- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 20,823
- Reactions
- 13,871
Any government with any backbone should be pouring more resources into facilitating the progress of brighter students to achieve their goals in the sciences and mathematics essential for research. A high proportion of these are Asian students whose parents take the work ethic seriously and wiill scrimp and save to educate their children.
So, your alternative is ?
... If the curriculum were remedied, then perhaps education might have something worthwhile to offer.
The dearth of basic literacy, numeracy and critical thinking is ample testimony to Australia's failure to efficiently educate its populace.
The education curriculum would need to undergo significant revision before seriously entertaining it as a productive solution.
In effect I simply see this as a way of reallocating existing resources in a more efficient mannerCould you outline how you think this would actually work, cynic? Would those who choose to opt out be funded by the working taxpayers to enjoy such an existence? Or do you mean if they opt out, then they also opt out of any taxpayer funded income?
Inventiveness, to my understanding, isn't actually taught. It's a skill that some people do acquire naturally. Others are able to learn how to emulate certain processes whilst at the same time lacking the true skills required for independent innovation.
With just a few basic revisions to the core curriculum, education could conceivably enhance the prospects for accommodation of the genii amongst us, however, I believe it would be a mistake to presume that education is a solution in and of itself.
Ah, TS, a beautiful illustration. My thanks to you.Orwell's Animal Farm ended with the pigs and men in a kind of rapprochement and unable to distinguish between themselves. It started as a Utopian society but as usual .. "equal" means many different things to many different people.
George Orwell .... "I saw a little boy, perhaps ten years old, driving a huge carthorse along a narrow path, whipping it whenever it tried to turn. It struck me that if only such animals became aware of their strength we should have no power over them, and that men exploit animals in much the same way as the rich exploit the proletariat."
I believe Orwell is right ... So to answer your Q Julia ... NON !
Agree. According to a program I heard just a few days ago about 'the leaps and bounds that Australia has made in education' many schools seem to have focused on what they deem imaginative stuff like no longer having students with chairs and desks, instead having couches, allowing students to come to class when they feel like it, choosing what they want to learn etc. The advocates for this, even in primary schools, seemed to believe it would develop initiative or something.On the contrary, my experience with contemporary education to date is that it conditions students to think in a very narrow and limited fashion.
Too often when discussing alternative viewpoints with others I've been beset with ridicule by teachers and students alike. If the curriculum were remedied, then perhaps education might have something worthwhile to offer.
The dearth of basic literacy, numeracy and critical thinking is ample testimony to Australia's failure to efficiently educate its populace.
The education curriculum would need to undergo significant revision before seriously entertaining it as a productive solution.
Yes, but the Asian children come from an entirely different culture where education is highly valued, as is discipline and duty. Seems like the other end of the spectrum from Australia with its undemanding ethos.It is a myth perpetuated by the do-gooders that equality can be foisted on us by governmenr edict. Another myth is that envisioned by Gonski that pouring more money into educating those with lower IQs and disabilities will somehow elevate them to equality in the market with more gifted students.
Any government with any backbone should be pouring more resources into facilitating the progress of brighter students to achieve their goals in the sciences and mathematics essential for research. A high proportion of these are Asian students whose parents take the work ethic seriously and wiill scrimp and save to educate their children.
Perhaps my powers of comprehension are lacking, cynic, but are you saying that yes, you think it's OK for a kid to choose not to engage in any requirement for either education or work, and still receive a taxpayer funded benefit?In effect I simply see this as a way of reallocating existing resources in a more efficient manner
Whilst there is a dearth of employment, some unfortunate people are going to need to avail themselves of welfare in order to survive. My preference is to see those with enthusiasm gainfully employed. Allowing those less motivated members of our society to languish on our welfare system may seem counterproductive, but such a scenario would be preferable to having indolent employees occupying roles that could otherwise be readily filled by the more motivated members of our society.
Good idea, but as I say that, I think 'how much more can we expect the schools to impart to students'?Yes, I think you are right, inventiveness is innate, but without knowledge whether it be gained by independent observation or structured teaching, inventiveness cannot readily be applied. One thing I would like to see more of in schools is a study of how successful people think and operate, something that was never studied when I was at school.
Whilst there are insufficient employment vacancies to accommodate so terribly many able bodied and willing candidates for employment - YES!Perhaps my powers of comprehension are lacking, cynic, but are you saying that yes, you think it's OK for a kid to choose not to engage in any requirement for either education or work, and still receive a taxpayer funded benefit?
Whilst there are insufficient employment vacancies to accommodate so terribly many able bodied and willing candidates for employment - YES!
If we were experiencing an abundance of employment then my stance on this issue would be quite different.
A gullible cynic! Now there's an oxymoron.
Good idea, but as I say that, I think 'how much more can we expect the schools to impart to students'?
Already they are failing to achieve an adequate standard of basic literacy and numeracy. We want them to teach social skills, sex education, financial literacy and god knows what else. Where are the hours in the day and where are the teachers who have even a fraction of the skills required to impart such wisdom to children?
So I agree with @cynic that there is room for reworking of curriculums, cutting away some dead wood consisting of rote learning and replacing it with some critical analysis techniques and real life stories of success. Basic literacy and numeracy should, as you implied be the main focus in the early years of development and as the child's brain develops, the higher levels of critical thought can be introduced. You are obviously correct when you say that we need teachers capable of imparting this sort of ability. I'm sure such people exist, it's a matter of attracting them to the teaching profession by paying on merit not length of service.
I believe that our only chance to survive in the future is by having a vibrant R&D sector, and one that has a greater capacity to commercialise inventions and ideas than we currently have. The more people who have ideas, the better.
Then why are you so against the medical research fund? It's a step in the direction for this sector you dream about.
So what's going wrong here? Are people engaging in degrees without properly researching the likely number of jobs in that field by the time they're graduated?There's all this talk of Education yet it's extremely difficult for a science graduate and harder for a science PhD graduate to find employment in their field. These are people who have done 4 or 8 years at university and want to work. The majority end up changing careers to a completely different field. This is not only a waste of education resources I ask: is this equitable?
Are graduates prepared to accept - in the meantime - jobs that are less than those to which they aspire?It seems everyone loves the idea of more science and engineering degrees. Yet education is not the answer. Put much more money into funding those who have already passed through the education system. Otherwise the lineup at centrelink will be much larger, however, this new lineup will be extremely well educated.
So what's going wrong here? Are people engaging in degrees without properly researching the likely number of jobs in that field by the time they're graduated?
... I wish people would actually read and absorb what I write before misinterpreting my comments.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?