scarybunny said:
I agree that we don't want people doing teaching for the money. To be a good teacher, you actually need to want to do teaching. There's a lot of effort that comes in outside the 6 hours spent at the school, and if you're just in it for the money your students will suffer.
But what's the alternative?
Stazi said:
However, to your detriment, I'm also a logical person who doesn't limit myself to the views of a particular ideology.
Nor I, mr. ass. For instance, my support of the privatisation of NSW electricity assets?
blakegman said:
Aren't after like 7 years teachers on like 68-70 grand or something?
I just copied this straight from the pdf article. You want the right hand column.
Increase 4.5% 4.5% 4%
Step 13 69,334 72,454 75,352
Increase 3% 3% 3%
Step 12 64,798 66,742 68,744
Step 11 62,341 64,211 66,137
Step 10 59,888 61,685 63,536
Step 9 57,435 59,158 60,933
Step 8 54,983 56,632 58,331
Step 7 52,527 54,103 55,726
Step 6 50,072 51,574 53,121
Step 5 47,621 49,050 50,522
Step 4 45,167 46,522 47,918
Step 3 42,943 44,231 45,558
Step 2 40,259 41,467 42,711
Step 1 36,936 38,044 39,185
---
Stazi said:
firstly, I don't know why I keep arguing. arguing with you is like competing against the 5th grade debate team. but, nonetheless:
Good start, Stazi. :rofl:
Stazi said:
You can also pay in advance which gives you discounts, so you don't have to repay your debt over X number of years: you can shorten it significantly.
Well uh, no,
I can't. Nice try though.
Stazi said:
Also, are you saying your cap will be $55k/year? You'll never earn more than that? You'll never do HSC marking? You'll never make use of quite a few other income supplementation schemes available to teachers during their holidays?
Maybe, I'm not too sure. It's possible that I'll tutor but since that's not certain it seems somewhat unfair to include it in this argument. The $55,000 was an average I took at a glance.
Stazi said:
It is sad that you have to pay more for supplementary subjects, however, and I would advocate that the debt you incur on the teaching degree be lower for subjects from outside your faculty, too.
I'm glad we agree. I think the current model of only subsidising education faculty courses is insane.
Stazi said:
However, couldn't you get a scholarship if you agreed to teach in a country town? That's where the teaching crisis really is, as far as I'm aware. They're not struggling to fill suburban schools (although there's still a problem).
I'm not at all sure. I've looked into scholarships a bit, but the information was hard to come by. I've heard rumours about those country town scholarships, but haven't seen much concrete evidence. There's a shortage across the board though...
Stazi said:
Oh right...so if the government suddenly said "free medical degrees" all those people who didn't get in to medicine would suddenly apply? Would all those people who are taking Law degrees suddenly reconsider and do medicine? The cost of a degree isn't a major factor in deciding which degree you choose. I didn't decide against doing a commercial law subject because it cost me $1000 - I'm deferring the fees, and if it pays off than it pays off. Why don't you create a poll: why didn't you apply for medicine. See if anyone selects "Too expensive" as an option.
Oh but apparently the money you earn makes a big difference in choosing a degree, according to you. Are you saying that people don't consider massive debt as a factor, but only look at the end result? It's a combination of both, and suggesting anything otherwise is terribly illogical. If the government subsidised medical, nursing, teaching and whatever else degrees, people who passed them up before would re-consider. It's stupid to suggest otherwise.
Stazi said:
You need to look at smaller-scale models to see the true benefits. And yes, it would help the "economy" (and why do you hate the word, how else would you name the economy). However, one could argue that anything that we do helps the economy. By purchasing an Xbox 360, I'm putting money into the pockets of EB Games, who in turn use that money to put pay their employees. The employees use that money to pay for their kids schooling, to pay their local mechanic for the car, to invest in shares, etc. So by buying a 360, I'm helping the economy. Perhaps we should start taxing you and me to put those guys through 'retail training'? Should we tax everyone else so that we can all make purchases that would help the economy?
Oh, it's just that too many people use it without knowing what they're talking about. I really don't know that much about economics. I mean, I know a bit, but I feel like a douche when saying the "economy" since I really don't know what I'm talking about on a very deep scale. It'd be the same if people started talking about the "chemistry" of things.
Would you say that buying at XBox 360 has as much impact on society as a doctor, vet, teacher, nurse, engineer or architect does? Or was that just a foolish strawman you came up with?
Stazi said:
I think that actual interaction in a real-life situation would develop those skills more than a theory does. Many students don't participate in class, nor do they do oral presentations. So, should we not fund their degrees since they don't develop those skills?
Possibly. A better solution would be to structure their courses so that they have to participate in class, have to do oral presentations, have to write essays and so on. And as an interesting point, the only subjects I've taken at USyd where I haven't had to do an oral presentation were chemistry, and maths subjects.
Stazi said:
*drum roll* and there we have it. The reason you're advocating free education is because you, yourself, don't want to pay for it. You took the longer route when shorter routes are available.
There's the unfortunate fact that I've been advocating it for years and took the longer route knowing that I'd have to pay more. So um, yeah... :rofl:
Stazi said:
We can now also start talking about discrimination: how much should we finance of an individual's degree? What if someone does a 5 year degree, followed by honours, then a masters degree, then a further phd, where they remain in university for 10+ years, whilst the taxpayer is paying for it. Why should they finance this person, when another can do a degree in 3-5 years, graduate, then get a job and start contributing to the "economy".
Well I imagine that the PhD would contribute a lot more than a bachelor would.
Stazi said:
Yes, although you'll also get 3-4 months of paid holidays/year.
lol. It's 10 weeks paid holidays per year. And there's also the fact that being a teacher is uh, pretty damn stressful.
Stazi said:
Basically degrees should be free because education should be free because it helps society. If degrees aren't free than people can't afford degrees and people who want to go to uni won't go to uni.
True.
Stazi said:
Just like "tearing up workchoices"..?
Hahaha, they're working on it. They're in the process of rolling it back.
Stazi said:
Ok, I have 10 people who subscribe to my video store company. My company makes $1,000/year. I have 7 customers who subscribe to a rental plan in which they pay $100/year giving them unlimited weekly rentals. 2 customers pay $150/year to get unlimited new release rentals. The government passes legislation that states I have to accept everyone at the same amount of money.
This means I have 9 customers giving me $900/year, as opposed to 9 giving me $1,000/year. I make less money.
Now, lets say a university will delete their full-fee places. A similar thing happens.
No, because that's not exactly the way university places work, from what I've been told. HECS places are subsidised, DFEE places are not. So say the total for a degree is $100k
HECS: 20k (user) + 80k (govt)
DFEE: 100k (user) + 0k (govt)
The ALP has said they'll replace DFEE places with HECS places, so the overall funding will remain the same. Should they not be able to afford this, they'll cut back student places temporarily. This isn't a good thing, but it won't have a profound effect on students at uni, since the funding cutbacks will, I imagine, be limited to getting rid of now redundant tutors and so on.
Stazi said:
I would assume that it'd cost over $1 billion unrecoverable dollars/year!
I suggest we take that money out of defense.
And while I support the ALP, I don't nessecarily agree with them all the time, nor do I vote for them all the time. In the federal election I voted greens in the upper house, and in the state elections I voted for greens all around. I'll more than likely be voting liberal in the next state election.