Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
>> I'd like to begin the course
by acknowledging the traditional owners of the [inaudible]
and the [inaudible] people and paying our respects
to their elders past and present.
The John Curtin Institute of Public Policy is very pleased
to be co-hosting today's public policy forum with CEDA,
the Committee for Economic Development of Australia.
Curtin and particularly through the Curtin Business School has a
great cooperative relationship with CEDA,
and this was proven again in the lead up to today's event.
So I thank for Liz Richie and her team
for joining forces with us today.
Our Institute prides itself
on bringing key national decision makers
to our western Australian audience
to discuss important public policy issues.
And, of course, today's event is no exception.
Later in the year we're expecting a number
of other distinguished speakers so please keep a lookout
on our website our via the email.
But for now, though, in the interest of time I would
like to call upon the Vice Chancellor
of Curtin University Professor Jeanette Hackett
to introduce our speaker.
So, Jeanette?
[ Applause ]
>> Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
And I also acknowledge the indigenous owners of the land
on which we're meeting today and pay my respect
to their elders past and present.
I particularly acknowledge the community leaders
that we have here today.
I look around and see many people who are leaders
in education or who are contributors
and volunteers in education.
So welcome.
It's terrific to have you here to be able to think
about such an important topic as the future of schools funding.
I especially acknowledge two of my own close colleague,
Professor Kerry *** who is the Vice Chancellor
of Edith Cowan University, and Professor Bill Louden
who is the Senior Deputy Vice Chancellor
at the University of Western Australia.
For all of us, of course,
funding of schools is a matter of great importance.
We all want to ensure that every child has access to schools
that are well funded and effective in developing
and educating our society's future citizens and leaders.
And making sure that we produce graduates and school leavers
who will be future entrepreneurs, the innovators
and employers and employees.
As an educational institution Curtin University has a
particular interest in the future of schools.
At one level, of course, it's critical
because school leavers are the largest source
of students for universities.
And then, of course, universities and Curtin
in particular also prepares teachers for tomorrow.
Every year at Curtin we graduate about 180 students with degrees
in early childhood, primary and secondary education,
plus usually something like 45 to 50 graduate diploma students.
We're also very active in science and math education
with our Science and Mathematics Education Centre or SMEC.
And it has a focus on offering post-graduate studies in science
and mathematics and technology education.
And this has been ongoing for 25 years,
and certainly has a very strong international reputation.
We have over 400 students including 300 studying
at doctoral level at SMEC.
And we believe it's the largest group
of post-graduate students specifically in science,
mathematics and technology anywhere in the world.
And we've done tremendous work in places as far afield
as Africa and the United States.
So it's a real lamplight for that field of education.
We also undertake a number of engagement activities
with other educational institution, and I'm aware
that our colleague universities do similar sorts of things.
For example, Curtin has a program called Curtin LinkUp.
And on an ongoing basis the university works
with year ten students mainly from local low SES schools.
We seek to lift their aspirations,
to come to university.
And we are finding that that's producing a very significant
improvement in their take up of higher education.
But our staff are also involved
in other programs including Curtin Coaches
which is a program where we send Curtin pre-service teachers
into low SES schools, and they work with small groups
of students, very frequently one-on-one,
assisting with their learning.
And there are a range of other activities for engagement.
But, again, it's all the universities
in western Australia that really seek to strengthen
that relationship with schools education.
This year Curtin University also accepted its first intake
of students into the bachelor of arts early education.
And this is a course intending to provide an opportunity
for directors and senior staff in early learning centres
to up school, and also it follows
on the new COAG national quantity agenda.
So for many reasons all
of us are deeply committed to schools education.
So now to our speaker today
who needs very little introduction, of course.
The honourable Peter Garrett has a very distinguished career.
We would all know that he's been a very passionate advocate
and campaigner on a range
of contemporary Australian and global issues.
And we all know he was a former member
of the Australian band Midnight Oil.
He served two terms as President
of the Australian Conservation Foundation from 1989 to 1993
and then from 1998 to 2004.
He received the Australian Humanitarian Foundation Award
in the environment category in 2000.
And in 2003 received the Order of Australia in the member
of the general division for his contribution to environment
and to the music industry.
In 2004 he entered Federal Parliament when he was elected
as the labor member for Kingsford Smith.
In 2007 he was appointed Minister for the Environment,
Heritage and the Arts following the election
of the Federal Labor Government.
Following the 2010 federal election Peter was sworn
as the Minister for School Education,
Early Childhood and Youth.
And it's in his capacity as Minister for School Education
that he's speaking with us today remarking the landmark Gonski
review on school funding.
Please warmly welcome the Minister.
[ Applause ]
>> Look, thank you to John Curtin Institute and CEDA
for hosting this important event.
Genuine pleasure to join you in pers.
To have the opportunity to outline the background and scope
of the most significant commonwealth reforms
to school education for decades.
And this is a period of unprecedented reform activity
and debate Australia-wide.
I welcome the opportunity to participate here today
with many others who are speaking to you and presenting
who have significant interest
and significant expertise in education policy.
By the by I was here late last year
for the Commonwealth Youth Forum which led into CHOGM.
They were both terrific events.
I thought they showcased the city well
and certainly western Australia's beautiful
natural environment.
And, of course, I'm also pleased to have the opportunity
to honour the work of John Curtin by speaking
at an event co-hosted by the institute named in his memory.
I must say reflecting on speaking to you today I do feel
that we continue to honour Curtin's contribution and legacy
in all the work the Australian government is doing
to build a society where citizens are supported
to reach their potential not only
for their individual benefit but also for the good
of the community in which they live.
A few months ago I had the pleasure
of awarding the National History Challenge Prize
to an outstanding ACT school student, Ellen Trevanion,
who wrote an exception analysis
of John Curtin's wartime relations
with the United Kingdom.
So for the institute that's something to follow up,
a really good bit of young scholarship.
And, finally, here it was a high point for me to be able
to approve funds for the preservation of his family home
in Cottesloe when I was Minister for Environment
and Heritage just a few years ago.
Now, the education, both formal and informal,
of John Curtin provides a useful starting point in any discussion
of the importance of education
and the reasons for education reform.
Following an erratic education at several Catholic
and state schools in Melbourne, Curtin left school at 13
and entered the world of work.
Each night he'd go to the public library to read.
He read to educate himself carefully and deliberately.
He read political works, poetry, novels and essays.
But he didn't only read.
He played cricket and football and eventually turned
out as a sturdy back for Brunswick.
At the same time gaining a reputation
as the labor boy-orator on the Yarra bank
and at the Eastern Market.
It's a remarkable story of intellect,
self- improvement and hard work.
And he filled all the gaps, the education gaps,
left by the poor quality of early 20th century schooling.
So his is an outstanding example
and I might add very much a labor story.
A man of working class origins rising through is own ability
and capacity to eventually lead the nation
at its time of greatest need.
I believe that people like John Curtin will always emerge
through their indomitable will and the support of others.
But for every John Curtin there were many others who weren't
so successful, for whom school education didn't exist
or was of poor quality.
Because central to the Curtin story is education
and what we describe today as a fully rounded education.
Academic pursuits, sport, music, public speaking.
But what Curtin provided through his own drive can't be left
to chance.
If we do not give every child in every school the opportunity
to be the best they can be we lose immense personal potential
and national capacity.
We lose tradesmen and scientists and athletes and musicians
and lawyers and engineers and potential noble lariats
and potential prime ministers even.
So this government's not leaving education to chance.
Until 2007 school education wasn't a national priority
and now it is.
So how do we do this?
How do we give every student opportunity?
Well, the answer is we do it
by making every school a great school.
And I want to reprise for you some
of the arguments I made last week at the Sidney Institute.
I think they bear repeating.
Now, firstly you may be aware that the Director General
of the Finland Ministry of Education, Pasi Sahlberg,
has recently been visiting Australia.
Finland students are among the world's to performers
as measured by the OECD Program
for Internal Student Assessment known by its acronym PISA.
Australian students also perform well in PISA with achievement
above the international average in reading, math and science.
But in the past decade our results have declined while
other countries have improved.
Finland has been systematically focusing on equity and quality
in their education system since the 1970s.
Finland also has very high university entrance requirements
for studying teaching.
On the other hand the Grattan Institute,
and I can see Ben Jensen is here, recently reported on,
and I quote, Ben, a shift from west to east
in school education performance.
That's a comment that catches attention
with the institute noting
that for the world's five highest performing systems,
and doubtless you've heard this, comprise Hong Kong, Korea,
Shanghai and Singapore.
And in Shanghai the average 15 year old math student performing
at a level two or three years above his or her counterpart
in Australia, the USA and Europe.
Now, the successful approaches used in other countries vary.
And they're often based on very different social
and structural arrangements.
I think it would be a mistake to try to copy overseas models
that don't fit our circumstances.
Still, what we can say is that our challenge is
to develop a uniquely Australian education solution applying
successful international strategies to local conditions
and drawing on our own expertise,
knowledge and insights.
In 2007 we inherited a system of different standards
of curriculum, of teaching, of teacher training,
of access to technology, of equity programs
and of school funding.
And we knew that we could do better.
So in 2007 we began to build a new architecture
for Australian schooling with the key features
of transparency, accountability, measurement
and investment in what counts.
This investment has seen us provide $65 billion
over four years, almost doubling the school education budget.
And there were clear problems with the existing system,
eight different curricula,
eight teacher accreditation systems and so on.
And the decline in student performance
that I've just mentioned a warning to us as a country
that the current approach to education
and education funding was inadequate to the task.
Some of these flaws
in Australian education invited national solutions.
Some required national leadership.
And what was overdue was an all encompassing education
improvement framework in which schools, all schools,
and students, all students, could flourish.
We're also clear that schools should not resemble identical
outlets of mass education isolated from neighbourhoods.
They should be unique, lively and fully engaged and integrated
with their communities.
At the same time common, high quality curriculum
and outstanding teachers are identified
as necessary in every school.
The answers are different to East Asia and different
to Finland and Europe.
I ask specifically Australian responses because states
and territories and school sectors run schools.
They run them well, and they should continue to have
that purpose and that function.
So any reform requires their close collaboration
and their agreement.
However, first up transparency.
Publicly accounting for public expenditure I think is
self-evidently an important principle.
But in education this had an important further dimension.
Allowing a light to shine on schools, for My School,
kick started a debate about improvement.
And for far too long until we brought My School
into being we simply hadn't known what was happening
in schools around Australia.
Concurrently we began the process
of introducing a high quality Australian curriculum which sets
out a consistent approach
to what students learn across the country.
A curriculum is a common learning entitlement,
a careful cultural statement about who we are as a nation.
But it should not be greatly different
in remote far north Queensland
than in the suburbs of this city.
And just like the state's railroad tracks
that eventually met seamlessly
at the borders we're now seeing an Australian curriculum rolling
out across the country.
Nor should the important steps in reform be compromised
by the teachers in the classroom.
And it is the case that the common threat that runs
through the successful education systems of East Asia
and Finland is teacher quality.
And we've introduced significant reforms in this area.
New minimum teacher training requirements setting the bar
higher in terms of entry levels to teaching.
Introducing national professional standards
for teachers and school principles.
The teaching standards creating an opportunity
to introduce merit pay.
For the first time old yearly salary progression systems are
breaking down.
And for next year every teacher in the country will be entitled
to effective performance management and support.
And for some it will be the first time this has
ever happened.
But getting this big picture right is only part of the task.
We know that the hard work
of education happens in the schools.
And an Australian education system needs
to be founded on quality schools.
And our schools are filled
with tertiary educated creative individuals who can manage,
organise and problem solve.
But in too many cases the formula as we could call it gets
in the way of the better solution, the local solution.
And I can say that the western Australian government
through its independent public schools have provided a
conspicuous example of reform in this area.
We're working with state and territory governments
to assist them in this process
through our empowering local schools reform,
commonwealth investment to allow schools to control more
of their finances, their staffing or their governance.
And most states and territories
and non-government sectors have enthusiastically embraced
this initiative.
We've introduced national partnerships with states
and territories to improve the literacy and numeracy results
of low SES students and raising the bar on teacher quality.
I can't stress enough that this is the first time
that focused partnership investment in education driven
by the commonwealth across all sectors, government
and non-government, has taken place on this scale.
And we've seen improvements in schools receiving funding
under the literacy and numeracy national partnerships including
in year three reading with 70 percent of schools improved,
and in year five numeracy with 75 percent of schools improved.
And I do note that education reforms
in western Australia are also showing dividends.
2011 was the best NAPLAN year ever
for western Australian schools.
The state's cohort gains across 2009 to 2011 for years three
to five, five to seven and seven to nine were higher
than the Australian average cohort gains
for all assessments.
And in a result which western Australia I think deserves
particular congratulations indigenous students also made
some important gains with significant improvements
in main schools in reading, spelling,
grammar and punctuation.
That's good news.
And there are other national reforms,
national trade cadetships, computers in schools,
trades training centres.
In western Australia alone the Gillard government has approved
over $149 million to fund 42 trades training centre projects
benefitting 142 schools.
By term one this year we've installed more
than 84,000 computers at 365 schools
under the National Secondary School Computer Fund.
And as you would be well aware under the building,
the education revolution an investment
of over $1.8 billion dollars for nearly 3,000 projects
at 1,065 schools in western Australia.
And pleasingly all these [inaudible] projects have
commenced, and 99.5 percent are complete.
As I said before, all these investments
from our government have been sector blind designed
to benefit all Australian schools.
And they are essential measures of where
to modernise our schools and prepare our students for work
and life in a new century,
a century that has been dubbed the Asian century.
So we've constructed a new national education architecture
that balances school empowerment with national standards.
We've put design back into the system with robust,
clearly articulated long-term policies
that we believe will bear fruit over the next decade.
The final issue that draws together all the elements
in our first wave of reform is a focus on student need
and an effective funding system.
A funding system that supports fairness, creativity, excellence
and accountability, a funding system that is transparent,
clearly understood and provides certainty across the sectors.
We believe getting a funding right will provide the engine
to drive future improvement.
So to that end in 2010 the first comprehensive review
of school funding was commissioned chaired
by Sidney businessmen Mr. David Gonski, the first time
since the Carmel report nearly four decades ago,
a review of this size and importance.
I have to say David Gonski
and his team have done a terrific job.
Western Australia was well represented by the way
by Carmen Lawrence and Peter Tanig.
Both of those names I'm sure are familiar to everybody here.
Both of them on the review panel.
And that report recently released has been widely praised
by education stakeholders.
It's provided a platform we needed
to have a national discussion, a mature national discussion
about how schools should be funded.
And as you know the review panel found that, and I quote,
Australia lacks a logical, consistent
and publicly transparent approach to funding schooling.
And we have to get this right if we're to address the slippage
in international student performance,
I mentioned at the start of my address.
And we have to get it right
because the panel also found a significant deficiency
in the education results of kids
from disadvantaged backgrounds compared to those
from better of backgrounds.
The panel recommended a new funding model called a schooling
resource standard, another acronym coming
up for you, or SRS.
Under this system schools would receive a base level
of funding per student calculated on the actual cost
of delivering a great education at a sample
of high performing schools.
Then there would be extra money to recognise schools
and students when needs are higher
and where the challenges are greater.
These [inaudible] would address issues including socioeconomic
advantage, indigeneity, remoteness, school size,
disability and support for students
with limited English proficiency.
The SRS funding model would allocate public education
funding on the basis of school and student need.
Now, we're taking the next steps carefully and methodically.
We've got a tight work plan in place that will investigate
and test the Gonski SRS model.
The work plan was agreed by education ministers
at a special ministerial council a fortnight ago.
And, in fact, we meet again
as education ministers here tomorrow in Perth.
But this represented a significant step forward for us.
I've established a ministerial schools funding reference group
of all key stakeholders and state and territory governments.
And state and territory and Catholic
and independent sector representatives have been
included in working groups to look at the various elements
of Gonski's model, disability, indigeneity and the like.
And our expectation is
that stakeholders will remain committed to the task.
States and territories are equal partners in this,
and the ministerial council which does meet
in Perth tomorrow will remain the key decision making body
under the Council of Australian Governments,
acronym number three COAG.
We're talking to parents, teachers, schools
and communities across the country.
The Prime Minister was here last night.
Unfortunately I got stuck in Darwin
because the plane wouldn't take off.
But we are having a national conversation on schooling
at the same time as this work is being undertaken.
And whilst we're strongly committed
to the education reform journey, no decisions about a model
and no funds have yet been committed.
No decisions taken, no funds yet committed.
And that's because there's still important work to be done.
We need to look closely at the model to test it out,
to consult with stakeholders, to discuss it
at ministerial council on COAG, and that was made explicit
in the Gonski review report.
And I think it's the prudent way to address this reform.
We need a model that we are confident will work
where the confidence is shared by stakeholders and governments.
So for that reason it's simply premature
to be talking about the dollars.
Any new system must meet our test
that no school will lose a dollar per student.
Any new system must also be an improvement
on the current situation.
It must be fair, effective and sustainable.
But we do believe this is a crucial component
of genuine education reform.
And I'm working towards having legislation introduced
into the Australian Parliament this year.
To conclude, it's a genuine pleasure and a privilege
to give an address of this kind, a foreign institute named
after one of our greatest Prime Ministers, John Curtin.
And it's especially pleasing to be able to talk about education
in this place with you.
Education is at the heart of the labor mission.
We understand the importance of education as reflected
in John Curtin's experience.
We believe in it as the great enabler,
a passport out of poverty and personal circumstance.
And we're very clear that our future prospects
as a nation depend very much on the quality
of education all citizens have received.
This government has led national school education reform.
The effects will be with us for generations.
So thank you very much for the opportunity
to address you today.
[ Applause ]
>> Thanks very much, Minister.
I don't usually do it this way.
I usually do it standing up and sort of walk off
into the background and let the ministers keep standing,
but we'll let him have a seat and [inaudible].
I think [inaudible].
So we have room for plenty of time for questions.
And I'm sure there are many people here from all sectors.
So have we got a question?
I'm looking around to see
who is our lucky number one question asker.
Put your hand up please.
And we've got roving microphones.
We need one over there.
Here we are table 17.
[ Pause ]
>> Peter, I've got three different questions.
I'll ask one at a time and see
if I've got time for the rest of them.
Later on part of the group that I'm [inaudible]
across Australia, I view what we do as important.
We're the people that lead these kids into schools.
We're part of a very,
very important [inaudible] of their education.
We are incenters.
[Inaudible] of Perth in the next month or so.
But also I'm [inaudible] Davenport and Tasmania
which is a very difficult socioeconomic climate.
So I [inaudible] be part of it.
I embrace what we're trying to do here in childcare
and that education and all the rest of it.
What I really worry about, though, is we're trying
to build a Mercedes Benz process here
that a very few privileged people will end up with,
but the big part of society will not be able to afford it.
I'm not saying the changes that we're introducing are not good.
We're passionate about changing.
We're passionate about education.
If you come and listen to our --
if you've been really aboard [inaudible]
for the last six years that's all you hear.
The kids education how do we improve what we do?
We have a desire to be the best childcare providers here
in Perth.
I think we are.
And I'll give a plug for [inaudible] Childcare
if anybody's got kids there.
>> Can I ask you to get your three questions in,
we're lucky with one of them [inaudible].
>> Is there recognition that this is getting expensive
and what are we doing about it?
I listen to the changes around [inaudible] cup of coffee.
That's rubbish.
I'm the [inaudible] finance here,
and all I know it's costing us money.
I know it's also important where is the government going
in trying to support the people that I have at [inaudible],
the people [inaudible] Perth they can afford it.
The people of Devenport they cannot afford it.
Those kids are a mile better
with what they're getting [inaudible]
for a big percentage of their lives.
>> Thank you very much for the question.
And I certainly applaud your aspirations
to provide the best possible quality childcare that you can
to those parents and children that come to your centre.
So congratulations on that effort.
Perhaps just to say very quickly a couple of things.
The first is that whilst my speech was specifically focusing
on school education reform, the question
by the gentleman highlights another area
of significant reform that the government has undertaken
which is effectively a pre- school education.
For the first time we have
in place a national quality framework and an aspiration
for universal access for children
in the year before school.
We now have a national regulator in terms of quality assurance
and legislation to reflect the high goals that we've set
for yourselves in the provision of quality childcare.
And we recognise that there are going to be transition issues
as we move to that higher quality of care.
But it is a journey that is strongly fuelled
by two specific factors.
The first that we know from the evidence that is given to us
from our early childhood experts and others, that providing
that high level of care is necessary
and essential for them.
And secondly we also know that in terms
of the schooling journey itself the better prepared young people
can be when they come into the school stream the more capable
they are of taking
up the education opportunities that are there.
Finally, to talk about the question of cost we have a level
of commonwealth investment in early childcare on a scale,
again, that we just simply haven't seen amongst previous
governments of both political persuasions.
We have a significant commitment that's
around $20 billion over four years.
And, of course, in terms of affordability
that includes the provision of both the childcare rebate
and the childcare benefit.
And, of course, the rebate has been increased
in terms of its quantum.
We're providing something just shy of a billion dollars
for the universal access requirements
to the states as you'd know, sir.
With an expectation that the states will prudently apply
that investment so that the facilities are there
for early childhood provision.
And we're also providing some assistance
in the education [inaudible].
And picking up on what we heard
from the Vice Chancellor earlier we provide some fee relief
for people studying in that area.
Because you do have a requirement now
for the provision of 15 hours per week over 40 weeks
of the year, in the year before the start
of primary school whether it's called kindy or foundation
with the provision of teaching
by a university qualified teacher.
So I think these reforms are absolutely necessary.
And I think that they will provide us
with immeasurable quantum benefits further down the track.
Because of course, if we're able to provide this level
of both high quality teaching and support and care and contain
that and continue it into school them we'll have much less issues
around the criminal justice system,
social welfare provisions and the like when people run
through later into their life.
I appreciate that you've got some challenges,
confident that we've thought through the nature
of this reform, and absolutely committed to continuing both
to listen to you but to work to the goals
that we've set for ourselves.
Okay, our next question.
We'll go to the middle there.
We've got one on table 16 and then one on table 8.
There you go.
And if you can [inaudible] because that will help
in finding the answer.
>> Ed Black, principal, public school.
A challenge for tomorrow there's a view released
that Gonski is just a plot to take over education
by the federal government.
Not that it comes from our state at all, Minister.
Challenge tomorrow in meeting to talk to the states to see
that it's not a plot but a partnership.
In public school it's the importance of equity
and the kids [inaudible] is so crucial
that will give us the tools will do the job.
But I think the partnership story is the crunch,
and are you feeling confident about convincing states
that this is a partnership to move forward.
>> Thank you for that question.
Yes, I am confident that we will be able to work
through these reforms as equal partners with the states.
Both the Prime Minister and myself have reiterated now
on a number of occasions that it is neither the desire nor the
intention of the commonwealth to be running
or administering state systems at all.
State governments are responsible
for their state education systems as they ought to be.
And generally I can say
that across the jurisdictions they do that job well.
There's always room for improvement,
and we're very keen to assist that.
On the broader question of do we have the capacity
as a ministerial council and within the federation
around what's loosely termed
or was termed previously property federalism,
and now it's got a couple of different names,
I guess I just make this concluding point.
When I came into this position I was told
that we would not reach agreement
on a national curriculum, that we would not reach agreement
on national teacher qualifications and standards,
and that we would not be able
to as a country chart a future course on reform in education.
All of that has proved to be completely wrong.
State education ministers of a variety
of political hues bring the interest of their schools
and their students to the table and agree reforms
which are not only in their interest
but in the national interest.
And I believe we can do the same thing
with the Gonski recommendations.
There's a table [inaudible] I think it's
in front, this lady here.
>> Hi, Grace Oakley from University of Western Australia.
As a musician you'd appreciate that you can't get good
at anything without practice.
We have a lot of problems,
and you've probably heard this a million times before,
getting our training teachers into school to do [inaudible].
We never have enough [inaudible] placements.
It's a huge challenge.
The national profession standards do state
that the teachers at the two higher levels will mentor
pre-service teachers.
But I'm just wondering if that's going to be enough.
Do you have a response to that issue?
>> Well, I agree that it's an issue that does come
up quite a bit in feedback from existing practitioners,
education, academics and teachers.
And my response to it is
to encourage state education ministers, directors general
and those who run the system to be aware of it.
It's a real issue.
It does need to be addressed.
I think there are opportunities for it
to be effectively addressed in the considerations
that the ministerial council is making tomorrow
around the question of national teacher standards and quality.
>> Okay, I'm trying to give this side of the room a chance.
But table 16 is keen so table 16 if you'd put your hand up.
>> I'm glad I wasn't sitting at that table for lunch.
>> The world's run by who turn we up,
so table 16 has turned up.
>> Thank you.
Claire Hard from the State School Teacher's Union.
We welcome the commentary that you're making
about further equity for students from the federal level.
However, we've got some real concerns regarding the positions
that the federal government continues to push
in particular two areas.
The first teacher bonuses.
The second the IPS model.
>> Sorry, what was the second?
>> The IPS model,
the Independent Public Sector school model, the IPS model.
The IPS model which is well recognised to be a replica
of those processes that have been followed in other states
and territories throughout the world,
particularly the United States, has at this point
in time not demonstrated any results
for improvement with the students.
The data is fairly clear in that what it's showing has been a
separation of students attending schools and also a reduction
in teaching conditions.
Further to that the review that is in place now for the IPS
from western Australia has not yet actually taken place.
The first report is due -- was supposed to be due this year
with a further review at the end of 2013.
Can you, therefore, explain, Minister,
why it is that the federal government has considered the
supporting of this model when there isn't the evidence
to give it credibility?
>> Well, let me just address those questions quickly,
and then I'll come back
to the substantial matter about evidence.
On the question of teacher bonuses we do believe
that it is appropriate to provide a recognition
for teachers who achieve on a voluntary basis
under the proposed national --
or the existing national standards
at either a highly accomplished
or lead level an additional one of payment.
The commonwealth is not in the business of engaging
in nor seeking to participate in any way in the setting
of industrial arrangements, the salaries and conditions,
staff arrangements or the like.
That is properly the province of state education systems
and the independent sector systems who run their schools,
and it should remain that way.
But I do believe that we have struck what I think is an
appropriate balance between recognition both the collegiate
nature of the teaching profession
and also the opportunity
that teachers hitherto have not had generally to be able
to consider how they might be a more effective teacher
or be recognised as one, and thus share
that expertise with others.
And I see this as being a very powerful tool
for improving teacher quality, and I'm very pleased
at the response that we've seen generally from academic,
education, thinkers and practitioners
in the school system more broadly.
And as you know we did calibrate this particular election
commitment to take into account how it might best fit
with the national qualifications and standards
that we want to have in place.
On the question of independent public schools there will be
many people in this room who have a more intimate connection
with the IPS's than I do, but I want to make two points.
The first is that, again, the forms that we are encouraging
at the commonwealth level around providing greater autonomy
for school leaders in the school setting as is the case
with independent schools are not intended
to nor should they be construed as nor enable an diminution
of the appropriate remuneration of the teachers
under various awards, regulations and the like.
I'm a strong supporter of the teaching profession.
Are teachers underpaid or overpaid?
Well, I think they need to be fairly remunerated,
and there's no question about that it's important,
but it's not linked in directly
to the support we're providing our school autonomy.
I look forward to seeing the review
on the independent public schools.
I have to say that I have found in the visits that I have had
to the independent public schools good teaching practice,
student populations that are performing well.
And certainly in some of the larger schools the opportunity
for the school leader, the principal,
to make what I think are entirely appropriate decisions
around the management and organisation of the school day,
a deployment of resources within the school setting and the like.
It is an important challenge to consider the overall impact
of a policy of this kind in relation to the way
in which kids in all government schools are progressing.
I think that's an absolutely [inaudible] point
that you raise.
So I look forward to seeing that review as well.
>> Okay, we've got a question here.
I'm still looking for this side of the room,
but you guys are [inaudible] at the moment so over here.
>> Thank you, Minister.
And as a member of a board
of an independent public school I can certainly say
that the experience of the school community
of which I'm a part in that role chose that --
they took that opportunity up.
And I think we need to think about where
that demand is coming from.
I think there's clearly a frustration
in some school communities that some of the rigidities
that they encounter in the administration
of education were frustrating some of the decisions
that they wanted to make to get the best
out of their local school community.
I want to just say that I think a missing voice
and a missing partner in what I've heard of the conversation
around the future of school funding and improving experience
and outcomes has been the voice of the parents.
And I think other than talking
about My School I don't think we emphasise that role
and that opportunity enough.
I hear lots of stories from parents of kids
with disabilities who work with some great schools
and some great teachers.
And as a parent myself I wonder how it is that parents
who find themselves looking at a My School website and learning
that their school is not performing might think
to themselves, well, where do I go from here.
If I'm not in a position to choose a different school,
to move to a different location particularly as the issue
of local intakes schools become difficult.
A real gap, and I commend the role of teachers
in progressing these reforms, but a real gap
in the education system that seems to me
to be advocacy for parents.
If you've got a school community that you're a part
of that you can comfortably go to our principal or your teacher
and take up some of those issues that's wonderful.
But the experience of many parents, particularly of kids
who don't fit in that middle bell curve
where our education system does the best work
where do those parents go to access support?
Not just information because information alone isn't enough.
People need as families to make choices, need some support
and skills development to help them work
as partners in education reform.
And if you could comment on that [inaudible].
>> Thank you for that question.
I guess the first thing to say is that I do believe
that parents through their constituent state
and national parent bodies have ample opportunity
to make representations to me as Minister,
and as I'm sure you'd be aware they do that,
and I do listen very carefully to them.
I think I understand as a parent who had three kids go
through the school system, and I've got two still
in higher education, I have a great interest
in how their education is traveling as well.
And my expectation is in the Gonski reform process
that I've just outlined to you here
that those parents' organisations
which do have access to the forums will make the views
of parents well known,
and they'll certainly be listened to.
The second thing to say about the question of parents
with disabilities, yes, I get it and you're right.
It's highly frustrating for a certain cohort of parents
who have kids not necessarily, and I was talking
about this a little earlier with a principal when I came
into Perth this morning finally, that there are kids
that will present at schools who have an identifiable disability,
and the parent will be very frustrated that the provision
of support and appropriate opportunities for teaching
or the kid and for learning to the kid are not
to the level that they expect.
Just to very quickly say that we recognise
that this is an important issue for parents.
We provided an extra $200 million in the last budget
in order for us to provide some additional support
across the states and across the sectors.
And I won't go into the detail of it here because I know
that we'll run out of time, but that was done in recognition
of the fact that this is a serious issue
for a number of parents.
And we hear from them, and there is a special parent group
and others who have a concern about disability
who provides us with advice as well.
Finally just to say that there is a working group
that looks specifically at the issues, a consequence
of the Gonski recommendations.
Because, again, disability was one of the identified barriers
to kids achieving their full potential.
My colleague, Senator Jacinta Collins shares that committee.
She'd be very pleased to have representations
from yourself and from others.
This is a difficult piece of work.
There's no doubt about it.
But we recognise the scale and seriousness of the issue,
and we're committed to doing something about it.
And just finally around the agenda for school empowerment
where we are investing significant funds
in supporting state and school systems it is specifically
contemplated that amongst those other issues
of greater autonomy are included a greater provision
and opportunity for parents, PNCs, participation in boards
and the like to take place.
>> Thanks.
There's a question down here on table 3.
[ Pause ]
>> Hi Peter, Paul [inaudible] Minister for Education.
Before I ask a question again
about independent public schools I'll just preface it by saying
that I'm neutral on that.
I don't actually yet have a view with regard
to their success or otherwise.
I welcome your observation that any analysis of the success
of IPS must include the impact on non-IPS schools
and the rest of the system.
And to that end I would ask is it your view
that ultimately we identify the benefits of IPS and provide them
to every school in the system?
Or, is it your view that that may not physically be possible
and we have to come up with some other solution?
>> Well, thanks for the question, Paul.
And it's something that I very much hope you may have the
opportunity to chew on at some stage, too.
I think with the IPS schools we're at an early period
of reform around autonomy
and greater decision making opportunities
for school leaders.
And it's a cliche for me to say that, A,
one size doesn't fit all and, B,
there will be different jurisdictional
and regional circumstances that attach to schools
and the desirability that they may feel to take that step.
I'm not trying to duck the question,
but I don't think we know the answer to that yet.
And that's what's exciting about it.
But I respond to what the parent said earlier.
It is the case, and some who specialise
in this area will know this, that the research tends
to suggest that greater degrees of school autonomy will lead
to better student performance.
Now, I think as we work through that, whether it's
in western Australia with their independent public schools
model, or whether it's in other states which are looking
at autonomy across a continuum, we have to judge
and evaluate firstly whether that is being delivered at all.
And in this case where you already have a number of schools
that have taken the IPS route whether, in fact,
you're seeing an overall potential increase
in opportunity for students and education results.
Final comment, there's a huge difference
between a small school, say for example in peri-urban area,
or in a regional or rural area, which is drawing a number
of kids from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, and a school say,
for example, in a Perth suburb drawing a student population
from middle or higher socioeconomic backgrounds
in terms of the capacity that the leadership
of that school has to utilise the capacities that exist
within a school community including the parent community.
So it is very much a case of both those
who run the education system, school leaders
in the communities themselves coming to agreement
about how they want to advance
and embrace this particular reform.
Now, here in western Australia whilst there's conjecture
and debate around the matters that have come off the floor
and the questions and your question, too, Paul to me,
I think the answer is that you're on that journey,
and so are many other schools
around Australia in different guises.
And now fortunately we have an opportunity
of assessing whether the journey is a successful one
through things like NAPLAN and otherwise and, again,
when the review that was referred
into the earlier question arise a better answer
or more thorough I guess answer about the desirability,
the impact and the effect it may be having
on non-IPS schools can be given.
>> One more question from the floor.
I was going to ask going back
to the Gonski review you mentioned the consultation
[inaudible] occur.
Is the aim to try and have the 2013 federal budget implementing
some of the outcomes from the Gonski review
and some of the funding.
Because you did mention funding.
It's not about funding now, but obviously
at some stage it's going to be.
I know there's a lot of [inaudible]
from various different school types.
Is the plan for the 2013 budget [inaudible] have
funding [inaudible].
>> John, the answer to that is similar to the answer
that I gave when we had this discussion at the table before.
I'm not talking about upcoming budgets in relation
to the funding review and models.
And, in fact, I won't be talking about it at all
until we have agreed on a model.
And the reason for that is that that is the first order
of business that we have in front of us.
And I am convinced that the most prudent way of going
through a debate which has derailed politicians
and political parties in the past is to take that approach.
>> Sure. Okay, we have one more question,
and it has to be extremely quick as [inaudible].
It's there, but it has to be quick one over there on table 17
because we've only got a minute.
So a quick question and quick answer.
Thank you.
>> My question revolves around PNCs and how they operate
and the corporate governance between the operating models
and the standardisation I guess through WAXO.
We've seen an increase in the number of incidences I guess
if I can call it that between how PNCs operate
and the school systems.
And teaching is probably the word I would use between some
of the school systems and how
and what the expectations of PNCs are.
The Gonski report, I'm sorry I haven't read it in its full
in depth and breadth [inaudible], yeah,
it doesn't touch on that.
But we've certainly got some issues here in WA
on how PNCs are perceived and the tension between them
and the school system.
Would you like to elaborate on that,
and please give us some insight.
>> Well, Mr. Gonski's panel didn't directly consider
this matter.
We have a view generally as a national government
that the views and the voices of parents both should be heard
and deserve to be heard.
And that parents are clearly extremely important stakeholders
in the education of their children.
We recognise that there are a range
of sometimes complex issues around the relationships
between PNCs and specific schools, and sometimes
with school systems as well.
And we encourage, again, recognising the diversity
of the education system that we do have,
the relevant authorities, principals and others
to speak openly and work through issues that may be of concern.
Just to finish in case it does sound a little bit
like a generalisation, I was asked the question earlier
on about what recourse does somebody have if they go
to the My School website and they find that the school
in their local community that they're thinking
of sending their kids to isn't performing
as well as a similar school.
Because remember My School really only looks
at similar schools by way of comparison.
And, of course, the answer to that is for the parent
to interact with the school itself, with the principal
and the teachers in the school.
And I'm very confident that if it's an open
and thorough interaction entered into in good faith then
in the vast majority of cases people are satisfied
with both what they hear by way of response to issues
that they raise, and also
that the school itself is better informed about the views
of parents that are thinking of sending their kids there
and what they might do.
The days in which what happened when your child went
into the classroom and came out the other end
and what the school is doing you could only really glean
from a conversation in the tack shop or getting it
out of your kid when they came home are over.
Which for those that have adolescents isn't probably a bad
thing, because sometimes you don't get a lot of information
when you ask the question, especially the boys I know.
I don't have boys but I know that.
So we're at a really exciting point where even on issue
that have got a little bit of edge to them
and where there may be different views we've got more information
in front of us, more transparency,
more understanding and, frankly, a very strong commitment
to improve all schools as if you
like the foundations for that discussion.
And so I encourage it to continue fruitfully.
>> Before I formally give a vote of thanks to the Minister,
I'd just like to say thank you to those
who helped organise today's lunch
and the whole event, in fact.
Some of you might be aware we have to be quite flexible
and nimble in putting on today's lunch
and the preceding panel discussion.
So I would like to take the opportunity to thank Liz Richie,
Elizabeth McGloughlin and the CEDA team
for their understanding and cooperation in working
with our institute and putting on the event.
And thanks also to the panel members for their contributions
and for being so flexible and understanding
in making your arrangements.
And [inaudible] thank you also to Lisa Duplot for all her help
in organising the event.
And, of course, to the staff of the Hyatt Regency.
And now on behalf of everybody here, Minister,
I would like to thank our speaker.
As the Minister said the school funding system has been left
unexamined for far too long.
I think 40 years is what we're talking about.
So I think the government should be congratulated for putting it
on the public policy agenda no matter what.
So the debate you might --
I don't know where it ends up because
at least it's now being discussed.
And I'm sure we're now much better informed
about that issue.
But also many other issues on the education,
the school's education front.
So on behalf of everybody I'd like you to join with me
in thanking the Minister.
[ Applause ]
Wait one second.
And I'd like to now call in Liz Richie who is the director
of CEDA and WA to conclude with a few words.
Thanks, Liz.
[ Pause ]
>> Thank you and good afternoon.
My name is Liz Richie, and I'm State Director of WA.
For those who joined us at lunchtime thank you to you all.
What an outstanding session I have to say.
As I opened this morning I mentioned that this was going
to be a very special event,
and I think it was all that and more.
And this is due to the expertise of today's panelists and speaker
and to the Minister, of course.
But also to you, the caliber
of the attendants here today is wonderful.
And we thank you very much for giving of your time
and participating here today.
And to, of course, the discussion
and questions that we've received.
So thank you very much.
Those who were here this morning enjoyed the three different
perspectives from our panelists, Ben, Alec and Tanya.
And I again thank you and thank you for your time
in being flexible with today's program.
Also to thank the Minister
who has outlined comprehensively the schools' education reform.
We look forward to seeing you again here in WA.
Thank you, Minister.
I'd also like to acknowledge and thank John and his team
and Curtin University and the John Curtin Institute
of Public Policy.
I think we'd all agree it's been a wonderful collaboration.
So thank you.
And to our chair today,
Dr. Penny Flit thank you very much for stepping in.
Finally just a quick thank you to my team.
These events don't happen without the work
of the exceptional team with me here in CEDA and WA,
and that is to Allana, Alicia and, of course,
to Elizabeth McGloughlin
who is today's event coordinator, so than you.
And just on a very final note a quick plug for CEDA.
We can't miss these opportunities.
And we're very proud of the program that we've put together
for the rest of the year and beyond.
And just a couple of things I would like to mention.
It's timely that we're about to launch the Coplin Emerging
Leaders Program.
And we do this very proudly in partnership
with Curtin University this year for the first time here in WA.
The Coplin program has been running for ten years
over in the eastern states.
it's an incredible leadership program.
So I encourage each of you to take a moment to look
at that as it's launched.
It's going to be on our website as of tomorrow.
And applications will be accepted as of tomorrow,
and the program will begin at the end of May.
So I urge you to take a quick glance at that.
And as I have a room
of education experts I think it's also timely
to advertise a program that we're going
to be running in September.
We're very pleased.
It's called the Higher Education,
How Can Australia Remain Internationally Competitive,
a very critical issue.
And we are delighted to have each of these five chancellors
from all of the five universities joining us
on a panel for this forum on the 25th of September,
along with one of the panel members
of the base funding review, Professor Louise Watson.
So certainly a wonderful event to look out for.
Thank you very much, and enjoy the rest of your afternoon.
[ Applause ]
[ Music ]