[Epicurus]

Kuzushisan, on 03 February 2011 - 12:51 PM, said:

Really? I meet them all the time. Really keen on maths/science/computing but not big fans of drawing/photography/art theory, contrasted with the really gifted artists who do not do well in maths/science/computing, and some in both streams who are good to brilliant at both and into that you can throw music and sport, though they are the exception rather than the rule. The first are hardly Savants, but perhaps it bears me clarifying the original intent of what I was saying.

Definitely we are talking about different things. Just because a student is 'keen' on a subject, does not make them gifted... bright perhaps, but not gifted. Gifted students are the exception and not the rule... just like remedial students. The rest fall within the standard bell curve and can range from below average to above average.

School grades do not necessarily reflect the gifted or remedial qualities of a student. It's a difference in IQs and that difference as expressed in education is predictable. Check the link on 'gifted' in this paragraph as an example.

Quote

The most recent example was a lad I had in a class who wished not to be at school, because he was 'just gonna end up working on the family farm'. When it was pointed out that he would need to know at some point about how to manage the books, dealing with suppliers/buyers, understanding the markets, etc., he replied, "I'm not stupid, I already know all that. I made $185,000 out of my share of the farm last year, so I don't see the point in being here." He was 15 years old.

Quite possibly he was gifted, particularly given his disinterest in standardized education in contrast to his exceptional business acumen. I wonder whether the same response would have resulted if an appeal was made to his curiosity rather than an appeal to practicality.

Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.

[Bam]

In relation to user pays:

Kuzushisan, on 03 February 2011 - 09:31 AM, said:

Examples being?

In Victoria FOI requests used to have a $100 cap. The cap was removed and suddenly an FOI request could cost tens of thousands of dollars.

Electricity and gas bills used to be charged on straight consumption without service to property charges. If you used $8 worth of gas, for example, your bill was $8. Now these bills have service charges that are ostensibly for maintenance of the network or some such waffle, when really it's about shifting the cost burden onto the poor with a thinly-disguised poll tax.

Education used to be free. Now with shortfalls in education funding, it is not unusual for parents to be charged hundreds of dollars in school fees to attend a government school.

Water consumption used to be paid for out of general rates revenue. In this case, owners of more expensive properties paid more. Now there are fixed charges just for having a water meter and consumption charges. This is another example of user pays cost-shifting from the rich to the poor through poll-tax-style pricing.

Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.

[Kuzushisan]

Epicurus, on 03 February 2011 - 02:52 PM, said:

Definitely we are talking about different things. Just because a student is 'keen' on a subject, does not make them gifted... bright perhaps, but not gifted. Gifted students are the exception and not the rule... just like remedial students. The rest fall within the standard bell curve and can range from below average to above average.

School grades do not necessarily reflect the gifted or remedial qualities of a student. It's a difference in IQs and that difference as expressed in education is predictable. Check the link on 'gifted' in this paragraph as an example.



Quite possibly he was gifted, particularly given his disinterest in standardized education in contrast to his exceptional business acumen. I wonder whether the same response would have resulted if an appeal was made to his curiosity rather than an appeal to practicality.

Actually, that chart does described many of the students I was talking about especially in reference to boredom thresholds and questioning of authority, memory retention, and so on... Such charts are too generalised for my tastes, and can lead to a 'one size fits all' approach, something I would caution against.

Renzulli (1982) is one model that is used and has currency, and is perhaps where I lean. To quote Marsh (2008) (sorry, no 'free' references)

Quote

Being able to pick out gifted children from a class can be difficult because of difference of degree. It is not usually sufficient to base it on such characteristics as those students who are interested in books and reading, or those who have relatively large vocabularies or those who are curious to learn. (p.223)

And gifted-ness also presents itself at different stages in the individual for a multiplicity of reasons, including 'genius' emerging in middle life (Peterson, 2010, p.466)

Thank you for the reference too

Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.

[Kuzushisan]

Bam, on 03 February 2011 - 03:44 PM, said:

In relation to user pays:


A) In Victoria FOI requests used to have a $100 cap. The cap was removed and suddenly an FOI request could cost tens of thousands of dollars.

B) Electricity and gas bills used to be charged on straight consumption without service to property charges. If you used $8 worth of gas, for example, your bill was $8. Now these bills have service charges that are ostensibly for maintenance of the network or some such waffle, when really it's about shifting the cost burden onto the poor with a thinly-disguised poll tax.

C) Education used to be free. Now with shortfalls in education funding, it is not unusual for parents to be charged hundreds of dollars in school fees to attend a government school.

D) Water consumption used to be paid for out of general rates revenue. In this case, owners of more expensive properties paid more. Now there are fixed charges just for having a water meter and consumption charges. This is another example of user pays cost-shifting from the rich to the poor through poll-tax-style pricing.

Thanks, Bam.

A) Can't agree this affects just the poor, or that they are hardest hit, because few could afford the FOI fees of many thousands, except the very rich, so even middle income earners would find this beyond their means. I'm sure low-income earners would be entitled to some form of waiver? Epicurus, do you know of such from your experience? Certainly, Legal Aid Australia offers assistance in paying for these fees, where it relates to Family law and Criminal law matters.

B) Respectfully, in the entire time I lived in Victoria (spans 1983 to 1995 including 18 months 2006 - 2008) all gas/electricity bills were like this; you had your commodity usage, plus a service/admin fee, and were uniform. I think that is fair. It has nothing to do with the size of the property (wealth) and accounts for the actually usage, plus a shared price for the service.

C) Yes, this true, but subsidies have been in place for low-income earners to alleviate these amounts, both through Centrelink (JETCCFA/Austudy/Low Income School Fee Allowance) and through arrangements with the schools themselves. Schools are very understanding in this regard, and amelioration is usually the result. So on the one hand the government taketh away, and on the other it giveth... I don't think that $300 dollars a year (as it is in Tasmania) is an excessive amount. That's 10 packets of cigarettes.

D) This is not poll-tax like, it is a poll-tax (head tax) and odious - the most recent changes in Tasmania have had a disastrous effect on the Bartlett/Giddings government, with the result being that councils lost water rates income (based on worth or wealth of properties) to 'independent' Water Boards (owned by the state, but as separate entities so 'we don't really own them', and the result is a huge increase in water bills for home owners, which equals severely pissed-off voters. This however rarely affects the poor, as it applies to home owners, and the number of low or low-middle income earners simply don't own/or are buying homes.

Where it does affect them is when prices of rental properties go up due to charges applied to home owners. Yet, again, these are often equalised by government rental assistance. Yet, I can't agree that the poor in Australia are disadvantaged to any greater degree than Middle income earners, who often fall outside of assistance from Government, save a nominal amount of Family Tax Benefit.

Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.

[icey]

Neil, on 30 January 2011 - 12:59 PM, said:

Except that private schools get more federal tax money than government schools. Another thing to thank Howard for.
Has anyone noted that the media constantly supports tax payer funding of private schools? Perhaps the media should declare their conflict of interest if their own children attend private schools.

Good point Neil. More tax money for the private schools as the parents are kicking in their own hard earned $ sounds fair enough to me too (thanks JWH and others).

My children have been to both private and "free" schools.

In fairness, do you have children (my best guess is none that you are responsible for), and if so, please declare if they go to a "free" school? Would not want a conflict of interest.

Marat, on 01 February 2011 - 09:29 AM, said:

It is very simple. Public Schools are available to all( or nearly all)children,irrespective of income. Similarly public transport is available to all(or nearly all ). If you want a taxi you pay extra. If you want a private education YOU PAY EXTRA.

Sounds like an argument against free private education. It's not free. It costs extra. What is the point you are making?

Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.

[Neil]

Quote

In fairness, do you have children (my best guess is none that you are responsible for),

I will never provide any information about my children to anyone on the internet

Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.

[icey]

Neil, on 06 February 2011 - 07:57 AM, said:

I will never provide any information about my children to anyone on the internet

What a bizarre and paranoid response to my not so pointed questions!

Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.