Are teachers parent replacements?

Here's an article by Justin Ferarri reporting on the APPA's concerns over teachers' responsibilities for teaching things 'normally' taught by parents. Are teachers currently seen as the arbiters of values and social welfare ahead of parents? Should this be the case?

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21452562-13881,00.html

I'm finding this statement interesting: "The national umbrella group of parents and citizens organisations, the Australian Council of State School Organisations, yesterday supported a charter that refocused primary schools on the traditional core tasks of literacy, numeracy and socialisation".

What's schooling for??

Donnelly says: "One way to describe the relationship between schools and wider society is to describe education as providing a ladder of opportunity. While it is true that not all in society are as wealthy as one another or as disadvantaged in terms of what they own or where they live, education provides an avenue for advancement. Based on ability and hard work, it is possible to use education as a springboard toward success in all its guises" (Donnelly, 2007, p. 135).

Here's where those interested in social justice and education come in. Recognition that MANY students are not advantaged by wealth, what they own or where they live is of paramount importance. However, there are many other forms of educational disadvantage! While I might agree with Donnelly that education can be "a springboard toward success in all its guises", there must also be a recognition that the potential differences between these disadvantaged students and others goes far beyond the financial.

What does Donnelly mean by "success in all its guises"? In other words, what is schooling for?

Is it for producing cohorts of people with skills and knowledge to perform tasks in our society, often related to economics or 'productivity'? Is it for keeping certain types of knowledge alive (eg, Shakespeare), and thus maintaining a cultural heritage? Is it for producing people who can adapt to various situations, thinking for themselves through the skills of analysis, critique and questioning? Is it for producing people who are in themselves content with the way they interact with the world, and want to be part of enacting world change?

Donnelly on Macintyre's book review - one point

"Not only does the book provide a definition of OBE in its glossary but it also gives a detailed analysis and description of Australia's adoption of OBE in recent years" (Donnelly, Education not to be toyed with, 10 March, 2007, The Australian).

Donnelly's 'glossary' was no more than an extension of his opinion, and cannot be called a 'glossary' as one should be conceptualised or named. For example, the 'glossary' had the term 'educrat' within in, and Donnelly's idea of a 'definition' was naming anyone that had views of education that you culd name as 'left wing'.

Teacher education students unprepared

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21390594-12332,00.html

This article by Justine Ferarri links teacher retention rates to lack of practica in teacher education courses:
"The survey found almost half chose teaching as a second career, but one in four of all new teachers became so dispirited by the job that they intended to quit within the next five years"

Stuart Macintyre's book review in The Australian

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21275638-25132,00.html