ATAR Notes: Forum
General Discussion => General Discussion Boards => Rants and Debate => Topic started by: Howzat on August 28, 2012, 02:13:09 pm
-
Hey guys,
I am a lurker on these forums (By that, I mean I haven't registered until recently) ...
Any way, I am having a massive breakdown right now. I can't fucking take much more of school, I'd prefer to just stay at home and study but alas, that wouldn't be possible.
I'm sick of this fucking VCE system. It's just some bull shit fucking archaic system where we're just some god damn numbers and they (meaning the people who invented this bull shit system) think that it's alright to subject people to this system.
I am a hard worker but I think it's just the fact that this is the ONLY system by which we are admitted to universities. (In the sense of going from High School to University. This system is ... boring. NO creativity. NO sense of what's 'beyond'. Just learning to the bare minimum in order to get a 'high' atar.
Also, I really want to talk about the massive disparity between public schools. I have been to several schools, both public and private, and it does FUCKING piss me off how some public schools are SO MUCH BETTER than others. This correlation can be seen in the god damn VCE results. Why should my friends, who go to bad schools (I believe I can say bad schools as I do not feel as though I should just suger coat 'facts' and other bull shit like some said education minister) have TERRIBLE teachers. I use to attend the school in question and let me say this, I can definitely see the differences in teachers, facilities and cohort.
I thought public schools would be the 'same' for all? Same resources, Same teaching quality. Shouldn't it be a 'It doesn't matter where you go, You can still do well?'. I know there are a plethora of people who do well in 'bad' schools but to me, that's a minority. What about the majority who are subjected to these bad schools?
This is what pisses me off. It just feels as though the better schools will obviously get the better teachers and this correlation will be seen with the results. Take my opinion with a grain of salt but I have been to both sectors and hence why I am saying all this.
Even with the implementation of SEAS, I still feel as though this 'system' will NEVER adequately do these people justice. Can they really believe that SEAS should cover just Year's 11 and 12? Have they experience educational disadvantage in ONLY those years? What about from Year's 7 to 10? ALL schools have different curriculums and due to these curriculums, that this will definitely develop an individuals mind. What about if you attended a not so well off school? From personal experience, even if you are coming in as a strong year 7, you will gradually decline in academic potential, when compared to your peers (From other schools) who are most likely having an 'elite' curriculum, and hence, even when in year 11 or 12, you won't be as academically able as the students, who from year 7, are already prepared for the 'higher order' thinking.
This is a MASSIVE generalisation but this is from my own experience. I am comparing students from Melbourne/Mac.Rob to students from regular public schools. To me, they were near the same in Year 7, by same I mean academically, but as the years went on, and the students moved to MHS/Mac.Rob, they were more prepared than the other people for 'higher order' thinking and hence, were generally more successful.
I will say this, ALL the people in said story were ALL hard working, and very smart, but the people who did stay at the 'regular' public school, only did so as they couldn't afford the move to MHS/Mac.Rob.
.... I am not too sure if I am conveying it well.
Look, I know no one here knows me but do not make the generalisation that I am just some person who is complaining after getting a 'low' SAC mark or a 'low' exam mark.
I need to get that off my chest.
I just want to talk, to who ever will listen.
-
And that's how the cookie crumbles...
There is probably no easy answer to your dilemma just because there is no way to make each school's teaching capacity the same.
They (government/education dep. w.e the heck) perhaps need to be more strict on assessing teachers.
I go to a private school but there are a few really horrible teachers that do not know how to control students and teach effectively/know their shit.
Also give teachers better pay because that might attract more people and make more job competition so that there are a larger pool of teachers to choose from by schools (I mean they put up with a lot of crap for what they do, even though they get a lot of holidays but I would probably suicide if I had to deal with brats every single day).
-
Hey guys,
I am a lurker on these forums (By that, I mean I haven't registered until recently) ...
Any way, I am having a massive breakdown right now. I can't fucking take much more of school, I'd prefer to just stay at home and study but alas, that wouldn't be possible.
I'm sick of this fucking VCE system. It's just some bull shit fucking archaic system where we're just some god damn numbers and they (meaning the people who invented this bull shit system) think that it's alright to subject people to this system.
I am a hard worker but I think it's just the fact that this is the ONLY system by which we are admitted to universities. (In the sense of going from High School to University. This system is ... boring. NO creativity. NO sense of what's 'beyond'. Just learning to the bare minimum in order to get a 'high' atar.
Also, I really want to talk about the massive disparity between public schools. I have been to several schools, both public and private, and it does FUCKING piss me off how some public schools are SO MUCH BETTER than others. This correlation can be seen in the god damn VCE results. Why should my friends, who go to bad schools (I believe I can say bad schools as I do not feel as though I should just suger coat 'facts' and other bull shit like some said education minister) have TERRIBLE teachers. I use to attend the school in question and let me say this, I can definitely see the differences in teachers, facilities and cohort.
I thought public schools would be the 'same' for all? Same resources, Same teaching quality. Shouldn't it be a 'It doesn't matter where you go, You can still do well?'. I know there are a plethora of people who do well in 'bad' schools but to me, that's a minority. What about the majority who are subjected to these bad schools?
This is what pisses me off. It just feels as though the better schools will obviously get the better teachers and this correlation will be seen with the results. Take my opinion with a grain of salt but I have been to both sectors and hence why I am saying all this.
Even with the implementation of SEAS, I still feel as though this 'system' will NEVER adequately do these people justice. Can they really believe that SEAS should cover just Year's 11 and 12? Have they experience educational disadvantage in ONLY those years? What about from Year's 7 to 10? ALL schools have different curriculums and due to these curriculums, that this will definitely develop an individuals mind. What about if you attended a not so well off school? From personal experience, even if you are coming in as a strong year 7, you will gradually decline in academic potential, when compared to your peers (From other schools) who are most likely having an 'elite' curriculum, and hence, even when in year 11 or 12, you won't be as academically able as the students, who from year 7, are already prepared for the 'higher order' thinking.
This is a MASSIVE generalisation but this is from my own experience. I am comparing students from Melbourne/Mac.Rob to students from regular public schools. To me, they were near the same in Year 7, by same I mean academically, but as the years went on, and the students moved to MHS/Mac.Rob, they were more prepared than the other people for 'higher order' thinking and hence, were generally more successful.
I will say this, ALL the people in said story were ALL hard working, and very smart, but the people who did stay at the 'regular' public school, only did so as they couldn't afford the move to MHS/Mac.Rob.
.... I am not too sure if I am conveying it well.
Look, I know no one here knows me but do not make the generalisation that I am just some person who is complaining after getting a 'low' SAC mark or a 'low' exam mark.
I need to get that off my chest.
I just want to talk, to who ever will listen.
don't give up!!!
you can do this!!
:)
Check your inbox
-
Hey you're not alone
I sometimes get discouraged by the fact that I often missed out on so much between years 7 & 10 (because of bullying, bad experiences in class, crazy students/teachers)
I didn't get to do many subjects I would have loved to have at least tried, like languages, more sciences..
and it just annoys me
and the whole scaling by having a weak cohort drag you down -.-.....
and yeah it does feel shit that I am just some number, and some people are totally brilliant but just flunk out in this system (I know a guy who pretty much failed y12..but during the summer holidays he taught himself all of chem in like a week..cause he was bored)
and you're allowed to be angry and peed off about it...remember theres only something like 90 days left and you can do whatevs you want
one good thing about the way universities in Aus operate is that one way or another, you could eventually do what you want...(i.e med/engineering whatevs) provided you have the dedication and passion for it
just channel your anger and tackle the next 90 days
then your free
and then be like f* you vce and school im done!
-
In respect to your opinion, and I am sorry you feel that way,
This system is ... boring. NO creativity. NO sense of what's 'beyond'. Just learning to the bare minimum in order to get a 'high' atar.
I disagree. It's only boring if you picked subjects that you didn't enjoy, and there's more than enough subject choices in the system for there to be at least one you enjoy. If there isn't one, and this may sound harsh, then maybe an academic life isn't for you and you may enjoy more "hand-on" courses through VCAL -> TAFE or the like.
Also, I really want to talk about the massive disparity between public schools. I have been to several schools, both public and private, and it does FUCKING piss me off how some public schools are SO MUCH BETTER than others. This correlation can be seen in the god damn VCE results. Why should my friends, who go to bad schools (I believe I can say bad schools as I do not feel as though I should just suger coat 'facts' and other bull shit like some said education minister) have TERRIBLE teachers. I use to attend the school in question and let me say this, I can definitely see the differences in teachers, facilities and cohort.
If by public schools you are referring to "MHS/MacRob" (as you mention later on a basis for comparison), those schools are select entry, don't you honestly expect them to be better in terms of academic quality? As for facilities, there are plenty of "average" government schools with amazing grounds that easily trump the likes of Mac.Rob's facilities (for example).
Also, just don't blame the teachers, there's a lot more to the issue. Good teachers move to schools where there are students who want to learn. And eventually, good public schools such as Uni High, Balwyn or GWSC are created in such a fashion, as they have environment where the bulk of students WANT to learn. In grade 6, we visited all sorts of local high schools as an orientation program, and these are some of the lowest ranked schools in the state (in the Hoppers Crossing region), I can see why teachers wouldn't want to teach there, because most students didn't want to learn the material required for high ATARs.
Of course it's unfair that those select few in such schools who want to learn are left in the dark. BUT, that is what MHS/MacRob/Cory/JMSS/Nossal are for. They are govt initiatives so that those students in "poor" schools can move to a school with students with similar academic mindsets. And they offer entry in yr9 and 10 and 11. If someone is that keen on a good public school education, they would seek these opportunities. The entrance tests aren't expensive, they are reasonable, and many people make the cut with next to no preparation. So finance isn't a valid excuse here imo, it's just the student motivation.
Even with the implementation of SEAS, I still feel as though this 'system' will NEVER adequately do these people justice. Can they really believe that SEAS should cover just Year's 11 and 12? Have they experience educational disadvantage in ONLY those years?
Agreed here, but you need to draw the line somewhere. And I think the line is reasonably drawn at VCE for most cases as it is now.
To me, they were near the same in Year 7, by same I mean academically, but as the years went on, and the students moved to MHS/Mac.Rob, they were more prepared than the other people for 'higher order' thinking and hence, were generally more successful.
Yes the environment plays a major role, being around people with similar academic aspirations. But opportunities to enter these schools were open to everyone, moreso now with 4 selective schools (+ JMSS).
It's dificult for me to have a large amount of sympathy for those who have very high academic aspirations who attend "average schools" as such opportunites are available to improve circumstances, and this isn't mentioning the various accelerated learning programs at other govt schools (eg. uni high, balwyn, werribee secondary, williamstown, etc.) and private school scholarship opportunities throughout primary and high school.
Sorry if I seem a bit blunt and unsympathetic, but I'm a strong believer that high aspirations do not magically come to someone in VCE, and that those who aim high start those aims in junior high school. And this is the time where opportunities to attend selective schools and select entry programs exist and can be taken advantage of. Furthermore, as you go to mhs, i'm quite confused about your complaint, you took the opportunity, correct? Everyone has that same opportunity to take, and many more after that to take as well.
-
It sounds like you're having a really hard time, and considering you're a MHS student it appears as if you feel almost undeserving of you're place in a top school as opposed to a 'bad school.'
At the end of the day, VCE and school itself is entirely what you make of it...teachers, friends and education system aside, it really is your VCE.
I don't think it's a fair comment to infer that the system is boring and rigid-students who love dance, drama and theatre are free to study and enhance their abilities in those areas. Students who are fascinated by science and the way things work can do chemistry and biology. Students who love the idea of doing a trade may complete nationally recognised certificate courses and study wood, metal, auto...the list goes on. The focus should be doing what one loves, rather than avoiding what they loathe.
I go to what many would consider a 'crap' school, and of course sometimes I feel discouraged. But the only person, object or service getting in the way of me getting an ATAR of 99 would be myself.
-
I'm sorry but I disagree with you pi, in regards to the OP calling the system boring - I do agree - it's not learning to acquire knowledge, but rather learning to a strict curriculum and perfecting things which don't matter in order to gain marks. Look at subjects such as Methods and Spesh - you actually spend so much time perfecting small intricate techniques so you don't make careless errors rather than learning real maths and their applications.
Also, just don't blame the teachers, there's a lot more to the issue. Good teachers move to schools where there are students who want to learn. And eventually, good public schools such as Uni High, Balwyn or GWSC are created in such a fashion, as they have environment where the bulk of students WANT to learn. In grade 6, we visited all sorts of local high schools as an orientation program, and these are some of the lowest ranked schools in the state (in the Hoppers Crossing region), I can see why teachers wouldn't want to teach there, because most students didn't want to learn the material required for high ATARs.
Of course it's unfair that those select few in such schools who want to learn are left in the dark. BUT, that is what MHS/MacRob/Cory/JMSS/Nossal are for. They are govt initiatives so that those students in "poor" schools can move to a school with students with similar academic mindsets. And they offer entry in yr9 and 10 and 11. If someone is that keen on a good public school education, they would seek these opportunities. The entrance tests aren't expensive, they are reasonable, and many people make the cut with next to no preparation. So finance isn't a valid excuse here imo, it's just the student motivation.
Teachers want to move to good schools, I agree with that, but it still doesn't excuse the fact that bad teachers cause a lot of harm to bad public schools. I have heard stories of teachers who are unfamiliar with the course they teach - I think this is a problem with teaching in general though - issues which I won't go through here because they are lengthy and irrelevant.
Regarding your second paragraph, I don't think it's fair that you look at selective schools - just because somebody didn't get into MHS, say, doesn't mean that they don't deserve a quality education. There are heaps of kids from poorer areas who don't get into MHS, but still love to learn and want to do well. I know students, friends of mine, from GWSC who didn't get into MHS and still ended up doing better than those who did, which just shows that the selection mechanism for MHS isn't exactly fair and on top of that - there are nowhere near enough places to cater for all those who want to learn and improve.
It's dificult for me to have a large amount of sympathy for those who have very high academic aspirations who attend "average schools" as such opportunites are available to improve circumstances, and this isn't mentioning the various accelerated learning programs at other govt schools (eg. uni high, balwyn, werribee secondary, williamstown, etc.) and private school scholarship opportunities throughout primary and high school.
I don't think this is a fair call to make because, coming from a poor background, I can say that even if I got a scholarship to a private school, I wouldn't be able to afford to go. On top of that, if I wasn't at a top-tier public school such as GWSC but was at a lower end school instead, I can honestly say that I wouldn't have been anywhere near as successful as I am today. The environment, the resources, the teachers and just the people there in general all played a part in my education and I know that a lot of the opportunities I had would not have been available to many other students in sub-par schools. So OP is right, it's not fair that it comes down to simple luck as to which school we end up at.
Moderator action: removed real name, sorry for the inconvenience
-
It sounds like you're having a really hard time, and considering you're a MHS student it appears as if you feel almost undeserving of you're place in a top school as opposed to a 'bad school.'
At the end of the day, VCE and school itself is entirely what you make of it...teachers, friends and education system aside, it really is your VCE.
I don't think it's a fair comment to infer that the system is boring and rigid-students who love dance, drama and theatre are free to study and enhance their abilities in those areas. Students who are fascinated by science and the way things work can do chemistry and biology. Students who love the idea of doing a trade may complete nationally recognised certificate courses and study wood, metal, auto...the list goes on. The focus should be doing what one loves, rather than avoiding what they loathe.
I go to what many would consider a 'crap' school, and of course sometimes I feel discouraged. But the only person, object or service getting in the way of me getting an ATAR of 99 would be myself.
I also got to a very crappy public school ranked 480 or so. The only stumbling block between my dream ATAR and me has been and will always ULTIMATELY be me, no one else. I can't blame my teachers, my parents, my friends, my environment, etc. nothing - I am control. I have made a lot of mistakes this year; a lot of regrets.. but these have been my decisions and I am willing to accept that even though I may not achieve my aspirations I know that if I learn from then I can perhaps get to
where I want to be one day.
The only problem with top tier and low tier public schools is as LovesPhysics has mentioned before is the environment of the different schools in terms of student motivation, the level of academic interest, the general atmosphere towards learning, etc. There is an environment which fosters and rewards academic success in schools like GWSC, Balwyn High, etc. which is a catalyst to their academic success in my opinion.
Do I however feel disadvantaged by attending low tier schools? Honestly, yes. I think it's very obvious that the top schools have an atmosphere which produces students with a high level of academic ability, they have resources (for my mid year exams the only practice exams I got were 2 for psychology and 3 chemistry), better quality teachers, etc. which all contribute to their success. I'm not complaining but you cannot say that the school you go to doesn't affect your overall academic potential, because it clearly does, as is obvious by just looking at the top tier schools.. not be contradictory here but this is how I feel.
-
I should clarify a few points.
(I would quote important points .. but I really don't know how to)
With regards to school comparisons, I'll be blunt and say I was comparing Melbourne High/Mac.Rob to other public schools. I do know the history behind public schools and to me, Shouldn't MHS/Mac.Rob be the minimum standard to what public schools should be? (They were the first public schools made). However, due to the governments negligence, they are the benchmark for what schools should be.
Also, I do not see how it is fair that my friends must go to bad schools. Let's not white wash it, when I mean bad, I bluntly mean teachers and facilities. School is what you make it. The people at those schools do not respect their school.
...
I do go on myschool, There does seem to be a correlation between good schools and good areas. Really? Should that even happen? Also, These people didn't have the chance to apply for Select Entry schools, don't just say the fees are relatively small, you should consider public transport, school uniform, time to get to and from school.
I will say that these people, whom I know personally, were highly motivated people who wanted to attend MHS/Mac.Rob but weren't allowed to do so, primarily due to funds. In my opinion, they shouldn't even need to consider these schools, had their local public school been a relatively good one.
...
I really do not know if I am getting my point across.
More should be done for educationally disadvantaged schools. The Gonski report, in my opinion, is a stepping stone into something that should've happened years and years ago. I am disgusted by this pathetic government, If you look on the news, they only highlight public schools with a huge reputation. (A nine report highlighted GWSC,Mac.Rob and MHS specifically. When was the last time I saw GWSC on the news. Oh yes, AFTER VCE results. To highlight that government schools are doing just as good as private schools but they are singling out only one school. To me, The government is patting themselves on the back by showing, basically, one of the best schools in the state and thinking to themselves, 'We're doing a great job'.)
I am NOT insulting GWSC in anyway, instead I wished that all public schools were like GWSC. But that's just an unrealistic dream.
Thank you.
EDIT: I thought I should add that I disagree LovePhysics with Good teachers move to schools where there are students who want to learn. And eventually, good public schools such as Uni High, Balwyn or GWSC are created in such a fashion, as they have environment where the bulk of students WANT to learn.
.
So, to me, you are basically saying that these good teachers should leave crap schools? If this is not your intention, I completely apologise. So, Let's say we had two schools, A and B. Both were relatively good schools. However, A had a minority of students who want to learn whilst B had the majority of students who want to learn. Over time, The best teachers from A decide to move to school B, thereby leaving the minority of students at A, who want to learn, at a disadvantage. Don't tell me that if these students really want to learn, they will cope. Personally, I know they will never achieve as well as students who have some of the best teachers in the state.
So effectively, The minority of student from A, who want to learn, should be at a disadvantage? That is my point. My old school had VCAA examiner teachers and VCE text book authors but they all left for Select Entry/Private School. Leaving behind teachers who are terrible terrible teachers. (I should say that my old school was ranked close to 500+. If you really do not believe me when I say VCAA examiner and VCE text book authors taught at my old school, PM me and I will give you a list)
Do you get my point? I really do not feel this is fair. Some schools have historic buildings or a better cohort and hence, attract better teachers whilst other schools are struggling to find teachers for certain subjects.
I have been to both public and private schools and I can see the differences between teaching. Some teachers know the course so well whilst some don't even know half the shit. I apologise for my language but I really do feel disgusted by this.
Note: I should say that in my previous post, Study Score Estimates, I had lied. I do attend Melbourne High School. I do keep in contact with my friends from my old school. I am very close with them and I do feel guttered by how educationally disadvantaged they are. I do feel terrible when they give me their undying support. They are my friends and naturally, I only want the best for them.
If you want an education history, of myself, it is this:
Private -> Public -> MHS.
I really do not feel as though I need to elaborate on what years were highschool and what years were primary school. I have attended enough of school to see the massive disparity between schools.
-
Just saw this, did not read this properly, I'm at uni atm, I'll read this properly tonight and tell you what I make of it mate (@ Howzat).
-
I agree. I also believe that there is a huge difference between the quality of education at public schools and private schools.
When i moved schools from public to private i saw the difference.
-
I'm currently at a private school and most of the students here don't have the right attitude towards study and they really bring down the academic atmosphere that should exist in this community.
I have to sit through certain classes dealing with people who do not care at all and disrupt constantly, I have to deal with a tonne of issues that are completely irrelevant to study and find time for travel which eats up a lot of study time. But in the end, it is not the school you go to, it is ultimately up to you whether you do well or not.
Yes, teachers can be better than other teachers, however the majority of your hard work should be done outside of the classroom.I will admit that I feel disadvantaged because of certain teachers (even at a private school, mainly because it's rural), but what I don't understand in class due to teachers, I have to study on my own until I do understand it. It's all about how willing you are to get the score you dream of and how hard you're willing to work to achieve it.
-
EDIT: I thought I should add that I disagree LovePhysics with Good teachers move to schools where there are students who want to learn. And eventually, good public schools such as Uni High, Balwyn or GWSC are created in such a fashion, as they have environment where the bulk of students WANT to learn.
.
So, to me, you are basically saying that these good teachers should leave crap schools?
Not "should", but they "do". And if you look at it from a teacher's perspective, you wouldn't want to teach 24 kids who aren't academic and have only 1 kid in that class of 25 that is, you'd want to be in an atmosphere that is mostly academic and an atmosphere where you know that the majority of students will listen to and appreciate what you have to say.
So from a teacher's perspective, I see nothing wrong with it. Is it fair being that single student surrounded by 24 that aren't like-minded to them? Not really, but I can't fully sympathise with them (unless there are severe family/medical/financial issues) because there are accelerated programs in many govt schools, there are private school scholarships, and there are 5 selective schools, all of which have MULTIPLE opportunities to try out and improve your situation.
I think what you have to think about, is why the students aren't academically focused in the first place. And I'm not saying this is a bad thing by any means, some people want to go to uni, others want to go into trade, and that's perfectly fine with me as long as they're happy with their lives. Having god teachers will not help much imo, there are a variety of factors involved including family background, socioeconomic status, friendship groups, etc. Most of the "poorer" performing schools have a lot of these trade focused students, and for those of the former, there are plenty of chances to get out as aforementioned.
Furthermore, unis recognise the difference and have SEAS categories for disadvantages schooling or being regional/rural and the like, so it's not really as unfair as you make it out to be in terms of uni entrance (at which point the ATAR means next to nothing).
Am I being harsh? Probably, but I think the view is justified. Teachers move to where they are treated with respect (good on them, they deserve it!), students who are academically motivated have a multitude of options available to them to move (both in the public and private sphere), and unis recognise a lot of these differences too.
Shouldn't MHS/Mac.Rob be the minimum standard to what public schools should be?
No. They are selective schools, and by that very definition, should have a higher standard of education. You go into history etc etc, but that's irrelevant. When they were made, they were not selective. Now they are, and their role is to cater for the academically motivated few who sought an atmosphere of like minds in either yr8, 9 or 10. The same could be said for many private schools and many accelerated programs in Uni high or Balwyn to name a few.
If you look on the news, they only highlight public schools with a huge reputation. (A nine report highlighted GWSC,Mac.Rob and MHS specifically. When was the last time I saw GWSC on the news. Oh yes, AFTER VCE results. To highlight that government schools are doing just as good as private schools but they are singling out only one school. To me, The government is patting themselves on the back by showing, basically, one of the best schools in the state and thinking to themselves, 'We're doing a great job'.)
What's wrong with it? They're making a comparison of top-tier govt and private schools. They're not comparing Mac.Rob to Thomas Carr College in Hoppers Crossing/Werribee (a local private school near me), they're comparing with the top-tier private schools. Fair comparison to make.
If you look at the lower performing private schools, you'll find that they're not much better at all than the lowest public schools. You seem to forget that and you post seems to only focus on the top-tier. What you're asking for is a complete education reform to boost every single lower performing public school to make the selective schools the "minimum standard". Take a step back and think if that's even possible:
1) Where are you going to get excellent teachers to teach students who don't want to learn?
2) What are you going to do with students who don't want to learn?
You realise the MHS, Mac.Rob, MGS, Scotch, etc have taken YEARS to get to where they are now, that's why they are top-tier,they have built up their reputation an teachers would love to work there because they are treated well.
Think about that, complaining is the easy part.
Note: I should say that in my previous post, Study Score Estimates, I had lied. I do attend Melbourne High School.
...wut
-
Is it fair being that single student surrounded by 24 that aren't like-minded to them? Not really, but I can't fully sympathise with them (unless there are severe family/medical/financial issues) because there are accelerated programs in many govt schools, there are private school scholarships, and there are 5 selective schools, all of which have MULTIPLE opportunities to try out and improve your situation.
Wut, I don't buy this at all.
If it's an underfunded, weak school the accelerated program isn't likely to suddenly become a shining light (it's probably the first thing to be cut).
Private school scholarships are not only having you compete against the brightest, but there are also only a few of them.
And as for selective schools, they're a great step but a) only have room for what...5%? max of the student population and b) are only available to people living in/can travel to metropolitan melbourne (unless there are rural ones, but I don't know of any)
-
Wut, I don't buy this at all.
If it's an underfunded, weak school the accelerated program isn't likely to suddenly become a shining light (it's probably the first thing to be cut).
Private school scholarships are not only having you compete against the brightest, but there are also only a few of them.
And as for selective schools, they're a great step but a) only have room for what...5%? max of the student population and b) are only available to people living in/can travel to metropolitan melbourne (unless there are rural ones, but I don't know of any)
I'm not saying the system as it is is perfect, I'm just saying there so many options for those who want to look for them.
Accelerated programs, you're mistaken. There is a local govt high school near me called Werribee Secondary. If you look back at it 30 years ago, the results (or so the teachers have said) were appalling. After the introduction of the Select Entry Learning Program (SELP), they have consistently been getting students in the 99+ ATAR range every year. This is a school in the west, in an area that most people would associate with either a zoo or a sewerage treatment plant. But it happens, and there's a story of success.
I haven't had much experience in other schools and their efforts at selective learning programs, but I did attend UHS for two years in theirs. They were the first govt school to introduce one, in a time where people, like you, would say it would fail. It didn't, rather, it has thrived and bred successful students for years. And from them, more and more schools, against your logic of cutting the programs due to costs, are implementing them.
As for rural schemes, I'm not aware of any, but getting teachers to teach in rural areas is a whole different challenge. And students from these areas are compensated to an extent by SEAS for university admission (just look at Monash MBBS for a prime example with the Dean's Rural List).
I partly agree with your concern regarding catering of selective schools, the Vic govt has fallen behind states such as NSW in this regard. But now there are five, and things are getting better (yes, we are still far behind NSW and their figure for selective schools). However, on the side in regards to accessibility, Nossal and Cory are fairly accessible for those living on the suburban fringes imo, and JMSS isn't particularly central either.
Private does not mean MGS or Scotch. If you look around, there MANY private schools all over suburban Melbourne who would love to help out and have a few more bright students among their VCE results. And they hold tests in at least two year levels, so plenty of opportunities there.
-
pi, I can't help but feel an undercurrent of elitism in your posts. If I could super-summarise; "Those who have the means and want to learn can get it wonderfully, but those who can't or didn't seek an opportunity can cop it".
What about those who don't have the academic ability to get into a select entry school?
On 'opportunities for those who want to look', I didn't even know select entry schools existed until I was in Year 11, and in Year 8 I was more concerned with avoiding bullies than looking for an educational opportunity that would let me thrive.
On not being academically focused and trades etc - my school has what they tell us is the best VCAL program in the state, whereas our VCE results have been slowly rising from a 24 median in 2007 when it opened. Disregarding SES which is admittedly low etc, 'good teachers' would absolutely change quite a lot. Probably the biggest factor of not wanting to 'do well' in my school is the perceived inability to do well. No one dares aim more than 90. Good teachers would absolutely focus kids. When I look at my education, classes were tame for the charismatic and passionate teachers and an absolute riot for those who weren't. People in a low SES area, family problems and all the other variables you've mentioned need some hope and stability, both of which good teachers can offer. I'd like to reply more comprehensively but my girlfriend has put the banhammer on procrastination and is looking at me like a hawk at the moment. I'll come back some time soon.
Moderator action: removed real name, sorry for the inconvenience
-
"Those who have the means and want to learn can get it wonderfully, but those who can't or didn't seek an opportunity can cop it"
I don't see what's so elitist about having motivation to find an atmosphere that suits you in early secondary school, but if it came off at elitist, I sincerely apologise, that was not my intention at all. And "no", they are not "copping" anything. Teachers only go so far in VCE, a lot of other factors come into play too. This sums up these sentiments well:
At the end of the day, VCE and school itself is entirely what you make of it...teachers, friends and education system aside, it really is your VCE.
If teachers were everything, the median at Mac.Rob/MHS would be closer to 98.
It's never too late to pick up that motivation either, I know someone who moved into Mac.Rob in yr11 from a western suburb school and she's now in my Med cohort and is a genuinely nice person, whilst another, went to western school and is also in Med and equally as nice.
Motivation is key, and I'd argue that most people who aspire to be high achievers have this motivation to get there, and that also encompasses finding opprtunities for themselves. It's not eletist imo (I feel very privileged to have gone to MHS and prior to that, UHS, very privileged. And there wasn't a day I took that for granted, and never a day when I pass MHS by train that I don't feel thankful for being there).
As I said:
there are a variety of factors involved including family background, socioeconomic status, friendship groups, etc
I acknowledge that not all parents would think to hit Google to see what academic opportunities there are for their kids back when they are only in Grade 5 or 6, and that most kids wouldn't be thinking that far anyway. Schools know that, which is why scholarships/select entry programs/selective schools all take an intake up to yr12. And those opportunities are available to all (except those that I mentioned having unfortunate severe financial/family/medical issues).
whereas our VCE results have been slowly rising from a 24 median in 2007 when it opened. Disregarding SES which is admittedly low etc, 'good teachers' would absolutely change quite a lot.
You know your school infinity times better than I, so let's say that statement is 100% true. What can someone say to good teachers working at MHS/Mac.Rob/MGS/etc. (the top-tier schools) to get them to teach at schools like yours. Schools where there hasn't been a strong academic record and progress in this regard will be limited (as I said, it took YEARS to for MHS/Mac.Rob/top privates to get to where they are).
Also, I'm not sure with your school, but a LOT of the schools in question re: "lower" academic performance, have serious discipline issues. IMHO, that needs to be tackled well before you start bringing in good teachers. Fix the culture -> teachers would want to teach there -> better results. Bringing in amazing teachers by themselves, isn't going to make a huge difference to most schools imo (yours might be an exception according to your post, I don't know).
It's tough, but I maintain that teachers would like to work in an environment where students appreciate them and on the whole, give them the respect they deserve. And from what I have heard from local schools in my area, this just not happen.
What about those who don't have the academic ability to get into a select entry school?
There are other pathways, look to private schools for scholarships (and don't just look at the top tier if you don't think you can make it) and look to select entry learning programs in many govt high schools around the state. More and more are opening every year.
-
The debate is pretty robust here, but to the OP: it's good that you have a strong social conscious and if these issues make you feel passionate, there are things you can do to get involved and create a more just society for those who experience disadvantage. You are certainly not alone in thinking that the system fails to serve the needs of everyone. However, every activist needs to know that self-care comes first. You need to learn how to shut those worries off in order to live a happy, productive, and balanced life. Learn to compartmentalise.
-
I'm sick of this fucking VCE system. It's just some bull shit fucking archaic system where we're just some god damn numbers and they (meaning the people who invented this bull shit system) think that it's alright to subject people to this system.
I feel that man, bits of it are definitely bullshit. However, try dream up an alternative, it aint all that easy. I reckon we have a pretty *decent* system compared to how it used to go years ago or how it still is in other countries.
Also, I really want to talk about the massive disparity between public schools. I have been to several schools, both public and private, and it does FUCKING piss me off how some public schools are SO MUCH BETTER than others. This correlation can be seen in the god damn VCE results.
Why should my friends, who go to bad schools (I believe I can say bad schools as I do not feel as though I should just suger coat 'facts' and other bull shit like some said education minister) have TERRIBLE teachers. I use to attend the school in question and let me say this, I can definitely see the differences in teachers, facilities and cohort.
....
This is what pisses me off. It just feels as though the better schools will obviously get the better teachers and this correlation will be seen with the results. Take my opinion with a grain of salt but I have been to both sectors and hence why I am saying all this.
I don't think you're looking deep enough. It's not the school so much. Is it a coincidence that schools in lower SES (aka poorer) areas do worse?
My school had a year 11 and 12 only campus. Every teacher was a VCE teacher and that only. Every teacher knew all about VCE. We were one of the largest catholic schools in the state. The government absolutely threw piles and piles of money at us. I'm talking literal millions. As part of the whole education revolution thing, we had a bakery, a restaurant, a theater (like an actual one, not just a hall), a sign writing workshop, picture framing workshop, new labs, every student with a iPad. I guess they wanted to buy the catholic vote.
I've always been interested in the results. I compared the past few years. Compared to the public school down the road, our results were almost identical. Median atar, median SS, % over 40. All of it. It mattered squat in this case.
Most of the students weren't well off at all. Almost all of them had parents from blue collar backgrounds and a good majority from non-English speaking/first generation backgrounds. The fees with various ways of doing them could get as low as about $3000 a year. So, we weren't some posh school at all.
The school down the road (won't name names) had PARENTS/RELATIVES show up with baseball bats during lunch to assault this kid because they did something to another kid. Another time a kid burnt down a building or something. The west side can be a rough place man. My school had its fair share of things which i probably shouldn't talk about since a lot of it isn't known in the wider community.
The fact is, compared to a lot of schools, we did fairly crap. Despite all the money thrown at us. Despite attracting rather good and experienced teachers (fair few had postgrad qualifications). We still didn't do fantastic.
A lot of this speaks deeper. It speaks to the poverty and financial disadvantage, it speaks to poor family circumstances and other horrible things, to non-english speaking backgrounds. All those things that come with a low SES status. You're a fool if you think all the root causes of academic problems start and finish at school. I know people who had horrible family enviroments, serious drug/alcohol problems or abusive. Lack of money and other stresses like that. The list goes on and on.
Remember the other school down the road? The one that sounds like something out of Afghanistan almost? A fair few of my friends went there, despite being seriously under-resourced and still got 90's.
They put in the work, they worked damn hard and they got results. While your school can disadvantage you, at the end of the day, everyone takes the same test. Even with a horrible teacher, if you're actually capable to begin with, you are certainly able to learn via other methods.
Even with the implementation of SEAS, I still feel as though this 'system' will NEVER adequately do these people justice.
Can they really believe that SEAS should cover just Year's 11 and 12? Have they experience educational disadvantage in ONLY those years?
You can nitpick SEAS all you want but the fact is SEAS existing is a shit-load better than SEAS not existing.
Honestly, you seem to make out like the worst thing that can happen to a person is going to a shitty school. I know plenty of people who came from abusive families. That is a real problem right there. They'd happily trade it for a less academically inclined school any day of the week.
ALL schools have different curriculums and due to these curriculums, that this will definitely develop an individuals mind. What about if you attended a not so well off school? From personal experience, even if you are coming in as a strong year 7, you will gradually decline in academic potential, when compared to your peers (From other schools) who are most likely having an 'elite' curriculum, and hence, even when in year 11 or 12, you won't be as academically able as the students, who from year 7, are already prepared for the 'higher order' thinking.
Years 7 - 10 don't really mean much at all. It's more babysitting whilst hopefully teaching you about the world rather than preparing you for rigorous academics.
You complain we don't have enough creativity or time to explore or opportunities to be shaped as a general person, those are in 7 - 10. You learn all about history, civilizations, the basics of science, how a government works, languages, literature, etc. Surprisingly, a fair few people our age still don't even understand how the government works, how we vote or the fact that we dont actually elect the prime minister. Thats a big problem right there.
You seem to want to have your cake and eat it too. You complain we dont have enough general education and we're shuttled into the system too fast but you also complain that 7-10 doesn't train you for some kind of rigorous academic gladiator match. Choose one position.
I'm fine with 7-10 as it is really. I think an extra year of VCE would be a very good choice though.
I think you're ignoring a lot of the root problems and a lot of the root causes. You have to be pretty intelligent/able/have supportive parents to make it into McRob/MHS to begin with. Disadvantage doesn't start or stop at just a crappy school. It goes much deeper. We have a pretty good system all things considered.
----------------
Teachers want to move to good schools, I agree with that, but it still doesn't excuse the fact that bad teachers cause a lot of harm to bad public schools. I have heard stories of teachers who are unfamiliar with the course they teach - I think this is a problem with teaching in general though - issues which I won't go through here because they are lengthy and irrelevant.
I'm very reluctant to blame the teachers, there are much more widespread problems in the community and in the schooling system but a good teacher or a great teacher can make so much difference it isn't funny. I speak from experience having maybe one or two good teachers and seeing people take the same subject with a horrible teacher. It really, really does matter.
What i found really shocking is that hardly any teachers scored over 90. Something like 1/3 of teaching graduates had an atar under something like 60. In other places, in particular Finland and other parts of Europe, teaching is a well regarded profession. In Australia, for a lot of people, its regarded as a bit of a cop out. In those places, its a rigorous, long course.
It doesn't really make sense to set an ATAR cap on teaching places. We might wind up with a teacher shortage. Lets not forget the ATAR for a course is purely demand driven. The clearly in is the mark of the last person to fill a place. If there were 5 places, you take the 5 highest applicants. The entry score is that of the lowest applicant who GOT IN last year. It's clear teaching isn't really in demand, especially amongst those at the top. We need to fix this.
http://theconversation.edu.au/gonski-review-time-for-a-new-vision-for-australian-education-5340
-
I can't agree with you enough King.
However, one point that I'd like to pick a tiny bone on - "Years 7 - 10 don't really mean much at all. It's more babysitting whilst hopefully teaching you about the world rather than preparing you for rigorous academics."
I'd say it's less about babysitting and more about developing critical thinking skills, problem solving skills and creativity (which I would argue you have ample time for in Years 7 to 10 and even to an extent in VCE) to prepare you for the rigorous world of academia - the critical problem solving skills could be in the field of humanities in argumentative essay writing and debating, or in science where we look for potential holes in experiments and studies. Creativity could be in the humanities, where you could learn to write poetry or creative pieces, or suggest and attempt to implement programs for the social good, or it could be in the sciences where you devise experiments and studies or suggest some form of invention, or it could be in maths where you figure out new and unusual ways to solve problems. For instance, last year in Spesh, our teacher gave us a problem to solve (it was a trig identity) - we went through it together in class and we were trying to feel for the solution by expanding and 'bashing out' the expression; it took up two whole whiteboards, and we couldn't solve it properly because the algebra got too messy. Now, this is where creativity comes in. I stared at the expression for a while, and then an unusual idea popped into my head, not a technique we were taught in class, or anywhere. I quickly derived the formula I needed to confirm my theory and then solved that identity with two lines of working.
Personally, I think one thing my school got right was this - I came into Year 11 prepared with the necessary skills to tackle VCE.