their votes count.
And I'm sure they will, in the next election.

When people within a demographic of society feel they are segregated, there are three possibilities:

1) They can continue to feel ostracized.
2) They can attempt successfully or unsuccessfully to assimilate.
3) They can attempt to change the society to suit them.

As veterans of these threads are well aware, there's a legion of people who comment on ostracized muslim communities and how they're trying to change Australian society.

(I'm mentioning this in passing on my way to my key point, for the love of god, please, don't flesh out this worn out topic up again. If you must have another go, start a new mundane thread, but don't divert this interesting one).

I view that as an unrealistic possibility, because the fearful scenario they predict is too divorced from the reality of Australian life and culture. Such an overthrow seems like a dystopian fantasy.

But, to get back to the 'bogan' stereotype, there's an irony in that the stereotyped Australian is often remarkably similar to the stereotyped bogan.

I say this Romany, because while there is no doubt in my mind that for many 'bogans' you're right in that they desire to fit in with society and to be viewed differently, there is also a large proportion who see things differently and consider themselves to be the pinnacle of being Australian.
Indeed, without an educated Australian 'stereotype' how can we rebut the assertion that they are indeed a representative Australian person?
The only reason why I have issue with it, is that it still defines the image of Australians today, and it also defines what we consider to be our popular culture.
Is it elitist to express disappointment that so many Australians consider the 'biggest loser' to be worthwhile programming? What happens when the subset of society that considers such things to be of the most importance, grows to such proportions that informative programming is canned?
What happens when we extend this example to other aspects of our cultural fabric?

I take on board every post, but my world has been very close to the badly educated poor, I came from their ranks.
Education is not all gained in schools, my best came from WASP parents, get a job work your way up.
22 years working for a NSW government department, in a union delegate leadership roll for most of it.
In a constant improvement culture, we found 1 in 6 could not read or write.
One in a management roll, helped set up a school and we saw that number drop.
Daily I see workplace failures schemes put in place to give people a chance fail.
Education is the reason, every time.
No one said get a job to them.
No way they understand its wrong to not try to make it work.
yes educate for real needs but until we educate for real life we fail too.
Tomorrow, first day back at work, grown men [ you must watch for it be ready act wise] will ask to see me in private, to read the last fortnights letters, yet they have worked without ever reading for lifetimes.
Some can not do it, ask for help, some give it up as too hard but we must find answers in education.