Should GTAC be at UHS?

An Investigative Report by Henry Tran

Our school community at University High school has gained increasing popularity each year, providing a systematic education to those keen to acquire for knowledge and living near our vibrant city. It is unreasonable to see how this accomplishment could simply come to a halt as our school is admirably doing what’s best for their students. However people are worried about the ability of the school to sustain these huge numbers of students with our limited given resources. Recently the school had decided to undergo a vital change to its systems resulting in a new developed sub school as a provision towards this developing issue. Nevertheless, if the school’s population is to continue expanding at this current rate, the school will eventually be overcrowded. Our group as investigators think that having more space is the answer to this difficulty and we are having debates on whether the GTACbuilding in the school’s ground is necessary. 

GTAC is an innovative facility dedicated to providing science education programs and other relevant resources for both Victorian school students and teachers. Principal Heather Thompson recognised the need to make sure that Victorian school students are inspired to study molecular genetics and biotechnology. Because of this University High, University of Melbourne and the Victorian government decided to set up GTAC on the grounds of Uni High. “I think a lot of what GTAC has is incredibly beneficial; enabling many students to step inside a world-class facility and to work with the latest technology in science. 15,000 students passed through GTAC last year and that’s a lot of young people who it services. I think it’s serving a really great purpose at the moment.” replied the principal when I questioned the productivity level of GTAC now compared to before, considering some of the restraints it currently provides us. Further on into the conversation I found out that the facility acts as an inspiration for those in the scientific field more so on its digital content than its actual physical facility. As said by the principal “Their websites are producing a lot of digital content to skill up teachers that are teaching biology and chemistry and other schools across Victoria can reach that content online.” Most students we’ve encountered seem not to acknowledge this part of GTAC simply because it didn’t get much promotion, although I can see the advantages for those who have access to this knowledge on the GTAC website. 

Coming back to our problem, principal Heather Thompson stated that she’s well aware of this developing issue and the problems it originated from, I asked if this could somehow disrupt our school’s cultural value since gathering all students in a closed space is now impossible for a formal assembly. The principal discards this proposition ensuring us that “the culture of the school can remain, regardless of the number of people that we have in our school” simply if we could agree on “what the school represents.” 

In a recent interview with Uni High student we were able to get an opposite insight to what the school’s cultural reputation looks like from the students’ point of view. Looking at the problem of not having a whole school assembly, the student insists, “Not being able to have our classic whole school assembly really puts a dent into our school’s cultural representation. No matter how you look at it, not having a whole school assemble, but rather smaller sub schools assemblies, really abandons that whole idea of a united school were everybody is seen as equal. Without a larger hall, we lose the ability to share our knowledge and experiences with our whole school’s community.” This is a strong argument against the school’s approach to the problem of overpopulation and I think this argument also appeals to many students of University High; evidence from a recently conducted survey reinforces this theory. This research shows that 66% of students from University High think that the population of the school is too high. This statistic was taken from a sample of 30 University High students. 

The student was then asked to describe his experiences at GTAC, he admittedly responded “I think my experiences with GTAC had been quite motivating. They were more focused on biology and genetic studies. For those wanting to go further into these types of science studies GTAC would be a great source for them to access information, and the experience should give them a clear insight into what they should expect when choosing these subjects in VCE. I think the programs they offer at GTAC are undeniably influential” From this GTAC can be seen as a crucial starting point for those engaged in scientific studies in Uni High; confirming a student’s interest in the science field. Having said this, the student later argued against GTAC being a necessary educational structure within our school’s boundary. “Facing our immediate problem of overpopulation, I think that GTAC would be the least necessary structure within our school. Don’t get me wrong, their programs are great but it’s just because that it’s usually only a one-time event. For most students here in Uni High, I think the most times anyone’s been at GTAC is around 2 times. I think it would be better if GTAC was built somewhere else, where we could still access it, just not within our school’s boundary.” To further extend our knowledge on the severity of this issue, we’ve decided to conduct another survey within Uni High. The results stated that around 34% of Uni High students also believe that GTAC isn’t as necessary to our school as it seems, considering the possible problem of overpopulation. This outcome can be related to what the interviewed student had said, making it a powerful argument that couldn’t be easily neglected. 

There is a flaw to this whole debate when looking through the policies of the school. Uni High being a government school, we are bound by the direction of the Minister of Education and so things could get quite political if GTAC was deemed as “unnecessary”. In other words, the decision isn’t ours to make. However looking through and considering all the restraints we have, I still think these are interesting ideas and so they’re all worth pursuing. 

Based on the principal’s words, apparently the school’s council is involved and their ideas are comparable to ours. In the end, we still don’t have a plausible solution for this problem yet, however we did manage to raise some critical questions and that should be resolved by the school’s council themselves. At this point, I think we can leave this responsibility to the school’s council for overseeing that policy direction of our school. As for GTAC, I think analysing the problem and forming an overall plan might be a better approach to this issue. As concluded by the principal “It might be more so about we use space throughout the rest of the school. I’m pursuing with the school council’s master plan for the school and that’s what we need to present to the government and the Department of Education for our master plan for the next 20 years.” Taking away GTAC as a resolution for our immediate problem can only last so long. Having a more persistent and reasonable approach to this problem would be recommended for this matter as well as an overall plan rather than a temporary solution.