Comments on: More Reactionary Educational Policy Measures

By: Mike Bogle

Mike Bogle — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 22:36:04 +0000

I found a PDF version of the Code here, however I'm not sure if it's the updated version that contains the changes: http://education.qld.gov.au/corporate/codeofconduct/pdfs/code_of_conduct.pdf

By: Mike Bogle

Mike Bogle — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 22:19:24 +0000

@Dean groom: Re: the media glossing over the discussion. Yes absolutely. That’s one of the reasons I’m still searching for the actual wording of the Code (I’ll post it here if I can find it).

It’s interesting too to see how similar the two news articles are – as if the 2nd was just reiterating the first without adding to it. I wouldn’t be surprised if they hadn’t even read the Code, which is the main reason not to base your conclusions on information from newspapers alone I think.

Given a well researched paper or policy document, you’re lucky to see one half of one of the key points described properly.

By: Mike Bogle

Mike Bogle — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 22:11:21 +0000

@Lisa M Lane: For some reason I was expecting the Rudd Government to be less restrictive of people’s freedoms and liberties. Unfortunately that’s proven to be an enormously false assumption and we now have a growing Nanny State to contend with in addition to similar measures in State Education. The national filtering scheme is as testimony to that as anything.

As far as civil disobedience goes, unfortunately if people aren’t familiar with social media enough to know it isn’t “The Thing That Goes Bump in the Night,” they won’t realise how ridiculous some of these policy measures are. So there’s a chicken and egg thing going.

I’d suggest that discussing it openly on blogs and other social media tools is a way that people can begin to come together in a more organised fashion, but again you’d need access to the services to do that. So many people are isolated, inexperienced with the technology, and victim to the fear-based policies of the system.

By: Dean groom

Dean groom — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 22:02:49 +0000

Transparancy is omitted from much of this ideological thrashing around. The term is, like much of educational policy, vague. Social
media may not be understood, but to those who are used to determining social relationships, they hear a hum of restlessness that results in bad policy and linguistic expression. What is the least worst option and what is the least worst definative phrase we can use to rule it out.

Transparancy and public disussion are usually absent in media reports. It’s boring. The focus is always on fear factors (all media but this is evil and so are the people using it) or the great benevolance of government ministers to fund the only thing tha is going to keep our children connected and relevant. It is a bug concern that policy is increasingly aimed at keeping people in line and not communicating.

Bugger em’ the Ramones are inappropriate and as Lemmy says ‘that’s the way I like it baybe’.

Great post and much more open discussion needed about the wombles that dream this stuff up. Wonder if they’ll ignore or accept?

By: Lisa M Lane

Lisa M Lane — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:56:08 +0000

What’s disconcerting to me is not the stupidity of government organizations attempting to control communications (I expect that, however horrific it may be), but the idea that anyone would respond to this by saying, “oh, OK, I guess it’s protecting us, so let’s go along with it”.

Someday I hope the first response to this sort of thing will be “you’ve got to be joking” followed by mass civil disobedience in the form of simply not obeying the code.