Anyone for a Gonski?

Can someone replicate this chart for Australia?

Gonski

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

94 Responses to Anyone for a Gonski?

  1. Tel

    About the only industry on Earth that has been unable to find any efficiency gains regardless of extensive technology developments.

  2. James B

    Tel: Because the government controls it.

  3. Julie Novak

    Well, I did this not so long ago: http://catallaxyfiles.com/2013/12/05/what-every-australian-needs-to-know-about-school-funding/

    If you want a longer series to graph, Andrew Leigh’s paper on school productivity tells you which data sources to track down.

  4. nerblnobnn

    Excuse my naivety, but what is all that money being spent on? Anyone with specific examples, rather than generalities?

  5. About the only industry on Earth

    Education is not, has never been, and will never be an “industry”.

  6. Tel

    Education is not, has never been, and will never be an “industry”.

    Have it your way, clearly a lot of spending is going into someone’s expensive hobby.

  7. Balatro

    Numbers, do you smile when you write this stuff? Do you get off on it?
    Do you support Gonski? If you do, I am sure we would all like to hear your brief, clear and concise explanation of what all the proposed spending in he name of Gonski will be spent on, what the expected outcomes are, how they will be measured, and what the response will be if the stated aims are not achieved in a predetermined time frame.
    Or do you think it is just a justifiable get square to take money from private schools and give it to the public sector – without any regard to the benefits?
    I bet you think the manufacturing industry has gone to the dogs because Tony Abbott won’t give any more money to the car companies.

  8. .

    Education is an industry.

    Do you produce a good or a service, numbers?

    If you’re not in an industry, you are declaring that you are unproductive.

  9. .

    That chart proves we need massive spending cuts.

    The problem is the internal industry regulators.

    They add no value.

  10. Fedup

    Exhibit 3 on Page 15 of this report gives an overview on educational return versus $ invested http://bit.ly/180C2cO

  11. George Brandis thanks for NOTHING

    About the only industry on Earth that has been unable to find any efficiency gains regardless of extensive technology developments.

    Hey! Don’t forget financial regulation!

  12. Tel

    Hey! Don’t forget financial regulation!

    First you have to figure out what it is they produce, and then when you have explained that to me, I’ll try to give a comment on their productivity.

  13. .

    If you don’t understand finance – don’t become a banker.

    If they produce nothing, start a business and run it without them.

  14. Tel

    Well you can’t run a business without paying tax either. In many industries you can’t run a business without unions getting involved, compulsory insurance payments, inspectors, gatekeepers, approvers, rubber stampers, ticket clippers, and what have you. I guess that proves anyone who can figure out a way of jamming themselves into the productive process must themselves be productive, right?

  15. Baldrick

    Quite clearly, increased government spending on education does not prove increased results.
    The government controlled Education industry should be scrapped and left in the hands of the private sector.
    There should be minimal government guidelines to dictate the curriculum.
    Teachers pay should be in accordance with their students performance and if they continually produce dumb students, their contract should be terminated.

  16. MemoryVault

    There should be minimal government guidelines to dictate the curriculum.

    Why?

    Teachers pay should be in accordance with their students performance and if they continually produce dumb students, their contract should be terminated.

    Terminated – by who?

  17. James In Footscray

    Julie N – very interesting, but wouldn’t we need to know money spent and teachers employed per student?

  18. Baldrick

    Why?

    A political party, ie:government, is not the best arbiter of curriculum.

    Terminated – by who?

    Terminated by the private sector school in which they’re employed.

  19. Alfonso

    Hee, hee….. the only certainty is that the Teachers Union doesn’t run my business.
    You can only produce those results if you have govt bluffed….with other people’s money

  20. Here’s what the NSW department of education has to say about the matter.

    NSW public school teachers enjoy one of the highest commencing salaries of any profession and have access to a generous range of employment benefits.

    Our common incremental salary scale rewards continuing efficiency in teaching practice, satisfactory performance and professional growth via yearly increments. Your level of training (three, four or five years), previous teaching experience and time spent child rearing are taken into account in determining your salary.

    In 2013, four-year trained teachers start on a salary of $59,706. Salary increases are by annual increments subject to satisfactory performance, with our most experienced classroom teachers earning $89,050 in 2013.

    Casual teachers with four years training are paid a daily rate of over $300.

    Of course, our school leadership positions earn higher salaries, reflecting increased levels of responsibility. For example, our assistant principals and head teachers earn a base salary of $102,482 and primary and secondary deputy principals earn $119,654. A principal of a large high school earns up to $153,050. Read more about our teachers’ salaries and allowances.

  21. H B Bear

    Spuds is the new Hammy.

    Nice work.

  22. another example using NSW, Nick Greiner crunches the numbers on the rise of education bureaucrats.
    We return to government in 2011 only to find Education head office has again exploded from 300 to 2075 staff.

    It was so bad there was nowhere to put all these bureaucrats. Bob Carr had reopened and filled the Bridge St building but also held on to the Greiner government’s Market St offices. More buildings and office floors were leased, until the burgeoning bureaucracy overflowed out of the CBD and began invading schools. At Erskineville Primary the “State Equity” bureaucrats took over two classrooms. It was no better the next level down. When the Liberals lost in 1995 there were 1200 staff supporting schools in the regions. But after 16 years of Labor, that number surged to 3290 staff.

  23. whoops… should be in quotes.

    We return to government in 2011 only to find Education head office has again exploded from 300 to 2075 staff.

    It was so bad there was nowhere to put all these bureaucrats. Bob Carr had reopened and filled the Bridge St building but also held on to the Greiner government’s Market St offices. More buildings and office floors were leased, until the burgeoning bureaucracy overflowed out of the CBD and began invading schools. At Erskineville Primary the “State Equity” bureaucrats took over two classrooms. It was no better the next level down. When the Liberals lost in 1995 there were 1200 staff supporting schools in the regions. But after 16 years of Labor, that number surged to 3290 staff.

  24. .

    Tel
    #1363142, posted on June 28, 2014 at 6:31 pm
    Well you can’t run a business without paying tax either. In many industries you can’t run a business without unions getting involved, compulsory insurance payments, inspectors, gatekeepers, approvers, rubber stampers, ticket clippers, and what have you. I guess that proves anyone who can figure out a way of jamming themselves into the productive process must themselves be productive, right?

    Tel

    The bank helps you. They can even help you get revenue from customers. How do regulators, the ATO or bullying & corrupt thuggish unions do this?

  25. I don’t mind the unions agitating for better pay for their members, teachers.
    I even think that there’s a case for paying teachers a decent wage. But let’s stop pretending that pay increases cause increases in education quality.
    The evidence is strongly against it.

    For one thing, we have a surplus of teachers, and there is low turnover… there’s no evidence that attracting candidates is the problem. And with such low turnover, changes in conditions won’t have much effect on anything, because the improved conditions simply accrue to those in the system.

  26. Bill Shut

    Health spending can easily replicate this graph. The increased spending in trying to change people’ behavior, smoking, drinking, drugs, gambling, weight loss, private psychiatry, I could go on. All unproductive and free. Why would you change your behavior if you’ve no skin in the game (it doesn’t cost you anything). And don’t get me started on the health bureaucracy and research into behaviours…

  27. Why would you change your behavior if you’ve no skin in the game (it doesn’t cost you anything)

    I don’t believe that people are reckless with their health because of free health care.
    Obviously, sickness is its own cost; regardless of the financial burden.

    What free health care does, though, is result in over-servicing, long wait times and reduced quality service.

  28. MemoryVault

    Baldrick
    #1363184, posted on June 28, 2014 at 7:25 pm

    I wasn’t having a go at you, Baldrick. I agree with everything you said in your first two sentences.

    The point I was trying to make (obviously not very well) is that if the entire business of education was taken out of government hands (as you propose) there would be no “curriculum” as such. Nor would there be any formal qualification as “teacher”.

    A business entity – whether a company or an individual – would offer a “product” – if you like, their “curriculum”, which need not have anything whatsoever in common with any other entity’s “product”. The entity would engage people and/or technology to deliver the product to the customer.

    Customers – parents and students – would make a decision based on their assessment of the product against their desired outcomes, plus the historical results of the delivery method – the entity’s measure of success – or otherwise. In much the same manner as we choose any other product in a competitive market today.

    In the grander scheme of things, governments have only been involved in education for a short time, and the results have not been impressive. Much of the failure lies in the fact that we are still employing eighteenth century methodologies. This will not change under the current system.

  29. Tel

    Decimal, you started your argument by saying that if financial regulation is necessary business, therefore it must be a productive part of the economy. Such an argument is logically wrong. It might be correct in another world where all parties are open to voluntary agreements, but the financial regulation industry doesn’t work like that.

    My point is there is no way for a business to say “no”, because in Australia the banks and the government work so closely together there’s hardly a crack of light between them.

    Let me give you an example: peer-to-peer lending started business in Australia (under the name SocietyOne) and they offer debt consolidation services to people at a better rate than the banks are hitting credit card holders. This means a guy with three credit cards who has either made a few bad decisions, or had a bit of bad luck might be facing ridiculous payments at 20% interest, but maybe with a bit of management and a consolidated loan at 11% interest, he can work through it. You can lend your money to this guy, via the peer-to-peer lending service, but only if you are a “sophisticated investor” which basically means if you have to be in the top 0.1% wealth category in Australia, or something close to that.

    You could also put your money in a bank (don’t have to be “sophisticated” for that), get about 3% interest, while the bank charges 20% or something in that area. Conclusion: we are not operating in a free market for banking, and it is the financial regulation industry that controls this.

    Here’s another example: if you are an individual and you have to put in a tax return, you must have a bank account and provide details to the ATO, end of story. Even though they have no real legal ability to demand this, you can’t put in a tax return without doing it. Not a free market, no opportunity to say “no”.

  30. Infidel Tiger

    What is the ratio of education bureaucrats to teachers?

  31. candy

    Tony Abbott’s plan to hand more power to the states is a good thing. Let them be in control of education completely and be responsible for results. It’s probably what the unions and teachers want anyway, no Federal intervention?

  32. Baldrick

    All good MemoryV.
    We’re on the same page with the main aim, and that is to get government out of education and hand it to the private sector.
    Product – Customer – Outcomes … I like it. Better than my proposal of ‘curriculum’ and ‘teachers’.

  33. My point is there is no way for a business to say “no”, because in Australia the banks and the government work so closely together there’s hardly a crack of light between them.

    banking is way over-regulated but that doesn’t detract from the fact that banking performs a useful service. It does.

  34. Education will eventually be deregulated. The internet, that new broom that has destroyed whole industries, has only begun to nibble at education, but change is coming.
    Developing nations will probably be on the cutting edge, as they are unencumbered by the legacy of our Byzantine education system.

    And let’s face it, everyone hates high schools. They notoriously suck.
    Popular culture has been shouting the message from the rooftops for decades now (remember Pink Floyd “Another brick in the wall?”) but when it comes to policy discussions, all anyone wants to talk about are those lovely, hard working teachers and how can we reward them better.

  35. Tel

    My original question was to ask what the financial regulation industry produces?

    I still don’t see any answers.

    By the way, this actually turns out to be a pretty good book:
    http://mises.org/document/2745/Money-Bank-Credit-and-Economic-Cycles

  36. MemoryVault

    Tony Abbott’s plan to hand more power to the states is a good thing.

    I can see I am going to have to run a course in understanding politic-speak, sometime, Candy.
    Tony Abbott has absolutely NO intention of handing any power (back) to the states.

    If you read between the lines, what Abbott is saying is that he wants to transfer financial responsibility to the states, NOT power, while the Federal grubbermnint continues to hold the purse-strings. This means the states will have to find some way of raising considerably more revenue, and realistically, that means the states agreeing to up the rate of GST, or broaden its base, or both.

    And stripping away the politic-speak, that’s what Abbott’s speech was all about. Laying the groundwork for an increase in the GST. Nothing more, nothing less.

  37. candy

    And stripping away the politic-speak, that’s what Abbott’s speech was all about. Laying the groundwork for an increase in the GST. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Nah, don’t agree, MemoryVault.
    I think he wants shot of education and health, give them some money and say hasta la vista.
    The Commonwealth has immigration, decreasing the debt and other issues to tend with.
    Perhaps the premiers are scared of having control, though. Because that means being responsible for results – ie, can kids come out of school with good reading and writing and math skills. Because they’re not now.

  38. My original question was to ask what the financial regulation industry produces?

    “Financial regulation” is, like all regulation, an arm of government.
    It is not the same as the financial industry – it regulates the industry.
    Similarly, for example, building regulators don’t actually build homes, fishing regulators don’t fish, etc.

  39. And stripping away the politic-speak, that’s what Abbott’s speech was all about. Laying the groundwork for an increase in the GST.

    That’s just Labor spin.
    I think the left want an increase in the GST, which is why they are creating the myth that it’s on the political agenda.

  40. MemoryVault

    Nah, don’t agree, MemoryVault.
    I think he wants shot of education and health, give them some money and say hasta la vista.

    Thank you for two excellent examples of exactly what I am talking about, Candy.

    If Abbott and the LNP had the slightest intention of handing back ANY power and/or control of education to the states, then the Minister for Education, Christopher Pyne, would have spent the last nine months studying ways of devolving the accumulated powers of the Federal Department of Education, back to the states.

    Instead, Pyne has spent the last nine months reviewing and approving a federally mandated and controlled National Curriculum.

    If Abbott and the LNP had the slightest intention of handing back ANY power and/or control of health to the states, then the Minister for Health, Peter Dutton, would have spent the last nine months studying ways of devolving the accumulated powers of the Federal Department of Health, back to the states.

    Instead, Dutton, and more importantly Payne and Andrews, (Social Security and Social Services) have spent the last nine months working out a new federally mandated and controlled Medicare co-payment system for general practitioners and attendant medical services.

    As the old saying goes, Candy, don’t listen to what they say, LOOK at what they do.

  41. stop depressing me, MemoryVault.
    I want to believe that the Abbott government are the good guys.

  42. MemoryVault

    That’s just Labor spin.
    I think the left want an increase in the GST, which is why they are creating the myth that it’s on the political agenda.

    About the only thing more pathetic in Australian politics than a rusted-on Labor supporter, is a bolted-on Liberal supporter.

    Even prior to the last election Abbott had announced that review of GST was on the table, and would be part of an overall review of taxation – which happens to be taking place right now. All Abbott committed to was that there would be no changes in his first term.

  43. candy

    My understanding, MemoryVault, is that Centrelink / Medicare is always a Federal concern. It’s the nuts and bolts.

    Yes, it seems at odds Mr Pyne’s curriculum policies and Mr Dutton’s health policies.
    But devolving to the States will take a few years. If Tony Abbott said it, it will happen, if Coalition is in government … He doesn’t say that stuff if doesn’t plan it.

  44. Johno

    And stripping away the politic-speak, that’s what Abbott’s speech was all about. Laying the groundwork for an increase in the GST.

    There are no justifications for increasing the GST.

    Australian governments already take around 1 in every 4 dollars generated by Australians. That is too much. They already have enough money to pay for schools and hospitals. (Not that I think they should be in that game.)

    Even if you did think that more money needed to be taken from taxpayers, it’s not clear whether that extra money should bro raised though the GST. Under current arrangements, GST revenue is ground through the Grants Commission before it gets to the States. The Grants Commission is an abomination that should be abolished and the GST distribution based on a per person basis. There should be no increase in the GST until the Grants Commission is abolished.

    Even if you did abolish the Grants Commission, it’s still not clear whether an increase it the GST is the way to go. States where granted payroll tax in the early 70s. It was the ‘growth tax ‘ demanded by the State in that era, in the same way that the GST was suppose to be the growth tax of the era when it was introduced. Rather than using payroll taxes as it was intended, State governments have undermined this revenue source by buckling to employers and lifting the eligibility thresholds. Rather than the Commonwealth taking on the task of raising the tax revenues for the States, maybe Tony Abbott should make the States responsible for their own finances. This would improve transparency and accountability of State governments. It would also make them less dependent on the Commonwealth.

  45. MemoryVault

    I want to believe that the Abbott government are the good guys.

    Sorry Aussiepundit.
    My ten year old grand-daughter desperately wants to continue to believe in fairies like Tinkerbelle, and my eight year old grandson is struggling to hold on to the idea of a Father Christmas.

    I can’t help them, either.

  46. Boambee John

    “What is the ratio of education bureaucrats to teachers?”

    Not sure, but I recall a story out of Queensland (under Beattie) that an inquiry into Q’l’d Health was closed down and started again under a new leader after the original inquiry discovered ( and apparently intended to report) that there was one administrator for very hospital bed in the state.

    On the subject of improving pay, I have heard too often that “we need to pay better, to attract the best into the profession (whichever profession might be under discussion)”.

    This implicitly says that the current people in the profession are not the best, however, they would be the first beneficiaries of the new pay rates.

  47. Johno

    I want to believe that the Abbott government are the good guys.

    The Abbott government is still a government, so they can’t be the good guys.

    At best, they will be less bad than the alternatives.

    It’s often a very close call, as those living in the Socialist State of Victoria well know.

  48. MemoryVault

    If Tony Abbott said it, it will happen

    So declareth the True Believer, and who can argue with that?
    It would be comical if it wasn’t so sad.

  49. MemoryVault

    There are no justifications for increasing the GST.

    Whoa! Back up there Johno.
    Who said anything about “justification”?

    The only “justification” an Australian government needs for taking more of our money, is their desire to take more of our money. You think logic, or even common sense, plays any part in this?

  50. About the only thing more pathetic in Australian politics than a rusted-on Labor supporter, is a bolted-on Liberal supporter.

    about the only thing more pathetic than a rusted on supporter of either party is the person who reflexively accuses others of being rusted on, bolted on supporters.

  51. MemoryVault

    Sorry Aussiepundit.

    You didn’t deserve that cheap dig.
    I’m just feeling a bit frustrated about the whole business of politics at the moment.

  52. Talleyrand

    Julie Novak
    #1363079, posted on June 28, 2014 at 5:33 pm
    Well, I did this not so long ago: http://catallaxyfiles.com/2013/12/05/what-every-australian-needs-to-know-about-school-funding/

    If you want a longer series to graph, Andrew Leigh’s paper on school productivity tells you which data sources to track down.

    Also you can try using the OECD note here

  53. Do you produce a good or a service, numbers?

    If you’re not in an industry, you are declaring that you are unproductive.

    I don’t describe what I do, and what I love doing, in economic terms, but I’ll play your silly game.
    If I teach a student with a disability sufficient independence skills to transforms that person from a disability pensioner to a wage earner, I’m returning literally millions to the taxpayer across that person’s lifetime, and contributing much more to the community than, say, your average trader at the big end of town.

    If that student with a disability has complex impairments that prevent open employment, but I teach him the skills to allow him to live safely in supported accommodation, I’m saving the community even more in the lifetime costs of 24 hour care.

    And then, of course, there’s that person’s dignity and quality of life to consider.
    But I guess those aspects don’t count on this site.
    It’s a blog about “economics”, (whatever that is) after all.

    I live in a society, not an economy.

    And teachers’ wages?

    From Wellbeing Australia

    Let’s stop and think for a minute how we value our teachers in the simplest of methods – what we pay them. A colleague recently sent me figures for Canada that I found very interesting so did a bit of research and matched them in Australia.

    What’s a basic baby-sitting wage – just for being there, no qualifications or input necessary other than just being with children to make sure they don’t do themselves any harm. What would you pay for that – perhaps $5 an hour per child? Not much.

    The average class size in NSW is 25 students (Office of Education, NSW, Nov 2013). I will assume that this is pretty much the same across the country.

    Now, not taking into account preparation time for lessons, parents evenings, school staff meetings, sports days, residential camps and the numerous weekends catching up on report writing or holidays – let’s just pay teachers for six hours a day for 190 days a year.

    What does that come to in babysitting rates? – $142, 500.

    The average teacher’s salary across Australia is $65, 371.

    So we pay teachers less than half than we would pay the teenager from next door for babysitting our kids. And if we counted all the other hours they do we would be paying them an even smaller fraction.

    Teachers who have studied for several years, gained formal qualifications, have high-level skills not just in their subject but in teaching methods; who have responsibility not just for child safety but for learning, behavior and other aspects of development. Teachers who often turn vulnerable lives around.

  54. I am sure we would all like to hear your brief, clear and concise explanation of what all the proposed spending in he name of Gonski

    Read the recommendations.

    And if you’re fair dinkum, read the final report.

  55. johno

    What does that come to in babysitting rates? – $142, 500.

    The average teacher’s salary across Australia is $65, 371.

    This ‘proves’ that babysitters are over paid. 🙂

  56. crocodile

    “data source – National assessment of educational progress” Why the comparison between Australian spending and American educational outcomes.

  57. Demosthenes

    What does that come to in babysitting rates? – $142, 500.

    I get your point, but the maths are very misleading. You’d pay a babysitter the same rate for one child as you would for three. Even teenagers understand economies of scale. It looks like Roffey doesn’t.

    Teachers aren’t paid much because there isn’t much competition for the job, a self-reinforcing cycle. It’s no accident that education degrees have cutoffs in the 50s and 60s.

  58. Andrew

    If I teach a student with a disability sufficient independence skills to transforms that person from a disability pensioner to a wage earner, I’m returning literally millions to the taxpayer across that person’s lifetime, and contributing much more to the community than, say, your average trader at the big end of town.

    And if you teach a class of 25 to be communist traitors and hate the Western ideals of democracy, freedom and capitalism thereby rendering them unemployable parasites and making them a permanent burden and possibly supporters of Islamist terrorist orgs, how much have you cost society?

  59. Senile Old Guy

    Half of all Tasmanians over the age of 15 are innumerate and illiterate.

    A completely erroneous and exaggerated statement about the results of the study. Students who are below arbitrary standards are not innumerate or illiterate.

  60. Senile Old Guy

    And if you teach a class of 25 to be communist traitors and hate the Western ideals of democracy, freedom and capitalism thereby rendering them unemployable parasites and making them a permanent burden and possibly supporters of Islamist terrorist orgs, how much have you cost society?

    You are a f*ckwit.

    That is really the only response that your remark requires. But, hey, keep on bashing teachers on a blog because…well, I don’t know.

  61. H B Bear

    Tasmania – Detroit with trees.

    The graph neatly illustrates the transfer of wealth from taxpayers to members of the teachers union. There is no surprise that, having killed off the manufacturing industry, the last great source of union members is the health, education and public service sectors. All dominated by government spending, bureaucracy and lack of market signals.

    Have a look at the next anti-Abbott rally (you won’t have to wait long). The blue singlets and fluro have been replaced by frumpy women with bingo arms and men in cardigans.

  62. Tel

    What’s a basic baby-sitting wage – just for being there, no qualifications or input necessary

    What does that come to in babysitting rates? – $142, 500.

    Let me shop around a bit and get back to you, I think there might be better offers on that.

  63. boy on a bike

    Depends on what you call babysitting. The missus did home daycare for a few years. The pay rate was indeed about $5 per hour per kid.

    Her day started at 8am with the first drop off and usually finished 10 hours later at 6pm with the last pick up. The only break she got was when the kids had their afternoon nap. She had a double sized rubbish bin because of all the nappies that had to be changed each week. She was expected to teach them as well as mind them – numbers, colours, shapes, the alphabet and so on – as well as set them to work on puzzles, crafts, activities and outdoor playtime. It might not be calculus and algebra and ancient history, but it’s still teaching. She often had to prepare their meals – and of course clean up after them – and bathe them if they made a pretty nasty mess of themselves. She was limited by law to (I think) 6 kids (less if they were babies), so her income was capped at $30 per hour.

    It’s cheaper to teach teens because they can look after themselves before the bell goes; they can get themselves home on the bus; they can feed themselves; most know how to use a toilet and if they are good students, they can be set a task and then left to fend for themselves.

    It might be hell on earth to teach a small class of tearaways who don’t want to be there – but then you have to ask the question, “Why are we forcing them to stay in school when they aren’t learning anything?”

  64. brc

    It might be hell on earth to teach a small class of tearaways who don’t want to be there – but then you have to ask the question, “Why are we forcing them to stay in school when they aren’t learning anything?”

    This gets to the nub of the matter really. Older versions of our society had master/apprentice systems, where the apprentice would learn a specific craft.

    Apprentices are less valuable because they cost money to have around. Everyone would go ape if we suggested thata cohort of teens would be better off in unpaid apprentice ships with a small study component. We prefer that they ‘work’ unpaid in a school uniform copying topics they have no interest in, into exercise books.

    Of course, the teachers union would be aghast if someone made money from the product of an apprentice while said apprentice was unpaid. But it’s not like the teachers themselves don’t proofit from their teensitting, which is what a majority of highschool is.

  65. ProEng

    “About the only industry on Earth that has been unable to find any efficiency gains regardless of extensive technology developments.”
    You forgot the aboriginal industry which has had lots of money thrown at it for negative benefit.
    No problem with the amendment of the constitution that aborigines should be counted (which most electors thought was the question and the only question) but the rot started with Whitless designating equal pay to working aborigines whose families were being fed, housed and educated. Whitless also messed up PNG giving them self government 10 to 20 years before they were ready.

  66. Andrew

    But, hey, keep on bashing teachers on a blog

    Not “teachers.” One teacher, who holds such uniformly reprehensible views that I’d rather send my kids to a Hizb-ut-Tahrir sponsored madrassa than let them into this person’s care (sic). Which is not to say there’s not others like it out there.

  67. boy on a bike

    One thing that graph makes clear is that we have picked all the low hanging fruit when it comes to education. If any gains are being made at the margin, they are being made at great cost – and we have to ask, is the cost worth it?

    I saw something the other day where someone was whingeing about being stuck with $100,000 in debt if the do a certain degree. My answer to that is, “Don’t study that course if it won’t provide a payback of at least $100,001”. Are people really that stupid? If they are that stupid, what are they doing at uni?

  68. Which is not to say there’s not others like it out there.

    You need one of these.…………

  69. Dave Wane

    As I have consistently argued: The federal education bureaucracy should be abolished, and in its place a Federal Education office should be created. This “office” would basically be a computer with a few humans to assist as required. Its purpose? Simply to provide every primary and secondary student in Australia with an education voucher – for use at the school of their choice. The voucher could be used at a public school, or used at a private school with some topping up by the parents. This would be the extent of Federal Government funding of education. How the states and territories deal with such an initiative would be interesting, to say the least, but I feel certain that it would encourage the establishment of more private schools. And obviously that would be a wonderful outcome.

  70. MemoryVault

    and in its place a Federal Education office should be created. This “office” would basically be a computer with a few humans to assist as required.

    Wayne,
    Having government “partly” involved in anything, is like “partly” taking a girl’s virginity.
    Education is the responsibility of the parents.
    Parents who fail to educate/have educated their children should be charged with neglect.
    And that should be the limit of government involvement.

  71. Dave Wane

    MemoryVault

    Obviously it would be far preferable to have zero taxpayer-funded education. No argument from me on that score. However, given the current massive federal education education is simply unnecessary, my proposal is a “politically possible” step in the correct direction – towards eliminating as many government schools as possible and creating a competitive education market.

  72. .

    Decimal, you started your argument by saying that if financial regulation is necessary business, therefore it must be a productive part of the economy.

    Pretty sure I didn’t.

  73. .

    If I teach a student with a disability sufficient independence skills to transforms that person from a disability pensioner to a wage earner, I’m returning literally millions to the taxpayer across that person’s lifetime, and contributing much more to the community than, say, your average trader at the big end of town.

    Hence you are in an industry.

    Why this is insulting and baffling to you we don’t know.

  74. .

    I live in a society, not an economy.

    You live in both, champ. You have fellow citizens and do the best you can with limited resources.

  75. .

    Teachers are paid enough. I think they were underpaid and became unprofessional when I was a kid.

    They are overworked, however. Abolish the increase in paperwork in the last 20 years – they will have time to teach and do PD stuff.

    Deregulation would be beneficial for teachers and outcomes.

  76. boy on a bike

    What baffles me is that those that hate private schools tell parents that they are wasting their money when they pay a lot in school fees.

    Those same people then turn around and say state schools need more money.

    Que?

  77. Tel

    Pretty sure I didn’t.

    I’ll leave you to carefully study the words written above. No point copying them again.

  78. nerblnob

    If I teach a student with a disability sufficient independence skills to transforms that person from a disability pensioner to a wage earner,

    Paid for by a private employer, or a government scheme especially set up for those with disabilities?

    If the latter, then the outcome is much the same as disability pensioner.

    It’s rather redundant to point out that a society which pays your wages and somehow provides goods and services that you want to spend them on is very much an economy. If it wasn’t, it wouldn’t be the kind of society you want to live in.

  79. duncanm

    Hey stop railing on Numbers.

    In this case, he’s right.

    Education is not an industry, its a charity for teachers.

  80. wreckage

    I live in a society, not an economy.

    Your fundamental error is to divide the two. The economy is nothing more than an observation of the flow of goods and capital within society itself. Your next mistake will be, to carry the implied metaphor, to assert that you’re a person, not a bloodstream, and then cut your wrists.

    Let me be very clear here: devaluing my money with your moralizing bullshit devalues the time and effort I must invest into making that money. Spit on it, and you spit on the hard, dirty work that I do; work that benefits everyone. Every time the government takes money off me to fund your self-righteous twattery, it is sending me back into the sheds with a shovel in my hand.

    And I note that when you reject “the economy” you make no offer – none – to stop accepting my money and do your work for the love of society. If “the economy” is so contemptible, why aren’t you a mendicant monk?

  81. The economy is nothing more than an observation of the flow of goods and capital within society itself.

    Exactly, it is a conduit, a tool – not an end in itself.
    Describing an individual’s endeavor purely in terms of the economy is similar to describing the Mona Lisa as just a bit of oil on canvas.

    Let me be very clear here: devaluing my money occupation with your moralizing bullshit ignorant condescension devalues the time and effort I must invest into making that moneycontinuing that work.

    FIFY

  82. wreckage

    I did nothing of the sort, numbers; in fact I value your profession, but I despise your cavalier attitude to other people’s money. You could try accepting the wisdom implicit in your own comment, perhaps, but experience tells me you’re intent on deflecting criticism and nothing more; you’re one of those people. You rearrange the words and throw them back, but you don’t show any signs of self-awareness.

  83. wreckage

    Describing an individual’s endeavor purely in terms of the economy is similar to describing the Mona Lisa as just a bit of oil on canvas.

    The Mona Lisa is oil on canvas. Ignore those components as somehow irrelevant and you end up with no Mona Lisa. To put it another way, an artist who never actually paints anything isn’t a very good artist, despite my “reducing” his art to mere “output of product”.

  84. I did nothing of the sort, numbers; in fact I value your profession, but I despise your cavalier attitude to other people’s money.

    I don’t have a “cavalier attitude to other people’s money”, but I do value “other people” above the means of exchange.
    As pointed out above, “other people” are content to pay me to perform a task which benefits a particular group of “other people”.
    You might as well argue that I should not have received my army pay whilst fighting in Vietnam.
    You have embraced an extremist ideology that values money but despises people.
    Or perhaps you’re simply naive – a died in the wool Glibertarian………….

  85. Aristogeiton

    dover_beach
    #1364750, posted on June 30, 2014 at 7:15 am
    Money is other people’s time.

    Too true. We’ll be sending you a bill, Numbers.

  86. The graph posted by Judith can’t be exactly replicated for Australia because we don’t have data like the NAEP data over a long period. Australia’s annual national testing program has only been running for 6 years. PISA and TIMSS have been going for longer but they are conducted every three or four years, which makes calculations of average increases a bit messy. Julie Novak pointed to Andrew Leigh’s productivity paper for a long-run analysis but it does not cover recent years. Leigh’s analysis uses LSAY data, which again are collected in waves, not annually.
    A few people have pointed out in the comments that comparing spending patterns with achievement over time should show per student spending, as total spending is obviously partly a function of student numbers. My CIS TARGET30 report has a graph showing per student spending against PISA scores since 2000. The trend is the same – spending up, achievement down – but with a less dramatic divergence in the trend lines.

  87. Lysander

    Actually Numbers; in WA you can be paid up to $100K as a senior teacher. Base salaries for first years are well above $50-55K and if you un-pro-rata their salary from a 8.45am to 3.15pm to a 9pm to 5pm job you’ll find yet another substantial increase in their salaries.

    Oh but they need this time for planning and stuff?

    Nope, that’s why they get 11 weeks annual leave per year as well as paid parental leave and all the other perks.

  88. Nope, that’s why they get 11 weeks annual leave per year as well as paid parental leave and all the other perks.

    Technically wrong.
    Generally, teachers get 4 weeks annual leave.
    They are stood down during school vacation.
    As a principal, I would routinely spend the first 2 weeks of the summer vacation at my school, and would be back at least two weeks prior to the beginning of the new school year.
    That is typical.
    Teaching has only one perk – the holidays, but it’s not the mythical 11 weeks per year.

  89. wreckage

    I don’t have a “cavalier attitude to other people’s money”, but I do value “other people” above the means of exchange.

    Yes you do, actually. Further, you have failed to grasp my basic point, and done so thoroughly and in detail. Then, having reiterated your total lack of understanding, and thrown in an argument that is flattered by the description “glib”, you call me a “glib ertarian”.

    You are psychological projection made flesh.

  90. wreckage

    Teaching has only one perk

    The wages are quite acceptable and the job security is excellent; the environment is very safe both in terms of long-term injury and accidental maiming; and the work is physically easy, allowing for, potentially, a very long career.

    I think teachers do an excellent job and deserve what they get. But I also think – well, actually, I know for a fact – a damned lot of them have no idea how good their pay and conditions are.

  91. The wages are quite acceptable and the job security is excellent;

    I know very few teachers are in it for the money, and I work with plenty of teachers who are on short term contracts and have no job security.

    the environment is very safe both in terms of long-term injury and accidental maiming;

    Well no.
    I work with a teacher who has had extensive surgery after being attacked by a sixteen year-old wielding a chair. She lost many of her teeth, and had to have her jaw wired. This is not an isolated incident.

    Before I retired from the principalship, I was attempting to retrieve a large student with severe autism from the middle of a busy four lane road when I split the bottom of my tibia as I twisted awkwardly. This resulted in immobilization of my leg and ankle which then led to a life-threatening deep vein thrombosis necessitating a course of pretty nasty medication.

    I also have chronic back pain as a result of repetitive manual lifting of students with physical impairments in the days before hoists became commonplace in special schools. As the minority male in a special school, and being of an obliging disposition meant that I bore the brunt of the heavy lifting for years. My orthopedic specialist was surprised that I was still working in the field and told me I should do something else before I ended up like my students – wheelchair bound.
    I was able to work through it and retired with accumulated sick leave of over two years untouched.

    well, actually, I know for a fact – a damned lot of them have no idea how good their pay and conditions are.

    Having worked in a variety of occupations, both in the public and private sector, I can assure you that many occupations enjoy much less exposure to real open ended physical threat than teaching.

  92. The graph above shows that total spend on education per pupil does not correlate to educational outcomes. Well done.

    So what does correlate? We know the answer to this. The two countries with the best education outcomes in the world are Finland and South Korea, by huge margins. There are some similarities: in both countries many children start pre-school early (from age 3) but formal school doesn’t start until age 7. Then they diverge: in Finland there is no homework at all and a lot of child-directed learning, while in Korea there is a huge workload (and a correspondingly high student suicide rate), lots of homework and extra study.

    The two countries have one thing in common: they have a massive focus on equity in school funding. Private schools are not richer than public schools. In South Korea the private schools get a lower subsidy that the state ones, and in Finland there are few private schools as they get the same subsidy as public ones but have to follow the same admission rules as the public ones and are prohibited from charging fees. Meanwhile in the US they spend inequitably and you get the graph above. Very similar to their health care spending: highest in the world, but terrible average outcomes, because they spend money so unevenly.

    There is a simple and inescapable logic to this. If spend per student depends on how rich their parents are, then most of the resources go on a random subset of rich kids who may or may not get the most out of those resources. If the resources are spread evenly then poor kids with potential have a chance to realise that potential. Total achievement over the cohort goes up.

    And, ta-dah! This is what Gonski is designed to do. It’s politically untenable to cut subsidies to rich schools, so instead those are left as they are, and subsidies to poor schools are raised so that we end up with equitable funding. Right now, as Australia has a 1.5 Trillion dollar economy, we can afford this. And if we buy ourselves a generation of well-educated kids who go on to expand opportunity for everyone, we may even be able to continue to afford it.

Comments are closed.