Teachers can change the world. The average Australian will spend 11,000 hours being shaped by the knowledge, beliefs, and behaviours of teachers, during some of the most developmentally critical years of their life. All people will interact with teachers, and all teachers will affect the shape and direction of society. It seems curious then, that when people rattle off a list of ‘prestige careers’ – doctor, lawyer, engineer, etc. – that teaching is rarely, if ever, on the list. Over many years, Australia has failed the teaching profession, by lowering entry barriers, neglecting to reward excellence, and ignoring the importance of education in changing the world for the better. For decades, Australian universities have set a low bar for entry into education courses. The Australian Tertiary Admissions Rank (ATAR) indicates an individual’s ranking amongst students of their age group. The average ATAR nationwide is typically around 70. Australian universities have allowed students with ATARs significantly below average to enter into teaching courses for the last several decades. Most universities report a median ATAR of 65-70 for Bachelor of Education courses, however many universities accept students with ATARs of 50 and below. Some states have attempted to elevate the entry requirements for teaching. The Victorian government recently set a recommended minimum ATAR of 70 for entry into education qualifications. However, a quick glance at some of the undergraduate education courses in Victorian universities will reveal the following publicly advertised entry requirements as of 2023: -              RMIT: 50.55 (Removing bonus adjustments) https://delta.vtac.edu.au/coursesearch/#/course/26/3201005 -              Victoria University: 59.57 (Removing bonus adjustments) https://www.vu.edu.au/courses/bachelor-of-education-p-12-ebed -              Latrobe: 55 (Removing bonus adjustments) https://delta.vtac.edu.au/coursesearch/#/course/26/2101349 The continuously low entry barriers to education qualifications are emblematic of the low competitiveness of teaching and low prestige of the career. Low prestige is part of a larger problem in Australia, which is that teaching is seen as a ‘backup’ option for many students. Evidence from the latest OECD teaching and learning study suggests that not only is teaching being thought of as a backup, for many, it is being used as such. For 42% of Australian teachers, teaching was not their first choice. The commonly held perception of teaching as a backup is incredibly harmful and inextricably linked with low demand and entry scores. As long as the profession is able to be treated as a backup, high achievers will be disincentivised from pursuing careers in teaching. Low barriers to entry create the impression that teaching does not present a challenge, which could not be further from the truth. Teaching is not a backup. More respect for the profession of teaching is critical. A 2022 study of 5000 teachers by Monash University found that 70% did not feel respected by the public. The low regard for teaching is not commensurate with its impact in society and has real consequences for those aspiring to enter the field. It is not uncommon for students to be told they are ‘too smart to be a teacher’ or advised that teaching is a ‘waste of potential.’ Such attitudes have undoubtedly caused scores of students to re-evaluate their future plans and eliminate teaching from their future aspirations. The consequences of low regard for teaching also reverberate throughout the field, with the same 2022 Monash study finding that only 3 out of 10 teachers planned to stay in the career over the long term. Whilst the profession as a whole deserves more esteem, being a teacher in and of itself does not necessitate respect. There is a spectrum of performance in all professions. Just as some doctors are better at diagnosing and treating disease than others, and some lawyers produce more favourable court outcomes for their clients, some teachers produce better outcomes for their students. However, unlike in law and medicine, there is no reward for teachers who excel. Whilst doctors and lawyers who stand out are able to obtain greater financial reward, greater esteem, and progress further in their career, teachers have little in the way of comparable opportunity. Teachers seeking greater opportunity, greater remuneration, or greater recognition are forced to transition to the private sector, or take on additional administrative roles, rather than work towards improving outcomes for their students. The current system does not promote excellence in teaching. Consequently, the highly ambitious teacher, who does not want to transition to an administrative or leadership role, such as that of a school principal, is stuck turning the wheel, while their neighbours in medicine, law, and other fields are able to climb to greater heights of recognition and compensation. Education changes lives. Good teachers, teachers who are highly motivated, passionate, and academically literate, provide good education. Investing in teachers and raising the esteem of the profession benefits all in society. To do so, we need to raise the standard for entry into the profession. OECD recommendations suggest that no more than the top 30% of students should become teachers, meaning ATAR requirements should start in the low 80s. Some may argue that elevation of standards will decrease the supply of teachers, and while it is possible that the number of applicants will shrink temporarily, the higher bar for entry is likely to attract new applicants who had previously been deterred. However, simply demanding more from students applying for teaching is not a complete solution. It is unreasonable to ask for more without providing a reciprocal reward. Financial incentives must be put in place for those teachers who stand out from their colleagues in improving student outcomes. Research and development into a system of reward and progression for exceptional teachers must be undertaken as a priority. Until teaching is given greater reverence in the public consciousness, there is work to be done. We will know that teaching is where it belongs when the next generation of high achievers is anxiously awaiting news of their admission to medicine, law, and education. References OECD TALIS 2018 https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/1d0bc92a-en/1/1/3/index.html?itemId=/content/publication/1d0bc92a-en&_csp_=1418ec5a16ddb9919c5bc207486a271c&itemIGO=oecd&itemContentType=book OECD TALIS 2018 Australia Profile https://gpseducation.oecd.org/CountryProfile?plotter=h5&primaryCountry=AUS&treshold=10&topic=TA#:~:text=Teaching%20was%20the%20first%2Dchoice,and%20economies%20participating%20in%20TALIS. Monash 2022 - Perceptions of Teaching https://www.monash.edu/perceptions-of-teaching

A quick Google search defines feminism as advocacy for women’s rights with the intention of achieving gender equality. The feminist movement is dynamic and has evolved with the changing social climates throughout history. Choice feminism has emerged as a modern take on feminism. Ironically, the term ‘choice feminism’ comes from Linda Hirshman’s criticism of complacent women choosing to follow societal expectations set out by the patriarchy who also identify as ‘feminists.’ Choice feminists maintain a woman’s choice is inherently feminist, regardless of what that decision means for themselves or the feminist movement. The ‘choice’ movement upholds a woman who chooses to stay at home and raise children as equally feminist as a woman who chooses to be a doctor. According to choice feminism, all power to you. A woman cannot adhere to societal expectations that leverage male privilege at the same time as identifying as a feminist. Choice feminism completely ignores the patriarchal society that interferes with a woman’s choice. There are certain expectations placed upon her, dictating the choice she is making. She is expected to take her husband’s surname in marriage, bear children, raise children and care for her family. How is a woman supposed to make an unbiased decision without restriction from pervasive social pressures? Choice under duress and the ‘choice’ celebrated by choice feminism are not the same. Some women have no choice. Take for instance a young Somalian girl. She does not have a choice whether to undergo genital mutilation. Female genital mutilation is a procedure to remove external genitalia or to injure female genital organs. The procedures are forced. According to UNICEF, 98% of Somalian women up to 49 years old have suffered genital mutilation. Choice feminism asserts all women have equal rights to have a choice. It is a post-feminist philosophy. Post-feminist philosophy rejects feminism, instead claiming that gender equality has been achieved. Post-feminist philosophy endangers the future of women and girls who rely on feminism to change policies and attitudes towards women. Unequal power dynamics are exactly what feminism fights. Negative attitudes towards women, fixed gender roles, and reduced societal participation are not bygone issues. The manifestations of negative attitudes towards women and power imbalances are undyingly pervasive; abuse, exploitation, domestic violence. Choice feminism negates female empowerment by justifying any choice women make as ‘feminist.’ The idealistic façade that choice feminism promotes perpetuates inequality. Choice feminism is too easy. It is easy to follow standard social progression; get a job, find a partner, get married, have children and stay at home to raise them. What’s even better is you can be ‘feminist’ while entertaining the male agenda by remaining financially dependent, reinforcing gender household roles, and not teaching your children any better. If anything, choice feminism promotes a return to harmful conventions, undoing decades of advocacy for equal rights. Choice feminism makes light of the very real struggles faced by those who cannot choose. Contrary to the post-feminist notions of the choice feminist movement, true feminism is as necessary now as it was at its inception. The fight for equality is not over. References Analysis of Linda Hirshman's Manifesto for Women https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj24_G6yciDAxX5SmwGHYv_D1wQFnoECA4QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fscholarworks.iu.edu%2Fjournals%2Findex.php%2Fssj%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F13386%2F19629%2F34065&usg=AOvVaw3n7Gfe6z8ZiLiO5WeP5sH4&opi=89978449 Linda Hirshman's Take on Feminism https://www.thenation.com/article/society/linda-hirshman-obit/ The Australian Government's Inquiry into the Relationship of Domestic Violence and Gender Inequality https://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/committees/senate/finance_and_public_administration/dvgenderinequality/~/media/Committees/fapa_ctte/DVgenderinequality/c02.pdf UNICEF's Global Concern for Female Genital Mutilation https://data.unicef.org/resources/female-genital-mutilationcutting-global-concern/ WHO's Definition of Female Genital Mutilation https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-genital-mutilation

Investing is a great way to make passive income, to make your money work for you. Most of us are investing, whether we know it or not. It isn’t just those who buy and sell stocks, or crypto, or other financial tools. If you have super, you are investing. Investing is also a great way to change the landscape of the economy and influence society’s future. By providing capital to businesses you are providing power and promoting their growth. This can, in some cases, be a good thing. For example, investment into businesses working on renewable energy technologies can lead to more research and development, and more rapid advancement. When you invest, you send a message. You tell the company that you have given your hard earned money to that they are doing a great job and that they should keep going - full steam ahead. You also implicitly suggest that other companies should be more like the one you gave money to, that they are doing something right which deserves attention and imitation. So when you invest in companies like National Australia Bank for example, you tell them that it is okay to harass, forcibly remove, prosecute, and wage war against villagers in Canada in order to build a non-essential gas pipeline. Or when you invest in Shell, you tell them that it’s totally fine to pay off local militias to murder, rape, and torture local civilians for decades in order to procure oil for profit. Or when you invest in JP Morgan Chase, you tell them that fraud in the sale of mortgage backed securities, years of manipulation and fraud in the precious metals market, and that more than 80 major legal actions, which continue to increase in frequency, are business as usual. Investing is like voting, and with increasing privatisation and deregulation our society looks less like a democracy and more like a ‘corporatocracy.’ As a result, choosing where to invest, and who to invest with, could soon mean much more for society’s future than writing a name or number on a piece of paper every couple of years. You have the power to make change. So vote wisely with your money. References Amnesty International on Shell’s Human Rights Abuses in the 1990s https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/AFR44/7393/2017/en/ Platform’s Report on Human Rights Abuses by Shell in the Niger Delta https://platformlondon.org/counting-the-cost-corporations-and-human-rights-abuses-in-the-niger-delta/?hilite=counting+cost Better Markets Report on JP Morgan Chase’s Legal Actions https://www.bettermarkets.org/sites/default/files/documents/JPMorgan_Chase_20-Year_RAP_Sheet_Sept_2020.pdf Backers for the Canadian Coastal Gaslink Pipeline https://www.ran.org/the-understory/2020-update-whos-banking-the-coastal-gaslink-pipeline/

Many will tell you that the pay gap isn’t real. That women are paid less not because of discrimination, but because they choose lower paying jobs and work less to ‘be at home with the kids.’ This is a reductionist perspective that perverts and overlooks the truth. According to the ABS, the gender pay gap is 13 percent, meaning women earn approximately $13,000 less each year. The calculation that gives us this number is based on a large sample of employees working full time in the public and private sector. A typical response to pay gap statistics is that ‘well that’s just because women work different jobs.’ This is true. Conservative cultural norms and traditional values have long disempowered women from entering the workplace. Old boys clubs have dominated industries throughout the country and created toxic environments that are incredibly difficult to endure. In the medical field for example, global studies estimate 33% of junior doctors will face sexual harassment at the hands of another medical professional, often a senior, and almost always a male. Differences in the type of work aside, there is a lesser known but arguably more important type of pay gap that poses a sharp counterpoint to those who would deny its existence entirely. The like-for-like pay gap. The like-for-like pay gap describes instances where workers are paid different amounts whilst working the same amount of hours, with the same level of productivity, in the exact same role, taking the same amount of leave. Organisations do not advertise this kind of discrimination, and it is difficult to collect data regarding the prevalence. However, according to data collected in a 2021 WGEA gender pay gap audit, more than 700 organisations (all with over 100 employees) in Australia demonstrated like-for-like pay gaps. Whilst more research is needed into the like-for-like pay gap issue, currently available data makes its existence undeniable. To all of those who deny the existence of a gender pay gap, best of luck explaining away the fact that women and men in the same jobs, who put in the same amount of hours, and who demonstrate the same level of productivity, do not earn the same wage. References Harassment and Discrimination in Medicine https://www.sap2.org.ar/i2/archivos/2224.pdf WGEA Audit https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020-21_WGEA_SCORECARD.pdf ABS Gender Pay Gap https://www.wgea.gov.au/data-statistics/ABS-gender-pay-gap-data WGEA General Information https://www.wgea.gov.au/pay-equity#:~:text=Gender%20pay%20equity%20is%20about,in%20a%20non%2Ddiscriminatory%20way