Last week the states agreed to the implementation of changes to the national school curriculum brought about by the National Curriculum Review undertaken last year. Of the 30 recommendations, the government ultimately followed through on only four: Reduce curriculum crowding Address the needs of students with intellectual disabilities Increase phonics in the curriculum So what does this mean for what our kids are learning in schools?
David Gonski was the architect of the needs-based funding model that the Labor party hobbledand which the Liberal party then sent right down the gurgler.
Did this mean we were back to a funding model that was apolitical, sector blind and all about a distribution of money based on need? Well, there is good news and bad news, and then some more bad news.
They say they need that promised money to deliver on education programs they have already put in place, and which they argue are already making a real difference to students. Fairer and sector blind The good news This funding deal returns to the original Gonski principle of one funding formula for everyone.
This is in contrast to the multiple deals done with systems and states back in as the Labor government tried to get a Gonski take-up around the nation.
They gave out lots of money, and promised that everyone would be a winner.
This deal-making did not solve the problem of funding inequity between the schooling sectors. Poor schools got more money, but so did rich schools.
The bad news The federal government inexplicably remains the benevolent benefactor of the private sector. It will rely on the goodwill of the states to fund the remaining amounts.
So it is only the private schools that are getting an iron-clad guarantee for most of their funding into the future. Not fair and certainly not sector blind.
Needs-based The good news The government claims their new funding proposal returns us to the absolute crux of the original Gonski review - it will be truly needs-based. This means there will be extra loadings for students who need more support to achieve. There will be loadings for low socio-economic status, Indigenous students, students with a disability, students with limited English language proficiency, school size, and regional or remote locations.
The bad news - and this is really bad news The government has no proposal for the allocation of those loadings. As a consequence they have no idea how much money it will cost to fund them.
Who will be eligible for the disability loadings? Each state and sector defines disability differently. The government says it will come up with a national definition. But it does not have one yet. Who will be eligible for the English language loadings?
How would this be measured? Nobody knows, including the government. And there is nothing in the budget papers or the Education Acts to indicate that the money will actually be delivered to the students who attract the loadings.
States, instead, could just spend the money on the general business of running an education system. The original Gonski report said that it was imperative an independent body, a National Schools Resourcing Body, be set up to answer these questions, and to monitor how those loadings are distributed.
The latest Education Council changes to the curriculum have not flagged a change to this three-dimensional structure, although the exact nature of change remains to be seen. The Clark County School District is teaming up with the justice system to combat the school-to-prison pipeline under a new program being unveiled Friday. With this change, teachers with a supplementary certificate will have more time to complete the requirements for their initial or professional certificate in the new certificate area. The Notice of Proposed Rule Making will be published in the State Register on Jan. .
However there is no indication that body will ever be instituted, and without it this funding proposal cannot claim to be needs-based and it will not successfully address educational disadvantage. Very bad news indeed. A new review - Gonski 2. This new review is to decide what good teaching and learning looks like.
Ken Boston, a member of the Gonski review panel, observedWe concluded that the issue in low-performing schools is not the quality of teachers in these schools but the magnitude of the task they are facing.
These teachers work in the emergency wards of Australian education, yet they lack the battery of specialist support typical of an emergency ward in a hospital.Other factors include changes in school purposes and populations, new school construction, the addition or elimination of busing, and the overall physical infrastructure, street layout, and traffic signs and signals surrounding a school.
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A Tulane University-based research group says New Orleans public schools saw sustained improvement in achievement scores, high school graduation rates and students' college.
In , the state legislature removed the cap on the number of charter schools, made changes that weaken charter accountability and oversight, and limited the ability of local districts to address negative impacts of charters on regular public schools.
Trump and other GOP lawmakers have worked to loosen gun restrictions, and the few bipartisan efforts to address mass shootings have stalled. FAFSA Changes for – Changes for the –18 FAFSA ® Process Resources for You and Your Students Sign Up for Emailed Updates.
Changes for the –18 FAFSA ® Process.
The –18 Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA ®) season began earlier than previous FAFSA application cycles. Since Oct. 1, , students have been able to fill out the FAFSA form for the –18 school . The new school year brought with it changes for some school districts.
At Watertown High School, this is Chad Fairchild's first year as principal. "The energy is awesome around the building. It.