Inconversible Thoughts

We often hear it phrased that the children of today are our ‘future’. This has been said over the last two decades and continues to be thrown around, especially in the political lime light. It is a way that politicians and those that want to be seen as empathetic can earn some reward points with the voters. Over the last many years it has worked well, right to the point that you believe it. Well, it isn’t true. Not in the way that you think it is.

When we say that the children of today are tomorrows leaders, that they are the future, we bring about thoughts that they will be able to do the world better, that they will be the politicians and presidents who will be able to bring about a new way of living, a better one. We trust that moving forward the children, then adults, will be able to place their knowledge and their skills in making the world a better place. This is all true, and very possible. This isn’t the problem though. The only thing that detracts all of this from happening is found in the description itself, for example when I wrote “place their knowledge and skills in making the world a better place”, what exactly are the knowledge and skills that these children gain?

To answer this thoroughly we need to look at the education system. Focusing on the Australian Education system we see a system which uses residual powers. The states look after the schools, the nation looks after the universities. Everything else simply fits in here or there, but in general things are consistent state-by-state. If we restrict out focus to the state schooling of South Australia we can see that the setup is very simple, yet in being so is very limited. The selection of topics available to students from reception through to year 12, final year of school, is very limited. In fact, students are told what they will study up to Year 10, and before this it is selected from a state curriculum. Surely this is good? Well, what is ‘good’ when it comes to Education?

The question of a ‘good education’ can bring about many different responses. At the end of Primary School, year 7, what do we want our students  to be able to do? Should they be able to read and write? I would assume most people would say yes, and I agree: They should be literate. They should be able to do simple mathematical equations? Once again, I agree: They should be numerate. But what else? Is it enough to simple know how to read and write? What about going beyond what is ‘required’ to live, and delve into what will help them beyond that. What if they leave primary school with the ability to read, but no desire to do so? What if they know how to multiply but have no will to apply it to their everyday lives? What if they can string together sentences but not appreciate the beauty contained within a poetic verse? Is their education still a good one, or merely an acceptable one? Is it even this?

The way that South Australian schools are currently set out, the students all learn the minimum and are graded depending how well they do on a ‘Basic Skills Test’. Each South Australian student does this and it allows the government to rank the students amongst themselves. Good for competitive reasons, bad for ranking schools and providing money to those schools that seem to be doing well within the test. Beyond this, the schools are teaching a curriculum which was devised by those on the payroll of the political party in power. It was not especially consulted through the experienced Education faculty members, nor was it given the chance to be scrutinised by the parents and community members that it would actually serve. Reminiscent of the strict teachings of the early 1920’s, it is now in place and students are being taught it verbatim. It seems to be doing ok though, so why change it?

I tie this back to the opening paragraph and remind you that the students are supposed to be the future: a forever changing path to help improve the world. How can a student of today change the world tomorrow if all they are taught is the same as yesterday? I mentioned above that the current curriculum is similar to that taught in the 1920’s, this means that our students are offered the same mindset (conservative) and same approach (conservative) as they were many decades ago. When it comes to implement “changes” in the political ring, do you not think that the students will also “change” in accordance to what they taught growing up?

The question often gets asked “if it isn’t broken, why not fix it?” A valid question, but a very naive one. When it comes to the education system, who gets to decide if it broken or not? Unlike a car or toaster, it simply doesn’t ‘stop’ working. Yes, there are the physical signs that it is in strife- such as what we are seeing now: violence within our schools; a decrease in test grades (though measurement of these is questionable); teachers striking, etc. There is another way of measuring a broken Education system but, and it is the way that we should approach it from the beginning. If we look at the current news articles in regards to education we will see that they are somewhat familiar of previous attempts. Julia Gillard has been in the media a lot in recent times in regards to education as she is attempting to push for a revolutionary change, unfortunately it is not a ‘new’ change, but a step back into what was proposed a long time ago. Not only with her national curriculum, but other things as well. In addition to the curriculum she is attempting to introduce a Nation Student Number for all students which ties the student’s academic records to the student for the life of their schooling. Questionable though it is itself, it is not unlike a government proposed to do with all citizens many years ago. Here is a very good example of a person pushing for something ‘new’, but is merely a repeat of what they were taught growing up. It is not new, it is not revolutionary, and it is not good. In regards to the curriculum, Julia is merely trying to push on the students what she learnt growing up, which is what they then would push on their students once they are in power.

What Australia needs is a *new* approach to Education. I believe that schools should be focussing more on ethical and moral topics rather than the technical ones. For example, I learnt psychology during school and in retrospect I believe that it was the biggest waste of my time. I’ve never used it, I’ve never had the urge to pursue a career in psychology and I could have been doing something else. What if I had actually studies Ethical Problems or something of the sort, perhaps I may have been able to make a contribution to the world through my understand of third-world-suffering or similar.

As it stands students are our future, but their voice is simply the echoes of leaders of the past. For the future of our state, country and world I do hope that we soon see a greater focus on the Education system within Australia.

You Might Want to Read:

1. A National Curriculum for Australia
2. News Weekly: Bring Back the Cane to State Schools, Troubled Children too Much