Education – the unkindest cut of all

Most of the early anguish resulting from the Australian Commission of Audit’s recommendations for cuts in government spending has centred on health - perhaps not surprising as we all want to live long and healthy lives. I would argue, however, that the recommended reductions in spending on education will be the most dangerous and, if carried though in their entirety, the most devastating for the future of the nation.

A day before the commission issued its findings I read a report from the right-wing think tank, The Centre for Independent Studies, authored by Jennifer Buckingham, in which she argued that students of well-off families should pay fees if they send their children to government schools.   

She would also like to see grants (she suggests $10,000) given to low-income parents who send their children to non-government schools, and an end to maximum class sizes.

Dr Buckingham supports these and other recommendations in the report by stating that steady increases in school funding over the past 25 years have not resulted in higher levels of student achievement.

“Current and future funding for schools must be reviewed. Australian governments seeking to reduce public debt cannot quarantine school education budgets from their efforts, especially since history shows that increased spending at the system level is likely to yield only minimal benefits,” she says.

Dr Buckingham has made her career in education research. She has been at the Centre for Independent Studies for some 15 years and spent a short while as schools editor for the Australian newspaper. Nowhere do I see in her CV that she has had any practical experience in the classroom.

If she had, she might have factored in a few more reasons for the lack of academic progress, other than a failure of the education system – increasing restrictions on teachers that make it ever harder for them to maintain discipline in the classroom; lack of parental support and, in some cases, a tendency of parents to take the part of the child against the teacher; a failure by some parents to place limits on their children’s access to social media and television which results in them coming to school tired and unmotivated to learn.

It is true, as Dr Buckingham states, that there is an over-supply of people with teaching degrees. One reason for this is that teachers are increasingly dropping out of the profession when they come face-to-face with the difficulties of actually delivering lessons to disruptive and unmotivated students.

Certainly it would help, as she suggests, if more teachers were among the top 30 per cent of school graduates. However, if the recommendations of the Commission of Audit for higher fees and increased interest on student loans are adopted, there may be fewer people interested in pursuing tertiary education and greater competition for the services of those who do.

To return to my original argument: in a world of constant change, Australia’s wealth depends far too heavily on the exploitation of mineral resources and primary produce. The nation needs a highly educated and entrepreneurial workforce where scientists, engineers, designers, IT professionals, artists etc. are given free rein to their talents.

As old industries, such as vehicle manufacturing, are transferred to low-wage nations closer to mass markets, we must literally invent new industries to replace them. That will involve more resources placed in primary, secondary, tertiary education, research and development – and certainly not the casual abandonment of the concept of universal free education.  

Our future lies in doing things better and doing things first. Everything else – our health, social systems, our quality of life, depends on it.