Gonski 2.0: A controlled flight into terrain

The release of the Gonski 2.0 report in early 2018 provoked a chorus of criticism, much of it derisive, itemising the reliance on platitudes and clichés and its failure to address the terms of reference in any meaningful way.

Particularly baffling is that the Review was established with everything in working order. It had just one job, which was to provide advice on how funding should be used to improve student achievement. It was in the blissful position of not needing to argue the case for extra funding because $24.5 billion over ten years had already been committed by government. The ‘pilot’ enjoyed enviable public esteem. And, not least, there is now an extensive literature, drawing on evidence from high-performing countries, on the policies required for improved educational performance.

What, as they say, could possibly go wrong?

Then-Minister Simon Birmingham promised that the Gonski recommendations would be implemented. Little of substance has happened since then, but it would be rash to conclude that Gonski 2.0 has been shelved and can be safely left to collect dust.

Australia’s poor academic achievement is neither fake news nor mere politicking over funding.

The Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) has started work on a proposed new curriculum that appears heavily influenced by Gonski 2.0. Agreement on a new method of funding Catholic and independent schools has prompted Opposition promises of an additional $15 billion for public schools, but these ‘funding wars’ have been unaccompanied by any evidence that the money will promote better performance.

These developments provide renewed impetus for checking whether Gonski 2.0 was on the right track for improved achievement by our schools. We start by summarising the worrisome levels of student performance that provided the rationale for Gonski 2.0. We then review the international evidence on school performance and follow this by asking whether Gonski 2.0 was consistent with that evidence.

Australia’s school performance: same old story but a fresh perspective

Australia’s poor academic achievement is neither fake news nor mere politicking over funding. It is a well-known story that has been given fresh and dramatic reinforcement in new work from the World Bank. We see from Figure 1 that in quantitative terms Australia is performing well. An Australian child can expect to complete 13.8 years of schooling by his/her eighteenth birthday. This quantity of schooling is higher than would be predicted for our income level and it puts us well into the top rank of countries.

The story becomes less benign when we turn to the issue