<< Ludwig, I don't think the problems with education have much to do with population size. >>

Antiseptic, I was making the point that a constantly growing population exerts constantly increasing pressure on our education system.

It’s not population size that matters in this instance, but the constant increase in the need for education services and the constant need to spend millions on education and the infrastructure and teachers and all the rest that goes with it just to break even for ever-more people, and that while we are spending our money on this we are NOT spending money, or anywhere near enough money, on real improvements!

We KNOW that this same constantly increasing population pressure is a critical factor with water supplies, transport, energy and many other basic quality of life factors.

It is no different with education.

This is enormously important. It is as important as everything else put together that affects the quality of education in this country.

Hmmm, I missed half that post when cutting and pasting! Here's the other half ....

We are just simply not going to get a significantly increased standard of education, and one that is equally distributed, until the expansion of our population stops or greatly slows. When this happens we will actually be able to allocate a much larger part of the education budget to the development of real improvements across the board, and not just in highly unequally distributed pockets, instead of on ever-more basic facilities and underpaid, poorly resourced and stressed teachers.

It really does dismay me that those who care so much about education seem to either gloss over this all-important factor or just not appreciate it at all.

<< But, of course, when politicians feed the clamouring for 'lower taxes' all the time, there is a shortage of funds, hence the privatisation of schooling, and the dumbing down of school administrations. >>

Yes Blue Cross. A shortage of funds is an enormous factor. But it is not the existing tax base or amount of tax that we are all paying that is the main problem, it is as I have said, the constant demand for our tax dollars to be spent on just trying to providing the same quality of service for ever-more people.

For as long as this is the case, you bet we’ll continue to get a dumbing down of administrations, and students, with there being practically no chance of any across-the-board significant improvements and probably a steady worsening of the whole education standard.

Ludwig, I grasp your point, but I disagree. It is only a problem insofar as it means that kids in outlying areas have less well-developed schools than those in more established regions. The actual quality of pedagoguery should not be at issue unless the training being provided to teachers is also inadequate.

My kids both attend well-established schools in reasonably affluent areas - my boy's school celebrated its 40th birthday this year and has 800-odd students. The facilities are excellent, despite one building being destroyed by arson earlier this year.

I think that your analogy with power, water reticulation etc is fundamentally flawed. These services are universally required and the more people live in an area the more pressure is placed on infrastructure. Managing existing infrastructure more efficiently can do a little, but not much. It costs a great deal to produce another power station or dam and these are large fixed costs that must be fully paid before the first drop of water or watt of power can flow.

Education is not like that at all. A shortfall of teachers can be addressed by realtively simply and cheaply increasing the availability of training or importing teachers from another place, as well as moving teachers from areas of low need to high need locations to plug gaps. Similarly, resources are relatively cheap and easy to expand piecemeal.

Yes, I'm sure that growth creates challenges for the department, but surely this is why the bureaucrats earn the big bucks?

Thanks Anti for entertaining some discussion on the all-important point that I was making.

<< I think that your analogy with power, water reticulation etc is fundamentally flawed. >>

Well, without going to great length to further make my case, I’ll just say that we have a fundamental disagreement here.

Just a few comments:

These services are not mutually exclusive with education in terms of funding. If there was less of a requirement to struggle to uphold basic power, water, road infrastructure and services, there’d be more chance of a significantly increased education budget.

Sure, all manner of improvements are potentially possible within a stressed budgetary regime. But they would be much more possible with a much bigger budget. It’s as simple as that.

Or, with the same budget redirected into real improvements instead ever-more duplication of basic infrastructure and service delivery.