|
||||
12 commentsYou must be logged in to post a comment. |
||||
|
Copyright © 2024 both kinds of politics - All Rights Reserved |
||||
|
||||
12 commentsYou must be logged in to post a comment. |
||||
|
Copyright © 2024 both kinds of politics - All Rights Reserved |
||||
Labor needs an additional ten million dollars to teach maths teachers how to teach maths?
Last I checked, financial management is distinct from maths. Sure, it involves maths, but so does physics. So, shall we extend your snark to include maths teachers needing training to teach maths (subschool physics)?
I’d assumed the LDP isn’t too got on high levels of personal debt, particularly when it’s unsustainable.
What then, can you have against a policy designed to minimise young people (who then become older people etc) getting into debt they can’t manage?
Lower profits for banks who prey on the financially illiterate?
Any of the items listed in the article should be able to be explained by any half-way decent maths teacher without the need for retraining. That our country’s teachers need to sit through thousands of dollars worth of additional training in order to explain household budgeting to their students points to the ineffectiveness of the current lowest-common-denominator approach to education.
Vowing to never introduce (or support) perverse incentives to home ownership (ie FHOG) or car ownership (ie cash for clunkers) should be the first step if the ALP is really concerned about discouraging unsustainable levels of private debt.
So, 50c per capita is an outrageous sum for the government to be spending on education?
And it’s possible that “half-way decent” is the problem. Yes, maybe if there was more funding for better teachers, and less concern about the cost of higher education to get into a low paying job, it wouldn’t be as big an issue. But maybe it is.
So, is it the lack of good teachers you have a problem with?
Looks like it’s not just the nation’s maths teachers that have trouble with numbers. The ten million dollars is not equivalent to 50c per capita, the article mentions six thousand maths teachers who need training in how to figure out how interest and fees can be compared between credit card offers plus a website to be set up. Assuming the government only spends four million on the website, that’s $1000 per teacher… to teach them what they should already know.
The lack of good teachers is simply an indication that the current system, which rewards mediocrity and provides no incentive for hard-working and talented teachers to stay in the profession, is failing not only our students – but our teachers as well.
Are you advocating a pay rise for public school teachers, Gabriel?
Yes. Absolutely. Fund public schooling through a voucher system and get rid of the cronyist system of paying teachers based on length of service and you have all the conditions for those who deserve them to get pay rises that accurately reflect their worth as education professionals.
voucher system? i don’t see a need for one of those… equalise school fees, give the option of home schooling (provided it can be given) and… that about it i think. also, someone give me a reason[able] that we still fund private schools…
i do agree with that last bit, a lot of old teachers are really crap… like in physics, when our old teacher left, and we got in a really new guy (first time he was teaching year 12s) and we all did much better as far as the carriculum goes…
The voucher system funds each child the same amount at the same year level. I imagine some degree of leeway might be appropriate for remote or disabled students to be subsidised at a higher rate, we’d have to do some fine tuning once we formed government I suppose.
At any rate, the focus should be on funding the child – which includes legitimate homeschooling as well – and not the “system” and rewarding talented and dedicated teachers – which also goes toward making teaching as a profession comparatively more attractive to talented and dedicated school-leavers than the usual law / medicine / engineering paths.
“… making teaching as a profession comparatively more attractive to talented and dedicated school-leavers than the usual law / medicine / engineering paths.”
I could really get behind this sentiment. Got a link to a policy document on this issue?
It could probably do with some updating, it’s at least a couple of years old but:
http://ldp.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1162:school-education&catid=101:policies&Itemid=290