Page 5313 - Week 12 - Thursday, 28 October 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
them to keep up with changing technologies in the field. For example, this year all of the vision support teachers attended a roundtable to get across the new rules for braille. The Liberals, who claim to care about students with disabilities, continually vote against these staff getting paid.
The hearing support team supports classroom teachers and helps them access professional learning to ensure that their skills remain current. In 2010 this team attended training in auditory skills for students with cochlear implants and they have all attended the international teachers of the deaf conference in Sydney. In addition, individual members of the hearing support team have attended workshops on literacy development for deaf students and specific learning assistance training at Renwick college. The Liberals voted against these staff getting paid. They voted against funding that enables these teachers to keep their skills up to date.
While the government has invested more than any other in this area of disability education in both government and non-government schools, clearly there is more to do. First, though, we must accept that the ACT budget is not a magic pudding, a point lost on those opposite and, perhaps most worryingly, on the man who wants to be Treasurer. We must accept the need to provide the best education possible for all students and to do so within the budget that we are allocated.
We must continue to review and improve the way that we use limited resources to ensure that the education system continues to cater for students with new and differing needs or who live in new or rejuvenating parts of the city. We must ensure that the education system prepares them for a changing world, and this means we must continue to review what we are doing to ensure that we get the best result for taxpayers and the best result—indeed, a better result—in terms of educational outcomes for all students. An efficiency dividend and the associated structural reforms are a small part of achieving this.
This challenge is not unique to government schools. Recently, I, along with the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools, launched a series of strategic plans to guide us as we work together for the benefit of students with disabilities in the territory. As I have said in this place many times, the public versus private debate is over and this divide needs to be a thing of the past. At least that is the view of those on this side of the chamber. Labor’s approach to disability education and our desire to work with non-government schools proves this.
Last year I commissioned Professor Shaddock to conduct an in-depth review into disability education in the territory. This review now forms a sound basis for long-term planning for disability education. Professor Shaddock in his report acknowledged that the options he put forward might take years to consider, pilot and implement. I think it is worth taking a moment to commend him and his team for such long-term thinking. The contribution made by the Catholic Education Office and the Association of Independent Schools in the development of their strategic plans has set in place a firm foundation for cooperation in this area.
Notably, of course, one of the key recommendations or key options within the Shaddock review was cross-sectoral collaboration—in other words, working together
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video