University Pres. Scolds Students for Inviting Ann Coulter to Speak

A lesson in how to make threats subtly.  Quite literally Jesuitical

American universities are often criticized for their left-leaning biases, but the president of Fordham University in New York appeared to take it a step further when he singled out the young Republicans on campus.

The group “College Republicans” had invited well-known author and columnist Ann Coulter to speak, and President Joseph M. McShane expressed his thoughts in a university-wide email, according to Young America’s Foundation (YAF).

It should be noted that Coulter’s appearance was to be paid for by the school’s student activity fees, but the president still made it seem as though the school deserved tremendous praise for allowing free speech by a conservative firebrand.  In the end, though, Coulter’s invitation was still rescinded, the university’s website says.

Here is part of the November 9th email, via the YAF:

    …Student groups are allowed, and encouraged, to invite speakers who represent diverse, and sometimes unpopular, points of view, in keeping with the canons of academic freedom. Accordingly, the University will not block the College Republicans from hosting their speaker of choice on campus.

To say that I am disappointed with the judgment and maturity of the College Republicans, however, would be a tremendous understatement. There are many people who can speak to the conservative point of view with integrity and conviction, but Ms. Coulter is not among them. Her rhetoric is often hateful and needlessly provocative-more heat than light-and her message is aimed squarely at the darker side of our nature.

McShane then references a number of racist incidents that occurred on campus, before concluding:

    Still, to prohibit Ms. Coulter from speaking at Fordham would be to do greater violence to the academy, and to the Jesuit tradition of fearless and robust engagement. Preventing Ms. Coulter from speaking would counter one wrong with another. The old saw goes that the answer to bad speech is more speech. This is especially true at a university, and I fully expect our students, faculty, alumni, parents, and staff to voice their opposition, civilly and respectfully, and forcefully.

The College Republicans have unwittingly provided Fordham with a test of its character: do we abandon our ideals in the face of repugnant speech and seek to stifle Ms. Coulter’s (and the student organizers’) opinions, or do we use her appearance as an opportunity to prove that our ideas are better and our faith in the academy-and one another-stronger? We have chosen the latter course, confident in our community, and in the power of decency and reason to overcome hatred and prejudice.

When the College Republicans rescinded their invitation to Coulter, saying they didn’t “vet” her properly, McShane said the university had passed its challenge “with flying colors.”  Here is part of his follow-up letter, via The Observer:

    Allow me to give credit where it is due: the leadership of the College Republicans acted quickly, took responsibility for their decisions, and expressed their regrets sincerely and eloquently. Most gratifying, I believe, is that they framed their decision in light of Fordham’s mission and values. There can be no finer testament to the value of a Fordham education and the caliber of our students.

Yesterday I wrote that the College Republicans provided Fordham with a test of its character. They, the University community, and our extended Fordham family passed the test with flying colors, engaging in impassioned but overwhelmingly civil debate on politics, academic freedom, and freedom of speech.

We can all be proud of Fordham today, and I am proud to serve you.

SOURCE





British universities paying £10,000 to sign up bright students

Bright students are being offered financial incentives worth up to £10,000 to study at "lower-ranked" universities amid a scramble to fill undergraduate places, the Telegraph has learnt.

Dozens of institutions outside the academic elite are making lucrative offers to applicants with the best A-level grades, irrespective of their household income, it emerged.

The awards - for students starting degrees in 2013 - normally include substantial discounts on tuition fees or cash contributions towards living costs.

Some universities are offering applicants guaranteed places in halls of residence and even free laptops or membership of sports clubs.

Institutions offering deals include Aston, Bournemouth, Brunel, Coventry, De Montfort, Edge Hill, Essex, Gloucestershire, Kent, Leicester, Northumbria, Roehampton, the Royal Agricultural College, Salford, Surrey and Wolverhampton.

City University London is offering awards of between £3,000 and £9,000 over three years depending on students' A-level grades and chosen undergraduate course.

Newman University College in Birmingham said it was offering £10,000 for all students who achieve three B grades or better in their A-levels.

Newcastle University's school of electrical and electronic engineering offers scholarships of up to £2,000-a-year plus a laptop, while Surrey University promises a £3,000 cash award alongside free sports club membership to students with straight As.

In most cases, these scholarships are not means-tested but depend on students naming particular universities as their "firm choice" on UCAS application forms.

The disclosure appears to underline the lengths universities are being forced to go to in an attempt to fill places following a backlash over the near tripling of tuition fees to a maximum of £9,000-a-year.

Earlier this month, England's Higher Education Funding Council found that university finances were under pressure after an "unexpected fall" in admissions rates.

Overall numbers were an average of 2.1 per cent lower than universities' own forecasts, it emerged. Some 57,000 fewer undergraduates started courses across the country this year.

In a report, the respected Institute for Fiscal Studies said "lower-ranked" universities were now increasingly likely to use cash incentives to attract students.

"Support for high-achieving students has become more generous across all types of institutions, particularly lower-ranked ones," it said. "This may be at least partly a response to the new admissions system... It may result in high-achieving students being attracted to lower-ranked universities by the promise of more financial support in the short-term."

Previously, the number of students recruited by each university was subject to strict Government caps.

But the Coalition has partially lifted controls to allow institutions to take unlimited numbers of students with the best A-level grades. In 2012, they could recruit more undergraduates with AAB grades, while next year the measures extend to those with at least ABB.

The move has triggered intense competition to sign up these students to prevent them being tempted to rival universities.

Nicola Dandridge, chief executive of Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, said high-achieving students were "in demand by universities and there are a wide variety of scholarships and other financial inducements being offered to them."

"Universities have offered merit-based scholarships for many years, so the concept is not new," she said, adding that UUK was currently undertaking research into the impact of bursary and scholarship packages on university application trends.

But Sally Hunt, general secretary of the University and College Union, said cash for bright students may come at the expense of means-tested support for the poorest.

"Some universities are now pulling out all the stops to secure students with the highest grades," she added.

"Students considering university next year should be attracted to the courses that best suit their talents, not by financial incentives."

But Deborah Streatfield, a London-based careers adviser, doubted that scholarships acted as a significant draw, adding that applicants "intensively study league tables of university rankings and subject ranking and never look at the financial incentives on offer".

SOURCE






Weak British primaries to become academies (charters)

The Government will improve the 400 weakest primary schools by turning them into academies, the Prime Minister said yesterday.

David Cameron said that by the end of next year he wanted them to be paired with sponsors to turn them into academies as part of the Coalition's efforts to improve education in the poorest performing schools.

"The driving mission for this Government is to build an aspiration nation, where we unlock and unleash the promise in all our people," he said. "A first-class education system is absolutely central to that vision.

"We have seen some excellent progress with our reforms, including turning 200 of the worst-performing primary schools into sponsored academies.

"We have seen how academies, with their freedom to innovate, inspire and raise standards are fuelling aspirations. So now we want to go further, faster, with 400 more underperforming primary schools paired up with a sponsor and either open or well on their way to becoming an academy by the end of next year.''

At the last general election, there were 203 academies but they were all secondary schools. There are now 2,456 academies, and a further 823 in the pipeline. Of the new academies, 333 were formerly failing primary or secondary schools.

SOURCE

Uneducated People Share Simplistic Graphic About Education, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney

You may have seen this graphic floating around the internet. I have no clue where it comes from, but wouldn't recommend visiting whatever "happyplace.com" is, which has been watermarked on this version:



Hah! Those dumb conservatives, they all vote for Mitt Romney. And they're dumb. Well, now that we've all confirmed our elitist preconceived biases about conservatives, it's off to the wine bar to celebrate eh?

Not so fast. Pretty much every exit poll shows very little correlation between education and electoral outcomes. Here are the graphics that accompany CNN's exit polling on education.



There is only one category here that correlates with level of education: postgraduates. President Obama won those who didn't attend high school, those who didn't attend college, and postgraduates.

Here's a news flash: Obama won the election, so he won slightly larger percentages of everyone. In fact, as education level increases, tendency to vote for President Obama decreases until you get to the postgraduate level. This is largely unsurprising when you consider that one of President Obama's major supporter groups - teachers' unions - consists almost entirely of members who have some sort of postgraduate education.

This sort of infographic is the kind of lazy attempt at snarky humor that actively misinforms people. And it's embarrassing to draw conclusions here - there is nearly a zero level of correlation between formal education and electoral choice.

SOURCE

Note for statisticians:  This is a very good example of why "ecological" correlations (correlations among grouped data) have to be treated with caution






British tuition fees hike 'may have benefited poorer students'

The gap in university participation between rich and poor students has narrowed since the introduction of higher tuition fees in England in 2006/07, according to a new report.

Students from poorer backgrounds may have benefited from the introduction of higher university tuition fees in England, according to a new study published today.

The gap in higher education participation between those from wealthy and deprived backgrounds has narrowed rapidly since the 2006-07 student finance regime changes, which saw the tuition fees cap rise from £1,000 to £3,000 per annum.

According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) report, this could be because the new fee regime was more generous to poorer students and hit those from richer backgrounds relatively harder.

"Contrary to the beliefs of many, the new HE [higher education] finance regime introduced in 2006-07 was actually significantly more progressive than the system it replaced," the report says.

It adds: "We cannot say for sure that this change in [university participation] arose as a consequence of the new HE finance regime, but it was coincident with it and we cannot explain it using the other characteristics that we observe in our data."

Only 18 per cent of state school students from the most deprived backgrounds attended higher education in 2009-10, compared with 55 per cent of those from the least deprived backgrounds - a gap of 37 percentage points.

But according to the report that gap had fallen from 40 percentage points just five years earlier, due mainly to a sharp increase in the number of pupils from deprived backgrounds applying for university.

The gap has in fact been diminishing throughout the last decade, but the process 'accelerated somewhat' after the tuition fees cap was increased in 2006-07, according to the report.

Claire Crawford, the author of the report, said: "This experience in 2006-07 provides some hope that the drop in university applications observed this year - following the most recent increase in tuition fees - may not herald the start of a longer term fall in participation rates."

However, NUS president Liam Burns said: "Top-up fees were in marked contrast from the current government's decision to increase the cap on tuition fees to £9,000 which, far from providing additional income, was used as a spurious justification by ministers to remove almost all public funding from universities and to substitute it with debt loaded onto the shoulders of individuals."

Students starting university this September faced another tuition fees hike, with the cap now set at £9,000 per year.

The IFS report cites studies concluding that poorer students became better off under the 2006-07 fees regime than its predecessor because the fees are means tested, and because student loans are only payable above a certain earnings threshold after graduation and can eventually be written off.

Bursaries and grants are also available to university students based on household income.

But the studies point out that poor students will only benefit if they fully understand the implications of the regime and aren't 'debt averse'.

The report also notes that increased university participation among poorer students has been partly driven by a 'catch up' in attainment earlier on in the education system.

The proportion of young people with at least 2 A-levels also rose more quickly among poorer students over the last decade, for instance.

  A separate report also published by the IFS today criticises the new National Scholarship Programme - introduced this year to replace previous bursaries for disadvantaged students - for being too complex.

The report also criticises the variation in bursaries available from different universities under the new regime. It found Russell Group universities offering more generous financial support than lower-ranked institutions.

SOURCE





Shock, horror!  Speaker at Australian Catholic college fails to honour politically correct custom

He paid a tribute to the real founders of a college instead of the imaginary Aboriginal founders.  He said nothing at all about Aborigines but saying nothing was to insult them!

Non-Australians will find this hard to follow but in Leftist and particularly academic Australian circles, big meetings such as graduation ceremonies begin these days by acknowledging the fact that Aboriginal tribes used to live on the land concerned.  The pretence is that the meeting is held only with permission of the "traditional owners" of the land  -- which is of course complete garbage.  They have no title to it at law at all

A leading Sydney barrister and senior counsel at the trouble-plagued St John's College has sparked outrage after mocking the Aboriginal community at an official dinner at the University of Sydney.

Jeffrey Phillips, SC, stood in the college's 150-year-old Great Hall and, in front of more than 250 staff, students and guests, paid tribute to the "traditional custodians of this place" whom he identified as being the "Benedictines who came from the great English nation".

The comment was made in the presence of several indigenous students, one of whom has lodged a formal complaint and, according to senior staff, remains "deeply traumatised".

Mark Spinks, a respected member of Sydney's Aboriginal community and chairman of the Aboriginal men's group Babana, said: "How disgusting, how disgraceful, how disrespectful are those comments. I am outraged and I am disturbed. For that to have been said at the university, in a room full of students, I am almost speechless."

Last night, the University of Sydney's vice-chancellor, Michael Spence, condemned Mr Phillips' remarks. He said: "The university is very proud of the fact that it stands on land where indigenous peoples have been teaching and learning for many thousands of years before us and we acknowledge this publicly whenever we can."

Mr Phillips graduated from the college more than three decades ago but today he is back and, on occasions, reliving the good old days. The students appointed him as patron of the student club in 2009 and he is always a phone call away. He drinks and sings with them at formal dinners. He invites a select group to long lunches and "networking" events in the city, including a recent cigar and whisky appreciation night. He helps to find work for the law students of the college and hosts an essay competition each year, with a prize of $500.

Yesterday, Mr Phillips said his comments had been taken out of context, adding that he had sent the upset student a letter.

"It is a great pity that my speech was misinterpreted by one student," he said in a statement. "The speech was not intended, nor delivered in any way to disrespect or mock indigenous people. On the contrary, the speech had an important message of forgiveness and tolerance.

Neither the rector, Mr Bongers, nor anyone else present at the speech complained. In fact, the Rector personally thanked me warmly for my speech. Whilst I apologised to the student, as she had been offended, it is important, especially in an environment of vigorous debate, such as a university, that simple misunderstandings by one student not be blown out of proportion."

SOURCE

Teachers 'failing to champion excellence', Australian academic warns

Speaking in Britain

School standards are being damaged by a "conspiracy of silence" among teachers who refuse to champion excellence, a leading academic has warned.

Pupils may be missing out on the very best results because of a "great equalisation" at the heart of the teaching profession that fails to mark out and reward top-performing staff, it was claimed.

John Hattie, professor of education at Melbourne University, suggested that too many teachers were reluctant to value expertise for fear of denigrating struggling colleagues.

He insisted that the "tyranny of the closed door" was a major problem as it prevented teachers sharing their best ideas and lessons with their colleagues.

A rigorous focus on teacher improvement is the hallmark of top education systems around the world but a reluctance to adopt a similar system in the UK risks undermining standards, Prof Hattie suggested.

He warned that the impact that schools can have on pupils "will barely change" until drastic reforms are made.

The comments come amid continuing concerns the variable quality of lessons in schools.

In its annual report last year, Ofsted warned that teaching was not good enough in more than four-in-10 English schools, with "dull" lessons fuelling bad behaviour in the classroom.

Ministers have now introduced new rules making it easier for heads to sack consistently struggling teachers. The Government is also considering introducing a new system of performance-related pay to reward the very best staff.

Prof Hattie, an expert in the evaluation of teaching standards, said there was a "great equalisation in the profession that does not welcome excellence and a conspiracy of silence to even talk among each other about the impact of their teaching".

Speaking ahead of a presentation to the London Festival of Education on November 17, he said too many teachers failed to properly observe their colleagues at work.

"The greatest difference between one school and another is the quality of teaching," he said.

"Yet in spite of this there is a conspiracy of silence, with teachers unwilling to talk to their colleagues about the impact of their teaching.

"Teachers, like politicians, prefer to talk about the curriculum, children, assessments and the structural parts of schooling such as the state of the school building.

"Until this situation is properly acknowledged, it just isn't possible to truly change the impact a teacher, a school, even an entire education system, can have on its pupils."

The academic, author of the book "Visible Learning", said the UK education system was not sufficiently geared towards teacher improvement, adding that the profession failed to sufficiently "rejoice" at evidence of improvement being made.

"Teachers too often live in their private worlds with teaching often done in front of classes not visible to colleagues," he said.

"And our studies show that the most high impact and passionate teachers are not always the most social in the staffroom."

Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, insisted that teachers constantly "strived for excellence" but were hampered by a lack of on-the-job training and attacks from politicians.

"Teachers find their efforts to improve the quality of their teaching stymied by the low priority given to continuing professional development," she said.

"And teachers' morale is at rock bottom - damaged by wave upon wave of denigration by Michael Gove [the Education Secretary] and his acolytes.

"If the situation is to improve, teachers must become partners in the drive to improve education performance. After all, it is teachers who will make the difference - not politicians."

SOURCE






Universities 'grossly distorted' by Government reforms

The higher education system is being "grossly distorted" by Government reforms to universities, a powerful coalition of academics and peers has warned.

Academic research and student teaching has been undermined by the sheer scale of "excessive, inefficient and hugely wasteful" regulations imposed on institutions, it was claimed.

The newly-established Council for the Defence of British Universities, which is being backed by 65 key figures, including Lord Bragg, Alan Bennett, Sir Simon Jenkins and Lord Rees, warned that the "very purpose" of a degree was under threat.

Students are increasingly being seen as "consumers" who are encouraged to invest in an undergraduate course to boost their earning prospects instead of developing their "intellectual and critical capacities to the full", the group suggested.

Particular criticism was levelled at the Coalition's decision to axe all direct state funding for arts, languages and humanities courses while continuing to subsidise science, technology, engineering and maths.

Sir Keith Thomas, the Oxford University historian and former president of the British Academy, said the move will have "unfortunate effects" and could lead to a decline in the study of subjects such as Chinese, Russian, German and French.

The group - which will be officially launched next week - will campaign for the abolition of existing Government quangos set up to fund higher education in favour of fully independent grant-making bodies designed to act as "buffers between the universities and the politicians".

Writing in Times Higher Education magazine, Sir Keith, a member of the council, criticised the "repugnant" treatment of universities by successive governments.

He said it was correct that safeguards should be placed on the spending of public money, but added: "The degree of audit and accountability now demanded is excessive, inefficient and hugely wasteful of time and resources.

"More fundamentally, the very purpose of the university is grossly distorted by the attempt to create a market in higher education.

"Students are regarded as `consumers' and encouraged to invest in the degree course they think most likely to enhance their earning prospects.

"Academics are seen as 'producers', whose research is expected to focus on topics of commercial value and whose 'output' is measured against a single scale and graded like sacks of wheat.

"The universities themselves are encouraged to teach and research not what they think is intrinsically worthwhile but what is likely to be financially most profitable."

In recent years, the system for funding university research has been overhauled, with institutions being scored through a complex mechanism based on quality and impact. Universities also must hit new admissions targets designed to create a more socially-diverse student body and institutions are subjected to additional audits by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education.

Sir Keith said that the "central values of the university" - to develop students' intellectual and critical capacities - were being "sidelined or forgotten".

Also writing in the Times Higher, Lord Rees, emeritus professor of cosmology and astrophysics at Cambridge University, said academics' morale was being eroded, even at world-leading institutions.

"I am lucky to have spent many years in one in the University of Cambridge. But even there, morale is falling," he said.

"Coffee-time conversations are less about ideas and more about grants, the research excellence framework, job security and suchlike. Prospects of sustaining excellence will plummet if such concerns prey unduly on the minds of even the best young academics."

SOURCE





British father attacks daughter's school after she was told to remove poppy band as it breached health and safety rules

A man whose grandfather was a Second World War soldier has hit out at his daughter's school after she was banned from wearing her poppy wristband because of health and safety fears.

Maggy Lane, 13, was ordered to remove the Poppy Appeal band - a symbol of remembrance sold by the Royal British Legion - by teachers at Shepshed High School in Leicestershire.

The teenager was told the wristband was forbidden because it breached the school's uniform code and it was feared the rubber bangle could get caught on something during a lesson.

The schoolgirl's father Myles Lane, 39, questioned why the rubber bands were banned because of the potential safety risk when students are allowed to wear poppies secured to their uniform by a pin.

'I feel quite passionate about it,' said Mr Lane, who added that his grandfather Arthur Witherbed, who died last year at the age of 90, was part of the Royal Leicester Regiment which fought in Norway in 1940.

'I have always drummed into my daughter the importance of Poppy Day and she had bought the band out of her own money.

'They told me it was a health and safety risk, but they are okay to wear a poppy with a pin on it.

'I can appreciate the school has health and safety issues with bracelets but I think they should be able to make an allowance with a poppy band,' said Mr Lane, a draughtsman.

'Perhaps they could ask students to remove them in potentially hazardous situations like for P.E. and in cookery lessons, then let them wear the bands at other times.'

Mr Lane, from Shepshed, said Remembrance Day held extra significance for his family since his grandfather's death last year.  When the Germans invaded Norway in 1940 Mr Witherbed escaped by walking to neighbouring Sweden. From there he made his way back to England, and he was stationed with the military police at Bletchley Park in Buckinghamshire.

Adrian Stephenson, joint head teacher at the school, said: 'We don’t allow children to wear wrist bands at school. It is as simple as that.  'We have to stick to the uniform code,' he said.   'When governors put the dress code together, health and safety is part of the issue of wearing jewellery.

'It is important to stress we want the children to understand all about remembrance and it is a central part of what we do, but at the same time, if you want to run a good school you have a set of rules and you have to stick to them,' Mr Stephenson added.

His co-head Stewart Goacher said the wristband was forbidden under the same rules that prevent pupils from wearing bracelets.  Mr Goacher added that the school sells lapel poppies, holds an annual remembrance assembly and supports the charity Help for Heroes.

David Hobday, chair of the Loughborough British Legion, said: 'In theory, I am upset because it is a promotional time particularly for us, but if it is school policy and they have been asked to take them off then that is the school’s prerogative.'

SOURCE

Indiana GOP firm despite education coup

Top Republican officials, including the current and future governor, argued vehemently Wednesday that their education reform mandate is intact despite the defeat of Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett.

“The consensus and the momentum for reform and change in Indiana is rock solid,” Gov. Mitch Daniels said.  “Every other factor that matters is aligned in this state in the direction of progress and change and reform, of teacher accountability, of more choices for families, more ability for school leadership to lead.”

Gov.-elect Mike Pence said his election on an agenda of education change, as well as the House’s picking up a supermajority of members, points to Hoosiers supporting continued progress in the area.  “We have a strong affirmation on the progress of education reform in this state,” he said, noting he hopes to work with Democrats in a bipartisan fashion next year.

But the new superintendent of public instruction, career teacher Glenda Ritz, takes issue with the Republicans’ assessment of the election.  “(Bennett’s defeat) was a direct message on the education policies of the last four years. It was a referendum going forward,” she said.

Ritz and others noted that she received more votes than even Pence – 1.3 million in all – and said the Republican leadership of the state can’t ignore her role in the process.

Senate Democratic Leader Tim Lanane, D-Anderson, said any reasonable person can see that ousting the superintendent of public instruction is a direct comment on recent changes.

Bennett, 51, clashed with teachers around the state when pushing a pile of reforms, including taxpayer-financed vouchers for private school, more charter schools, reduction in power to collectively bargain for teachers and tying teacher pay to student scores.

The Indiana Department of Education also took over several failing schools and loosened teacher licensing requirements to allow more professionals in the classroom.

Ritz said Bennett had a 10-1 fundraising edge over her, including loads of help from national education advocacy groups, but her grassroots effort prevailed in the end.

Only GOP House Speaker Brian Bosma said clearly that Bennett’s loss was about him – not his policies.

He first noted that many of the education changes were pushed by the legislature – not Bennett – and that House Republicans were largely re-elected while picking up nine seats in all.

“This is not an indictment in any way of reforms,” Bosma said. “Some of the education reform controversy deals with the tone and presentation of the reforms and how it’s explained. Occasionally the discussion moved into arenas that teachers found offensive.”

Daniels even raised the prospect of making the position appointed by the governor – something he ran on in 2004 but never actively put on his legislative agenda during his eight-year term. Pence said he has not formed an opinion on that matter.

“Oh, isn’t that something?” said Nate Schnellenberger, president of the Indiana State Teachers Association. “The election didn’t work out the way they wanted, so they’ll change the rules. Can you imagine the backlash of undoing an election? That would be asinine.”

Schnellenberger said he hoped Republicans would see the defeat as a chance to take a step back and consider that they might not be right all the time.

Sen. Dennis Kruse, R-Auburn, chairman of the Senate Education Committee, is at least willing to listen.  “The voters are sending a message,” he said. “I’ll be very attentive to what seemed to drive her to victory.”

Kruse believes Bennett’s tendency to move forward without consulting educators offended people.  “It was an anti-Tony Bennett vote more than a pro-Glenda Ritz vote,” Kruse said.

But he acknowledged working closely with Ritz on various bills in 2011 and said he looks forward to maintaining that positive relationship.

SOURCE





The young British children who do worse educationally also do worse physically

The "explanation" offered for the findings is hardly an explanation at all.  The findings are however well explained by IQ being one aspect of general biological fitness

Tens of thousands of children are being held back at school because their sedentary lifestyles have left them lacking basic physical skills. A study of four and five-year-olds shows nearly a third struggle with tasks such as balancing on one leg and crawling.

Researchers say children increasingly spend their early years sitting in front of screens and being ferried around in prams and car seats, with fewer opportunities to roll, climb, crawl and enjoy rough-and-tumble play.

The study found those who struggle with basic physical exercises are significantly more likely to fall behind academically.

Sixty children in reception classes at a school in the West Midlands were given 14 short tests, including asking them to balance on one leg for three seconds and crawl a short distance.

The study found 30 per cent of pupils showed signs of physical immaturity and a further 42 per cent some signs of delays in development.

Some children even appeared not to have lost primitive baby reflexes, such as their arms and head extending when their head moves to the side.

The study, carried out by former primary headmaster Pete Griffin in conjunction with the Institute for Neuro-Physiological Psychology in Chester, found that of pupils in the bottom half of the group for physical maturity, 77 per cent were in the lowest two groups for academic ability.

Mr Griffin said: ‘The main issue is that children don’t have the same kind of physical challenge and upbringing they might have had 40 or 50 years ago.’  ‘Children are strapped into travel systems and are not physically picked up as much.  ‘I don’t see family members throwing their babies up into the air as much. We do less of that.’

Babies also spend less time on the floor learning to roll and crawl, he said.  ‘There’s less opportunity to climb, to roll, to jump.’  In these safety-conscious times, parents will stop their children walking along a wall in case they fall, he added.

The rise of screen-based entertainment was likely to be having a ‘dramatic effect’, both because it led to sedentary lifestyles and stunted concentration.  ‘There’s less creativity involved in playing on the screen or watching TV,’ he said.

‘TV comes in very small bites so children are not used to concentrating for long periods, video games move from one stimulus to another very rapidly.’

This was likely to have an effect on children’s ability to concentrate in the classroom, he warned.

Mr Griffin added that the pressures of today’s exam-focused schooling meant that children with immature physical skills were less likely to catch up.  ‘There is less of a place for a late developer in the education system,’ he said.

SOURCE






Is it still worth going to university? Earning power of a degree in Britain falls 22% in a decade

The higher salary that graduates traditionally gain from having a university degree has been slashed by a fifth during the past decade.

A study has found that the rise in numbers attending university and increased competition for jobs has drastically driven down the earning power enjoyed by previous generations of graduates.

Researchers from Warwick University followed 17,000 students from 2006 to their graduation into one of the worst recessions in history, and compared it to graduates who finished their studies in 1999.

The recent graduates are, on average, earning 22 per cent less than those who started at university a decade earlier.

They are also struggling to find jobs that justify the debts they have built up in getting their degrees, with four in ten failing to get work that requires their qualifications, while one in ten have spent at least six months on the dole.

The researchers concluded that a degree continues to deliver a 'significant earnings advantage', although the size of it varies widely according to the subject studied.

Medicine and law graduates suffer the least, losing about 16 per cent and 9 per cent respectively, while arts graduates saw the sharpest slump in earning power, losing 32.9 per cent.

Students who began their studies in 2006 were the first to pay tuition fees of £3,000-a-year and emerged from university owing a record amount. Almost half reported debts of £20,000 or more.  Despite this, the researchers found that 96 per cent of graduates would do a degree again if they had the chance.

They also concluded that a degree continues to deliver a 'significant earnings advantage', although the size of it varies widely according to the subject studied.

While medicine and dentistry graduates were earning on average £32,447, those who studied the creative arts and design were bringing in just £18,514.

While the average decline in earnings since 2003 was estimated at 21.9 per cent - about two per cent a year - the slump for arts graduates was 32.9 per cent.

For medicine and related subjects, it was 16 per cent. Law held up particularly well, with graduates in this subject seeing an earnings decline of just nine per cent.

With a further hike in tuition fees to a maximum of £9,000-a-year, the study concludes that the boom in the numbers going to university seen in recent decades is over.  It claims the number of graduates will now plateau at 250,000 per year.

The 'Futuretrack' research, conducted by Warwick University with funding from the Higher Education Careers Services Unit, followed 17,000 students from the time they applied for courses in 2006 to their graduation into one of the worst recessions in history and experiences on the job market.

The researchers had previously carried out research among graduates who finished their studies in 1999.  'Compared with the experiences of graduates some ten years earlier, Futuretrack graduates faced a tough labour market,' the report said.

'The greater number of graduates seeking employment, coupled with harsh economic conditions, have combined to create higher levels of graduate unemployment, a higher proportion of graduates in non-graduate employment and a lower rate of progression for graduates than was the situation ten years earlier.'

The Government has claimed that a degree can add more than £200,000 to a male graduate's salary over a lifetime compared with those who decided against university.  But the research found the claim 'does not reflect the evidence revealed here'.

It said the 'relative earnings advantage associated with a degree appears to have been declining slowly over the past decade, possibly by as much as two per cent per annum relative to average earnings in the economy'.

The report went on to warn that the decline in the earnings premium was not simply due to the recession, and was unlikely to bounce back up as the economy improves.

In further findings, students who got involved in teams, societies and clubs at university were more likely to have landed good jobs. The researchers found that employers are increasingly looking at extra-curricular activities when seeking to differentiate between a field brandishing mainly 2.1s.

Graduates with first-class degrees and those who attended high-ranking universities were also better off.

One of the most 'disturbing' findings, the researchers, said was that the pay gap between men and women was showing no sign of narrowing. Men earn about £2,000 more per year on average.

SOURCE

More tax revenue for schools in California

There is of course zero guarantee that all or any of the money raised will actually go to schools.  Tax revenue is fungible

Overcoming decades of anti-tax sentiment in California, Gov. Jerry Brown's Proposition 30 -- billed as a tax hike to rescue the state's schools -- narrowly won Tuesday.

"I know a lot of people had some doubts and some questions: Can you really go to the people and ask them to vote for a tax?" Brown told supporters as the measure inched into the "yes" column just after 11 p.m. "Here we are ... We have a vote of the people, I think the only state in the country that says let's raise our taxes, for our kids for our schools, and for our California dream."

With most precincts reporting, results showed the Bay Area, Los Angeles and coastal areas supporting the measure while inland and rural areas were rejecting it.

Brown made Proposition 30 the hallmark of his administration, spending the year trying to convince voters that California schools have reached a breaking point and need taxpayers to come to the rescue. It will raise $6 billion annually for education and the state budget by increasing the sales tax by a quarter-cent for four years and raising income taxes on the wealthy by up to 3 percent for seven years.

"It sold itself," he said at a victory party in Sacramento.  "The core reason it brought people together was a belief in schools and universities and the capacity of government to make wise investments that benefit all of us."

The governor has repeatedly promised that rejecting Proposition 30 would have meant $6 billion in fresh cuts to schools starting Jan. 1 -- threatening to shorten the K-12 school year and raise tuition at public universities again.

Kevin Thompson, a teacher in Union School District in San Jose, who took time off from teaching to campaign for the measure. "The early returns look really good," he said earlier Tuesday night. "I think the message is out, that this is the way we're going to invest in our students and our schools."

Meanwhile, wealthy attorney Molly Munger's Proposition 38, a competing tax-for-schools measure, trailed badly, as expected, despite Munger providing most of the money for the $48 million campaign. Proposition 38 sought to raise $10 billion, mostly for K-12 schools, by raising the income tax on the wealthy and middle class, who bristled at the idea of hiking their own taxes by hundreds of dollars a year.

"Win or lose, Molly Munger put public education back on the front burner, where it belongs, during this election cycle," said Nathan Ballard, a spokesman for Yes on 38.

However, a third tax measure, Proposition 39, passed as expected, closing a loophole that allowed big multistate businesses to pay fewer state taxes. The result could add $1 billion a year in new revenues to the state. Bay Area hedge fund manager Tom Steyer bankrolled nearly the entire $39 million campaign for Proposition 39, which voters approved overwhelmingly.

But deep into the night Tuesday and Wednesday morning, all eyes were on Proposition 30.

Supporters led by teachers, other employee unions, Democratic politicians and even some businesses waged a $40 million campaign. Brown personally campaigned around the state in recent weeks and has staked his political reputation on the measure as his top priority during his current term.

Principal Amy Caroza estimated that Coliseum College Prep Academy in Oakland would have lost $200,000 if Proposition 30 failed and said she didn't know how the school would offset that loss.

Voters have spent the last two decades rejecting one tax hike after another, and many voters either didn't believe Brown that the cuts would happen or thought the state should make due with the money it has. They also continue to be skeptical of state government and think new projects like the $69 billion high-speed rail line are a waste when the state needs more for schools and public safety.

In addition to anti-tax groups and conservatives, Munger briefly launched attack ads on Proposition 30 last month while a group with ties to the Koch brothers donated millions of dollars to defeat the measure.

"We are grateful for all the hard work from thousands of small business owners, taxpayers and many groups from around the state in helping us communicate our 'no on 30' messages to voters," the No on 30 campaign said in a statement.

SOURCE





Education reform law turned back in SD

Voters overwhelmingly rejected Gov. Dennis Daugaard’s education reform law, which sought to overhaul the way South Dakota public schools evaluate and reward their teachers.

Daugaard promised to hand out $15 million per year, giving $2,500 to all competent math and science teachers, college scholarships for those who take hard-to-fill teaching jobs, and bonuses for teachers who rate as the best in their district or take on leadership roles.

But half of every teacher’s rating was to be based on test scores or other quantifiable measures of student achievement, a major point of contention for the teachers union. The law also would have phased out job protections for veteran teachers.

When the law passed the Legislature by a single vote, the South Dakota Education Association organized a petition drive to put it on the ballot. About 68 percent of voters rejected it Tuesday.

“I think (voters) listened to the teachers,” SDEA President Sandy Arseneault said.

The vote-no campaign had a heavy TV presence, thanks to the National Education Association, which poured $683,000 into the campaign to defeat the measure. The state chapter chipped in $15,000.

A group backing the law reported contributions totaling $113,500, which came mostly from Sioux Falls business leaders and StudentsFirst, a national political action committee led by reform-minded Democrat Michelle Rhee.

Valerie Schonewill, a 29-year-old librarian from Sioux Falls, initially supported the law. She thinks teachers are underpaid and liked the notion of paying bonuses while holding them accountable. But teacher friends who objected to merit pay and special treatment for math and science teachers, as well as the official vote-no argument included in ballot materials, persuaded her to vote against.

Carol Blickstead, 58, a former public school teacher who now works as a private school librarian in Sioux Falls, voted against the law. She took offense to the possibility that schools would start paying merit-based bonuses, saying it implies many teachers aren’t doing a good job.

More HERE




Idaho education reform laws headed for defeat

Leaders of a campaign to reform Idaho schools that would have weakened unions and put laptops in the hands of the state’s high schoolers all but conceded their loss late Tuesday night as voters appeared to reject the propositions.

“I thought it would be a little closer,” said Ken Burgess, manager for the campaign in support of the propositions that included one that awards bonuses to teachers based in part on student test scores.

“We feel great,” said Mike Lanza, chair of the campaign to defeat the so-called Luna laws. “The public doesn’t like these laws.”

The three propositions trailed throughout the early voting, with the closest running 12 percentage points behind with more than half of the state’s precincts reporting.

State schools chief Tom Luna spent much of the past two years pushing his plan through the Legislature and then seeking support from Idahoans, including parents.

Some of Idaho’s most powerful people, including Gov. Butch Otter and Frank VanderSloot, CEO of Melalueca, backed the plan. VanderSloot put $1.4 million toward supporting the so-called Luna laws. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has wrestled with teacher unions, put $200,000 toward bringing the three propositions to victory.

The three education laws, passed by the Legislature in 2011 and put on the November ballot after a successful petition drive, were at the top of many Treasure Valley voters’ minds Tuesday.

Kathie Corn, a retired teacher, expects she’ll hear from her colleagues about her vote in favor of Proposition 1, which limits bargaining rights and ends continuing contracts, or tenure.

“My friends are going to be mad when I say it, but that’s OK,” said Corn, 68, who taught in Idaho for 25 years. “There were too many teachers who shouldn’t be working forever and nothing was done.”

But Corn voted no on Prop 3, the laptop and online mandate for high school, reflecting the split ballots cast by many Idahoans on Luna’s Students Come First laws. Proposition 3 drew the most no votes of any of the measures.

Danton Killian, 52, a Meridian welder, voted no on Props 1 and 3 and yes on 2. He’s concerned about a $180 million, 8-year laptop contract with Hewlett-Packard and about machines becoming obsolete.

“It’s a little early to be making rules about what you can do with technology,” he said.

Stacey Van Kirk, 41, of Eagle, opposed all three proposition. She didn’t like Proposition 2, which hands out bonuses to teachers based in part on how students perform on achievement tests.

“I do not think teachers should be (incentivized) by teaching to the test. I think they already do that so much and I think kids are already losing,” she said.

SOURCE

British drama teacher facing dismissal after she is convicted of hitting pupil, 13, with folder for talking in class

A drama teacher could be sacked after being convicted for smacking a 13-year-old boy in the head with a folder because he was talking in class.  Vanessa Greening, 49, lost her temper with the child as he watched other pupils perform at a high school in Tipton, in the West Midlands.

A court heard Greening flipped and slammed the folder she was holding into the schoolboy's head after hearing someone speak during the performance.

Greening from Bearwood, Birmingham, was sentenced to a six-month community order at Sandwell Magistrates Court on Friday last week after being found guilty of common assault.

The young victim, who was sat next to his teacher at Alexandra High School, had admitted speaking when he shouldn't, but claimed when Greening lashed out with the binder he hadn't said a word.

She was hauled before magistrates after parents of the pupil complained to teachers who then contacted the police.

Greening, who turned up to court clutching a folder, now faces the sack following a career in the classroom spanning 30 years.

Prosecuting, Kelly Crowe said: 'Whilst they were watching the group do the piece of work, someone spoke, and the defendant who had a folder in her hand slammed it once to his head.'

The court heard the boy was shocked but uninjured and later told police 'it didn't hurt'.

JPs were also told Greening, who had pleaded not guilty, had been previously reprimanded for her conduct.

Defending Laura Culley said she didn't accept that the incident happened 'intentionally or otherwise.'

Following the case, headteacher Ian Binnie did not confirm whether Greening would lose her job or not.

Headteacher Ian Binnie said in a statement: 'The school reported the allegations made to the police and worked closely with them during their investigation.  'I am aware of the verdict but I am unable to comment further at the moment as the school's disciplinary procedures are underway.'

SOURCE





British teachers off school for "training" are caught at wedding: Head accused of lying in letter to parents

When father-of-two Kamal Hussain received a letter from school saying classes would be ending early for staff development, he duly arranged for his children to have the afternoon off.

But he became suspicious when he spotted three teachers in smart clothing driving past him when they were meant to be at school for the ‘inset’ (which stands for ‘in-service training’) afternoon.

Calling in at the deserted school, he was told by a cleaner that the head and teachers had gone to a colleague’s wedding.  A furious Mr Hussain then drove to the wedding venue and confronted the head, who he says was sitting with 23 of her staff.

Mr Hussain yesterday lambasted head Gillian Pursey, for sending a ‘blatant lie’ in an official letter to parents. He said: ‘I was just so angry and furious. I teach my children not to lie – what sort of example does that set?  ‘I’ve lost my trust and confidence in them and I’m going to look to move my children elsewhere.’

He called for an inquiry into the matter, saying pupils had lost hundreds of hours of teaching between them.

Mrs Pursey, 51, head of St Hilda’s Primary School, Oldham, sent a letter saying classes would end at 2pm on Tuesday, October 30, instead of 3.30pm, for ‘staff development’.  Teachers are entitled up to five days at school without pupils present so they can carry out administrative tasks or training.

However, Mr Hussain, 35, who had recently been refused time off for his own children to attend a family wedding, found Mrs Pursey and up to 23 of her staff sitting down for a meal at a colleague’s wedding.  When he confronted Mrs Pursey at her table, she claimed the teachers had been given time off to ‘do research’, adding she had the governors’ permission.

Mr Hussain added: ‘But to my understanding the governors don’t have the real authority to put in jeopardy the education of 500 pupils.’

Last night Mrs Pursey said: ‘Staff were given that hour and a half of staff development time to research things for the school’s golden jubilee celebrations.  ‘They could do that research on or off site, and whenever they liked. Some decided to do it straight away, and others decided to do it after the wedding.  ‘It was all agreed with the school governors and is all  above board.’

An Oldham Council spokesman said: ‘This is an interim management issue for the school and no action will be taken.’

SOURCE






Disruptive under-fives 'blacklisted by British schools' who are also judging parents by their jobs

If schools were allowed effective discipline options, they wouldn't need to do this

HEAD teachers are screening out unwanted pupils by trawling nurseries for disruptive children and blacklisting them, it was claimed yesterday.  They are also accused of judging parents on their jobs and trying to dissuade those in lowlier roles from making an application.

A primary head lifted the lid on ploys he claims some fellow schools are using to weed out poorly-behaved or low-achieving pupils.  Nigel Utton said one headmistress checks nurseries for disruptive pupils and puts their names on Post-It notes in her office.  She then tries to ensure they don’t get places by giving their parents ‘a bad view’ of the school.

He claimed a second head told a lorry driver that sending his son to the school would be similar to forcing him to work as a brain surgeon.

According to Mr Utton, head of Bromstone Primary, Broadstairs, Kent, the vast majority of schools, both primary and secondary, are using subtle techniques to engineer their intakes.

He called on Ofsted and the Government to crack down on the practices and reward schools which do well with a broad intake of pupils.

His remarks received support from Children’s Commissioner Maggie Atkinson, who is conducting an inquiry into ways that schools illegally ‘exclude’ pupils by asking them to leave without formally suspending or expelling them.  She condemned schools which ‘pull up the drawbridge’ and ‘let children fail’.

Speaking at a seminar in central London staged by Westminster Education Forum, Mr Utton warned that pressure on schools to maintain test results was driving some to use dubious methods to keep out pupils considered disruptive or difficult.

‘This is what some of my colleagues do across the country,’ he said.  ‘Basically they don’t let them in. And there are different ways of not letting them in.

‘One head teacher I know of puts Post-It notes on her wall.  ‘She goes round the nurseries finding out which are the disruptive children and puts their names up on her wall, and those children don’t get into her school.’  This head’s school had been judged ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted, he said.

The school must abide by national rules on fair admissions so the head tries to stop them applying in the first place.

Mr Utton, who said his own school took pupils with a range of needs and abilities, claimed that another common ruse was to ‘alienate’ parents at open days or show-rounds.  ‘When a parent comes and looks round your school, you are rude to them so they don’t go to your school, they go to the school down the road.’

Some heads attempted to ‘signpost’ families to other local schools, claiming they would be more suitable for their children.

A further strategy was to ‘denigrate’ parents according to their jobs.  ‘A parent was sent to me, a lorry driver. He was told by the head teacher of an outstanding school, “your child coming to our school would be an equivalent of asking you to be a brain surgeon”,’ he said.  ‘This is a real example from this year. The kid came to my school.’

He added: ‘Once the children are in, if they are kids you don’t like, there are ways of getting rid of them.’

He also hit out at the trend for children with behavioural problems to be ‘drugged’ with Ritalin.

Rosi Jordon, deputy head of Chessbrook, a unit for expelled pupils in Hertfordshire, said schools felt under pressure to ‘get shot’ of some children ‘at all costs’ to boost their league table positions.

She told the seminar that schools were increasingly aware that pupils who fail to meet exam benchmarks can knock ‘half a per cent’ of the school’s overall score.

‘I know of one head teacher who will say, “Leave your personal problems at the school gate. When you are in here, you are doing your work, and I do not want to know anything of what happens personally with you”,’ she said.  ‘”You can only be here if you are performing for us, and if you’re not - go”.’

SOURCE

Preschool is no substitute for parents

In naming preschool a legislative priority, GOP leaders may make Indiana the first state to ground such a program in private initiative. There’s talk of preschool vouchers, for example, rather than the usual state preschools, which function like a space-time-money vacuum.

As a mother of two small children, a relatively new Hoosier, and someone who reads stacks of education studies for work, I’d like to sketch why state preschool has largely failed so far.

Anyone interested in surveying early childhood research would do well to start with E.D. Hirsch, a prominent former University of Virginia professor and bestselling author. His work demonstrates that people build new knowledge on old knowledge. Knowledge sticks to itself, like a spider’s web. This means what and how much children learn in their earliest days is crucial to constructing a sort of upside-down pyramid of knowledge that increases as they age.

“There is strong evidence that increasing the general knowledge and vocabulary of a child before age six is the single highest correlate with later success,” Hirsch writes.

This means a child’s most influential teachers are his parents, as our ancestors knew without studies. They also knew another truth we don’t like to acknowledge: Some parents are better than others. Some weave their children the first few rounds of mental spider web with habits such as speaking frequently with their children, reading books aloud, practicing numbers and names, and taking the kids to places that expand their knowledge, such as the zoo, grandpa’s farm, the library, and parks.

These are all normal behaviors for many families (they are also largely free, so not restricted to rich people). But these habits are foreign to some, and consequently their children are deprived.

Observers of this deficit suggest government can solve the problem. Kids can’t count to ten by age five? Put ‘em in school at age three.

This is similar to the classic answer to the question about what holds up the turtle that the ancient myth says the Earth rests on: It’s turtles all the way down. When children prove unready for preschool at age three because of home deprivation, then what? Decide when a woman gets pregnant whether she will be a fit mother and, if not, have government agents waiting in the delivery room?

The reality is that mass preschool programs don’t work. Most studies claiming fabulous effects from government early childhood programs are extrapolations from three test programs of decades ago. No statewide preschool to date approximates these intensive programs, which included expensive amenities such as health care, parent training, and home visits, costing upwards of $65,000 per child, and unlike typical half-day preschool they were full-day and even full-year interventions.

No state preschool does that much substitute parenting, or could, so it’s not surprising they haven’t yielded smarter kids. Oklahoma, for example, has the highest percentage of state preschool students in the nation, but students statewide have had declining average test scores since the program began.

States’ experience with preschool largely exemplifies what doesn’t work. Research and common sense show us why: Even 40 hours of remediation a week doesn’t change the child’s other 58 waking hours.

Instead of attempting the impossible--displacing parenting--a rational and fitting early childhood initiative would aim to cultivate it. This is the crux of the early childhood deficit Republican lawmakers must target. They could start by acknowledging it.

SOURCE





Sick Vid: ‘Big Bird’ Punches ‘Romney’ in Face… During School Performance‏

Ever since Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney said he would cut funding to PBS and Sesame Street if elected, the left has championed Big Bird as a way to verbally attack him.  Now, video uploaded to YouTube by the Texas Sports Center takes it a step further, showing Mitt Romney being punched in the face by the iconic character during a school halftime performance.

According to the Texas Sports Center, the the Beaumont Central High School marching band decided to have a political “dance-off” instead of a more traditional show, and the director began by asking whether everyone is going to vote on Tuesday.

After “Obama,” identified as the athletic youth in the white shirt, dances and does a back flip, the beloved Sesame Street character taps a young man wearing a Mitt Romney mask on the shoulder.

“Wait a minute, I got somebody for you, Mr. Romney!” the announcer calls.  “Mr. Big Bird is in the house! Big Bird!”

“Romney” then moves out of the screen while Big Bird does a brief dance, but when he comes back Big Bird decks him in the jaw, sending him straight to the ground.

Though the political bias is pretty clear based on the captured video, the Texas Sports Center adds that Romney also did a dance of his own.

“Tasteless inappropriate influence of and use of high school students,” one commenter concluded, while another said it was “beyond the bounds of decent taste.”

SOURCE




Former Australian PM  wants jobs quota for Asian speakers

Since there are about a million Australians who speak an Asian language as their home language (out of 22 million Australians) this is a bit idiotic

Former prime minister Kevin Rudd says the business community should set aside a quota of jobs for Australian students who can speak an Asian language.

Mr Rudd has praised the Federal Government's white paper on Asia, which outlines how Australia can deepen its engagement with the region.

The white paper calls for more students to be taught at least one of four Asian languages - Mandarin, Japanese, Hindi and Indonesian - in every school in Australia.

Mr Rudd told Sky News that businesses also need to provide incentives for students.  "They need to know there's a career path for them," he said.

"So if the 100 businesses which make up the Business Council of Australia were simply to say each of us will provide 10 graduate jobs for first class Chinese speakers, Japanese speakers or whatever, each year, that's 1,000 jobs on the Australian market.

"Kids will respond to that and they will master these languages and become as they were, the army of the future in our economic engagement with the neighbourhood."

He says the roadmap to 2025 set out in the white paper is comprehensive and a "wake-up call" to Australia.

"It draws together the various arms of what both government, corporates and others in Australia are doing in their engagement with Asia and charts a framework for the future," he said.

SOURCE