You can destroy the environment without destroying or changing the climate of the planet, but I wouldn't expect someone with such a lack of capacity for critical thinking as you to be able to discern between the two.

So you decided to cryptically go off topic.

You're welcome to elaborate. Or not.

Explain where I lack ''critical thinking''. Bet you don't ...

My family only has one car, we have one plasma TV, we generally eat home cooked meals other than for birthdays, anniversaries or maybe a night out once every couple of months...

You clearly miss the point/we have diametrically opposed views so it doesn't look like we'll have consensus here. Suffice to say I don't see people as "consumers" but as people. There are plenty of useful things for people to do to keep them employed, they don't just have to be working a counter at McDonald's or working in factories producing plasma TV's and cars. As far as Australia goes this is a bit of a fallacy anyway as I would hazard a guess that all (if not close to all) TV's purchased in Australia are built off-shore and this will be the same for cars soon too. One thing that should be done immediately to curb this is to tear up the bogus "free trade agreements" and disband the WTO which only exist to fatten the wallets of those at the top at the expense of those whose jobs you'd seek to save by ensuring every family has multiple cars and TV's.

This is a world wide problem and it's not just restricted to Australia, we will continue to see our population grow as long as countries around the world can't feed or employ their people. They see us as an alternative and set off in their boats for a life of relative comfort at the taxpayers expense.

Also, there are only so many jobs we can "manufacture" that will take the place of the manufacturing jobs we have lost in Australia; that's what Keating wanted wasn't it no one working in factories?

What do they do instead, flip burgers, clean rooms, build houses for the ever increasing population?

Quite a large % of the teachers in our schools are left leaning dodo's and they are pushing their agenda on to the young students as if they are facts, not their opinion. The teachers get dumber and therefore the students get dumber, the next generation of teachers drop a little further down the intelligence chain so on it goes.

Politicians should just keep their noses out of education but unfortunately the Labor Party found the best way to pollute young minds and tune them in to their agenda was to get to them early through the education system. Kids nowadays accept a whole load of rubbish as fact because that's what they are taught.

It is increasingly becoming a case of the blind leading the blind.

Well thanks for that Robbie. I won't pass on your on your expert opinion and thoughts to my wife who has spent nearly 30 years teaching in schools for the disadvantaged in the northern suburbs, Greeks in Fawkner High, East Timorese at Richmond, battlers from Heidleberg, Olympic villiage, Sudenese, Somalies in Mcleod, you name it, she has had to deal with struggling kids from often dysfunctional families. But of course she doesn't get the results they manage over at Brighton Grammer but that must be a reflection on her abilities. As we know all kids are created equal and should be measured as such (and I blame Julia for this absurdity). Yes she may lean to the left but the last time I looked she was working at home after work hours developing the next days classes that concentrate on the process of learning and less on the content. She and the majority of her cohorts are not dodos, I can assure you. And as for the young ones coming through as teachers, when they can score a job, they are better trained and more prepared than our generation.

But of course being on the public payroll I suppose they are all parasites in your mind. Would I be correct?

Well thanks for that Robbie. I won't pass on your on your expert opinion and thoughts to my wife who has spent nearly 30 years teaching in schools for the disadvantaged in the northern suburbs, Greeks in Fawkner High, East Timorese at Richmond, battlers from Heidleberg, Olympic villiage, Sudenese, Somalies in Mcleod, you name it, she has had to deal with struggling kids from often dysfunctional families. But of course she doesn't get the results they manage over at Brighton Grammer but that must be a reflection on her abilities. As we know all kids are created equal and should be measured as such (and I blame Julia for this absurdity). Yes she may lean to the left but the last time I looked she was working at home after work hours developing the next days classes that concentrate on the process of learning and less on the content. She and the majority of her cohorts are not dodos, I can assure you. And as for the young ones coming through as teachers, when they can score a job, they are better trained and more prepared than our generation.

But of course being on the public payroll I suppose they are all parasites in your mind. Would I be correct?

I don't know where she finds the time to attend all the Socialist meetings and to de-stabilise the govt. She's clearly bludging on the tax system even though she spends all those extra hours marking papers. They must sit around preaching racial tolerance and all that bogus fact based knowledge which leaves them no time to do the work.

Better if your wife just sent the immigrants schoolwork off too Manus Island for processing and then she could get on with the job .

Well thanks for that Robbie. I won't pass on your on your expert opinion and thoughts to my wife who has spent nearly 30 years teaching in schools for the disadvantaged in the northern suburbs, Greeks in Fawkner High, East Timorese at Richmond, battlers from Heidleberg, Olympic villiage, Sudenese, Somalies in Mcleod, you name it, she has had to deal with struggling kids from often dysfunctional families. But of course she doesn't get the results they manage over at Brighton Grammer but that must be a reflection on her abilities. As we know all kids are created equal and should be measured as such (and I blame Julia for this absurdity). Yes she may lean to the left but the last time I looked she was working at home after work hours developing the next days classes that concentrate on the process of learning and less on the content. She and the majority of her cohorts are not dodos, I can assure you. And as for the young ones coming through as teachers, when they can score a job, they are better trained and more prepared than our generation.

But of course being on the public payroll I suppose they are all parasites in your mind. Would I be correct?

You sort of miss the point Hood; I didn't ask how long or hard they work, or even the conditions they work under; with all due respect to your wife, working long hours has nothing to do with the capacity to teach children, it's the standard that concerns me. It's also the bias that's passed on by the teachers, especially when it comes to issues relating to things like climate change where there is no alternative view put forward.

There are, seemingly, very few in the teaching industry that aren't left leaning and that shows up in the way the children are taught; left is good right is bad.

Now that may be ok with you and the fact that teachers spend a lot of time on the job and work nights is admirable but it is the quality of the work they do that is of concern.

What score do you need to become a Lawyer or a Doctor, 98 plus; what do you need to become a teacher, 60 or thereabouts. In other words the pass mark for teaching is barely a pass mark and that's the quality we are getting. It may surprise you but in some countries in the World they demand that teachers have a very high pass mark because they want the smartest people teaching their kids not those that can barely scrape through themselves.

Why would I think they would be parasites, we need well educated teachers and I'm happy to see my tax $'s go there.

Bachelor of Science Game Development 91.2

Bachelor of Design Fashion and Textiles 95

Bachelor of Design in visual communication 95

Bachelor of Architecture 94

VCE scores for courses are based on how popular they are.

The more popular the course, the higher the score (although for Medicine I would imagine that there is testing as well to get into it).

EDIT: Also a score of 60 doesn't mean that person had grades of 60 out of 100, it means they are in the top 40% of students in the state. They may have B average grades (70-84%) but that score only puts them in the top 40% of students. I hope that makes sense.

VCE scores for courses are based on how popular they are.

The more popular the course, the higher the score (although for Medicine I would imagine that there is testing as well to get into it).

EDIT: Also a score of 60 doesn't mean that person had grades of 60 out of 100, it means they are in the top 40% of students in the state. They may have B average grades (70-84%) but that score only puts them in the top 40% of students. I hope that makes sense.

A few years ago a friend of mine's son barely passed his HSC, he attained a score of just over 50 and the only course he could get in to was teaching at Deakin in Geelong.

Let me assure you he wasn't in the top 40% and fortunately he failed in his first year and dropped out; it was frightening to think he could have been teaching other children.

A few years ago a friend of mine's son barely passed his HSC, he attained a score of just over 50 and the only course he could get in to was teaching at Deakin in Geelong.

Let me assure you he wasn't in the top 40% and fortunately he failed in his first year and dropped out; it was frightening to think he could have been teaching other children.

I'm just pointing out how the scoring works.

If he was able to get into teaching with such a low score it simply shows that particular teaching course wasn't all that popular, hence it was easier to get into.

If more people wanted to do teaching the score to get in would be higher.

I'm just pointing out how the scoring works.

If he was able to get into teaching with such a low score it simply shows that particular teaching course wasn't all that popular, hence it was easier to get into.

If more people wanted to do teaching the score to get in would be higher.

It's a vicious circle, if the pay was better then more would want to get in to it but it's not, by the look of it, a desired occupation.

I understand what you are saying by the way.

there's no point in spending money and resources on a solar heating system that's going to cost more in resources than it's gong to save, other than to sustain another bogus industry.

The embodied energy in a solar PV system is no more than 18 months of its lifetime production. They have an anticipated lifespan of 25+ years.

The current economic payback period, or return on investment, for a correctly-sized household solar PV system is 5-6 years, even with the current feed in tariff of around 8c/kWh, which is not much more than the average wholesale price of electricity produced by coal-fired generators (5-6c/kWh).

The payback for solar water heating is even less, because they have even greater efficiency.

Try basing your argument on the correct facts.

You sort of miss the point Hood; I didn't ask how long or hard they work, or even the conditions they work under; with all due respect to your wife, working long hours has nothing to do with the capacity to teach children, it's the standard that concerns me. It's also the bias that's passed on by the teachers, especially when it comes to issues relating to things like climate change where there is no alternative view put forward.

There are, seemingly, very few in the teaching industry that aren't left leaning and that shows up in the way the children are taught; left is good right is bad.

Now that may be ok with you and the fact that teachers spend a lot of time on the job and work nights is admirable but it is the quality of the work they do that is of concern.

What score do you need to become a Lawyer or a Doctor, 98 plus; what do you need to become a teacher, 60 or thereabouts. In other words the pass mark for teaching is barely a pass mark and that's the quality we are getting. It may surprise you but in some countries in the World they demand that teachers have a very high pass mark because they want the smartest people teaching their kids not those that can barely scrape through themselves.

Why would I think they would be parasites, we need well educated teachers and I'm happy to see my tax $'s go there.

Bachelor of Science Game Development 91.2

Bachelor of Design Fashion and Textiles 95

Bachelor of Design in visual communication 95

Bachelor of Architecture 94

Robbie as you can probably guess again I think you are on the wrong tram (or should I say tunnel). If I was interviewing teachers for a position I would be looking less at their academic scores and more at their rapport with children and their passion for their subject. Have they worked with kids previously, coaching sport part time, something that indicates their commitment and enthusiasm for teaching and working with kids? High IQ's and exceptional study scores are one thing but not necessarily an indicator of a great teacher. If they can inspire a child to be as good as they can be, the teacher has achieved much more than some highly intelligent graduate who cannot relate to their class.

why do we need high IQ teachers who are teaching fairly basic level curriculum that anyone with a degree could understand. The real skill is being able to impart knowledge to others and Can inspire others.

Our different opinions may stem from the emphasis on content versus process. I think the content, the curriculum is secondary. The process is all important. Teachings kids to analyse things, how to solve problems and think for themselves is important but not as important as building their self confidence and ability to communicate and work with others. You don't need Einsteins to deliver this.

Robbie as you can probably guess again I think you are on the wrong tram (or should I say tunnel). If I was interviewing teachers for a position I would be looking less at their academic scores and more at their rapport with children and their passion for their subject. Have they worked with kids previously, coaching sport part time, something that indicates their commitment and enthusiasm for teaching and working with kids? High IQ's and exceptional study scores are one thing but not necessarily an indicator of a great teacher. If they can inspire a child to be as good as they can be, the teacher has achieved much more than some highly intelligent graduate who cannot relate to their class.

why do we need high IQ teachers who are teaching fairly basic level curriculum that anyone with a degree could understand. The real skill is being able to impart knowledge to others and Can inspire others.

Our different opinions may stem from the emphasis on content versus process. I think the content, the curriculum is secondary. The process is all important. Teachings kids to analyse things, how to solve problems and think for themselves is important but not as important as building their self confidence and ability to communicate and work with others. You don't need Einsteins to deliver this.

That's all very well and good and probably makes you feel all warm and fuzzy, but the problem is our students are falling further behind other Countries simply because we want to make our kids study the process instead of the content. Ever since Kirner we have had the ridiculous situation where everyone deserves to pass their VCE or whatever it is called this year. You get kids who are complete morons that pass their VCE when in reality they shouldn't have gone past year one at High School.

One of my friend's sons failed every year at school, but despite his mothers requests, he was promoted each time; he has serious issues and yet he passed his VCE, his father said at the time it was ludicrous. But that's ok, as long as everyone feels good, that's all that counts.

We can have smart kids or we can have not so smart kids.

A few years ago a friend of mine's son barely passed his HSC, he attained a score of just over 50 and the only course he could get in to was teaching at Deakin in Geelong.

Let me assure you he wasn't in the top 40% and fortunately he failed in his first year and dropped out; it was frightening to think he could have been teaching other children.

teachers at my kids school said quite strongly

we need every kid to go through year 12

dont worry about the scores,the basically all pass

but if they are not up to exams,we prefer they dont sit them and our school will only have students sitting exams that are capable of passing

for the school prefered to have all exam sitters ,be classed as passed

and boy o boy ,one of my sons was going to be a plumber at best,but the school insisted he stay and told us he was good enough to finish year 12

what a waste of 2 years and money

he could of been earning a quid and not wasting resources,was the last time i trusted the school

There's no such thing as "passing" your VCE.

You get an ATAR, which determines your percentile rank. You won't do much with a low ATAR anyway. I know a girl who spent six years at a private school, got an ATAR of 20 and is working in a cake shop.

In regard to Education degrees, you won't get entrants with a high ATAR until you pay teachers more. What's the incentive? Politicians make promises like Bailleau, then reneg.

You don't need a high ATAR to be a good teacher in the lower grades of school, although it helps. My wife is a lecturer in Education at a Victorian university. She says the best students are those with a high ATAR, good at communication and understanding teaching concepts, and working with kids. They're the ones who will often end up as leading teachers and principals. Not far behind are those with lower ATARs but who still have the idea of what makes a good teacher. Some of the worst are those with higher ATARs but who have no commitment.

As you go further up the years at school, a high ATAR is more important because the knowledge of the subject matter demands it. But again, there are teachers with very high ATARs who have continually poor teaching skills and poor communication.

So a good ATAR is important and would improve the teaching profession, but not the sole determining factor, or even that critical.

My daughter is a teacher and has a double degree in Arts-Science from Melbourne. She teaches VCE Psychology and Biology and currently tutors in graduate education. For the last two years she's actually written the VCE Psychology paper, and is currently working on a project with a number of universities to include Neuroscience in the Psych curriculum. For the record, she had an ATAR of 94.

IMHO, notions of problems with 'left-leaning' teachers are spurious and irrelevant, dragged up by politicians when they want to divert an educational debate.

That's all very well and good and probably makes you feel all warm and fuzzy, but the problem is our students are falling further behind other Countries simply because we want to make our kids study the process instead of the content. Ever since Kirner we have had the ridiculous situation where everyone deserves to pass their VCE or whatever it is called this year. You get kids who are complete morons that pass their VCE when in reality they shouldn't have gone past year one at High School.

One of my friend's sons failed every year at school, but despite his mothers requests, he was promoted each time; he has serious issues and yet he passed his VCE, his father said at the time it was ludicrous. But that's ok, as long as everyone feels good, that's all that counts.

We can have smart kids or we can have not so smart kids.

It's a valid point, one of the issues teachers face is they are not allowed to write anything negative in school reports. It's all what the child can do, not what he or her cannot do, but that's forced upon the teachers.

IMHO, notions of problems with 'left-leaning' teachers are spurious and irrelevant, dragged up by politicians when they want to divert an educational debate.

Agreed, it's as if people think there is some big conspiracy that the "left" are trying to infiltrate students minds and they only hire people from the "left". If the "right" want to see "right" ideologies taught then people of the "right" should become teachers.

There's no such thing as "passing" your VCE.

You get an ATAR, which determines your percentile rank. You won't do much with a low ATAR anyway. I know a girl who spent six years at a private school, got an ATAR of 20 and is working in a cake shop.

In regard to Education degrees, you won't get entrants with a high ATAR until you pay teachers more. What's the incentive? Politicians make promises like Bailleau, then reneg.

You don't need a high ATAR to be a good teacher in the lower grades of school, although it helps. My wife is a lecturer in Education at a Victorian university. She says the best students are those with a high ATAR, good at communication and understanding teaching concepts, and working with kids. They're the ones who will often end up as leading teachers and principals. Not far behind are those with lower ATARs but who still have the idea of what makes a good teacher. Some of the worst are those with higher ATARs but who have no commitment.

As you go further up the years at school, a high ATAR is more important because the knowledge of the subject matter demands it. But again, there are teachers with very high ATARs who have continually poor teaching skills and poor communication.

So a good ATAR is important and would improve the teaching profession, but not the sole determining factor, or even that critical.

My daughter is a teacher and has a double degree in Arts-Science from Melbourne. She teaches VCE Psychology and Biology and currently tutors in graduate education. For the last two years she's actually written the VCE Psychology paper, and is currently working on a project with a number of universities to include Neuroscience in the Psych curriculum. For the record, she had an ATAR of 94.

IMHO, notions of problems with 'left-leaning' teachers are spurious and irrelevant, dragged up by politicians when they want to divert an educational debate.

When this guy's son was at school there was; they seem to change they way kids are graded on a regular basis.

I find it difficult to understand why someone would want to become a teacher if they didn't have commitment.

I'm struggling with that part about it not being critical; I would have thought that it would be rather important.

Not sure why you bothered to put in the info about your daughter and what relevance that has to the matter, other than making you seem proud of her.

Agreed, it's as if people think there is some big conspiracy that the "left" are trying to infiltrate students minds and they only hire people from the "left". If the "right" want to see "right" ideologies taught then people of the "right" should become teachers.

Would you agree that the Teachers Union is a fairly left wing organisation?

I find it difficult to understand why someone would want to become a teacher if they didn't have commitment.

It's just like all the players Melbourne have recruited over recent years who haven't been committed. It's not something exclusive to teachers.

It's just like all the players Melbourne have recruited over recent years who haven't been committed. It's not something exclusive to teachers.

I think you'll find that when they started out they were committed but after a short time at Melbourne that commitment would have dried up.

If you are a teacher and you have the commitment then it would take a Melbourne type situation to suck that commitment out of you.

Anyway the results speak for themselves; we are not keeping up with the smarter nations.

Would you agree that the Teachers Union is a fairly left wing organisation?

Just because someone is part of a union doesn't automatically mean they are "left" with everything they do or think. Someone may have "left" opinions on one issue and "right" on the other, it's not something you are tied down to.

I don't see what there being a union has to do with anything. As I said, people from "right" are allowed to be teachers too and they don't have to join a union.

Anyway the results speak for themselves; we are not keeping up with the smarter nations.

The question is why? I won't pretend to know the answer, whether it's because of teachers or other reasons.

There's no such thing as "passing" your VCE.

Not quite right. You receive a certificate of satisfactory completion of year 12 - This is attained by attendance minimum and handing in SAC's ( trying to find the exact requirement to attain this without much success - I do know the bar is really low)

Not sure why you bothered to put in the info about your daughter and what relevance that has to the matter, other than making you seem proud of her.

Because you said "In other words the pass mark for teaching is barely a pass mark and that's the quality we are getting".

Not quite right. You receive a certificate of satisfactory completion of year 12 - This is attained by attendance minimum and handing in SAC's ( trying to find the exact requirement to attain this without much success - I do know the bar is really low)

So you think an ATAR below 50 is a "fail"?

A certificate of completion is irrelevant to anyone with a low ATAR. They can do nothing with it.