GONSKI 2.0

Remove this Banner Ad

You only have to look at the manicured grounds and sports facilities of the schools in question to see there's plenty of fat to cut

Can't see why so called rationalists would disagree with this

Govt money comes with obligations and scrutiny

In all those Howard years the focus was flagpoles and history wars
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Sounds like a good idea.

Our public schools are already ******* horrible quality, let's bring our other schools down to that level as well.

Class warfare?

If reasonable people (Gillard. Turnbull) on both sides are saying the same thing. We still want to wage war?

I ask one thing. As a smaller country in a constitute world can we afford these divisions

I suppose we could do nothing and continue to import people with skills. But the ratbags don't like that either
 
You only have to look at the manicured grounds and sports facilities of the schools in question to see there's plenty of fat to cut

Can't see why so called rationalists would disagree with this

Govt money comes with obligations and scrutiny

In all those Howard years the focus was flagpoles and history wars

Schools can hire a groundskeeper?

Burn them all to the ground.
 
We should give religious schools a level of funding commensurate with the level of taxation paid by their church.
Maybe we could make the funding more in line with the taxes paid by the parents who send their children to these private schools.
 
Like, as a percentage of their total income?

Or the richer you are, the more tax you pay... so rich people should have more funding for better education, than poor people?
Just a bit of sarcasm thrown Gough's way. I am a believer in the pay your own way. Don't have children if you can't afford to look after them. I am not against assistance for poor children. Maybe the parents of those who deliberately fall pregnant to kick back on welfare ferris wheel should be given less money and their children's education should be funded separately from their parents. Meaning, the parents shouldn't receive cash. They should be given text books and other equipment for the childs education.
 
Did laugh - a merchant banker, conservative party leader is "left-leaning".

Never change Lebbo :D
Many conservatives still call him a lefty, despite him keeping numerous Abbott era conservative positions, the gay plebiscite being one. Turnbull should just give up trying to appease them (he shouldn't have bothered in the first place) because these nutters won't accept him anyway. Gonski 2.0 looks great, and people like Abbott being unhappy about it, or are talking of debating it in the party room, only confirms that.
 
Just a bit of sarcasm thrown Gough's way. I am a believer in the pay your own way. Don't have children if you can't afford to look after them. I am not against assistance for poor children. Maybe the parents of those who deliberately fall pregnant to kick back on welfare ferris wheel should be given less money and their children's education should be funded separately from their parents. Meaning, the parents shouldn't receive cash. They should be given text books and other equipment for the childs education.
Leaving the "parents who deliberately fall pregnant to kick back on welfare" bs aside...
Do you think that situation would be as common, if we had a better education system for everyone, that is adequately funded for the best results?

Don't you think it would just get worse, with the system you've just proposed?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

45348d878b724260cf112eb09f4a7916.jpg
 
Leaving the "parents who deliberately fall pregnant to kick back on welfare" bs aside...
Do you think that situation would be as common, if we had a better education system for everyone, that is adequately funded for the best results?

Don't you think it would just get worse, with the system you've just proposed?
Throwing more money at it has never worked and Gonski 2.0 will fail as well. Even if David Gonski has his way and the funding is adequate.
 
Why would anyone with semi decent qualifications go into a lowly paid job and be constantly s**t on by useless, disinterested parents and conservative numpties?
If there were higher salaries then there'd be more interest from those that are more intelligent.

The problem would be that so many undeserving teachers would also get paid more.
 
Probably related to such a low standard of teaching in contemporaneous education.

The people my age that chose to become teachers were far from bright.

One of my mate's son is a teacher at a school in the notorious KGB area in Perth. He claims there isn't a day where he isn't called a "campaigner" or similar. There is no chance you could teach kids in that environment where attention, control and respect isn't maintained.

Rather than throwing money at the solution, perhaps just offer the kids a 12 hour working day doing menial work on wages reflective of drop outs. Perhaps a break from the class room and a reality check of the alternatives might work rather than tolerating poor behaviour. This break not only benefits the student but prevents them bringing down an entire class with them.

Throwing more money at the curriculum won't change attitudes. Unless of course the money goes toward motivating kids, like providing role models and demonstrating opportunities in life. I would suggest most poor behaviour is frustration and having no clear guidance in life. It is this that should be addressed.

Oh and aligning the interest of the school, student and parents is so important. That's why I'm a big advocate of Saturday morning remedial classes for the student and for the parents.
 
If there were higher salaries then there'd be more interest from those that are more intelligent.

The problem would be that so many undeserving teachers would also get paid more.

just like every other high performance organisation, bonuses should be paid to performers rather than rewarding length of service
 
just like every other high performance organisation, bonuses should be paid to performers rather than rewarding length of service
The problem with rewarding performance is that teachers just cheat the system (as evidenced in the book Freakonomics).

If they're rewarded on testing, the teachers will inevitably try to help their students cheat.

What methods, outside of testing, would be able to accurately gauge a teacher's performance?
 
Probably related to such a low standard of teaching in contemporaneous education.

The people my age that chose to become teachers were far from bright.

teaching should be a course for people who have been successful in their careers and ready to contribute back to society rather than something done straight after school.

I can't fathom what type of guidance a twenty year old kid can provide to teenagers desperately wanting to understand how the world works.

At the very a sensible balance between straight out of school teachers and successful industry personal
 
One of my mate's son is a teacher at a school in the notorious KGB area in Perth. He claims there isn't a day where he isn't called a "campaigner" or similar. There is no chance you could teach kids in that environment where attention, control and respect isn't maintained.

Rather than throwing money at the solution, perhaps just offer the kids a 12 hour working day doing menial work on wages reflective of drop outs. Perhaps a break from the class room and a reality check of the alternatives might work rather than tolerating poor behaviour. This break not only benefits the student but prevents them bringing down an entire class with them.

Throwing more money at the curriculum won't change attitudes. Unless of course the money goes toward motivating kids, like providing role models and demonstrating opportunities in life. I would suggest most poor behaviour is frustration and having no clear guidance in life. It is this that should be addressed.

Oh and aligning the interest of the school, student and parents is so important. That's why I'm a big advocate of Saturday morning remedial classes for the student and for the parents.
I've not heard of the KGB area, however, the acronym itself sounds foreboding.

Getting wages as a 15/16 year old reflective of a drop out's wages would send the wrong message. When I was 15, getting $20/hr would've been amazing! I understand your point, but I'm not sure that would work.

Your overarching argument rings true, however. When everything is geared towards testing, eg those year 5, 7, 9 tests, we probably begin to lose sight of the bigger picture in education.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top