Schools back!
Well school is back today and I started my first day on the job. Sure it was only a staff development day but still an important day for me. I start teaching classes tomorrow. I am a social science teacher mainly teaching Business Studies and Geography in a public school (western suburbs).
Not only is school back, but education more broadly was back on the agenda today for a number papers.
Schools
This article reported that:
MORE than 70 per cent of principals say their school is in need of a serious maintenance overhaul.Well I am sure that this is not reporting anything we didn't already know. Anyone with some contact with our highschools know that they are being slowly degraded. Taking it from first hand experience I can definitely say that our schools, or at least our public ones, have been starved of the necessary resources for years. That is not to say no money at all has gone into it, what is clear is that a lot more needs to be quickly funnelled into the state system. it should come to no surprise given the State Government's unnecessary fervor to reduce the state deficit (at the expense of our public services like schools).
Universities
Another issue also hit the bulletins regarding foreign students at universities. The thrust of the piece is:
MORE than a third of overseas students are completing their degrees at Australian universities with English so poor that they should not have been admitted to tertiary study in the first place.The first thought that ran into my mind was to ask was this another xenophobic piece to kick foreigners in the guts. However, after thinking about the issue a little more I realised that it was an important issue that needed to be dealt with. The underlying issue in this story is not about foreigners stealing degrees from Australians but rather that Universities are being placed into a position where they are now dependent on the income generated from foraign students.
This is not a race issue, this is a funding of universities issue. The Howard Government has endeavoured to turn these fine public instutions into commercial ones where they need to turn generate substantial revenue to survive. Without these pressures their would be no need to rely on foreign students or even bend the rules (lower standards) to keep foreign students at the university.
Our education system in this country has been torn to shreds by economic rationalists who are turning education into a product; whether it is private education in the secondary system or the commercialisation of our tertiary system.
posted by Joel MacRae @ 7:28 pm
8 comments
8 Comments:
Regarding the English levels of foreign students at universities: I have first-hand experience of this and it is a real problem. I would also suggest that it's a problem with a lot of Australian-born students. Standards within the university sector are deteriorating significantly and it is quite obviously a direct result of uni funding pressures. It is a poor relection on us as a society and the Liberal and Labor state and federal governments of the last 20 years that our universities and public schools are in this state. What greater priority should there be for our culture and economy than investing in education and health? I would love for someone to go through each line in the state and territory budgets and justify to me why most items are considered more important than education and health. Here's a start: take the funds we're spending on the civil war in Irag and put it into our children's future.
I would nothing less, Cameron, than passionate people to come to my site and write whats on their minds and in their hearts. All writers here can vent their ideas on any of the issues that I raise, as long as it is not done aggressively or with any intention of insulting anyone. Otherwise i will have to moderate.
I am glad you brought up the US proposal to reflect some UV rays away from earth. All I can say is at least the issue is being thought about...
And as both Sam and Cam are saying, the prioritising of budgetary funds away from education is a sign that a) the government has not got its head screwed on straight, and/or b) the Government is reacting to popular opinion to reduce the deficit. If b) is the factor than the wider population needs to understand a little economics to understand that deficit does not always equal bad.
Its fair to say that our schools and universities are in a pretty sorry state. As the product of the public system, and having younger siblings going through the same system, the degradation that has occurred in just a small amount of time is quite substantial. Also, as a uni student, I have noted many local students that are also full fee paying. They did not get the marks that was required, yet were able to get into the same degree as a full fee paying student. Now thats all well and good if you are a daddy's girl from the North shore.
Yes, funding definitely need to increase. Most people without the economics understanding Joel mentioned, see the state bank account as the same as their household accounts, deficit does equal bad. I only have a limited understanding, but it is enough to know that without investment in education and infrastructure, amongst other things.. well we don't have enough water to be going down the gurgler.. but you get my drift.
Hey guys, when we talk of increasing funding to public schools, I think we ought to be careful. I offer this analogy:
In recent times, pro-lifers have been known to lament the number of abortions taking place in Australia – an abortion epidemic, says Abbott. A typical, and justified, response from pro-choicers is: “well, how many would you like to see?” The point, of course, is that there is no objective metric for how many abortions ‘should’ take place. Rather, pro-lifers are completely against abortion and want to see the number reach zero. So it’s sort of a funny argument that they’re peddling, because it’s never completely refuted until abortion is banned.
Similarly, I think we need to approach the education debate with caution. Don’t get me wrong, I strongly support public education, having directly benefited from it for the last 21 years (and counting!). But when we say that we should increase funding for public education, although it’s a good political selling point, I have to ask, “what do we really mean?”
For example, what are the metrics with which we assess the levels of funding? I certainly think the argument for making the system fairer and more equitable is universally cogent. Similarly, the argument for re-prioritising budgetary spending has a lot of potential, but is fraught with difficulties because people (and especially the media) tend to favour oversimplified numerical indicators which rarely tell the full story (think interest rates). Another common metric is to compare teaching ‘outcomes’ through comparisons with other OECD countries. My understanding – and I haven’t looked this up in detail, so feel free to correct me – is that Australia does quite well in many of these (for some info, see here).
Now, if that is the case, where does that leave our claim that public education should receive more funding? Are we arguing, for example, that Australia should occupy a certain (higher) position within the OECD? Or are we simply saying that that measure is limited and ought only to be considered in combination with other metrics? If so, what are they? Again still, perhaps we’re arguing that Australia’s private school students are carrying their public counterparts, and the results are therefore skewed?
In any case, we don’t want to sound like funding fundamentalists now, do we? (Always asking for more.) So, like the pro-choicers (of which I am one), I ask: how much is the right amount? And how do we know?
You make a valid point ilwade and would like to direct you to the NSW greens policy on education to show a more sophisticated stance than my short spiel that doesn’t only look at increasing funding.
However, as I am sure many readers could confirm, our education system is not improving, it seems to be degrading. Now of course one could ask, “degrading compared to what exactly?” and could even point out that funding to education has increased over the term of the current NSW Government. Nevertheless, the survey conducted that I pointed to in the SMH stated that a majority of principals want more done to upgrade their degrading facilities. Having seen first hand a bunch of public schools, I make the argument that not enough is being spent on public education. Particularly when we are, as Sam Clemens pointed out, wasting money on things like the Iraq war.
If that is education ‘fundamentalism’, then so be it.
Yeah, the public/private comparison is a partial measure of fairness, and should therefore play a role. But I guess we still require some sort of external datum against which we can measure total education expenditure.
Re 'anti-life'...I don't think I've personally been called that (since I rarely speak on the issue, other than in congenial company), but I've heard it bandied about. Both sides have certainly been quite judicious in the battle for the rhetorical high ground.
Hey Cam,
I have been called a baby murderer while a candidate for the federal election. Does that count, cam?
I have also been called a number of very rude things that I refuse to reprint here. Oh and if only Bob brown new what some people are calling him. On second thoughts he probably knows.
Hmmm...'Federal Greens Candidate', 'baby murderer'...c'mon Joel, you can't complain about that one; those terms are basically synonymous!
I wonder if those same people think George Bush is a murderer for his 'pre-emptive' war...
Post a Comment
<< Home