Senate report calls for reinstatement of Gonski

The report of the Senate Select Committee on School Funding is recommended reading, not just because it validates what we do, but also because it gives an insight into the way those who oppose Gonski think.

The committee recommended, as one of eight recommendations, that the Australian Government honour its pre-election commitment to implement the national needs-based, sector-blind funding model incorporated in the National Plan for School Improvement to improve equity across Australian schools.

The committee in particular recommended that the Australian Government should commit to a six-year transition to a nationally consistent schooling resource standard.

The committee also made a number of recommendations regarding students with a disability, including that:

• "the government moves as a matter of urgency to a disability loading based on student actual need"
• "the federal government honours its election commitment for increased funding to cover unmet need for students with a disability".

A number of those who provided evidence to the committee made extremely salient points.
Much is made of choice in the rhetoric of those who seek to undermine public schools.

Appearing in a private capacity, Monash University senior lecturer Dr David Zygnier stated: “School choice is exercised in Australia, favouring those with resources to exercise that choice while reducing opportunities for disadvantaged students who are increasingly sitting in classrooms alongside their own disadvantaged peers.” 

Professor Stephen Dinham, National President of the Australian College of Education, said this of the Abbott government’s changes: “It is hard not to conclude that what we are seeing is a deliberate strategy to dismantle public education, partly for ideological and partly for financial reasons.”

And while there has been increased education funding from 2000 – 2012, former Gonski Review panellist Dr Ken Boston pointed out that this has been far from needs-based and sector-blind, and national performance has declined as a result: “The issue is that increased funding is not spent strategically. Too much is being spent on schools that do not need it. Not enough is being spent on what matters where it matters.”

That is the point that those supporting a new funding model have been consistently making – diverting the rivers of funding to those who are already flooded with money rather than sending it to those areas suffering a shortage will not improve the overall outcome.

Not all the comments were that sensible however. A minority report from the Coalition Senators devoted significant ink to attacking the messenger, condemning the AEU for sloganeering, using emotive rhetoric and distorting the public debate.

Those who put the minority view included a number of right wing think-tankers and members of the commentariat who displayed a complete lack of understanding of the principles that underpinned the Gonski recommendations.

They showed no awareness that Gonski is about targeting educational disadvantage, creating a meritocracy and spending where it is needed – in short, that educational outcomes should be determined by how smart and how diligent the students are, not by the income of their parents.

Or perhaps they are aware and that is why they are afraid of Gonski - because they believe that a quality education should remain the privilege of the already privileged.

Certainly, while those government senators responsible for the minority report state that “as a function of their birth right, each Australian citizen is equitably entitled to an excellent education,” their actions are completely at odds with their words.

You can read the report here 

Barry Welch
Deputy General Secretary

Queensland Teachers' Journal, Vol 119 No 6, 22 August 2014, p13