To gain an insight into the worst tendencies of Liberal Party social policy, look no further than their recently released schools policy, which promises $1 billion to fix school buildings. Why is this money a priority? We’re not told. How will it be spent? Doled out to everyone. How will we measure its impact? We’ll never be able to. Any serious discussion of teacher quality, school choice, equity, testing or any fundamentally important educational issue? Nup.
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
PJD on Turning Points PJD on Turning Points Clinton McMurray on Turning Points ChrisPer on Turning Points Daniel Waldenström on Turning Points Archives
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
Categories
- Australian issues
- Australian Politics
- Behavioural Economics
- Blogging
- Book launch stuff
- Books
- Coming Events
- Current Affairs
- Development Economics
- Eclectic Observations
- Econometrics
- Economics & Public Policy Course
- Economics for Government Course
- Economics Generally
- Economics of Education
- Economics of Elections
- Economics of National Security
- Economics of the Family
- Election
- Environmental Economics
- Film
- Finance
- Food and Drink
- From the Frontiers
- Games
- Global issues
- Health economics
- Indigenous Policy
- Inequality
- Interesting stuff
- Iraq
- Jobs
- Labour Economics
- Law
- Low Wage Work
- Macroeconomics
- Media
- Prediction Markets
- Randomisation
- Religion
- Social Capital
- Sport
- Sports
- Tax
- Television
- Thinktanks
- Trade & Development
- Travel
- Uncategorized
- Universities
- Urban Economics
- US Politics
- Web/Tech
- Weblogs
- What I'm Reading
Meta
I must admit I haven’t read the government’s school policy, though I am quite prepared to believe that its evidence is a bit light on. But the quality of school buildings is a big issue, often very run-down with no cooling and inadequate heating. Teachers have the worst physical conditions of any white collar workers. It is one of many things making teaching an unattractive career.
Andrew,
I didn’t mean to come across as opposing the improvement of school buildings. But if your goal is to make teaching a more attractive career, $1 spent on buildings across the state almost surely gets less bang-for-buck than $1 spent on salaries or performance-based top-ups. In some schools, the reverse might be true, but because this is about as carefully targeted as a drunk twelve year old with a shotgun, my guess is that its effect on teacher quality will be approximately zero.
Andrew.
I’ve been mightly unimpressed with the Coalition’s spendathon, but I suspect this one is defensible (even if they have not defended it with real data). In this policy, they are avoiding recurrent spending, which is what you get if you become involved in salaries. I think it is best to avoid further complication of federal-state financial responsibilities by getting the feds involved in teacher salary setting, however important that issue may be.
As I understand the situation with school buildings, far too many are in a state that no teacher should have to work in and no student should have to study in. Fixing some of them is something the feds can do to improve things without any huge ideological fight.
In your original post you mentioned school choice, which has surely been one of the Howard government’s relative successes in schools, given the growth in the private school system over their term in office. They’ve done about as much as they can, it is now up to the states. And my old boss, David Kemp, had a big battle with the states in the late 1990s to get literacy and numeracy testing.
Maybe I missed something in reading the policy documents, but the policy didn’t seem to be aimed at fixing the worst schools so much as providing a dose of capital funding for all schools.