General Education Discussion

[penegal]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Congratulations Steady Jnr.

Time for Steady to open a good wine I think.

 

[Skyring]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

One thing we dont need is more science graduates; there isn't enough funding for those of us that already exist. Approximately 8% of grants submitted to NHMRC in any one year get funded. Thats 92% of people that didnt get money to fund their research.

Perhaps the funding is the problem...

I disagree. I think that a science-heavy education gives a student the skills in critical thinking and analysis to have more respect for facts than humanities courses, or worse, no higher learning at all.

There is more to life than getting a job, and I would rather have citizens schooled in logic and analysis than not. I think that the USA is in a tonne of strife now because it has skimped on education.

Not everybody is going to be an Einstein, of course. But let us not rule out that possibility by denying half the population the chance because of their gender, their ethnicity, or their means. As a nation, we should try to make the most of our human resources, not make life easier for the children of the rich by cutting down the competition.

 

[anat0l]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Perhaps the funding is the problem...

I disagree. I think that a science-heavy education gives a student the skills in critical thinking and analysis to have more respect for facts than humanities courses, or worse, no higher learning at all.

There is more to life than getting a job, and I would rather have citizens schooled in logic and analysis than not. I think that the USA is in a tonne of strife now because it has skimped on education.

Not everybody is going to be an Einstein, of course. But let us not rule out that possibility by denying half the population the chance because of their gender, their ethnicity, or their means. As a nation, we should try to make the most of our human resources, not make life easier for the children of the rich by cutting down the competition.

There is a difference between a science-heavy education versus the number of science graduates.

Your ambition to see a more logically and analytically minded population can be achieved without necessarily needing to increase the number of science graduates, and it doesn't even mean that every university student must take science courses/subjects.

This is why science is nominally compulsory up until the age of mandatory education. The key really is whether or not we are teaching it well enough to equip students with enough life long skills that would fulfil your vision. If students don't see connections between what they learn and their lives, they are likely to forget what they learned rather quickly, especially if they had not cultivated any sort of appreciation for it in the first place. This is even more difficult when we are talking about skills and not content.

It is also important to keep in mind that logical and critical thinking is not, cannot and should not be limited to or be monopolised by the physical sciences and mathematics. Indeed, critical judgement is an Australian Curriculum cross-curricular general capability which should be integrated across all subjects.

From a rough examination of many sets of assessment standards, I can assert with confidence that in order to pass any given subject (viz. gain a C- or a Sound Achievement) - including mathematics and sciences - no satisfactory competency in critical judgement is required to be demonstrated. In fact, this more or less applies in university as well - most subjects can be passed (50%) without necessarily showing satisfactory skill in critical judgement. That's not necessarily an issue of the subject matter or teaching method as much as it would be the assessment standards.

 

[JohnM]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

It's getting hard to even get people to understand science and the methodology of science when it is often so roundly, even actively, rejected in this post-truth world: The War on Science : Shawn Lawrence Otto : 9781571313539

 

[Skyring]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

So long as we don't follow the USA too far down the local funding route. Schools in poor areas suffering because the parents don't have the resources. Students saddled with huge debts.

A system set up by the elites to ensure their children have a good education and the masses remain ignorant and uncritical. Whitlam brought in some reforms, but they have been whittled away, and I think Tony Abbott was set to take us down the American path.

 

[anat0l]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

So long as we don't follow the USA too far down the local funding route. Schools in poor areas suffering because the parents don't have the resources. Students saddled with huge debts.

A system set up by the elites to ensure their children have a good education and the masses remain ignorant and uncritical. Whitlam brought in some reforms, but they have been whittled away, and I think Tony Abbott was set to take us down the American path.

I think society shifting without even thinking about funding models is already driving much of the inequity or problems we are seeing.

Schools are increasingly assuming the prime or sole responsibility of the development of the child. Whilst classically this was true in an academic sense, it is also tending to be that in other senses, i.e. social, emotional, spiritual, etc..

I don't know about the opinions of all of you here, but for schools to be responsible (and for parents to believe and hold to account schools to be wholly responsible) for all of that is not reasonable and not optimal for a child's development.

I would like to hope that university education does not become at least upfront unaffordable for the near future. It's one thing to be saddled with a debt at the end of your degree (whether that is an unreasonable amount is another thing); it's another to not be able to go in the first place due to a mere financial barrier. But we also have a greater responsibility to our graduates to make sure that their degrees translate into jobs. At present, we're not doing a fantastic job at that, with the result of either a waste of a degree or the international brain drain.

 

[Flying mermaid]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

I think society shifting without even thinking about funding models is already driving much of the inequity or problems we are seeing.

Schools are increasingly assuming the prime or sole responsibility of the development of the child. Whilst classically this was true in an academic sense, it is also tending to be that in other senses, i.e. social, emotional, spiritual, etc..

I don't know about the opinions of all of you here, but for schools to be responsible (and for parents to believe and hold to account schools to be wholly responsible) for all of that is not reasonable and not optimal for a child's development.

I would like to hope that university education does not become at least upfront unaffordable for the near future. It's one thing to be saddled with a debt at the end of your degree (whether that is an unreasonable amount is another thing); it's another to not be able to go in the first place due to a mere financial barrier. But we also have a greater responsibility to our graduates to make sure that their degrees translate into jobs. At present, we're not doing a fantastic job at that, with the result of either a waste of a degree or the international brain drain.

A friend of mine who was a high school teacher said to me some years ago she felt more like a social welfare officer than a teacher - she worked in a fairly disadvantaged area.

Unfortunately with all the pressures on parents (both working long hours, blended families, single parents etc), schools have had to pick up the pieces. I certainly don't believe it should be expected, but it has become the norm. I think it works best as a partnership between parents and schools, but not all parents are interested and are happy to leave it to schools, either through incompetence, laziness or sheer exhaustion.

I think the HECS system is a good compromise. As you say where it is falling down is where Unis are letting people in, who have very little chance of even completing the course, let alone finding a job at the end. Miss FM was fortunate enough to get a permanent teaching job straight out of Uni (she is a science graduate, plus did a Masters in Teaching), but from what I have heard many graduates really struggle to find a position. Surely this is a waste of taxpayers money and they all have a debt hanging over them?

 

[anat0l]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

A friend of mine who was a high school teacher said to me some years ago she felt more like a social welfare officer than a teacher - she worked in a fairly disadvantaged area.

Unfortunately with all the pressures on parents (both working long hours, blended families, single parents etc), schools have had to pick up the pieces. I certainly don't believe it should be expected, but it has become the norm. I think it works best as a partnership between parents and schools, but not all parents are interested and are happy to leave it to schools, either through incompetence, laziness or sheer exhaustion.

I'm glad you don't think it should be expected, but in some circles it certainly has become that way.

I think when it comes down to it, there's a point where a teacher is not teaching to get everyone to an A; it's just at a point where a teacher can start to instil some faculties of wisdom and maturation, and do it whilst dodging the incoming flying chair or desks being defaced. If the latter can be achieved, that's a job well done, even though a PISA report would say otherwise. If a student can be coached through school to a stage where they can at least stand up on their own and make a productive decision on what they want to do with their life, then I think that's a job well done, even though any academic report would brand it a failure.

I know some schools have expressed that the development of the child is a partnership between parents / carers and the school; a very fair statement.

To turn it around on parents and their workplaces, are we admitting that as far as "work/life balance" (quotation marks intended) goes, we aren't quite getting it right?

On the other hand, there is a large argument out there by many (voting-eligible) people that society isn't falling apart, and relative to the rest of the world (including if we only consider OECD), we're doing OK. So why the big brouhaha? Smart people will be smart and do good things, dumb people will be dumb and they will learn or suffer.

I think the HECS system is a good compromise. As you say where it is falling down is where Unis are letting people in, who have very little chance of even completing the course, let alone finding a job at the end. Miss FM was fortunate enough to get a permanent teaching job straight out of Uni (she is a science graduate, plus did a Masters in Teaching), but from what I have heard many graduates really struggle to find a position. Surely this is a waste of taxpayers money and they all have a debt hanging over them?

My gaining this contract I am starting next January didn't come easy, and even then it is only six months (maternity cover). However, I was probably more selective in targeting where to apply than others might think is reasonable. For example, I would have liked to stay in the city I am in, or at least metropolitan. I wanted to target more private education than the state system. Behaviour management is not my strongest point, although of course it always takes experience and development.

There are plenty of jobs further afield in rural areas, though I will admit that takes guts (even if the state offers quite a bit of compensation for taking up the role).

Many graduate teachers in my cohort were lucky to be recruited by their prac school.

It's not really a case of whether a student has little chance of completing the course from the outset, but really it is finding a job at the end which is concerning. Sure, we can argue that some of them don't really try, some aren't prepared to suffer a bit (e.g. a low ladder job, move cities, downgrade lifestyle, etc.), but when lots of them are struggling to find reasonable jobs, surely we can't say all of them are unreasonable graduates?

I'd like to hear from other people on this forum in the following backgrounds as to what are their current experiences or opinions with respect to job searching, positions opening or closing, or the general feel of graduates to jobs in (excluding university research):

• Engineering
• Information Technology
• Law
• Commerce, Business and Marketing
• Physical Sciences