Julie Bishop's Vision for Education in Australia (Merged) (1 Viewer)

[Kmahal1990]

Julie Bishop put up for discussion about two weeks ago on an episode of 'insight' on SBS, that she is playing with the idea to introduce bonus pay to teachers who perform well ( i.e make more impacts on students, in what ways are yet to be decided) as means to increase the overall standard of teaching across Australia. I am not sure how the other schools are functioning, but i personally fail to see the crisis on the topic of poor teachers. I go to a selective school which may run better than some other schools, but we also have our fair share of poor teaching staff. In my experience, a poor teacher is not the sole contributor poor academic results (in secondary school). The syllabus is on the board of studies website, and if you have a textbook, you can quite easily have a competent understanding of the currciculum's contents.

Even conceding the fact that teachers are directly linked to better academic results, i think the answer is not in offering rewards for those teachers who are already achieving the amount of success with their students, that the government would like. We've all had those teachers, who are truthfully, not made for the teaching proffession. I'd personally think, alike the medicine course, there should be a UMAT equivalent exam for future teaching candidates, examining their ability to communicate to students. The communication skills of the candidate needs to be examined critically. They can not just be able to speak fluently, but be able to engage the students. My principal can come up with the most gem studded speeches during assemblies, but noone will ever listen to them attentively.

Secondly, i'd like to look at the minister, Julie Bishops. From the limited exposure to her, she seems really conservative and stubborn. In a speech justifying her suggestion to unify the states' and territories' curriculum content and education organisations, she argued that students in schools are taught useless content, for example: analysing the "trashy" show Big Brother and reinforced the return to the study of traditional literature. I think this is a bit of a uninsightful statement on her behalf. I think the year 8 (or was it year 9?) focus on analysing the media and how they portray perspectives is a particularly useful segment of the english curriculum. Up to that point, i have never ever thought that the channels on Australian television are highly sensational for commericial purposes. I never knew. I probably have thought about it, but never until high school, did i fully comprehend the nature of T.V channels.

She says that there are too much political context on subjects, the example she used being history and reconciliation. Again, i think she fails to see the pure genius, in my opinion, of the people who wrote our (the NSW board of studies) syllabus. History as a subject, has evolved beyond dates, battles, and people into a study into a comprehensive study into the forces which influenced change in our history. Should political content be included in history? Ofcourse it should. Politics and political figures have played a major role in changing our lives, especially in the last century.

I know i have travelled from one point into another, but i feel really passionate about this topic. I feel extremely forlorn, that gifted with the role of shaping Australia's education system, is the type of person that is competent, yet not fully connected with the needs of Australia's education system. A person that is more importantly, seemingly unconscious of the ingenuity behind perspectives different to hers. I wonder how the Australia government could let such a woman be the Australian minister for education, science and training. This is the exact same thing i was talking about to start with. Alike teachers, she displays a competent individual no doubt, but fails to meet the more intricate requirements of the job. Of someone, who is innovative, and embracing the 21st century and not using past experiences as a template.

 

[Iron]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

I like the idea that Labor is hostage to the unions: Labor controls the states: the states control primary/highschool education: the unions control education to indoctrinate kiddies with the leftist mantra.

But I dont think Bishop is too bad, apart from her slightly mad look. She's just reflecting the view that her department and some leading academics have been pushing for. And I think it makes sense to at least nationalise a syllabus-making body (Board of studies), rather than needlessly duplicating essentially similar ones across states.

I fully agree that the standard of state education is pretty shit. The Australian had a good quote about how we’ve gone from teaching Latin in the HSC to teaching remedial English at university. There was also an example of a HSC question about analysing marxist/feminist issues raised in Shakespeare.

The Howard government are starting to talk about Independent Schools which provide HSC subjects catering to an industry, for those who dont intend on uni study. Meanwhile, other schools can go for gold again.

The standard of teaching is a seporate issue which is better suited to the private/public school debate.

 

[banco55]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

Couldn't the feds go around the teachers unions by setting up a parallel system and offering it to independent/catholic schools? If they set up a year 11/12 system with higher standards/greater difficulty they could probably force the states to play ball.

 

[banco55]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

It would, however if uni places were given out based on national results. I wont be surpised if only 10% of QLD students are from QLD (3u maths = the highest level of maths there)

Assuming there was a widespread adoption of a tougher, more rigorous curriculum by private schools the divide would be between public schools and private schools rather than states. If it was obvious that kids at private schools were getting a better education there'd be a lot of pressure on the states to get the state schools fixed up. Plus if unis were allowed to favour students who'd gotten good results in the more rigourous curriculum over students who got good results in the softer system the states would be forced to change. After all the Feds control the unis.

 

[Kmahal1990]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

I cannot further your discussion because thats as far as my understanding goes ( what a joke =[ ) What about on the topic of crisis in the education system. Do you concede that there is one? I am currently in school and must say i am not so much affected by it as the media has made it out to be. However, i do admit that my primary school was absolutely atrocious in management and staff. Year 3,4,5,6 was manned by two teachers, in two classes. It was a horrific place.

 

[Kmahal1990]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

It was the only photo i could find that had a yellowish overlay.

 

[SkyScout]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

I do agree that analysing Big Brother is a load of rubbbish. As what the education system is merely implying that anything in the media is worth analysing, even if it has negative values and acts and perceptions.

I was talking once to my friend about OC once and I said its a load of rubbish, its diminishing the value of women with the addition of alcohol and drugs and the lack of control of their actions and emotions. And then he argued that well dun u think its a reflection of what our soeciety is currentlly functionning upon. And i said that's when you analyse things to much... Eventually OC became a culture that was worshipped rather than a reflection of what was actually going on.

On the other hand, I have heard Julie Bishop speak alot on conference on ABC etc... I strongly believe that some of her ideas are good however.. the part of givimg extra money to good teachers will only create a segregation amongst the teachers... Instead what she should do is perhaps channel that money towards raising the pay of teachers overall all around. Teachers pay are not good altough the take all the trouble, time and effort to raise tomorrows future leaders.

I think thats all for now... lols! studying time HSC!!!

 

[Iron]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

If you could possibly find that quote from the Australian, I'd much appreciate it.

Blegh, sorry. It was front page Friday (6th Oct)

 

[wuddie]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

the fact is, nsw doesn't have enough potential teachers, so to meet the demand of the ever increasing amount of students in our public school system, they drop the standards so that more graduates can 'officially' become a teacher. why do you think we (HSC graduates) keep getting pamphlets trying to encourage us to become a teacher? why else would there be incompetent teachers teaching in our schools? because we dont have enough teachers

so before we can talk about changing the syllabus (which i have no problem with throughout my 12 years of education), we got to get our priorities right and fix the scarce teaching resources.

another view i'd like to present, is that the state government is trying to lure us into the private schools. it should be no surprise to you all that private schools recieve more fundings than public schools. why? if the private schools are already getting money from students, on top of the millions they get from the government, then it'll be obvious that they are rolling in cash and are resourceful. apart from a few selective schools, all other high schools in sydney are struggling with essential expenses. see the contrast here? if you're a middle or high income parent, where would you send your kids to school?

what the government is doing, in my view, is trying to decrease the educational funding for the future, if one day, majority of the students attend private schools. it's a long shot, but i think they are smelling success right now.

sorry to throw you out of the topic, but whatever, if you disagree, that's fine by me.

 

[banco55]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

Feminism probably did the most damage to the teaching profession of any change in the past 30 years. In the '60s when job oppurtunities were limited for women you'd get a substansial portion of the top 10-15% becoming teachers. These days far fewer of the top 10-15% of women become teachers instead they become lawyers, doctors etc.

 

[SkyScout]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

You have a great point there Wuddie... Its true that the there is a lack of teachers around NSW. Perhaps its due to the low pay and the hell lot of pressure and test paper marking that it requires. Therefore, the Government should increase the pay of teachers instead of funding it to private shcools( which mind you already receive loads of money from parents itself).

I also heard that the standards in privates shcools are staeadily increasing and would perhaps one day outbid the public education systems. This again is due to the lack of funding. Education shuold be made free for it wasn't found or created. It was discovered. However the opportunities and facilities to experience the education is the thing we shuold be paying for and that is where the government comes in.

Parents today are ever struggling to send thing children to any selective schools around OR to a private shcools ... no where LOWER apparentlly... and all thanx to the government's idea of reducing funding towards the public education and increasing the funding of private education...

 

[Aslightissue]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

I find this talk bothering, primarily because of the comments that have been made about teaching left wing ideals. The various comments Howard and Bishop have made on the subjects of postmodernism, feminism and marxism being taught in schools kind of get me annoyed. I heard on the news the other day in an article about it something about teachers sympathising mith Mao Tse-Tung. Some teachers are pretty fucking leftist, true, but it gets me that the government would want to remove Postmodern, Marxist, Gender-Political, etc, content from the curriculum, as I believe this kind of thinking, while not always overly 'practical' allows students to contrast different viewpoints and open up their minds a bit more. I mean, in the case of Marxism, nobody would know anything about it if you didn't learn a bit about it in school.

The government is kind of bothering me at the moment:

Still no gay marriage rights
Wants to get rid of all the -isms in English (didn't Howard actually use the word 'gobbledegook'?)
Taking this conservative stance on immigrants, trying to stop terrorism with bullshit tv advertisements. Okaaaayyy.

Apparently it's not their role to run businesses, but it is their role to try and run culture? Wow.

 

[kami]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

Leaders slam school test on gay colony
Greg Roberts
October 09, 2006
A STATE school assignment that asked 13-year-olds to write about life in a gay community has been attacked by Education Minister Julie Bishop as an example of "a politically correct agenda masquerading as curriculum".

Queensland Premier Peter Beattie also criticised the school project, saying it was inappropriate and not part of the state curriculum.

Year Nine students at Windaroo Valley State High School in Brisbane were asked to write an assignment on living as a heterosexual in a mostly homosexual colony on the moon.

However, the school withdrew the assignment when a mother said her daughter would refuse to write it because it conflicted with her religious beliefs.

Mr Beattie said: "I don't think it's appropriate for a13-year-old to be doing an assignment like this and I think the authority should withdraw it."

Queensland Democrats senator Andrew Bartlett said the outcry over the assignment was a gross overreaction.

"I'm not quite sure it is such a terrible thing for students to be asked to think about what it would be like to be in different social situations," he said.

Source:http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20547391-5006786,00.html

Hmmm, Julie Bishop doesn't seem to keen on the idea of a 'Blue eyes-Brown eyes' program either ...although that shouldn't really come as a surprise given the conservative stance of her party.

 

[banco55]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

Getting 13 year olds to write about life in a gay colony is beyond parody.

 

[kami]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

Getting 13 year olds to write about life in a gay colony is beyond parody.

I think people are taking it out of context when they see the words 'gay colony' as no 13 year old would know enough about the subject matter to make it overly about sex and sexuality. It is probably just an exercise in getting the student to percieve what its like to operate in a world of difference much like Jane Elliott's fairly famous 'blue eyes/brown eyes' exercise. I really doubt it would have anymore sexual content then if they were told to write an example of being an immigrant in an asian country or something like that.

Then again, I could be wrong but meh I thought it worth mentioning since we were talking about left vs. right educational ideologies and Julie Bishop.

 

[walrusbear]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

are people on here seriously speaking as though postmodernism should be ignored for being 'left-wing'
we should just forget about the primary discourse of the last 50 years and make english what it was a century ago??

 

[banco55]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

are people on here seriously speaking as though postmodernism should be ignored for being 'left-wing'
we should just forget about the primary discourse of the last 50 years and make english what it was a century ago??

50 years ago the new criticism was the craze in universities and that was almost never taught at high school level. But the new criticism had no political overtones so probably wouldn't have excited whatever socialist/right wing teachers were around back than.

 

[walrusbear]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

Predominantly because Post-Modernism is negating the fundamental issues of communication.

By year 12 english you should be able to PROPERLY PUNCTUATE, SPELL, EXPRESS AND ARGUE PROPERLY. Post-modernism is a PRIME example of form over function, use flowery phrases and idiotic rhetoric instead of succinct ideals.

that's just plain incorrect
there's nothing in general postmodern theory which directly leads to poor spelling, grammar, punctuation etc.
a lot of conservatives (eg. miranda devine) seem to propound this but it's pretty much impossible to prove. some of the theory (which isn't really delved into during high school) is dense... is that where this whole lie began??

It's too open minded and frankly out of touch. It was good for a ride, but I'd much rather people be able to discuss the BASER facts than interpret a load of rubbish from a poem. I mean, for fuck's sake, I could extrapolate that one of Yeats poems was an indoctrination lesson on Nuclear Fusion and got really good marks for it. That is when the system is flawed, when it becomes a weak parody of itself, and post-modernism has done that.

how have the postmodern issues been superceded? care to elaborate what replaces it? how are issues of representation and interpretation 'out of touch'? by 'BASER' do you mean 'more simplistic'?
your Yeats example is fairly baseless. there is almost no situation where interpretation is that absurd.
the onus on critics here is to prove that the current 'leftie postmodernised' education style is actually responsible for worse english students. if anything, introducing these issues into high school is a mark of sophistication.

 

[Red-Wine-&-Joni]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

I'm training as a history and an English teacher, and the only reason I am even bothering with the English component is that I'm on a scholarship and to be eligible for the scholarship I have to train as an English + second subject. Don't get me wrong, in its purest sense I quite enjoy English, but the possibility of teaching this ludicrous HSC English syllabus fills me with dread.

I agree wholeheartedly (and will be in a similiar situation next year, if I recieve the scholarship I've applied for). I think the English Syllabus is very, very flawed, but not in the late stages of years 11 and 12 that our politicians constantly stress.

My personal problem with the Syllabus as it stands is the demand it places on the students. This year I have to study 4 Coleridge poems, 2 related Journey texts, Hamlet, a Stoppard Play, 12 Speeches, Nineteen Eighty-Four and 2 related Powerplay texts. That's 23. And we're told English is 'too easy'.

I disagree, because many students parrot what they're taught in order to get marks so they're not taught to think independently.

Another agreement with you, my fine sir. I think instances of students "parroting what they're taught" is when the HSC Exam itself asks questions such as 'How was your perception of "Transformations" been illuminated by..." - I doubt, for most students, it has at all. And yet we're expected to say it has?!

Forgive me for being rusty on post-modernism

It is my understanding that "Postmodernism" is a literary ideology does not appear on the English Syllabus until being an option for study in Year 12 Extension 1. Mr. Howard criticises it being taught instead of reading, spelling et al - anyone studying Extension 1 without the capacity to understand the fundamentals of English shouldn't be sitting the HSC.

 

[wuddie]

Re: Julie Bishop's vision for education in Australia

Have you ever thought about the possibility that the ideological nature of the syllabus, and the twin evils of increasing political correctness and declining standards, are turning potential teachers away from becoming teachers? Let me tell you something. I'm training as a history and an English teacher, and the only reason I am even bothering with the English component is that I'm on a scholarship and to be eligible for the scholarship I have to train as an English + second subject. Don't get me wrong, in its purest sense I quite enjoy English, but the possibility of teaching this ludicrous HSC English syllabus fills me with dread.

the twin evils of increasing political correctness and declining standards are turning potential teachers away?? are you kidding? if the standards of the teachers decline any further, we might as well teach ourselves. let me tell you something, an average teacher couldn't care less about the content of the syllabus - yes sure, passion for what you're teaching is a pre requisite - but it ends there, its all about the money, the dollar sign.

the fact that private schools recieve better fundings than public schools, even though they are already resourceful, goes to attract the better teachers. public schools don't get to choose, they'll get what they are given.

take my english teacher for example, every lesson she spends at least 10min talking about how the old syllabus was better - yet she stayed as a teacher, even though she's well into her 60's. why? because she is the head teacher and earning 80k+ a year. so as you can see, what they teach does not matter, it's the money that they're in for.

the point i am making here, syllabus or not, good or bad, it matters a little. if everyone is so conscious about what they do, then there won't be lawyers around. sure there are those who place values before wealth, but the majority is in for the money. it is a sad but realist fact. if you have problem with this, you have problem with reality.

so please, do not give examples of your study in uni and think the world is likewise. look around you. this is a materialistic world, and people would do anything, and i mean anything, for the right price. call me cynical, again, it is the world we live in.