......and ask if they can guarantee your child wont be being taught by people who have only completed a 6 to 8 week (learning to pass your skills onto kids) course, whilst completing a lazy substitute associate teaching diploma online if Gillard and the greens win this pro-republican election.

This policy of fast-tracking people into the teaching "soon-not-to-be" profession is a US Obama policy.

Not Gillards!

Both private and public schools will be effected, as the rate of pay becomes less negotiable with an emerging influx of not-quite-teachers applying for teaching positions.

Thus the standard of teaching and education will drop even further than it already has with Gillards school building and lap-top failings.

A vote for the Greens or Labor is a vote for a Republic, and unfortunately, as has been demonstrated, Obamas failed policies come with it.i

JULIA GILLARD WANTS MORE MUSLIM INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS

But oh dear, where did this article go?

Hey guys, take a look at this article:

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23037328-29277,00.html


Quote:

Gillard has patronisingly told Australians that more Muslim schools is part of living in "modern Australia" so we should just accept it. The fact that Gillard is championing the cause of Islamic Australia whilst doing her best to attack Christian values and Christian schools is quite disturbing. Lets not forget that Gillard was a driving force behind Mark Lathams plans to strip funding away from private christian schools and low fee catholic schools. She was pushing that policy (which the ALP have now dropped in order to appear less "anti-family").

The original link was posted on this forum,
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-407851.html
however, newscorp decided to pull it for some strange reason.

"Page not found"

Can you think why?

And  can any of you retrieve this article?

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23037328-29277,00.html

Lots of "Gillard articles appear to be missing-in-action" since her rise to glory.

How ironic.

8-)

Mellie, making the teaching profession more accessible to every able personis a good thing. However, a short course qualification is not the way to go about it. We should just get rid of degree requirements for teachers altogether and replace them with comprehensive, grueling aptitude tests (specialized for the type of teacher). A few of my friends, including myself, never went to college nor completed high school, and yet, are certainly more than capable of teaching. Certification and degree whoring is unfair and punishes independent learners and disciplined autodidacts. A qualification test can be constructed in such a way that it will produce a high predictive validity for teacher performance (higher than degrees and work experience put together, easily) and will open up job opportunities to everybody with the talent and knowledge to be a teacher; not just those that a scrap of paper saying that they "can".

Nationally accredited professional aptitude tests threaten to render the entire tertiary education industry almost entirely irrelevant. They would also completely overthrow employer usage of "prestige" colleges as proxies for discipline and cognitive ability. It would be a real educational revolution. Not to mention the fact that it would allow our brightest and most promising minds to totally circumvent the clutches of the leftist drones that lord over academia. Private enterprises would spring up left and right offering brief (relative to bachelor degrees) courses. What is learnt in them would be picked up in properly constructed, discriminating aptitutde tests, and this would open up the professions to everybody sufficiently capable of performing well in these professions; without needing them to spend years, partially at the taxpayers expense, in universities.

aikmann4 wrote on Aug 18^th, 2010 at 1:33pm:

Mellie, making the teaching profession more accessible to everybody is a good thing. However, a short course qualification is not the way to go about it. We should just get rid of degree requirements for teachers altogether and replace them with comprehensive, gruelling skills tests (specialized for the type of teacher). A few of my friends, including myself, never went to college nor completed high school and yet are certainly more than capable of teaching. Certification and degree whoring is unfair and punishes independent learners and disciplined autodidacts. A qualification test can be constructed in such a way that it will produce a high predictive validity for teacher performance (higher than degrees and work experience put together, easily) and will open up job opportunities to everybody with the talent and knowledge to be a teacher; not just those that a scrap of paper saying that they "can".

Or we could pay teachers what they are worth for a change.

This and supply schools with adequate funding and support, this opposed to rolling it all out on a NBN?

The trouble is, we have not appropriated adequate 'available'  funding towards infrastructure, health and education, in accordance with population growth, preferring to semi-privatise (band-aid effect) and squander funds on useless projects such as Lap-tops, pink-bats, and wasteful school building projects to create the illusion we have invested in the future, when clearly we have not.

We had a surplus, were in a position to stay in good shape, this and could have done so had Gillard not squandered it needlessly.

Imagine if Rudd have had handed out free- teaching scholarships to thousands of bright "AUSTRALIAN" HSC students back in 2007?

No, he took the US-backed  opportunistic model, to work towards turning us into a republic.

"HENCE THE BIG AUSTRALIA"

.....Which Gillard denies wanting anything to do with, though has yet to show us her population and immigration policies.


And this is why the Greens and Labor writhe for the same republic ideal, this and have become one big Green-Labor coalition party?

Ok, be a coalition, but at least be honest about it and tell the Australian people what they're voting for.

Because back dooring Australians is rather impolite.


::)i

Quote:

Or we could pay teachers what they are worth for a change.

How much is that? Most of the teachers in my school weren't worth more than $24,000 a year.

Quality of schooling is a lot less important than you think.

It amazes me how all you people turn every issue around into a Labor/Liberal mudslinging match. There's a world of discussion beyond the superficial differences of the two heads of the Hydra of the main parties.

aikmann4 wrote on Aug 18^th, 2010 at 1:56pm:

Quote: Or we could pay teachers what they are worth for a change. How much is that? Most of the teachers in my school weren't worth more than $24,000 a year. Quality of schooling is a lot less important than you think. It amazes me how all you people turn every issue around into a Labor/Liberal mudslinging match. There's a world of discussion beyond the superficial differences of the two headed hydra of the main parties.

One gets what they pay for!

8-)

We need to work towards raising the calibre of all helping professions, if we truly do want to see an "education revolution" as something more than a slogan.


Finland, according a major international survey, has the best educational system in the world, why cant we follow their model?

This oppose to following Obamas?

How do you suppose we raise the calibre of the "helping professions"? My aptitude testing in the place of degrees would go a long way to doing so. Bad and unknowledgable teachers would simply be screened out of the process. It would also open up the profession to all sorts of professionals who have specialized in other fields who want to take part in teaching for a while; engineers, mathematicians, etc interested in teaching for a while could take the tests and qualify as math teachers. You'll see all sorts of very talented people coming and going.

aikmann4 wrote on Aug 18^th, 2010 at 2:12pm:

How do you suppose we raise the calibre of the "helping professions"? My aptitude testing in the place of degrees would go a long way to doing so. Bad and unknowledgable teachers would simply be screened out of the process. It would also open up the profession to all sorts of professionals who have specialized in other fields who want to take part in teaching for a while; engineers, mathematicians, etc interested in teaching for a while could take the tests and qualify as math teachers. You'll see all sorts of very talented people coming and going.

8 weeks is not enough time to learn how to pass your skills onto others, particularly distractable kids who provide a challenge for even the more experienced teachers.

Gillard is offering a short term solution to a long term problem, we should be gradually improving, not revolutionising over night.

Rome wasn't built in a day, even if the Gillard Labor administration was.


Imagine all those grubs looking for their fast- ticket into the profession?...

8 weeks is better than waiting 4 years...and with the wages & conditions being so bad, this and sure to get allot worse.... hey...  there has to be some sort of incentive afterall?

....  Yes, I'm sure they will have plenty of candidates jumping at the chance.

Ultimately, if you were a peddo, you might re-think going to uni for 4 years just to work with kids, but if given the option of testing the waters after just 8 weeks, and a crim-check then hey.....

I'm sure Denis Ferguson types will jump at the chance to revolutionise their 'own' professions.

At the expense of our kids, and the teaching profession itself.



8-)

???

I never supported an eight week course. In fact I explictly said it wasn't a good idea.

If we want better teachers, we need to pay them more so we hold onto the good ones, not treat it like a maccas job.