# What makes for a quality education system?



## basilio (13 November 2011)

I was speaking to friend yesterday who just completed an education MA.  As part of her work she researched the Finnish education system.
Turns out students from Finland are literally the best in the world ! There is ane xcllent summary on how Finland has achieved these results.

What do you think ?


> *What makes education in Finland that good? 10 reform principles behind the success.*
> 
> Posted by Bert Maes on February 24, 2010
> 
> ...




http://bertmaes.wordpress.com/2010/...good-10-reform-principles-behind-the-success/


----------



## basilio (13 November 2011)

Came across other stories which offered a more practical, detailed account of how the Finnish education system worked. 

One point was there are very few private schools because the public system is valued so highly. Excellent read.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life...-educations-top-model-finland/article1183419/

http://www.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=3749880


----------



## explod (13 November 2011)

My Stepgrandaughter went to MacRob Secondary Colledge which is a state run school for above average female students.   They top the VCE exam most years together with Melbourne High which is the male student equivalent.

Now parents pay huge amounts to send their kids to private schools yet they do not allways stand out.

If the system was all government based I feel we could do much better for everyone with the money pool combined.

My Stepgrandaughter is now just finishing third year Uni, last exam next week.  So far she has not had a mark below Distinction and first semester this year had thee Highs D's and one D.


----------



## Wysiwyg (13 November 2011)

I believe teachers need their *students* to be *responsive, attentive, retentive,* *respectful and polite* These and other qualities could be verbally taught and practically performed by parents, since so much of a child's words and actions are reproduced. My parents, although doing so themselves and without saying so, expected the schooling system to teach me life skills, to be a good human. That is not the primary role of a school teacher although they could be good role models.

So in summary, the student needs to be learning ready.



> Another key was reassuring teachers would not lose employment security and salaries. Before the reforms even commenced the teacher trade organization achieved this in negotiating higher teacher compensation for the extra more demanding work.




On the teacher side, this agreement allows the teachers to commit.


----------



## sptrawler (13 November 2011)

Teaching used to be a calling, it appears now to be just another job. 
Unless you manage to get into the teachers union then the skies the limit. IMO


----------



## medicowallet (13 November 2011)

A well designed curriculum

ie the current curriculum is designed by women and suits girls.

a new curriculum should be tailored around boys too.


----------



## basilio (13 November 2011)

By the way has anyone had a chance to read any of the URls on Finland's education system ? They gave me food for thought and  the success that has resulted is plain to see.


----------



## Julia (13 November 2011)

explod said:


> My Stepgrandaughter went to MacRob Secondary Colledge which is a state run school for above average female students.   They top the VCE exam most years together with Melbourne High which is the male student equivalent.
> 
> Now parents pay huge amounts to send their kids to private schools yet they do not allways stand out.
> 
> ...



1.  Have you considered that your stepgranddaughter's success may derive from her personal attributes and motivation, perhaps also good modelling from her family?

2.  Private schools imo do more than just provide academic achievement.  They usually place importance also on life skills, respect, and politeness, qualities often lacking in the state schools.


----------



## sptrawler (14 November 2011)

I can't help but think back to when I was at school. The subjects were maths, science, social studies, english, art, manual skills(metal work, wood work, home economics) sport.
These were broken down to three levels advanced, intermediate, elementary.
The students were tested at year 10 and could decide if they wished to move into the workforce or move on to a higher level and therefore a more tertiary job.
At this point the subjects were more tailored for a tertiary qualification or to further education through university. At year 12 a further examination filtered the academic abilities of the students.
Back then I think about 5% of students went to university. Most male students left at year 10 and became tradesmen.
Now we find ourselves in a situation where the government legislate that students must go to year 12. 
Universities have to lower their intake criterea to accept them and we have a shortage of skilled tradesmen because employers don't want to take on 17 year old first year apprentices.
But now we have degrees in surfing and instead of boring subjects you can now do golf, kayaking and heaps of other great subjects the teachers like. Also the class excursions aren't boring anymore like going to the zoo, no now it's a skiing trip to the alps.
Nothing wrong with our education system it's a hoot.


----------



## Knobby22 (14 November 2011)

explod said:


> My Stepgrandaughter went to MacRob Secondary Colledge which is a state run school for above average female students.   They top the VCE exam most years together with Melbourne High which is the male student equivalent.
> 
> Now parents pay huge amounts to send their kids to private schools yet they do not allways stand out.
> 
> ...




Good on her for succeeding, I know its a great school.
It would cost tax payers a lot more if everyone went public so you would have to raise the money pool. Catholic primary schools for instance get by with 1/3 of the funding that State schools do and it shows sometimes with the ratty carpets etc. If the system became all state controlled then standards would drop and we would be broke.  Viva la difference.


----------



## Knobby22 (14 November 2011)

Julia said:


> 2.  Private schools imo do more than just provide academic achievement.  They usually place importance also on life skills, respect, and politeness, qualities often lacking in the state schools.




Spot the private school girl:


----------



## noirua (14 November 2011)

Julia said:


> 2.  Private schools imo do more than just provide academic achievement.  They usually place importance also on life skills, respect, and politeness, qualities often lacking in the state schools.




Private Schools also advantage children just because their parents can afford to pay for them. Everyone should have an equal chance in education, no ifs or buts whatsoever.
In my opinion all private schools should be abolished; fair play for all and not just for those born with a silver spoon in their mouths.


----------



## basilio (14 November 2011)

> It would cost tax payers a lot more if everyone went public so you would have to raise the money pool. Catholic primary schools for instance get by with 1/3 of the funding that State schools do and it shows sometimes with the ratty carpets etc



 Knobby 22

That is a really surprising statement Knobby.   

I can understand when religious orders were the teachers the costs of Catholic schools could be far less than State ones. But in 2011 teachers wages are roughly the same, class sizes are also roughly the same and almost all teachers in Catholic schools are lay teachers.  How can they  get by on a third of the pretty basic costs of State funded education ? Do you have any figures ?


----------



## Knobby22 (14 November 2011)

basilio said:


> Knobby 22
> 
> That is a really surprising statement Knobby.
> 
> I can understand when religious orders were the teachers the costs of Catholic schools could be far less than State ones. But in 2011 teachers wages are roughly the same, class sizes are also roughly the same and almost all teachers in Catholic schools are lay teachers.  How can they  get by on a third of the pretty basic costs of State funded education ? Do you have any figures ?




Parents put in (around $1500 a year) but I think its mainly the running costs are kept down by larger class sizes. Fortunately it is a proven fact that class sizes have little correlation with student performance.

In the 1950's the State government decided to not put any funding into the schools so the parents as one withdrew the kids and put them into the state schools. The government changed their mind pretty quickly as we save them a fortune.

I will chase the fugures when I get a chance.


----------



## Julia (14 November 2011)

Knobby22 said:


> Spot the private school girl:



You can stick your tongue out at people who go to private schools, if you wish.

Yes, I did, but my remark was much more as a result of mentoring children in both state and private schools here over the last decade and meeting many of the parents.

That doesn't necessarily reflect a lack of teacher quality or dedication in public schools, but rather that they are forced to take all comers and there are some kids whose home backgrounds are more than the school can be expected to 'fix'.



noirua said:


> Private Schools also advantage children just because their parents can afford to pay for them. Everyone should have an equal chance in education, no ifs or buts whatsoever.
> In my opinion all private schools should be abolished; fair play for all and not just for those born with a silver spoon in their mouths.



 Your idea of private schools being populated by 'those born with a silver spoon in their mouths' is totally outdated.

Some undoubtedly will come from affluent households but many have both parents working in jobs they'd prefer to leave in order to send their children to a private school.  Many of the parents I talk to are working class, but determined to give their children better opportunities than they had.  Without exception, they believe they're getting good value for their money.

That was the case with my parents.  My father was an accountant, my mother a music teacher.  They gave up those careers to go into a seven day, long hours business which was a lot more profitable but which was exhausting, so they could send me to a private school.  

I'm grateful that they did.  It's funny the little things you remember.  One was that every Anzac Day when everyone was having a day off, we had to go to school and knit stuff for the returned soldiers while the teachers reminded us of the sacrifices made on our behalf.  (Whether the resulting articles were much use is another matter.)


----------



## Knobby22 (14 November 2011)

Julia said:


> You can stick your tongue out at people who go to private schools, if you wish.
> 
> Yes, I did, but my remark was much more as a result of mentoring children in both state and private schools here over the last decade and meeting many of the parents.




Sorry, I meant it as a gentle jibe. Its a happy sort of toungue out smile. I know things can appear stronger than you mean when you post.

(I went to a private school)


----------



## tech/a (14 November 2011)

*What makes for a quality education system?*

Teachers who know that students have to *UNDERSTAND* what it is that they are being taught.

Many years ago my son (Kris) came to me and said.

"I need to pass maths because I want to study Physics at University but I cant understand what Im supposed to be being taught. I dont know how it works?? Im confused and my teacher cant help me understand----. I need high credits and currently Im a struggling "C" student."

I said 
"Find yourself a tutor someone you can relate to someone who speaks your language and can explain to you what you need. Someone who hears what you are missing.
There are many who teach out of University hrs. I would start at the employment area of the Adelaide Uni. Ill pay for him."

Frankly I really felt he was pushing it up hill. Physics at Uni "C" student in Maths.
I couldnt help being a Leaving Honors genius!

Off he went and in 3 weeks and evidently 3 interviews he found a 26 yr old Maths Masters student at $25 an hr who he felt understood his needs.

I payed every week for around 14 weeks. (I didnt see much of my kids as I was a Weekend Dad.) From time to time Id ask how it was going and each time the same answer---good I think Im getting there. There was a point where I noticed no bill.

"Whats happened to your tutor??"

"Oh I dont need him anymore"

"Wow why??"

*"I GET IT"*

Well Kris got his BSC and then spent another 7 Yrs getting his Doctorate.

Neither of us will ever forget the power of *UNDERSTANDING*.
A key teaching ingredient which is sadly missing in most teachers.
The ability to pass on and recognise* UNDERSTANDING.*
Being able to pass it on and recognise that its been comprehended.


----------



## McLovin (14 November 2011)

You nailed it tech/a.

I'm an applied learning sort of guy so I really struggled with maths until I had a teacher who took the time to show me how to apply it rather than just look examples on a page and try and blindly apply a formula. I went from a D in maths to coming second in the year in one term.


----------



## DocK (14 November 2011)

noirua said:


> Private Schools also advantage children just because their parents can afford to pay for them. Everyone should have an equal chance in education, no ifs or buts whatsoever.
> In my opinion all private schools should be abolished; fair play for all and not just for those born with a silver spoon in their mouths.




Strongly disagree with this statement.  My kids go to a private school and I can guarantee there are no silver spoons present in my home.  We choose to go without in order to send our kids to the school we feel will give them the best opportunity to succeed in life.  Others in the same financial circumstances as us choose to send their kids to state school and have the surplus income to indulge in the holidays and toys that we do without.  It's a matter of personal priorities, the nature of the child involved (some would not flourish in a huge state school, some will do just fine anywhere) and the location of the schools.  Not all state schools are the same - and I assume you must send your kids to the school in your district.  There are some here on the Gold Coast I'd do just about anything to avoid my kids going to.  To me the major difference between the state and private shcools is that the private schools do not have to put up with any #### and can expel any troublemakers and those with no interest in learning.  This leaves an environment much more conducive to learning, and leaves teachers free to educate rather than waste endless hours on disciplinary matters.  Unfortunately the state schools don't always have this option.  I went to a convent primary, then state high school in a small town (many years ago) which was just fine - but the state schools I see now bear little resemblance to the one I went to, with the knife attacks, teachers being punched and spat at and gang behaviour.  If I'm willing to pay to avoid that for my children - why shouldn't I have that choice?


----------



## Julia (14 November 2011)

Knobby22 said:


> Sorry, I meant it as a gentle jibe. Its a happy sort of toungue out smile. I know things can appear stronger than you mean when you post.
> 
> (I went to a private school)



Thanks, Knobby.  The 'sorry' is reciprocated.  I probably sounded prissy.  Just feel strongly about the topic.



DocK said:


> Strongly disagree with this statement.  My kids go to a private school and I can guarantee there are no silver spoons present in my home.  We choose to go without in order to send our kids to the school we feel will give them the best opportunity to succeed in life.  Others in the same financial circumstances as us choose to send their kids to state school and have the surplus income to indulge in the holidays and toys that we do without.



Exactly.  The holidays and toys are soon forgotten.  A quality educational environment is with you for ever.



> To me the major difference between the state and private shcools is that the private schools do not have to put up with any #### and can expel any troublemakers and those with no interest in learning.  This leaves an environment much more conducive to learning, and leaves teachers free to educate rather than waste endless hours on disciplinary matters.  Unfortunately the state schools don't always have this option.



Yes, this is the point I raised earlier.



> the state schools I see now bear little resemblance to the one I went to, with the knife attacks, teachers being punched and spat at and gang behaviour.



It's the same in the state high schools here.  The staff are frustrated and exhausted with trying to manage little sods whose main focus is disruption.  Detention/time-out rooms overflow.  Appeals to parents for support are a joke.  The response is either "it's your job to fix him/her", or "he's just fine at home so it must be your fault if there's a problem at school".

It's really tough on some of the kids who have genuine potential.  I had one terrific little aboriginal girl, seriously wanting to learn and do well.  Her mother was a prostitute to support her heroin habit.  Her elder sister was well on the way to emulating the mother.  After a couple of years, the little girl was up near the top of her class, from being at the bottom.  Her mother pulled her from the program because she was "spending all that time reading and stuff when she should have been doing the housework".


----------



## McLovin (14 November 2011)

DocK said:


> Strongly disagree with this statement.  My kids go to a private school and I can guarantee there are no silver spoons present in my home.




Probably depends on the school. There are private schools and then there are private schools.


----------



## Tink (14 November 2011)

I agree with Julia and Dock

Both my children went Catholic right through, and so did I.
I see the school years as the crucial years in a childs life, next to their home environment
People have choices
I was happy with mine 

I was always amused listening to people who would willingly pay childcare for the childs earlier years, but come the time for school, they would throw their hands up in the air at the thought of 'fees'.


----------



## Judd (14 November 2011)

Difficult one.  Our children went through the public system first and then ended up in the private system.  There just seemed to be less turnover of teaching and administrative staff in the private system and we, my wife in particular who was educated in the public system and with both parents being Secondary school principals in the public system, wanted that consistency.

Having said that, I know of some fine young adults who were educated in the public system and achieved.  Same for the private system.  However, the reverse is also true.  And I know of teachers in the public system who refuse to send their children to public schools as well of very wealthy families who prefer to use the public system.  And some families with two parents working, the entire salary or the vast majority of one parent going towards payment of the school fees.  I don't think that there is really one particular answer to why parents choose private schools or not

As for the difference in facilities between public and private, I'm not surprised.  After all, where do you think a $2,500 non-refundable, non-tax deductible building contribution fund payment goes if you accept a place?

And future parents, if you decide to send your children to a private school and there is such a fee, ensure you have your children are no more than 5 years apart because you will not pay that fee if your older child is still at the school.  There, I've just saved someone $2,500.

I wonder though.  I've noticed that the larger independent schools, while the principal has overall day-to-day control and develops strategy, the schools appear to be governed by a board of management rather than being accountable to an nebulous Education Department.  Possibly that could have some impact on perceptions, valid or not, about education.  I don't know.


----------



## tech/a (14 November 2011)

tech/a said:


> *What makes for a quality education system?*
> 
> Teachers who know that students have to *UNDERSTAND* what it is that they are being taught.
> 
> ...




By the way he was a public student.


----------



## kimcasablancas (15 November 2011)

The school I went to was really good I thought. I'm not an educator so I don't have a lot of theory to put behind it, but if I were to say what 'good' is, it would be that. We had good access to technology and education on how to use it, reasonable class sizes (especially in the later years when more classes were optional) and good teachers who encouraged discussion in their classes (I think this is REALLY important). We also had a variety of other classes like woodworking and acting, and really strong arts and sports programs.


----------



## IFocus (15 November 2011)

My son went to a public school on advice (he is the smartest person I know) but ended up in classes with kids who were failing plus tough / difficult environment, he didn't get the grades or into uni as a result but is now as a 25 year old going to uni and excelling.

My daughter we sent to a private school where she was given every opportunity / environment to excel and she has out performed our wildest dreams.

BTW the private school wasn't obsessed about performance but they were obsessed and totally uncompromising about behavior and how everyone treated each outer etc.


----------



## Julia (15 November 2011)

IFocus said:


> BTW the private school wasn't obsessed about performance but they were obsessed and totally uncompromising about behavior and how everyone treated each outer etc.



Exactly the point I was trying to make earlier.  The ethics and need for respect inculcated by most private schools sets principles for young people which will carry through their business and future personal lives.


----------



## NewOrder (15 November 2011)

IMO the issue isn't private v's public (although my kids are Private from kinder to Yr 12) the real issue is mainstream/cookie cutter education v's Progressive education.

My guys started in the Montessori system which is child led, hands on education. 



> *Montessori's educational principles are based around the following central ideas:*
> _*All children want to learn...*_
> With freedom to investigate the world around them, they will become active, engaged learners.
> _*Children have absorbent minds...*_
> ...




from here http://montessori.edu.au/

From there they have gone onto Progressive/Democratic/Secular independent schools. These are schools that embrace a love of learning and allow for individuality. They have next to no bullying issues and are big on respect for each member of the community. 

I have put in many hours of research into the best schools for my kids, to me education is not just about the end result, it is about the journey along the way. I want them to be great people, world citizens, critical and independent thinkers and the standard mainstream private or public schools cannot offer the exceptional educational and life experience my kids are having. 

After doing a lot of forum reading on education and child issues I am convinced one of the biggest problems with our education system is the parent community. They are scared to step outside the square, they want conformity in schools, they want too much say in what goes on in the classroom, they are too demanding of the teachers, they don't "house train" their kids before sending them to school, they are helicopter parents who micro manage their kids.

I am also think we should have complete separation of Church and State when it comes to the education system, get religion out of the public system to start with.


----------



## basilio (15 November 2011)

Interesting to see the thread move to comparisons of private and public school systems.

I opened the thread  on the Finland model  because in fact the State decided to make the public education education system as good as humanly possible. Both political parties  are committed to an extremely high quality education system that creates highly skilled citizens. It demands excellent teachers, respects their skills and pays them well. The schools are physically well designed but don't necessarily have hot and cold swimming pools and the excesses of some private schools.

And it does work.

In that environment it seems that almost everyone sends their children to the public schools and the standards are very high.


----------



## Starcraftmazter (16 November 2011)

I would very much like to share this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U


----------



## DocK (16 November 2011)

basilio said:


> Interesting to see the thread move to comparisons of private and public school systems.
> 
> I opened the thread  on the Finland model  because in fact the State decided to make the public education education system as good as humanly possible. Both political parties  are committed to an extremely high quality education system that creates highly skilled citizens. It demands excellent teachers, respects their skills and pays them well. The schools are physically well designed but don't necessarily have hot and cold swimming pools and the excesses of some private schools.
> 
> ...




http://www.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=3749880



> ....the three biggest reasons for the country’s success are probably the hardest to replicate.
> 
> *First of all, “there is a near absence of poverty,” *says Julie Walker, a board member of the Partnership for 21st Century Skills. Walker visited Finland, along with Sweden and Denmark, with a delegation from the Consortium of School Networking (CoSN) in late 2007. “They have socialized medicine and much more educational funding,” she adds. For residents, school lunches are free, preschool is free, college is free. *“Children come to school ready to learn. They come to school healthy.* That’s not a problem the United States has solved yet.”
> 
> ...



  (my bolds)

Ok, to get back to the original topic, Basilio, the parts I've highlighted are the most telling imo.  Until these aspects are addressed in Australia I can't see our present system, complete with the divide between public and private schools, improving.  I also note that the Finnish schools have absolutely no co-curricular activities - no sports teams, school bands etc - that's not something I'd like to see adopted here.  They also appear to have no problems with discipline, and a much more informal relationship between students and teachers.  



> One anecdote that truly illuminates the difference between U.S. and Finnish culture came when visitors asked librarians how they filter the Internet for students. Finnish educators didn’t understand the question, Walker says, because the concept was so foreign to them.Finally, the two responses the group got were, “Students know these computers are for learning,” and “The filters are in students’ heads.”




Can you imagine this attitude working here?  We'd have students graduating with a master's degree in facebook and pr0n if the filters were removed in Australian schools 

It's also worth considering that Finland's population in very small, and what they've been able to achieve may simply be unworkable in a larger country - can you imagine the outcry if a politician were to suggest free childcare, free public shool, free uni, hot meals provided, no testing, autonomy for teachers with no standards-based review??  Where would the funding come from??


----------



## basilio (16 November 2011)

Starcraftmazter said:


> I would very much like to share this:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U




Unbelievable!!!

Thank you for that Starcraftmazter. Ideas and history of education were fantastic. Animation process also outstanding.  Just starting to appreciate how good that process is at  engaging listeners aurally and visually.  

Well worth 10 minutes


----------



## NewOrder (16 November 2011)

But there are schools in Australia that encompass most of what you have said DocK the problem is that parents are too scared to embrace Progressive style education. They feel comfortable with "cookie cutter" education. 

At my kids schools they can climb trees, use hammers, saws, power tools, in Secondary they can leave the campus to go to the shops during lunch break, light the fire places. They have democratic meetings every day and the student have a say in the running of their community.
The atmosphere is informal, no uniforms, teachers being called by their first names. These kids are respectful, well mannered and generally are keen on learning.

Most of the people around me have a minor heart attack at the thought of their kids going to a school without a uniform.

It is not the Govt that needs to change, it is the parents. We are living in very conservative times.


----------



## basilio (16 November 2011)

> It's also worth considering that Finland's population in very small, and what they've been able to achieve may simply be unworkable in a larger country - can you imagine the outcry if a politician were to suggest free childcare, free public shool, free uni, hot meals provided, no testing, autonomy for teachers with no standards-based review?? Where would the funding come from??    Dock




Thanks for getting back to the topic.

I agree that there are significant cultural differences which could make it more difficult to use the Finnish model. With regard to the quote I highlighted it's worth realising that the education model used  was/is bi partisan. Both political parties supported the principles outlined. 



> (9) Political consensus and the capacity of policy makers to pursue reform: governments, trade unions and employers’ organizations form a tripartite in Finland, closely coordinating, communicating and heading to a common goal. In many countries the opposing-parties usually polarize debates and public opinion. Since the beginning of the 1970s until 1987 the ministry of education had two ministers from the main parties, requiring close political cooperation, resulting in workable solutions as both parties could endorse them. This proved to be the key factor behind the continuity of Finnish education policy. The parties detached from their populist political objectives and strategic maneuvers and began focusing on the subject-matter, on cooperating and acting together.
> -
> Via the close partnership between the labor organizations and the governments, between the employees and the employers, in both planning and implementation stages, the teacher union changed from external political pressure group into a stakeholder in government decision-making, i.e. into one encompassing labor organization, that looks at the interest of the COMPLETE SOCIETY, just like the government. This key element in good quality of governance and public institutions turned out to be the driving force of education performance and economic competitiveness in Finland.




From what I heard from people who went there recently it is still an excellent education system and the principles are worth examining.

By the way the video/talk  suggested by Starcraftmatzer is also a beauty.

__________________________________________________________________

Also found another  blog story which adds more  information to the Finnish education model.

http://zaidlearn.blogspot.com/2009/09/finnish-education-system-rocks-why.html


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (16 November 2011)

It is essential that the Educated Class be able to get their family in to Medicine or Dentistry School as students through the use of personal contacts rather than on merit.

This enables a Darwinian succession of an Educated Class without having to deal with upstarts and students of merit.

Queensland is fortunate in that the University of Queensland adheres to this Medieval but worthwhile process.

Other states and universities pay only lip service to this exercise.

gg


----------



## noirua (16 November 2011)

Julia said:


> Your idea of private schools being populated by 'those born with a silver spoon in their mouths' is totally outdated.
> 
> Some undoubtedly will come from affluent households but many have both parents working in jobs they'd prefer to leave in order to send their children to a private school.  Many of the parents I talk to are working class, but determined to give their children better opportunities than they had.  Without exception, they believe they're getting good value for their money.
> 
> ...




I still think everyone must have equal rights to education and that includes ruling out parents from saving to advantage their children against others. Your standards and attributes are high but still conjure up feelings of a little Englander.


----------



## DocK (16 November 2011)

noirua said:


> I still think everyone must have equal rights to education and that includes ruling out parents from saving to advantage their children against others. Your standards and attributes are high but still conjure up feelings of a little Englander.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Englander



> Little Englander is an epithet applied in attacks on English people who are regarded as "xenophobic" and/or overly nationalistic and are often accused of being "ignorant" and "boorish". It is applied to opponents of globalism;




I fail to see how wanting to maximise my children's opportunity for career success, and being prepared to sacrifice to do so, equates to being xeophobic, ignorant, racist, nationalistic or any other epithet you wish to apply.   I'm not philosophically opposed to equal rights to education for all - but if that can only be achieved by lowering the outcome for those lucky enough to have parents prepared to pay higher fees for their education I'm dead set against it.  My children have the right to the standard of education their parents are prepared to pay for, and the right to go to a school of their choice that does not have the disciplinary problems that many of the state schools around us have.  When you can come up with a solution to the problems faced by the public system, such that will have them on an even par with the standards set by most private schools, I'll be happy to send my kids to one.  In the meantime, I'd argue I have every right to send my kids where I want if I'm prepared to pay for it.   We don't live in a communist society do we?   We all have equal rights to public health care, but some still choose to take out private health cover and use private hospitals - should we turn these over to the state also?


----------



## Sir Osisofliver (16 November 2011)

@ Noirua

I'm also going to give you some heat on your assertion that all private schools should be shut down. To give you some background, my wife is a secondary school teacher (she doesn't like being a kept woman).

We are having serious discussions about where to send our youngest at the moment. 

Here's our issues.

She's got talent - she's 10 and her language skills are at a grade 9 level, Maths at a year 8 level. She scored within the top 5% in her recent NAPLAN results across *all* categories. I'm a proud Daddy - but the kidlet is doing really well. She loves learning and reading and has musical talent as well.

So where do we send her? Around Brisbane here's what we have discovered.

1) To the private religious schools - I'm glad that JC is your Lord and Saviour. Please don't force your Messiah down my daughters throat. There's a word for that. We won't be sending her to a school that has mandatory RE - which rules out *every* religious school. I've yet to find one where RE isn't a mandatory part of the curriculum.

2) To the Non-Denominational Private Schools - I don't care about your high price tag and wonderful facilities, tell me why your student population think that because Daddy is rich that the world shines out of your bum and you have drugs problems, bullying and the teachers are treated like lepers? 

3) To the small independent schools - You wonder why you cannot grow your student population and have better school facilities?  That's right it's not your fault - it must be everybody else that has a problem. 

4) State schools - It's my wife's professional opinion that between the ages of 11-14 most boys and girls are a special circle of hell. She sees the problems first hand and is firmly against sending a gifted kidlet to a state school that has no programs to accomodate them.

We are seriously considering my wife taking two years off work and home schooling.

Cheers

Sir O


----------



## Gringotts Bank (16 November 2011)

Only the catholic private schools are overbearing with their religious studies and practices.  Private schools with a protestant/uniting/COE type background are quite liberal and nothing is forced.  High achievement in studies and sport is forced in a subtle way (it's all about winning), but not the religion.

The catholic schools are generally much cheaper though.  One upside.


----------



## Julia (16 November 2011)

noirua said:


> I still think everyone must have equal rights to education and that includes ruling out parents from saving to advantage their children against others. Your standards and attributes are high but still conjure up feelings of a little Englander.





> Little Englander is an epithet applied in attacks on English people who are regarded as "xenophobic" and/or overly nationalistic and are often accused of being "ignorant" and "boorish". It is applied to opponents of globalism;



You would *rule out parents saving *to pay for what they believe is an appropriate education???  Good Lord, you'd fit right in with the most ardent of communists with such an extreme philosophy.

I thank DocK for the definition of a Little Englander, an epithet I was unfamiliar with.
Think what you like, Noirua.  I only feel insulted by people whose opinions I respect, so am unmoved by your criticism.




Gringotts Bank said:


> Only the catholic private schools are overbearing with their religious studies and practices.  Private schools with a protestant/uniting/COE type background are quite liberal and nothing is forced.  High achievement in studies and sport is forced in a subtle way (it's all about winning), but not the religion.
> 
> The catholic schools are generally much cheaper though.  One upside.



That's been my observation also.  The best school here is the XXXXX Anglican College, but there is no emphasis on religion and they accept children from every background, religious and otherwise.

Sir O, for what it's worth, I know quite a few home schooled kids, including one family of six children.  I'd have worried that not mixing all the time with their peer group would disadvantage them in terms of social skills, but on the contrary, all these kids are - as well as being very bright and very well educated - more at home in good conversation and capacity to adapt to different social circumstances.


----------



## DocK (16 November 2011)

Sir Osisofliver said:


> @ Noirua
> 
> I'm also going to give you some heat on your assertion that all private schools should be shut down. To give you some background, my wife is a secondary school teacher (she doesn't like being a kept woman).
> 
> ...






McLovin said:


> Probably depends on the school. There are private schools and then there are private schools.





Home schooling is certainly an option - I guess your wife, being a teacher already, has the patience to home-school without killing your kidlet.

Totally agree re your opinion on the brainwashing that occurs at some religious schools - that is the reason my husband and I send ours to an interdenominational christian school - they don't have religious instruction as such, but spend time on a "virtues programme" in primary and philosophy studies in secondary.

So far as the  privileged attitude you ascribe to the students at private shools - I know where you're coming from and agree that this can be an issue, but would refer you to McLovin's words of wisdom above - there are private schools and there are private schools.  We all know of some that promote the attitude of "I'm untouchable 'cause Mummy/Daddy's a brain surgeon/lawyer/drug dealer" or whatever - but this attitude has to be at least ignored (if not actually fostered) by the private school in order to flourish.  The private school that my kids go to is not cheap, but is not the most expensive in the area either, and includes parents of most salary brackets.  Sure, some of the kids there have very wealthy parents - but I've actually found they're usually the ones least likely to boast of their belongings and some even seem almost embarrassed about their advantaged circumstances.  I guess it comes down to the attitudes promoted at the school in question.  If kids see their parents treat others with respect no matter their financial standing I think that's worth far more to them than any nonsense fellow students carry on with - after all their first and most important role model in life is their parents, for better or worse....


----------



## McLovin (16 November 2011)

DocK said:


> So far as the  privileged attitude you ascribe to the students at private shools - I know where you're coming from and agree that this can be an issue, but would refer you to McLovin's words of wisdom above - there are private schools and there are private schools.  We all know of some that promote the attitude of "I'm untouchable 'cause Mummy/Daddy's a brain surgeon/lawyer/drug dealer" or whatever - but this attitude has to be at least ignored (if not actually fostered) by the private school in order to flourish.




I went to a school that was expensive, infact it's probably in the top 5 price wise in the country--day boys ~$25k, boarding over $50k. It constantly appears on those lists of "rich schools getting government handouts". No one was really "poor" (except for a few of the kids on scholarships) or even "middle class" (for want of a better word). But never was there a sense of entitlement or thinking you were better than anyone else because you happened to have a better start in life. Anyone familiar with the Eastern Suburbs of Sydney would know there are two (non Catholic) private boys schools and the difference between the two is chalk and cheese. It really comes down to what the school culture is and in that regard I think the headmaster and housemasters are who determine that. There was no bullying (in entire time there, from year 3 to year 12 I saw 2 fights), and you knew that the teachers were in charge. While you weren't overly pushed to excel (and I didn't), if you wanted to the opportunity certainly existed. You get a lot more out of school than just grades, the school really shapes the man/woman that emerges at the end.

I'm sure that there are plenty of good schools for far, far cheaper, of course I didn't have much say in where I was going!


----------



## basilio (16 November 2011)

It's interesting that the conversation has reverted back to private school/public school discussions. I can certainly understand it in the Australian context.  I suppose the reason I started this thread was to point out that at least one country took education seriously enough to set up an exemplary model that makes private schools unnecessary - from an educational perspective. (_One of the agendas of some private schools is to create an exclusive opportunity for the "right" people to keep together. Another agenda is the Catholic religious intent on promoting their faith_)

As far as Sir Osisofliver's situation. Is there a a quality State school with an accelerated learning stream ? In Melbourne there are at least 4-5 state secondary  schools with mostly high achievers. I would have thought there were similar ones in Brisbane?


----------



## noirua (16 November 2011)

I suppose, to go further, I quite like the French system that does not allow religion in schools  - at least I have about 40 million French people on my side on that one.

Many people do see their children as better than others and in need of private education, and therefore prefer a class system in Australia that puts their children one step higher by advantage rather than ability.

Fair enough though, if you like a class system much like private schools in England then carry on with it, and god save the Queen.


----------



## Julia (16 November 2011)

Julia said:


> Think what you like, Noirua.  I only feel insulted by people whose opinions I respect, so am unmoved by your criticism.



Noirua, that was unnecessarily rude of me.  I apologise.


----------



## sptrawler (16 November 2011)

IFocus said:


> My son went to a public school on advice (he is the smartest person I know) but ended up in classes with kids who were failing plus tough / difficult environment, he didn't get the grades or into uni as a result but is now as a 25 year old going to uni and excelling.
> 
> My daughter we sent to a private school where she was given every opportunity / environment to excel and she has out performed our wildest dreams.
> 
> BTW the private school wasn't obsessed about performance but they were obsessed and totally uncompromising about behavior and how everyone treated each outer etc.




Exactly what happened with my children. 
My sons were in the second and first year of a new state high school. Therefore I assumed being the oldest boys in the school and also being big boys bullying etc wouldn't be a problem.
Also being a new school it would have all new equipment and services. Well to cut a long story short they underperformed due to disruptive students and have had to play catchup post school.
The boys outcomes encouraged me to put my daughters through a private high school. The results were outstanding, I just wish I had put my sons through the same school.
Hindsight is a great thing.


----------



## qldfrog (16 November 2011)

basilio said:


> As far as Sir Osisofliver's situation. Is there a a quality State school with an accelerated learning stream ? In Melbourne there are at least 4-5 state secondary  schools with mostly high achievers. I would have thought there were similar ones in Brisbane?



There are some: my son is to join Kelvin Grove State College from y8 for that reason: advanced stream, uni collaboration, etc =>excel by ability, not by money or class selection;
in any case was too late to register in any decent private school even if i had wanted to, which I did not.
But this opportunity might not be available to everyone: ie non capital city residents
And Brisbane state is one of the best in Brisbane if I am not wrong (not convenient transport wise for us)
So there are opportunities in the public systems...


----------



## basilio (16 November 2011)

Julia said:


> Noirua, that was unnecessarily rude of me.  I apologise.




Nice one ..


----------



## Julia (16 November 2011)

DocK said:


> Totally agree re your opinion on the brainwashing that occurs at some religious schools



Let's not imagine that our state schools are immune from brainwashing.  In other threads, Sails has given us some quite amazing examples of how little kids are being brainwashed about the catastrophic effects of "climate change".

I abhor brainwashing of any description but would probably prefer a kid to be told that Big J died on the dreaded cross than to terrify them with thoughts of an annihilation about which they can do nothing except feel fearful and anxious.


----------



## DocK (17 November 2011)

Sat through almost 3 hours of Speech Night tonight.  Have decided that Finland are onto something with their policy of no school bands, sports etc - the night would have been done and dusted in half the time if not for the "musical" numbers and extra-curricular awards on top of the academic ones.

If there is only one thing that our state and private schools have in common, surely it must be that an under-rehearsed band and the year 4 choir are nothing but pure torture for all but the doting parents of the darling performers.  Must remember earplugs next year

Lots of school formals happening here this week, I guess that means that the great Gold Coast cultural event that is "schoolies" is about to begin and we shall all be regaled nightly with media reports of teens run amok


----------



## kimcasablancas (17 November 2011)

basilio said:


> Interesting to see the thread move to comparisons of private and public school systems.
> 
> I opened the thread  on the Finland model  because in fact the State decided to make the public education education system as good as humanly possible. Both political parties  are committed to an extremely high quality education system that creates highly skilled citizens. It demands excellent teachers, respects their skills and pays them well. The schools are physically well designed but don't necessarily have hot and cold swimming pools and the excesses of some private schools.
> 
> ...




Canada is a lot like that as well. It's not -as- good as Finland, and it's slid a bit in the last years (at least in the OECD PISA scores) but Canada takes public education very seriously.


----------



## Tink (17 November 2011)

Being a practising Catholic, there was no surprise that my children would attend Catholic Schools complimenting their home life, and I was happy with their outcome. 
They are now both at University and working part time.

Call me conservative, but I see uniforms just as important, as I think it teaches them that there is a time and place in what they choose to wear.

Yep DocK, its that time of year again, I was thankful that both my children and their friends stayed in Melbourne : )


----------



## noirua (17 November 2011)

kimcasablancas said:


> Canada is a lot like that as well. It's not -as- good as Finland, and it's slid a bit in the last years (at least in the OECD PISA scores) but Canada takes public education very seriously.




I worked in Toronto for nine years and lived in an appartment on Sixth Line. Very dedicated they are to the two language system of English and French. 
It was very cold in the winter though and out of town there were very few roads so it was always necessary to come off the Freeway at the correct point, as getting back was a nightmare; very polite drivers out there - always stopped to let me cross at the two white lines. 
If a school bus stops all cars stop as well until all the children have alighted -- never saw a single vehicle fail to obey that rule.


----------



## noirua (17 November 2011)

Julia said:


> Noirua, that was unnecessarily rude of me.  I apologise.




During a short stay of 10 months in America they told me to, "Never apologise" several times. I remember they did not apologise when they cut my contract short by 8 months, though I was given a name and phone number in Toronto and the job lasted over 9 years -- a good apology maybe.


----------



## Julia (17 November 2011)

noirua said:


> During a short stay of 10 months in America they told me to, "Never apologise" several times. I remember they did not apologise when they cut my contract short by 8 months, though I was given a name and phone number in Toronto and the job lasted over 9 years -- a good apology maybe.



 Um, what's the message here?  That I should not have apologised for sounding rude despite the provocation of your suggesting I'm xenophobic etc etc?


----------



## noirua (18 November 2011)

Julia said:


> Um, what's the message here?  That I should not have apologised for sounding rude despite the provocation of your suggesting I'm xenophobic etc etc?




Unfortunately many people reach for google to obtain an answer. 'Little Englander' is more a term used, and that's how I meant it, to someone who is fixed in a view  -private education for instance - and will not see or accept the other sides view from the point of view of possibly being wrong and that it is not always the correct way IE educational fairness.

I did not mean the lyrics by 'Simply Red' which even I find somewhat offensive. Nor of course this phrase as it was used during wartime or the so called battles in sport - if they can be called that.

The Free Library did publish something: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Al's+kicking+off-a0146883081


----------



## Julia (18 November 2011)

noirua said:


> Unfortunately many people reach for google to obtain an answer. 'Little Englander' is more a term used, and that's how I meant it, to someone who is fixed in a view  -private education for instance - and will not see or accept the other sides view from the point of view of possibly being wrong and that it is not always the correct way IE educational fairness.



It's a pretty big stretch to say that because I strongly disagree with your suggestion that parents should be prevented from having any choice about the education they want for their children, especially when they're more than happy to pay for what they want, I'm fixed in my view that private schools are the only way to a good education.

I haven't said that.  I've just noted my own impressions, more as an observer in schools in recent times, than necessarily from my own experience, that the local state schools here are pretty revoltingly feral places in which the frustrated teachers spend way more time trying to control the little sods intent on disruption than they do actually teaching.

And if you imagine that forcing all children into exactly the same type of education you're going to end up with equality amongst all, you're dreaming.
Kids don't have equal genes or equal modelling from parents or any number of other factors.   It's facile to think that by thrusting them all into an 'equal' form of education you're going to create some ongoing environment of equal opportunity for them thereafter.

And to imply a link between a preference for one type of education over another and being xenophobic is just silly.


----------



## Judd (18 November 2011)

Oh I don't think private school education is all bad.  I mean that icon of the Labor Party, Edward Gough Whitlam, was educated at Knox Grammar and subsequently was Dux of Canberra Grammar in 1932 I believe.


----------



## DocK (18 November 2011)

noirua said:


> Private Schools also advantage children just because their parents can afford to pay for them. Everyone should have an equal chance in education, no ifs or buts whatsoever.
> In my opinion all private schools should be abolished; fair play for all and not just for those born with a silver spoon in their mouths.






noirua said:


> I still think everyone must have equal rights to education and that includes ruling out parents from saving to advantage their children against others. Your standards and attributes are high but still conjure up feelings of a little Englander.






noirua said:


> I suppose, to go further, I quite like the French system that does not allow religion in schools  - at least I have about 40 million French people on my side on that one.
> 
> Many people do see their children as better than others and in need of private education, and therefore prefer a class system in Australia that puts their children one step higher by advantage rather than ability.
> 
> Fair enough though, if you like a class system much like private schools in England then carry on with it, and god save the Queen.






noirua said:


> Unfortunately many people reach for google to obtain an answer. 'Little Englander' is more a term used, and that's how I meant it, to someone who is fixed in a view  -private education for instance - and will not see or accept the other sides view from the point of view of possibly being wrong and that it is not always the correct way IE educational fairness.
> 
> I did not mean the lyrics by 'Simply Red' which even I find somewhat offensive. Nor of course this phrase as it was used during wartime or the so called battles in sport - if they can be called that.
> 
> The Free Library did publish something: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Al's+kicking+off-a0146883081




Noirua, you actually seem fairly fixed in your views and unwilling to accept the reasons some parents choose the private school option - you seem somewhat resentful that some children are "advantaged" by their parents' choices.  I'd put it to you that it's not necessarily a case of parents feeling their children are better than others, or wanting to place their children "one step higher due to advantage rather than ability", although I'm sure this is also _sometimes_ the case, but rather that they don't want their kids to be disadvantaged by being denied the chance to reach their full potential due to the woeful conditions that exist in some state schools.  I'd be quite happy to have all children sent to state schools if the same standards of discipline, expected behaviour, school culture etc applied to all schools equally across the country.  Sadly, they don't.  Perhaps you have some ideas on how the gap in standards could be addressed?


----------



## bandicoot76 (18 November 2011)

What makes for a quality education system?  

thats easy to answer!

1)one that produces a student with a competent grasp of the fundementals (maths, science, english, history, economics, technology etc) and

2)who has the capacity for free, independant, critical thinking processes,and

3) is free of political bias and the politically correct BS brainwashing that comprises the current curriculum!

but unfortunately i think george carlin had it right when he stated: 

"they (the education 'industry') only want to create obedient workers with just enough brainpower to operate the machines and do their work, but who are incapable of independant thought"

the proof is in the pudding that the education system is totally corrupt when students can go to school for 13yrs and come out the other side illiterate and incapable of even the basic mathematics required to work out the correct till change without help... a future nation of burger flippers!


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (18 November 2011)

bandicoot76 said:


> What makes for a quality education system?
> 
> thats easy to answer!
> 
> ...




Hear hear bc76

And then they buy their way in to university at the University of Queensland, and reproduce.

gg


----------



## Tink (18 November 2011)

Yep, agree yet again with Julia and Dock.

There is no difference to the private and public schools, as there is with the public and private hospitals
People have choices, and its up to them what they choose.

I am glad we have choices.


----------



## noirua (18 November 2011)

DocK said:


> Noirua, you actually seem fairly fixed in your views and unwilling to accept the reasons some parents choose the private school option - you seem somewhat resentful that some children are "advantaged" by their parents' choices.  I'd put it to you that it's not necessarily a case of parents feeling their children are better than others, or wanting to place their children "one step higher due to advantage rather than ability", although I'm sure this is also _sometimes_ the case, but rather that they don't want their kids to be disadvantaged by being denied the chance to reach their full potential due to the woeful conditions that exist in some state schools.  I'd be quite happy to have all children sent to state schools if the same standards of discipline, expected behaviour, school culture etc applied to all schools equally across the country.  Sadly, they don't.  Perhaps you have some ideas on how the gap in standards could be addressed?




You appear to have capsulated the education system well though the same applies in UK schools that overall, run the same system as Australia. I notice, through newspaper articles, that some large UK comprehensive schools (1.000 pupils or more) have been turned round just by having a Head who managed to make a school at the bottom of the ratings become one at the top.
If a school does poorly then sack the head seems the way out. Some teachers are totally useless and allowing them to bumble on getting their monthly pay cheque is one of the deep seated problems.


----------



## Julia (18 November 2011)

bandicoot76 said:


> What makes for a quality education system?
> 
> thats easy to answer!
> 
> ...




Largely agree.  The current practice of moving kids up a class every year even when they have failed the previous year woefully does nothing for anyone, least of all the bewildered child.

It's apparently supposed to protect the precious self esteem of each little snowflake, but in reality and in the longer term disadvantages them massively.

It's so true to point to the symptom of check out people being unable to calculate change as an example of the failure of the current system.  Even if the total comes to, say, $15.10, and you give them a $20 note plus a ten cent coin, they have no idea how to work out the change!


----------



## Tink (19 November 2011)

So not alot has changed?

I remember when I started my first part time job in my mid teens, there was no cash register telling you what change to give back, and I was working with a guy a few years older than me.

He asked me if I could teach him division.
I said "Um, er, arent you at school?
"Yep, I just dont understand it" he said to me  

So I showed him and I thought, how strange.
I will never forget that.


----------



## noirua (19 November 2011)

Julia said:


> Largely agree.  The current practice of moving kids up a class every year even when they have failed the previous year woefully does nothing for anyone, least of all the bewildered child.




I do remember the old system brought in during the 1950s and that was to keep some children down in a lower class if they failed to progess. This only really worked in schools with a very on-the-ball head who saw to it that a child stayed down in a subject they were behind on but still progressed in a subject that they were good at.

From the above it would be a nightmare in a school of 1,000 pupils with them all swopping around from class to class. The deputy head had the task of making sure every lesson ended on time so pupils could swop around.

I remember each year had a colour allocated. It worked only because most teachers in those days taught multiple subjects, so every subject in each year was the same and at the same time.

Sadly the headmaster, a Mr Sankey, died suddenly around 1967 and though continued for a while collapsed in a farce.


----------



## Calliope (25 April 2012)

*Garbage in - Garbage out.*

*Sub-par uni students let into courses despite low scores*



> HUNDREDS of students with university entrance scores below 50 have been accepted into courses with much higher cut-off marks, as universities compete to expand their number of places.
> 
> Victoria University advertised its cut-off for psychology as 53.05, but a third of the enrolments had an Australian Tertiary Admission Rank below that.
> 
> ...




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/hig...spite-low-scores/story-e6frgcjx-1226337491524


----------



## basilio (18 March 2021)

There are many stories here. In theory a huge fraud committed over a teaching lifetime.
But then it seems everyone who spoke up said the guy was an outstanding teacher and leader.

And somehow his CV was never properly checked by the many schools that employed him !
I'm glad he didn't go to jail. It would have been interesting to see the outcome if he had not been such a high flyer but simply a run of teh mill teacher.









						'Outstanding and influential' teacher who faked qualifications for decades avoids jail
					

Neil Lennie taught at some of Melbourne's most prestigious schools and has been lauded by past students, including renowned infectious diseases expert Sharon Lewin AO.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## sptrawler (18 March 2021)

basilio said:


> There are many stories here. In theory a huge fraud committed over a teaching lifetime.
> But then it seems everyone who spoke up said the guy was an outstanding teacher and leader.
> 
> And somehow his CV was never properly checked by the many schools that employed him !
> ...



So true Bas, as with most things today, pull down the achievers, until everyone is equal.
That is the inevitable end to the current game.
20 years ago the big push was for most children to go to university, because apparently only the rich kids were given the opportunity and if all kids were pushed into uni we would be awash with geniuses.
Well now 20 years on we are awash with university graduates, but only the same amount of geniuses we were producing 20 years ago.
Now we have the opposite happening, my oldest grandson who is very smart, is going to leave school asap to do an apprenticeship and then start a business he is coming on 13 years old.
I have chatted with him and to be honest he is focused, he has a plan and he seems determined.
Time will tell.


----------



## Smurf1976 (20 March 2021)

basilio said:


> But then it seems everyone who spoke up said the guy was an outstanding teacher and leader.



Have a look at society today.

We're surrounded by people who can't apply basic maths and science to real world situations and who seemingly don't grasp concepts such as debating or justice.  

Something's very seriously wrong with education for that to have occurred on such a large scale. This isn't a failure to understand university level concepts, it's a failure to understand what used to be taught in grade 6 and 7.


----------



## basilio (21 March 2021)

Perhaps this discussion around the knowledge  of "experts" is worth considering when discussing what we value in an education system.


----------

