Kevin Rudd needs more Pink Floyd.  The Floyd’s classic lyrics from The Wall album denigrate the standard of teachers and curriculum as “just another brick in the wall”.

I’m sure David Gilmour, Roger Waters and other band members would be amazed to learn that thirty years later Australia is attempting an Education Revolution based wholly on bricks in the wall.  Okay, maybe I oversimplify it.  It’s not just bricks, there’s a range of other building products going into Kevin and Julia’s fabulously named ‘Building the Education Revolution’ program.

Now I don’t mean to overload on dark sarcasm.  But isn’t an education revolution far more than bricks and mortar?  How about first class curriculum?  Higher teacher standards?  Modern learning tools?  Smaller class sizes?  Advancing both the vocational and the academic?


Or, how about a controversial three C’s for our education system – competition, choice and control?  These factors, which can empower families, parents and students while encouraging excellence from teachers and schools, seem to be sorely lacking in any current revolutionary discussions.

Choice is a major piece of the puzzle of providing the best education to young Australians. 

Providing choice, and thereby greater control for families, requires real competition in the education marketplace.

Families who can afford to choose between an overly bureaucratised government school and a usually more responsive private school have voted with their feet in recent years.

Growth in the non-government school sector has far outstripped growth in public school enrolments over the past decade or so. 

The policies of the former Howard Government helped more Australians afford their choice, with lower cost non-government schools proliferating across the country. 

But those most in need of choice – people in areas of disadvantage or with low incomes – continue to miss out.

Although a happy product of the public education system myself, in my first speech to the Senate I advocated a system of school vouchers that would give all families their schooling choice.  Such a system would see a family’s share of government funding allocated to their chosen school.

Families would make their choices based on whatever particular aspects of education they value, creating a marketplace in which schools would accordingly respond. 

There would be clear consequences for schools – rewards for those that deliver results and a necessity to change for those that don’t.

We shouldn’t be afraid of exploring the merits of this system, at least on a trial basis, and at least for disadvantaged families.

Overseas experience shows the strongest supporters of publicly funded vouchers are the disadvantaged: those with most to gain.

Dissatisfaction in public education serves nobody’s interests.  It perpetuates a two tier system of haves and have nots. 

More significantly it perpetuates social disadvantage.  All too often the schools with the worst educational outcomes are in areas with high levels of unemployment, creating a vicious cycle of intergenerational unemployment, welfare dependency and a raft of health or social problems. 

If public school parents could choose where the thousands of dollars in government funding provided for each of their children was directed it would empower them to break the cycle of disadvantage. 

Local school control would also deliver greater efficiencies, especially compared to the current gross mismanagement of Building the Education Revolution funding by education bureaucrats across Australia.

A voucher system is not a magic wand. 

Initial implementation may be costly, which is a challenging prospect in these times of rapidly escalating government debt. 

And it may require tailoring to families of difficult income levels to enhance equity and maximise educational outcomes for all students.  But trialling vouchers would certainly be more of an education revolution than forcing one size fits all school halls on thousands of schools.

Competition creates choice.  It gives control to families over their children’s futures.  And it may even free teachers from the constraints of overly bureaucratic systems. 

That’s a real revolution, as opposed to Labor’s attempts to style as a revolution a simple building program which, all in all, is just bricks in the wall.


Simon Birmingham is a Liberal Senator for South Australia

9 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Keith says:

      12:58pm | 11/07/09

      Education Revolution? Who has time for that!
      Rudds been too busy working on getting Australia convinced he and Swan didn’t lie to Parlimant for giving John Grant Motors favouritism. Which obviously they did. Lets ambush Turnbull before they get to the truth! I’m sure he didn’t want that hanging over his head before he strutted around on the world stage AGAIN! Here I am world, your next UN Presidient! It’s all about Rudd!

    • Paul says:

      12:08pm | 12/07/09

      @ Keith -
      John Grant got a 2 minute phone call and a fax, which was one of hundreds, was sent to Swann’s home fax. John Grant got $0.00 as a result of this so-called favouritism.

      On the other hand Turnbull and Abetz have yet to answer how the knew about the Grech email weeks before anyone else did.

      @ Simon JWH wasted the gold bars raining down from the mining boom on middle class welfare, that is his legacy and our Schools, TAFE and Universities suffered as a result.

    • Richard Free says:

      02:17pm | 12/07/09

      The comments by Birmingham are so lightweight they aren’t worth reading. Does he really write them himself and if so he should outsource them to someone who actually has a cogent opinion. Why oh why are you putting this fluff on the punch

    • Scott Morrison says:

      02:34pm | 12/07/09

      I find Labor’s defence of Swannie on Mategate extraordinary - it’s OK because John Grant didn’t get anything anyway.

      So had Swannie been successful in his intervention, that would have proved it existed?? Are Labor so used to getting what they want when they do favours for mates they have a 100% success rate.

      I know Sussex street has always believed that the ends justifies the means.  It would seem seem they also believe without the ends, the means don’t matter.  So much for integrity of process. It’s clear Sussex street is now also a Canberra address.

      They don’t seem to get it, just because the ends Just becuase the case couldn’t stack up, despite the mates

      SO it ‘s OK for one taxpayers to get favourable treatment above hundreds of other applicants.

    • MF says:

      03:46pm | 12/07/09

      Bollocks.  I came from a low income family, and I’m a product of the “overly bureaucratic” public education system.  I went to schools that were pretty average my entire life.  And I came out of high school with good marks, put myself through undergraduate and a PhD and am now working as a university lecturer. 

      It’s got nothing to do with the “haves and have nots”.  If the student is motivated, they can succeed.  I’ve seen the “haves” fail - students who went to the “best schools in the state” who got spoon-fed in high school to the point that they couldn’t think for themselves and flunked out of university very quickly.  And I’ve seen the “have nots” come out top of the class.

      If you’re determined enough, you CAN succeed, regardless of your socio-economic background.  It blows my mind that people put this down to finances.  It’s a cop out excuse that people use when they fail.

    • Citizen G says:

      09:10pm | 12/07/09

      This article was intended as a critique of Labor’s Education Revolution. I’m not at all certain it succeeded, even less how ‘Ute-Gate’ is relevant, even more ably demonstrated by those few that hope it will be a souffle that rises twice that selective & amnesiac rants do not a cogent argument make!!

      And ‘Scott Morrison’ wouldn’t be he of Liberal State Director (Sinking)-Ship, no? An example of how not to ‘get it’, although he does seem more pragmatic than most of his party-fellows these days.

    • Senate Watcher says:

      11:36pm | 12/07/09

      Simon is spot on.  One of the major advantages of Education Vouchers is that it educates all parents about how expensive it is to educate each & every child each year, regardless of which school they attend. 

      If parents knew that it cost over $400,000 to put through 3 of their darlings through a public school to Yr 12, they might take a bit more interest in how they were going.  Then parents & their little darlings might treat their public school teachers with a little more respect. 

      There is no such thing as “free” education.  Families might value their education more when they know it’s value.

    • iansand says:

      09:04am | 13/07/09

      Parents deciding the direction of education?  Creationism here we come.

      I was once an office bearer for a P&C.  The choice of spending a chunk of budget came down to spending money on library books or funding the part time employment of a junior sports instructor.  Guess what the parents chose?  They could not see the benefit in books.

      On the other hand, a voucher system would silence the canard of “too much public funding going to private schools” once and for all.  Assuming state and federal funds were included in the same voucher system it would soon be blindingly obvious where the vast majority of funding went.

    • Caz says:

      06:45pm | 13/08/09

      I have lived in the UK for the last 15 years, teaching in London schools. We have done some serious investigating into the ‘Building Schools for the Future’ programme and those behind the Academy Schools agenda in the UK. What we have come up with is disturbing indeed.
      The head of Studioearchitects, Andrzej Kuszell, confirms that architects are working on the principal of ‘human re-engineering’ although declines to make detailed comments about this, also known as ‘euthenics’, the reframing of the mind on account of the physical environment someone is placed in.
      We know that a new schools agenda is occurring in Israel, India, Libya, Vietnam, Australia, the US, and Canada, at least. The National Audit Office in the UK commissioned the Rand Corporation to write up a document on the 14-19 curriculum to be applied in the Netherlands, Sweden and Australia.
      Evidence is available for a eugenics programme now in place in UK schools on the youtube video ‘ARK Schools, Academies and Eugenics’ at this location:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBxQpft5F_k
      And more here:
      http://www.global-elite.org/node/912

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

Dementor doing a good job for sweden #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

Ukraine song pinches chord progression from The Verve's Bittersweet Symphony. Fo real #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

RT @GerardDaffy: @antsharwood all the talk over there is the grannies will win.they entered to get a church built,feelgood story

Anthony Sharwood

These peole insult my grandmothjer, who was born in minsk, belarus #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter