In November 2014, Daniel Andrews promised to make Victoria “The Education State”. Twelve years later, the Victorian Auditor-General had found that overall literacy and numeracy outcomes had barely moved, disadvantaged students were still being left behind, and the Department of Education had stopped publicly reporting progress against some of the Government’s flagship targets.
“The Education State” was not an independent recognition of Victoria’s educational achievements. It was a political promise made by Daniel Andrews during the 2014 Victorian election campaign and subsequently adopted as a flagship policy and branding initiative by his Labor Government.
On 5 November 2014, Andrews announced his intention to change Victoria’s number-plate slogan to “The Education State”, linking the promise to rebuilding schools and improving education. In September 2015, Education Minister James Merlino formally launched the Education State targets.
The ambition was substantial. So was the investment. By May 2024, the Victorian Auditor-General reported that the Government had invested $10.8 billion in the initiative. Yet the audit found that student literacy and numeracy outcomes had remained broadly stable since 2012. The achievement gap affecting disadvantaged and Aboriginal students had not been adequately reduced. And the Department of Education’s public performance reporting was not providing a fair or transparent picture of student achievement.
Meanwhile, Victoria’s COVID school closures had disrupted learning, concerns about student wellbeing and disengagement had intensified, and the number of children registered for home schooling was rising. By June 2026, home-school registrations had reached 12,708 children — approximately 86% more than in June 2021.
Not all these developments can be attributed to government policy. Educational outcomes are influenced by families, socioeconomic circumstances, school communities and national trends. But the Victorian Government is responsible for the education system it administers, the policies it adopts and the public money it spends.
What did successive governments promise? What did they know about shortcomings? And what measurable improvements have Victorian children received?
2014–2015: THE EDUCATION STATE IS BORN
When Daniel Andrews became Premier in December 2014, the Government inherited an education system facing familiar challenges. Student achievement varied considerably between schools and communities. Disadvantaged children were less likely to achieve the same educational outcomes as their more advantaged peers. Population growth was increasing demand for classrooms, teachers and infrastructure.
In 2015, the Andrews Government launched the Education State agenda. Its stated objective was to improve educational excellence and reduce the influence of disadvantage on children’s learning. The reforms established targets across four areas:
Learning for life.
Happy, healthy and resilient children.
Breaking the link between disadvantage and educational outcomes.
Pride and confidence in government schools.
These were not vague aspirations. The Government established measurable targets. By 2025, it wanted 25% more Year 9 students achieving the highest levels in reading and mathematics. It also wanted to reduce the reading achievement gap between disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged students in Years 5 and 9 by 15%. The targets created a clear basis for evaluating the Government’s performance.
The Education State was not merely a slogan. It was a promise of measurable educational improvement.
2016–2019: THE GOVERNMENT REPORTS ITS PROGRESS — THEN STOPS
Between 2016 and 2019, the Department of Education reported annually on progress towards the Education State targets. These reports compared student outcomes with the improvements the Government wanted to achieve by 2025. Then the reporting stopped.
The Victorian Auditor-General confirmed in May 2024 that the department’s last public progress report against those targets had been published in 2019. It had not subsequently updated that reporting.
This is one of the most important findings in the investigation. The Government had established targets to demonstrate whether its education reforms were succeeding. But the department stopped providing the public with the same straightforward measure of progress.
The Auditor-General did not establish that the reporting ceased because the Government wanted to conceal poor results. That motive cannot be assumed. But the consequence was clear: parents and the wider community lost a readily accessible way to evaluate progress against the Government’s own commitments.
Why did reporting stop? Who authorised that decision? And why was transparent progress reporting not restored before the Auditor-General intervened?
A government that establishes performance targets must be prepared to publish the results, including when those results are disappointing.
2015–2021: MORE FUNDING, BUT WHAT IMPROVED?
The Education State involved substantial additional expenditure. The Auditor-General’s 2024 report documented significant increases in funding per student.
Between 2015 and 2021, Victoria’s base funding per government school student increased by 33.7% after adjusting for inflation. In 2021-dollar terms, annual base funding rose from $11,522 per student in 2015 to $15,405 in 2021. For students in the lowest quarter of socioeconomic advantage, average total funding increased from an inflation-adjusted $15,426 to $21,478.
These were substantial real increases. Additional funding can support smaller classes, specialist programs, learning assistance, improved facilities and greater support for disadvantaged children. But expenditure is an input. The outcome must be measured by what children learn and the opportunities they gain.
When the Auditor-General examined literacy and numeracy results from 2012 to 2022, it found that overall achievement remained broadly stable. Some areas improved, particularly reading outcomes in the earlier primary years. Other areas showed little improvement or slight deterioration.
The Government had spent substantially more, but the audit did not find the sustained, widespread improvement required to meet the Education State’s ambitions.
More funding was provided. The promised transformation in educational outcomes had not been demonstrated.
That does not mean the additional money achieved nothing. But it does mean the Government must explain why increased investment did not produce stronger overall results.
2020–2022: COVID SCHOOL CLOSURES AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES
Victoria’s COVID response fundamentally disrupted schooling. Students experienced extended periods of remote learning, particularly in Melbourne. Schools, teachers and families were required to adapt to changing restrictions and learning arrangements.
For some students, remote learning provided flexibility and a more comfortable learning environment. For others, it created serious difficulties. Access to technology, parental support, suitable study spaces and reliable internet connections varied considerably between households. Children with additional learning needs could face particular challenges. Social isolation, disrupted routines and reduced opportunities for face-to-face interaction also affected many students.
These outcomes were influenced by COVID itself, but government restrictions were an additional and distinct factor. The Victorian Government made decisions about when schools would close, when they would reopen and what arrangements would apply. Those decisions were intended to manage public-health risks. They nevertheless carried educational and social consequences.
Evidence submitted by youth mental health organisation Orygen to Victoria’s parliamentary inquiry into the state education system highlighted the continuing effects on some young people. Orygen cited the Royal Children’s Hospital’s 2022 Child Health Poll, in which 42% of Victorian children were reported by their parents to have experienced ongoing mental health challenges attributed to remote schooling.
Parents also reported difficulties involving learning, social skills, friendships and emotional wellbeing. These were parent-reported experiences, not clinical diagnoses or proof that remote schooling alone caused each difficulty. But they establish that the consequences were substantial enough to warrant serious investigation.
What educational and wellbeing assessments informed decisions to continue remote schooling?
What alternatives were considered? How were the effects on disadvantaged students evaluated? And what long-term support was provided to children whose learning or wellbeing deteriorated?
The Government’s responsibility did not end when classrooms reopened. It extended to identifying and addressing the consequences of its decisions.
2021–2026: THE HOME-SCHOOLING INCREASE THAT DID NOT DISAPPEAR
One of the most revealing developments in Victoria’s education landscape is the continued growth in home schooling. The Victorian Registration and Qualifications Authority records the number of children registered for home education. Its figures show:
Year
Registered children
2021
6,836
2022
11,332
2023
10,481
2024
11,240
2025
11,691
2026
12,708
Figures at 30 June each year.
The initial increase coincided with COVID-related disruptions. Registrations rose sharply in 2022, then declined somewhat in 2023. But they did not return to the 2021 level. Instead, registrations rose again in 2024, 2025 and 2026.
Between June 2021 and June 2026, the number of registered children increased by approximately 86%. Even between 2023 and 2026, registrations increased by approximately 21%. That suggests the change has extended beyond the initial COVID period.
The regulator states that it does not ask parents why they register children for home schooling. Consequently, these figures cannot establish whether families are motivated by dissatisfaction with schools, concerns about bullying, curriculum preferences, children’s health, disability-related needs, religious considerations or positive experiences with home education.
Nor do they tell us how many children withdrew from established school enrolments rather than beginning their education at home. Those distinctions matter. But the trend warrants investigation.
Why are more Victorian families choosing home education years after schools returned to ordinary classroom operations?
Is Victoria experiencing a broader shift in parental preferences? Are some families responding to concerns about their children’s experiences at school? And has the Department of Education undertaken research to understand the reasons?
An Education State should be interested in why families choose to remain outside the conventional school system. Not because home schooling is inherently a failure, but because understanding parental decisions can reveal unmet needs and opportunities for improvement.
2024–2026: CURRICULUM, PARENTAL OBJECTIONS AND WHO DECIDES WHAT CHILDREN ARE TAUGHT?
As Victoria debated literacy, numeracy and student wellbeing, another disagreement emerged over the content of school education and the role of parents in decisions affecting their children.
The Victorian Government’s Respectful Relationships initiative is intended to promote healthy relationships, equality, safety and the prevention of gender-based violence. It operates through teaching resources and a whole-school approach. Consent and sexuality education also form part of Victorian curriculum requirements.
Some parents and organisations object to particular material dealing with gender identity, sexuality and gender norms. Their concerns include age-appropriateness, religious and cultural beliefs, parental consultation and whether schools should teach contested social questions. Other parents and education organisations support the programs as a way to strengthen safety, inclusion and respectful behaviour.
These objections are documented, rather than merely anecdotal. The Victorian Parliament’s 2024 inquiry into the state education system heard concerns about Respectful Relationships and Safe Schools, as well as strong endorsements. The committee noted that these programs were not themselves formal components of the Victorian F–10 Curriculum, although relevant learning is drawn from curriculum areas.
In August 2025, the Australian Christian Lobby reported that 1,850 Victorian parents had signed a joint letter seeking a review of Respectful Relationships, sexuality education and the Mature Minor Policy. The number is a count reported by the advocacy organisation, not a representative survey of all Victorian parents. Its concerns deserve accurate attribution and scrutiny, not automatic acceptance or dismissal.
There is a concrete question about parental rights. Victoria’s Department of Education states that schools need not obtain advance parental permission to include sexuality or consent education. Parents may decide that their child will not participate in the sexual-health component of health education. Age-appropriate consent teaching from Foundation to Year 12 is nevertheless mandatory. The scope of the withdrawal option should be explained clearly to families.
The debate is not simply between parents and teachers. Teachers are expected to deliver mandated content, exercise professional judgement about age-appropriate resources and respond to different family expectations. The parliamentary inquiry also considered curriculum crowding and workload. Evidence of widespread teacher opposition to these programs has not been established and should not be claimed.
There is a legitimate public-interest question about priorities. When the Auditor-General reports broadly stagnant literacy and numeracy outcomes, parents may reasonably ask how instructional time is allocated, what evidence supports additional programs and whether their effectiveness is independently evaluated. That does not establish that respectful relationships education caused poor academic results.
The Government should be able to show what materials are actually taught, how families are consulted, which elements are mandatory, how objections are handled, and what independent evaluations demonstrate about student outcomes.
The Education State promised both academic excellence and student wellbeing. Public confidence depends on transparency about both.
2024: THE AUDITOR-GENERAL DELIVERS A DAMAGING ASSESSMENT
On 1 May 2024, the Victorian Auditor-General tabled Literacy and Numeracy Achievement Outcomes for Victorian Students. The audit examined whether the Department of Education was improving outcomes for students in government schools.
Its conclusions were serious. Overall literacy and numeracy achievement had remained broadly stable since 2012. The proportion of Aboriginal and disadvantaged students performing below expected levels had not improved sufficiently. These students were not learning at a rate that would close the achievement gap with their peers. And the department’s public reporting did not provide a fair or transparent picture of student outcomes.
The audit found that the department focused its public budget performance reporting on students achieving in the higher NAPLAN bands. It did not adequately report the proportion of students falling below expected achievement levels. It also used reading results as its public measure of literacy without presenting writing achievement alongside them.
That mattered because students’ reading and writing outcomes differed considerably. In 2022, 10% of Year 9 government school students were reading below the expected level. For writing, the proportion was approximately 14%. Reporting reading alone could therefore give an incomplete picture of literacy.
The Auditor-General recommended changes to reporting and greater public accessibility of government-school performance data. The department accepted two recommendations and accepted one in principle.
The department had detailed information about student achievement. The public was not being given an equally clear account.
That is an accountability failure extending beyond test results. Parents should be able to understand whether the education system is meeting its objectives.
2024: THE CHILDREN BEING LEFT BEHIND
The most concerning findings involved students experiencing disadvantage. The Education State was explicitly intended to reduce the relationship between socioeconomic disadvantage and educational outcomes. Yet the Auditor-General found that the gap persisted.
In 2022, more than 20% of Aboriginal Year 9 students and students experiencing the highest levels of disadvantage were reading below the expected level. The audit found that Aboriginal students were, on average, approximately two years behind their peers in literacy and numeracy by Year 9.
Students experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage also faced substantial learning gaps. Although many were developing skills over time, their rate of improvement was generally insufficient to close those gaps. For some groups, the writing achievement gap widened.
This is particularly significant because the Government had directed additional funding towards disadvantaged students. The funding increases were real. But the educational gap the reforms were designed to address remained.
If the Education State’s defining promise was to break the link between disadvantage and educational achievement, the Auditor-General’s findings demonstrate how far the Government remained from achieving that objective.
The consequences extend beyond school. Literacy and numeracy affect employment opportunities, further education, financial independence and participation in society. Children who leave school without adequate foundational skills may carry those disadvantages into adulthood.
2024–2026: TEACHERS, WORKLOAD AND CLASSROOM CAPACITY
The quality of education depends heavily on the availability of qualified teachers and the conditions in which they work. Victoria’s education system has faced challenges involving recruitment, retention, workload and the distribution of teachers across schools and regions.
These problems are not unique to Victoria. They reflect national teacher supply pressures, changing workforce expectations, population growth and the demands of increasingly complex classrooms. But the Victorian Government remains responsible for planning its public-school workforce.
In 2024, Victoria’s parliamentary inquiry into the state education system was directed to examine teacher recruitment and retention, training, administrative workload, student wellbeing and the adequacy of government support. These are substantial matters.
Teacher shortages can affect subject availability, class continuity and the capacity of schools to provide individual learning support. Administrative demands can reduce the time available for teaching preparation and direct student engagement. And difficulties recruiting teachers in regional or disadvantaged communities can compound existing inequalities.
The Department of Education’s published workforce statistics show that the number of full-time-equivalent teachers on government school payrolls increased between 2021 and 2025. That is an important qualification: workforce pressures cannot be reduced to a claim that teacher numbers simply declined.
The more useful questions concern whether staffing growth matched enrolment growth, whether vacancies were concentrated in particular subjects or locations, and whether experienced teachers were being retained.
The Victorian Auditor-General has scheduled a future audit into the department’s management of teacher demand. That planned examination is itself a reason to scrutinise how accurately the Government forecasts and responds to staffing needs.
Building schools and increasing staff numbers are necessary investments. They are not sufficient evidence that every child has access to consistent, high-quality teaching.
2025–2026: THE NATIONAL RESULTS PROVIDE CONTEXT, NOT AN EXCUSE
Victoria’s educational performance must also be assessed against national trends. The Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority reported broadly stable NAPLAN achievement nationally in 2025. In 2026, national results again remained broadly stable, although there were improvements in some numeracy measures and weaker results in some reading measures.
This matters because Victoria is not operating in isolation. National curriculum arrangements, teacher supply challenges and changes in student wellbeing affect other jurisdictions.
It also matters that NAPLAN reporting changed substantially in 2023. The assessment scales and proficiency standards were reset. Results from 2023 onwards cannot simply be compared numerically with results from the earlier system. Any twelve-year analysis must account for that break in the data.
But those limitations do not erase the Auditor-General’s historical findings. Its 2024 audit specifically examined comparable results from 2012 to 2022. The conclusion was that the improvements sought through the Education State had not been achieved on a sustained, widespread basis.
The Government should now be able to demonstrate what has changed since that audit. Have more children reached expected proficiency levels? Are disadvantaged students catching up? Have writing outcomes improved? And has public reporting become more transparent? Those are measurable questions.
THE EDUCATION STATE’S BIGGEST ACCOUNTABILITY PROBLEM
Across this series, a familiar pattern has emerged. Governments establish ambitious objectives. Public money is committed. Strategies and programs are announced. But independent audits subsequently identify weaknesses in planning, delivery, performance measurement or public reporting.
In education, the problem is especially troubling. Children cannot recover lost years of schooling as easily as governments can revise a budget or extend an infrastructure timetable. A child who falls behind in literacy may struggle throughout secondary school. A student who disengages may find returning to education increasingly difficult. A family that loses confidence in its school may seek alternatives, sometimes at substantial personal and financial cost.
These consequences are not fully captured by government spending announcements. Nor can they be measured solely by the number of schools constructed. The fundamental purpose of an education system is to educate children.
The Education State must be judged by what children learn, whether disadvantaged students receive genuine opportunities to catch up, and whether families can trust the information government provides about performance.
TWELVE YEARS OF PROMISES. WHAT DID VICTORIAN CHILDREN RECEIVE?
The Andrews Government introduced the Education State in 2015. The Allan Government inherited its targets, programs and unresolved challenges. The Carroll Government now carries responsibility for demonstrating that the system is delivering measurable improvements.
The record is mixed. Funding per student increased substantially. Some literacy outcomes improved, particularly in primary school. Government-school staffing increased. Victoria continued investing in schools, facilities and student support. These achievements should be recognised.
But they sit alongside serious findings. The Auditor-General found that overall literacy and numeracy outcomes remained broadly stable over the decade examined. The gap affecting disadvantaged and Aboriginal students persisted. The department’s public reporting did not adequately reflect the full range of student outcomes. And progress reporting against the Government’s own Education State targets stopped after 2019.
COVID school closures disrupted learning and wellbeing, while the number of children registered for home schooling subsequently reached record levels. Not every problem can be attributed to the Government. But the responsibility for evaluating policies, responding to evidence and transparently reporting outcomes cannot be transferred elsewhere.
Victoria promised educational excellence and greater equality of opportunity. Its own independent auditor found that the promised improvements had not been demonstrated.
That should have prompted a comprehensive public explanation. Which targets were achieved? Which were missed? What happened to the additional funding? Which interventions worked? Why did reporting stop? And what changes have been made to ensure that the next generation of Victorian children receives better outcomes?
After twelve years, these are not unreasonable questions. They are the basic questions any government should be able to answer about one of its most important responsibilities.
Daniel Andrews promised to make Victoria “The Education State”. The evidence now demands an account of what that promise actually delivered.
Investigation 05 of 06 — SUNA | More Tax. More Debt. What Did Victoria Get?
PRIMARY SOURCES
1. ABC News, Victoria election 2014: Labor to change state number plates, 5 November 2014. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-05/victoria-election-2014-labor-to-change-state-number-plate/5867712
2. Victorian Auditor-General’s Office, Literacy and Numeracy Achievement Outcomes for Victorian Students, 1 May 2024. https://www.audit.vic.gov.au/report/literacy-and-numeracy-achievement-outcomes-victorian-students
3. Victorian Registration and Qualifications Authority, Home Schooling — Trends and Statistics, figures to 30 June 2026. https://www2.vrqa.vic.gov.au/home-schooling-trends-and-statistics
4. Parliament of Victoria, Inquiry into the State Education System in Victoria. https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/stateeducationinquiry/
5. Orygen, submission to the parliamentary inquiry into Victoria’s state education system. https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/495ebc/contentassets/9849f4bde3144adc9f9e29882648b127/186.-orygen.pdf
6. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, NAPLAN National Results. https://acara.edu.au/reporting/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia/naplan-national-results
7. Victorian Department of Education, Summary Statistics for Victorian Schools, 2025. https://www.education.vic.gov.au/Documents/about/department/Summary-statistics-brochure.pdf
8. Victorian Auditor-General’s Office, Managing Demand for Teachers, future audit program. https://www.audit.vic.gov.au/report/managing-demand-teachers
9. Parliament of Victoria, Inquiry into the State Education System in Victoria, final report (15 October 2024). https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/get-involved/inquiries/stateeducationinquiry/reports/
10. Victorian Department of Education, Sexuality and Consent Education: Policy. https://www2.education.vic.gov.au/pal/sexuality-education/policy
11. Victorian Government, Respectful Relationships. https://www.vic.gov.au/respectful-relationships
12. Australian Christian Lobby, 1,850 Victorian Parents Call for Review of School Programs & Policy (19 August 2025). https://www.acl.org.au/media/vic-parents-call-for-review-school/
13. Parents Victoria, Respectful relationships and sexuality education in schools. https://www.parentsvictoria.asn.au/issues/sexuality-education-in-schools/