Entry test for teachers, page-32

The bit I'm not understanding is why not just raise the ATAR entrance level then? The reasoning behind things like UCAT are that there are extra skills medical practitioners need which aren't picked up in ATAR.

But I don't really see that for teaching. If ATAR is good enough for the skill set required for engineering or law or accounting, why isn't it good enough for teaching?

The other bit I don't understand about this policy is what you called ensuring "a higher educational standard for teaching graduates".

Surely it is the fact that the students were able to pass the university courses which ensures a higher educational standard for graduates.

If the students are being allowed to graduate without meeting a sufficiently high educational standard, then that is a university problem, and the university's accreditation for that course should be pulled. Australian universities are not supposed to be diploma mills.

From my own experience (having hired literally dozens of university graduates over my lifetime), I can assure you that entrance examinations are not a predictor of educational success. Anyone can get tutored to a level that will get them past a university entrance test (and even excel when passing it). But that doesn't give any indication of how well they'll pass university courses once they are on their own.

For these reasons, I don't think the policy will achieve what it is claiming.