Update: Safe Schools Findings

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/conservative-mps-angry-after-safe-schools-review-finds-program-should-not-be-scrapped-20160315-gnjzgf.html

So this morning, they finally delivered the review of the Safe Schools Coalition. Surprise, surprise, it's been deemed worthy and should not be scrapped. More specifically, while the professor reviewing it argues that there are some changes that should be made, the program actually aligns with the Australian Curriculum (no surprises there at all). In other words, the program shouldn't be stripped of funding or basically scrapped in its entirety.

I, for one, am very pleased with the professor who conducted the review, even if the conservatives are not. The changes that he recommends are actually fairly reasonable and do allow for some compromises. The changes noted in the article include:

- Giving teachers more guidance over how to use the material they have been given for the program. (As a note, around 85-90% of the program is school-wide policies, so really this is a small part of it)

- Restricting the dissemination of some website links to school counsellors only (such as, for example, a student coming out as transgender). This actually makes logical sense, since the counsellors are usually either psychologists, social workers or similar and would therefore be the best place for a student to actually discuss these matters without feeling like someone will eventually find out, even if by accident (i.e. teacher letting slip to students or parents). Although that said, nothing will stop the student from finding this stuff out themselves.

- Providing more information to parents: This really isn't an issue, but again, like I've said, about 85-90% of the program is school-wide policy changes.

- Opt-out options: This really only affects the classroom component. I do actually have to disagree with this one only slightly. The reason I say this is that there's no real "sex" components to the program, it's mostly looking at sexuality and gender identity-sexuality and sex are two very different things (i.e. it's entirely possible to be gay and a virgin by choice). Unless you're prepared to thoroughly educate your kids on this issue without forcing religion down their throats or controlling what information they view online/in magazines, opting-out is somewhat moot.

The fact that the conservative MPs still seem to be of the view that it's disseminating PORN to schoolchildren seem to have a very narrow-minded idea of how online filters actually work, or a broad definition of what constitutes pornography. I say the former as many schools (if not all schools) will have a filter in place to prevent students accessing certain material. In the case of public schools, the filter is put in place by the government (so cracking it is not as easy as it sounds). Yes, I'm familiar with proxy sites, VPNs and whatnot, but really, you would think the MPs would know this.

It also doesn't surprise me that they're viewing the professor who conducted the review (who, by the way, can be found here)  as a fraud among other things. Funnily enough, this same guy was previously used by the Coalition (in the Howard era) to conduct the National Inquiry into the teaching of literacy in 2005 and is also a foundation board member of the two committees who are more or less responsible for education in Australia - ACARA and AITSL (the latter of which assesses teachers against certain standards). Guess he's not a fraud when it suits them.

Furthermore, the comments on the review were that it was inadequate, too narrow and the terms of reference weren't suitable. So...in other words, you're pissy because he did what you asked of him and he found out that it went against your agenda. Oh boo-frickin hoo.

The full report will be released in the coming days and I will try and find it. When I do, I'll share it here.