Agreed Qunda, however we should also be making savings in some obvious places.

We have a behavioural problem in many highschools. Much of this is caused by having too many kids there who definitely don't want to be there, or are bored stiff.

We increased the leaving age years ago, basically to hide the unimployment problem. Now we are running short of labour, we should reverse it.

When I went to school we had only 15, & 12 kids in each of the senior classes. The kids that were going to be tradesman retail & office staff, & infact most workers were all ready happily working, & earning money. In fact some of them used to sling off at us fools, who still had no money as we were still at school.

My wife used to handle the in school apprenticeship scheme at a large high school, for the P&C. We watched as a trouble maker could be turned into a happy kid, just by being given something as simple as one day a week at work. They earn very little, but it is something that is theirs. With restless boys, they also feel like a man, something they need, & can't get at school, if not academically talented.

At least 50%, & perhaps as high as 70% would be better off going to work. Studding things like media studdies, dance, & many of these make work subjects, just wastes their time, & our money

Hasbeen

Maybe you are right in some cases, however from my experience on school councils and the like, it appears to me that many good students fall through the gaps and become disenchanted or alienated towards education.

It is far too easy for a student to be lost to the system or have a crippling set-back because he/she encountered a bit of a problem that was not picked up or was badly handled. I do not know why the counselling, where available, fails but in so many cases that I became aware of the student could have been rescued quickly had there been young trained adults available to visit them as caring mentors to help them get back in the saddle.

There is a severe lack of counselling resources, however the problem is deeper than that.

All
It seems to me this topic confusing correlation and cause with cause and effect, at the very least.
The judgments are highly dubious at best.

Hasbeen's story about about the 1 girl with a 16OP is as unrepresented as GY's 17OP for a singular strand of a science.
Firstly OP requirements vary from strand to strand and year to year often based on places available. In effect is it based as much on business model supply and demand the institution ability to provide places than actual competence.
The Medical colleges (unions) and Lawyers influence.

I could also cite several "science" and "law “grads who have to drive cabs because there aren't the jobs for them.
Do I also mention other”science based” grads who have had to go overseas for jobs.

It is all very well getting more or better 'science grads' but they need to have gettable jobs.

Also your "dumbing down" crowd still haven't considered where the big money is....it ain't necessarily in 'useful' science day to day careers.

Hasbeen, what is the average year 12 OP?

If we currently have too many under-qualified, unemployable in various areas ,see unemployed rates and mind numbing prejudices, as reflected by some OLOers, how is tightening up the courses going to change anything, where it counts?

Do I mention the availability/ timetabling of specific subjects in local schools are also a limiting factor. My sons ran into that one on several topics. The two local competing HS schools prided themselves on strong well funded music curriculum. But a decent science lab? (personal enmity between the two heads and board members)

Take the local PS Board insisting on Polish as a language.(as it happens there was one qualified teacher in polish , happened to come and was well related in that area)

PS she now teaches German elsewhere pity about the non ethnic Pole graduates.

I'm still waiting for some one to offer me substantial proof, that the percentage per capita of science grads is reducing. Or even the quality on the same basis is slipping.

Hasbeen

<< we should also be making savings in some obvious places >> Of course, but obvious to whom, which ones, who decides, will we (taxpayer) let them?

<< We have a behavioural problem in many high schools. Much of this is caused by having too many kids there who definitely don't want to be there, or are bored stiff. >> That’s true (they could be learning a trade for example) and as I understand, high schools are working collaboratively now with TAFE and industry to address the issues you have raised.

<< When I went to school we had only 15, & 12 kids in each of the senior classes ... >> Times have changed, yeah. The population is disproportionately increasing to the infrastructure and resources provided. Our society (culture if you like) expects all sorts of stuff these days – yet we bitch and gripe when the taxes needed to pay for it goes up, why is that?

<< At least 50%, & perhaps as high as 70% would be better off going to work. Studding things like media studdies, dance, & many of these make work subjects, just wastes their time, & our money >> Possibly, that’s why I would like to see some comments from sociologists, and of course the teachers themselves.

Graham’s thread was focussed (I thought) on the ‘science in society’ component in the ‘new’ curriculum – he was concerned about it, I’m not. However, there is a wider problem that needs addressing, as you have acknowledged. Thanks.

____

Examinator

The number (entering science) is not proportionally dropping, but to get in - yes, the tertiary entry requirement is. You can check this with the UAC's or the individual universities - but that's another topic.

Perhaps I did not male myself quite clear. I did not suggest we throw out kids that want to be at school. I would like to let those who want to get out do so.

I mentioned the in school apprentice scheme, which was a great success. Unfortunately a concurrent work experience scheme was a disaster. EG. A girl, with no chance of of attaining the necessary
PO 1 or 2, being sent to work with the physiotherapy department of the local hospital.

Examinator, the middle rank OP is 12, with 4% of students in each rank.

My idea of savings to be made by letting some kids leave earlier, was with a view to apply those savings in other areas. This particularly in areas of more difficult subjects, where more effort is required both for the kids, & the countries future.

I know the union wouldn't like it, but perhaps we will have to pay higher wages for some subjects, if we are going to get adequate teachers, in both ability, & numbers.

Maximum effort must be applied to kids who want to learn, not wasted on those who don't. When kids who will take on maths C, & physics, we should move heaven & earth to supply teachers who can teach them. It is just these kids who will supply the next generation of teachers.

A friend of ours, a junior maths, & senior biology teacher, quit when told he was to teach senior maths next year. As he said, how could he teach, what he could not do? The kids got a lady from the subcontinent, who could not evenmake change. Those who did not get coaching failed miserably.

He now teaches maths at tech, to young people who find they need it. Most are sorry they didn't work harder at school. He tells us it is a joy to teach, only those who really want to learn.

Teachers were much happier when I was at school. Of course we still had real discipline, & most of the kids wanted to be there.

qanda
I take your point
Perhaps it's me but facts/stats on their own are worthless without the context.
Do you have a web address that confirm the decrease in entry level OP entry level are decreasing? My evidence limited though it is 2 recent and one current student doesn't support this?
Ive tried both sites without joy.
Also where is the evidence that the Science curriculum is solely or primarily the cause?
Having looked at the proposed curriculum, I wonder that it will make a hay seed's difference in upping the quality of school leavers. The issue is far wider and needs a more holistic approach other than changing just a curriculum or few. It's far too superficial.

If I were to criticise the political powers that are it would be to point this out and reiterate if the answer is a simple instant fix
then the question is clearly grossly inadequate.

Speaking from sad experience the biggest problem we faced moving around for business, was clearly the lack of coordination between schools within and between states. Frankly I've seen dogs vomit, that makes more sense. If this irons that out it will be useful and not a total waste of space.

PS I abhor Generalizations other than to point directions. To be turned into total solutions, IMO they invariably fail to meet expectations and create more problems than they solve. Additionally they lend themselves to the dreaded quick fix and short term planing.