Tuesday, 14 August 2007
More on teacher performance pay
Wednesday, 20 June 2007
and now for some good news
Then again, maybe this should inspire others (me too) to do better with them, and all kids will benefit. Perhaps Minister Bishop should take note...
Ignore the blog title with the naughty word - when you read the article it will make sense!
http://blogs.smh.com.au/lifestyle/allmenareliars/archives/2007/06/a_cheater_on_cocaine.html
Never judge a town by its airport - Sam de Brito
I don't meet people like Mandy and Tony Whybird too often; modest, happy, determined and absolutely passionate about making a difference in kids' lives.
Tony is the principal of Weipa's Western Cape College, in far north Queensland, his wife Mandy the head of curriculum, and last month I had the privilege of getting a glimpse into their lives and the daily, practical ways they're imbuing a generation of Indigenous and non-Indigenous kids with mutual respect and enthusiasm for learning.
As I mentioned a few weeks ago, as part of the Croc Festival, myself and veteran Queensland teacher Geoff Bishop gave a four-day creative writing workshop to 21 children at Western Cape College.
Not having kids myself, it was a fascinating and hilarious glimpse into what occupies the minds of youngsters today.
Even more significantly for me, it was a humbling opportunity to see people like the Whybirds and Bish in action, teachers who don't just talk about making a difference but are up to their armpits in the next generation, shining a torch on the path of life for them ...
If you think kids have little to do in your neighbourhood, spare a thought for the 1000 or so youngsters who live in Weipa. There's no cinema, no mall and none of the other diversions city teens in larger regional areas take for granted.
That said, it's an absolute Disneyland for hunting, angling, spear fishing, camping and water sports (when the crocodiles and box jellyfish allow).
Weipa is also the site of the world's second largest bauxite mine and sits in the middle of a cluster of aboriginal settlements called Napranum, Aurukun and Mapoon which, it's fair to say, have their fair share of challenges.
When you live at the absolute end of the Earth it's hard to not sometimes feel like the rest of the country has forgotten about you and that's why initiatives like CrocFest work so well, in previous years bringing people like screenwriter Craig Pearce (Moulin Rouge, Romeo+Juliet) and author Melina Marchetta (Looking For Alibrandi) to meet and hopefully inspire kids.
Luckily for me and my workshop, I had help in the inspiration department, teaming up with Bish, a transplanted South African who's spent 30 years teaching the children at the tip of our country and in the Torres Strait Islands.
He also has a finely tuned nose for injustice because of his experiences in his homeland and through him and the Whybirds I got a revealing look at the challenges facing educators in the area.
The Whybirds are a magnet for Indigenous kids, and having spent many years teaching in fly-speck schools like the one on Masig aka Yorke Island (check this photo), indigenous families from all over the Torres Strait are now sending their children to Weipa and Western Cape College, safe in the knowledge that the Whybirds are running the show.
I reckon if you want to know whether a school is operating properly, take a look at who's beating up who at lunchtime.
At Western Cape, schoolyard brawls are almost unheard of and when you listen to people as streetwise and wily about the ways of teens as Tony and Mandy, you know they're right on top of what is happening with their students in and out of class.
It shows.
I was just some dude in jeans and a T-shirt from Sydney and I was blown away by the respect and attention I was given by the students.
I expected half oranges in the back of the head and all I got was "mister". I kept turning around every time a student addressed me, thinking someone else had walked into the class room.
My job was to spend four days with the children and coax a short story out of each of them and it ended up being a wonderful peek into the of the lives of little people who I'd never usually get to meet.
Like 13-year-old Carmilla, who gave me a crash course in creole in her fantastic short story Chucking Some Hard Punches about (ironically) a schoolyard fight which never quite happens (see I wasn't lying).
Kerryann and Kaschea are yelling.
"Come sissy come, I nor fright for fight you!"
"Come girl I nor fright too I gor hit you. Luk you nor suber fight, you screaming like some one e killing you!"
"Shut up you think you good, Kerryann!"
I can feel my throat tightening and my face getting hot. I was about to explode and start chucking some hard punches.
Then there was 13-year-old Adi who described fish and chips as "boxes of scrumptiousness" and the flock of seagulls who comes to steal them as "a flapping blanket of grey and white mongrels".
Stick that description up your jumper Tim Winton.
13-year-old Garry, who modestly described himself as "the sexy beast" in his school bio, also proved a dab hand at metaphors, giving birth to one of the best of the workshop:
"Faster then a cheetah on cocaine all three of us ran to retrieve the football," he wrote, showing equal creativity at the other of the scale of motion when he added: "Luke crept under the car as slow as NSW can win a State of Origin match."
Rub it in why don't you Garry?
The sexy beast's turn of phrase was matched by 12-year-old Samantha, who showed admirable political instincts when describing a fellow student who'd begged for forgiveness, saying 'sorry' for a misdeed.
"I don't understand why she said it, but that 'sorry' was so fake, John Howard wouldn't have used it. I just walked away to cool off."
14-year-old Stephanie produced a soulful insight into what it's like to be the new kid in town in her story Never Judge a Town by its Airport.
'Weipa International' is the smallest airport I have ever seen, strangely reminding me of our local footy clubhouse back home.
"I am excited to be somewhere new; somewhere no one knows who I am. This thought strikes a new emotion in my body - emptiness. I am in an airport surrounded by at least fifty people, yet I have never felt so alone.
"It drains my excitement. I no longer have my safety net of a familiar scene, a familiar town; the Chermside shopping centre, the great Brissy River, familiar friends, teachers or relatives."
14-year-old Jarrod opened a window into the lives of teenage boys which I probably didn't need so soon after lunch:
"With a sinister grin on his face, Bom went around the classroom filled with busy children, harvesting the vilest germs from people's ears and rears onto the rubber eraser.
"Fear struck me. The signal that turns all kids into monsters had sounded - the school bell for lunch."
Two more students, Deserae and Machala, used the opportunity to write about a friend and relative at the school who had tragically hung herself earlier in the year; a heartbreaking true story of a teenage squabble gone terribly wrong.
I also got an appreciation of the wild world of Weipa with stories about snake bites, spiders, stalking crocodiles, rampaging kangaroos and turtle hunts - and you worry about your kids hurting themselves playing in the backyard?
Another highlight was meeting Marion, a bubbling 12-year-old who is so shy in front of a class she could barely whisper her responses, but as soon as I got her one-on-one she turned into Oprah Winfrey, but much, much funnier.
Then there was 12-year-old Pelina, who's story Scary Voice I read from start to finish without finding one spelling mistake - the only child in the class to earn that distinction.
And we say our education system is failing Indigenous kids.
Lastly I just want to thank all the kids I've mentioned above as well as Derek, Vivienne, Emma, Aquila, Olive, Chaye, Geraldine, Stephanie, Michelle and Shannon; you're a frighteningly talented bunch and you'll all do me out of job in five years when you hit the work force.
I wish that I could reprint all of the stories you wrote. Instead, I've chosen just one, by 12-year-old Pia, which blew me away with its sophistication and insight.
Hate, love and in-between
I hate funerals, everyone crying, whimpering and sobbing, Kleenex and soggy hankies flying everywhere. I can hear the Frank Sinatra My Way music sailing in as my grandfather's coffin is carried by my older cousins and relatives.
"Regrets I have a few but then again, too few to mention," I hear the deep, strong-as-a-lion voice of Sinatra belting in my ear. It is like a big annoying fly I can't get it out of my head, that won't ever go away.
I'm certainly not going to cry. I'm not that sad. There are an obese amount of people here, relatives I don't even know, you'd think my grandad was Elvis Presley or something. I'm sitting next to my mother who's literally crying her eyes out. She's looking at me sideways like I'm some extra-terrestrial. She must think my blood is made from ice and that my heart is a hard, freezing icebox, refusing to make any emotion whatsoever.
"He was a wonderful grandfather, Dad, and a mighty man all round," sobs my cousin Ben. He looks like a wreck, his eyes like gushing waterfalls, full of fresh, raw and clear water.
I've got better things to think about. It's in the middle of the day and the sun is outside, sauntering through the windows, bringing life into the dark and disturbed room. You'd never know it, there's nothing shining in here mentally. I'm too ashamed to look at anyone in case they take offence or get embarrassed.
Everyone is dressed very formally; tailored suits and dresses, good shoes, make-up. Most of the outfits consist of black, navy blue and brown - the most depressing colours in the rainbow. My grandmother is dressed up the best I have ever seen her, wearing a matching skirt and vest with horrible, 80's style, so-over-and-done-with shoulder pads. I feel like telling her to get with the times and throw them in the bin.
Everyone puts roses, daisies and tulips on my grandfather's coffin, which is made of hard oak with a nice glossy sheen, the best money can buy. Beautiful flowers, daffodils, tulips, some bright and some pastel - colours that stand out on the shiny coffin lid. They look fresh and premature like the beautiful gift of life has just burst into them.
I feel a lot of emotions: awkwardness, confusion, wonder, sadness. I start to remember. He was a wonderful man; tall, beer gut, bandy legs and a croaky voice. He liked a beer or two, or three or four. He was a great bloke to have as a grandfather; he treated me like a goddess, but with restrictions too. He taught me right from wrong, how to say a few Russian words and when a tomato was ripe enough to pick.
I'm suddenly struck by the fact he's no longer around. How will life go without him? I talked to him everyday, sometimes about my innermost thoughts and I never had to explain anything. I feel like an arrogant, too-good-for-this, too-high-class, insensitive idiot for not crying. I'm overcome with feelings of goodness and joy; the world feels like it has stopped, paused for a few moments.
A slow, long, wet drip slips from my eye and runs down my cheek. It feels like ice on my warm face. How did I let this happen?
THE END
Tuesday, 19 June 2007
2012: A classroom odyssey
Peter Hodge
June 18, 2007
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/2012-a-staffroom-odyssey/2007/06/17/1182018932123.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
COMMITTED teachers who, though underpaid, continue to devote the best years of their working lives to our children will decide to walk away from teaching en masse should performance pay be introduced.
If federal Education Minister Julie Bishop sincerely believes in the educational benefits of her policy, she clearly knows little about her ministerial portfolio, and even less about teachers.
Fast forward to the beginning of the 2012 school year and assume a "performance pay" system imposed on my school has been in operation for several years now. Even before the students arrive there are squabbles over class lists — primarily, how many strong and weak students there are in each class.
Teachers previously prepared to accept that the distribution of students evened itself out over a few years now demand a better than average list every year. They fear their livelihood depends on it.
The new system, that has sown mistrust from the outset, has gradually eroded collegiality within faculties. Where sharing of resources was once routine, teachers now prefer to hoard their intellectual property for their own use and students are the losers.
Rather than leading to improved standards, analysts discover that standards have actually fallen. There is no longer any incentive for teachers to challenge students.
In 2007, I convinced parents and students in years 7 to 10 that exposure to harder concepts and tasks may temporarily result in lower grades but benefits would be yielded in later years. In retrospect, such a philosophy appears crazy.
Meet the Australian Essential Learning Standards requirements (the new national curriculum) but go no further — that is our mantra. The prudent teacher seeks mediocrity, indeed to be the most mediocre, although, of course, we never say that.
The bright students are a little frustrated, but those of us who have best learnt the game have never been more popular. If we don't set too much homework, don't stress the kids with concepts that many find difficult, if we set tests that everyone can pass, the students are happy. But for many students, the jump from year 10 to 11 has never been harder, and the universities are complaining that students are ill-prepared for the courses on which they are embarking.
I am a mathematics teacher. In 2007, assuming the students could handle it, I endeavoured to prove every theorem we encountered. They should demand no less, I insisted. "Why?" was an important question back then, when teaching was still a vocation.
In 2012, some of the weaker students think they are doing better than they are, but they are happy, and that makes their parents happy, which is a big plus when I come to argue for a pay rise. Thankfully, they will be someone else's problem next year.
"Record number of teachers on long-term sick leave", the headline screams. No wonder. For many teachers, the battlefield has expanded from the classroom to the staffroom. In the new dog-eat-dog environment, there is no workplace sanctuary for teachers.
Worse, with the higher staff turnover, there is little continuity for students and, as thousands of experienced teachers have retired or forged new careers, the average age of teachers is younger than ever before; many have never worked under a different system.
But this is exactly what the Howard Government wanted when it proposed these changes in 2007, isn't it? The teacher unions have been effectively neutered and schools have become competitive workplaces. That irksome egalitarian attitude, once so characteristic of teachers, has been crushed once and for all.
Adam Smith's invisible hand of the market place — that's what rules in most schools now. For teachers, the pie never increased in size, it was simply carved up differently.
Of course, some aspects of the scenario I have painted will be familiar to many teachers already. Yet, with further change, the potential impact on our education system will be severe.
It's difficult to credit that Ms Bishop truly believes the rhetoric about teacher performance that she has spouted in recent months. A more plausible explanation is that, having ticked off the ABC and IR laws (among others) in its ideological war, education and teachers, in particular, are next on the Howard Government's list. Teachers — with all their "holidays" — are a soft target for any government, much easier to tackle than dealing with problems such as resourcing schools.
The Victorian Institute of Teaching has also been quiet on this issue. Its purpose is to "promote the profession of teaching to the wider community". Yet, members (membership is compulsory) must be wondering what value they are getting for their $69 annual fee.
VIT has just released its Draft Code of Conduct for teachers, which is well and good, but in the absence of a parallel campaign to boost awareness of the good work teachers are already doing, the institute seems like a political tool foisted on the profession.
As it is with most spheres of work, there are teachers who work harder and demonstrate greater aptitude than others. That's life. However, in the world of education, I'm yet to learn of a scheme capable of measuring performance in a fair and equitable manner, and of rewarding teachers without causing a divided workforce.
Both state and federal government need to seek better ways of remunerating teachers, without adding to the burden of tasks they already complete. In the meantime, education ministers should switch tack and focus their concerns on raising public awareness about the vital role teachers have played for decades.
Peter Hodge is a Melbourne teacher.
Wednesday, 13 June 2007
Bishop has decided, but ...
Media Release
Expert to develop performance-based pay
12 June 2007
The Minister for Education, Science and Training, the Hon Julie Bishop MP, has announced that the Australian Government will conduct a tender process to engage an expert to develop models of performance-based pay for teachers to be trialled in Australian schools.
“To support the introduction of performance-based pay for teachers, I have requested my Department engage an expert consultant to analyse best practice models of performance-based pay, both in the education field and in other professions, examine mechanisms for assessing and rewarding teachers and likely costs, and develop models of performance-based pay to trial in Australian schools,” Minister Bishop said.
“In trialling models of performance-based pay, the expert consultant will work with the teaching profession and the wider school community to refine and evaluate approaches to recognising and rewarding teachers.
“Current teacher pay arrangements are impacting on the attractiveness of teaching as a career, and retention of quality teachers within the profession. We need to explore ways of creating incentives for our best teachers and move beyond the notion of salary based on time in the job.
“In other professions, performance-based pay schemes are proven to work and are accepted as an effective way to enhance career structures. The time has come for the teaching profession to embrace performance-based pay to reward teachers who achieve outstanding results for their students or who make a significant contribution to school life.”
The Australian Government is committed to ensuring the teaching profession is defined by excellence and that every student has access to a high quality teacher. From 2009, federal funding for schools will be tied directly to quality reforms including the introduction of performance-based pay for teachers to encourage and reward quality teaching.
Is there
one expert who can determine this? If so, who is this expert? What alliances might this expert have? What methodology might this expert use? And are those methodologies going to take into account the myriad of variables that make this issue so complex?
Wednesday, 30 May 2007
Indigenous education
RHIANNA KING and PETER KERR
26 May 2007
The West Australian
(c) 2007, West Australian Newspapers Limited
The Federal Government is set to introduce a controversial "no school, no welfare" policy as part of a new push to boost education in indigenous communities, which includes making English compulsory for all Aboriginal students.
Indigenous Affairs Minister Mal Brough was accused by the State Government yesterday of spreading populist nonsense "straight from the Pauline Hanson handbook", for suggesting Aboriginal children would have no chance of escaping a cycle of poverty if they spoke only their traditional language, which a handful of people could understand.
He was supported by Prime Minister John Howard, who said Aboriginal children should learn English just like children who migrated to Australia had to.
State Indigenous Affairs Minister Michelle Roberts said the idea was populist, unnecessary and the sign of a desperate Government.
"Its out of the Pauline Hanson handbook. I think theyre desperate and behind in the polls," she said.
"This whole focus on making sure they speak English is somewhat exaggerated. I would suggest that in most of the remote communities where Ive been, Ive yet to meet a child who doesnt speak English."
The Howard Governments renewed focus on the issue, which comes before the 40th anniversary of the referendum giving Parliament the power to make laws for Aboriginals, could see welfare payments withheld from the parents of truant children.
"I will look at anything at all, both incentives as well as things such as welfare quarantining, to assist the circumstances," Mr Brough said.
A similar program at Halls Creek District High School last year boosted school attendance from 54 per cent to 80 per cent in the two months it operated.
Chairman of Australian Indigenous Studies at Murdoch University Len Collard agreed with the push to keep Aboriginals at school, but said the move needed to involve improved teacher education.
Mr Collard said Mr Broughs plan for all Aboriginal students to learn English was insulting and could see indigenous languages eroded.
Shadow Federal indigenous affairs minister Jenny Macklin said the Government had ignored the issue for years.
Merit or performance
Jim McAlpine, head of the NSW Secondary Principals Council , said that teachers' merit not performance should be considered (see Maralyn Parker's Blog http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/maralynparker/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/expect_a_performance_over_teacher_pay_issue/). Here, attention to semantics is needed.
The issue of merit versus performance MUST be considered. Until now, these words have been bandied around as if they meant the same thing, but really, the idea is vastly different. The former focuses on teachers’ good teaching and on teachers bettering themselves to achieve that. The latter focuses upon student output and not rewarding those whose students don’t achieve. Of course there are links, and to many they both mean the same thing. However, the lens through which we look can alter the perspective from simply rewarding for production of students with good marks to pushing for teacher improvement. (I haven't lifted that - it's mine)
How the Leigh article was reported by Justine Ferrari
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21765738-13881,00.html
I have this article, and have read it deeply. Justine Ferrari's reporting of this publication is incorrect. In it she says: "The study examined the literacy and numeracy test results of more than 90,000 students with more than 10,000 teachers in Years 3, 5 and 7 between 2001 and 2004, tracking the same group as it advanced through the school system".
Actually, the study examined literacy and numeracy test results for that many students and that many teachers, but not tracking the same group between Years 3 to 7 as she suggests. There were three cohorts' results in the study. The results of the first were from Year 3 (2001) and Year 5 (2003), the second from Year 3 (2002) and Year 5 (2004), and the third from Year 5 (2001) and Year 7 (2003). For each cohort, two test result were examined, two years apart.
Further, Ferrari says, "The study, to be released today by the Australian National University, debunks claims by teacher unions that teacher performance cannot be confidently measured by looking at the results their students achieve in universal tests.". This is actually not true. The study shows that teacher 'performance' can be measured with many limitations. If Ferrari read more deeply she would realise that there are data missing, and that there are many other factors that affect students' achivements missing, too. The author does mention these limitations, and does not use the word 'confidently', 'confident' or 'confidence'.
AND we must be careful about saying that the teachers of students who score well in these standardised tests are 'better'. The students did better, suggesting that the teachers were better. Don't ignore that this analysis was based on 'fixed effects' where there is an assumption that things have not changed with students, teachers, the schools, etc. between the years of the first and second tests.
"Education Minister Julie Bishop said the results made a mockery of claims by the Australian Education Union and Labor that a teacher's performance could not be measured. " She would, of course: she is not unbiased! We must remember that this type of measurement is NOT considered to be the correct or most accurate measurement of teacher performance. It is ONE attempt at figuring out a way to do so. Leigh makes that quite clear, even though he obviously has an agenda."The study, by economist Andrew Leigh, also finds that demographic differences between teachers account for less than one-hundredth of the variation in their student scores, suggesting other factors such as a teacher's IQ or classroom skills are much more important." Er, no, he didn't say the latter at all!!
Come on, Justine. This is a paper about statistical measurement, and the possibilities of using it for assessing teacher 'performance'. Although Leigh uses it to back the government's push for differential pay, the content is far from convincing as a model to be adopted even if the stats are excellently executed. Education writers with no idea should perhaps be more careful in what they write and what they convey to the public. They should also not make stuff up. It might be your job, darling, but this subject is far too important for mucking with.
Thursday, 24 May 2007
Summer school for teachers
How are teachers selected? I believe (could be wrong) that they are to be identified by principals. A few questions ... Are all principals actually able to identify good teaching? How will they identify good teaching (what measures will be used)? Is it possible that principals will identify teachers that they like / are friends with / have drinks at the pub with? Are principals allowed to recommend teachers that actually need more professional learning or who identify themselves as wanting / needing professional learning? How will early career teachers fare under such a system?
I believe the rewards for good teaching argument should be turned into an improvement of not-so-good teaching argument.
Tuesday, 22 May 2007
Andrew Leigh's study on measuring good teaching
AM - Monday, 21 May , 2007 08:13:00
Reporter: Gavin Fang
TONY EASTLEY: A new study has found that the test scores of schoolchildren can be directly linked to the performance of their teachers.
Australian National University economist, Andrew Leigh, has looked at the results of students over three years and found that the best teachers are twice as effective as the worst. He says it shows that teachers can be judged on their performance.
Dr Leigh spoke to our reporter Gavin Fang.
ANDREW LEIGH: So the study is looking at the differences between the best and the worst teachers, trying to look at whether teachers are basically all the same, or whether there's quite a large degree of dispersion.
It does this by looking at how the same child performs with two different teachers, or even three different teachers, and that way you can take out the effect of the child's family background, and all you're left with is the impact of the teacher.
GAVIN FANG: And what did you find?
ANDREW LEIGH: There's pretty substantial differences. A child working with a teacher in the top 10 per cent learns about twice as fast as a child learning with a teacher in the bottom 10 per cent.
GAVIN FANG: What role do demographics play in determining these results?
ANDREW LEIGH: Student demographics are huge and that's why doing the study in this way teaches you a lot more than if you look at a simple snapshot of a classroom. Looking at a snapshot of a classroom doesn't in fact tell you anything about teacher quality, but looking at how a child's test scores change over time really does tell you a lot more about teacher quality.
The demographic characteristics that I have, or the demographic characteristics of the teachers, it turns out that more experienced teachers do in fact do a little bit better. And surprisingly female teachers do slightly better in teaching literacy than do male teachers.
I don't find any impact of teachers having a master's degree on, any suggestion that those teachers do better on raising students' score. But all of those characteristics really explain very little of the differences.
What the study says is there's big differences between the best and the worst teachers, but it's difficult to explain those differences based just on age and experience.
GAVIN FANG: Have you got any idea where these better teachers are placed? Are they in the public or private school systems?
ANDREW LEIGH: Look, I'd love to be able to look at that, but again the confidential nature of the data prevents me from doing it. But it's a really important question. I mean, if we're currently assigning the best performing teachers to the most advantaged students, that's the opposite of a policy, of a way in which you'd do things if you believed in equality of opportunity.
GAVIN FANG: Why is a study like this important to do, do you think?
ANDREW LEIGH: Well, I think it's important for two reasons. First of all, it indicates that we can measure output rather than just focusing on inputs as a lot of education policies have tended to do.
Secondly, it indicates that the factors that we currently take into account in paying teachers are essentially just experience and also potentially qualifications, really explain very little of the variation between teachers.
There's hugs gaps between the best and the worst teachers. But currently, many of those high performers and low performers are being treated the same way by the system.
TONY EASTLEY: Economist Dr Andrew Leigh from the Australian National University, speaking to Gavin Fang.
Monday, 21 May 2007
More on merit pay for teachers
Anna Patty Education Editor
May 21, 2007
NSW school principals are designing their own plan to reward quality teaching in defiance of the Federal Government's push to link performance pay to student results.
The body representing 460 high school heads has rejected the Government's "ideologically driven" model. They are wary of Labor's alternative, saying it is still too thin on detail.
The president of the NSW Secondary Principals Council, Jim McAlpine, said the council's plan would be "based on merit rather than performance".
"[The federal Minister for Education] Julie Bishop's performance pay is going to be based on results of students in tests and that is a very narrow performance measure," he said.
"But teachers who take on additional responsibilities, who undertake additional professional learning, who contribute to the further development of other teachers, merit extra pay."
From January 2008, first-year teachers in NSW Government schools will earn an annual salary of $50,250 and receive an increase each year for the following nine years up to $75,000. They will then receive no further increase unless they take up a position as a head teacher, deputy principal or principal.
Top principals earn $119,000. In all there are 21 pay points in teaching, based on merit, years of experience and school size.
The principals suggest creating extra salary steps for teachers who, for example, complete master's degrees and use them to help their colleagues. This would recognise the collegiality of the profession, where a number of teachers may contribute to a pupil's development.
The state Minister for Education, John Della Bosca, has also said he is open to a system of merit pay not based on student results.
Mr Della Bosca and his state and territory colleagues last month rejected Ms Bishop's proposal to pilot performance pay in schools from next year, saying they would develop their own plans. Since then, Ms Bishop has said schools will be rewarded with up to $50,000 for outstanding results in numeracy and literacy. Schools could divide the money among their best teachers.
Federal Labor has said it would reward quality teaching using a merit-based system that took into account extra qualifications, professional development and working in rural and remote areas.
The Prime Minister, John Howard, has said that from 2009 he would tie Commonwealth funding to the states and territories to the introduction of performance pay for teachers, giving principals more autonomy to hire and fire and providing parents with more detailed information on school performance. That information should also include cases of bullying and violence.
The principals' plan is separate to another being devised by the national teacher union, the Australian Education Union.
Funding and disadvantage
Anna Patty Education Editor
May 17, 2007
THE national system of funding schools is helping entrench social disadvantage in rural and suburban Australia, a report has found.
Australia is the only OECD country to funnel a disproportionate level of public funding into non-government schools, it says.
As an increasing proportion of students move into private schools, the report, to be released today, says the tool used to fund schools was established to favour disadvantaged Catholic schools, but it now advantages the richest private schools.
The report's author, Lyndsay Connors, a public school advocate who chaired the former NSW Public Education Council, said it was no longer appropriate to link funding for private schools to state government school funding.
Commonwealth funding to schools is indexed on increases to the average amount states spend on public schools per student.
This method was used when the bulk of non-government schools had fewer resources than government schools.
But according to the report, Making Federalism Work for Schools, commissioned by the NSW Teachers Federation, the method is now being used to increase the resource gap between public and private schools.
Ms Connors said indexation was a financial tool that was being used as a policy device to increase grants to private schools, which receive two-thirds of their public funding from the Commonwealth. Public schools receive less than 10 per cent of their funding from the Federal Government.
"The formula has an insidious effect," Ms Connors said. "When students leave a public school, the cost to the state government of running that school stays the same. But the cost per student of running that school rises. It is this increase that gets passed on through Commonwealth indexation, where it flows disproportionately to private schools."
The complexity of the language of indexation was also used to mask real cuts to university funding, Ms Connors said.
Despite Australia's strong economic growth, pockets of concentrated social disadvantage had become entrenched across rural, remote and suburban Australia.
"The differences in the social background of students are sufficient to register on OECD indicators of inequality and reflect no credit on such an affluent country," she said.
The federal Minister for Education, Julie Bishop, yesterday disputed the State Government's claims that the Commonwealth had pegged recurrent funding for public schools to state indexation, with no real increases above this level.
Ms Bishop said that the Federal Government had also provided $3 billion in grants to public schools for capital works and literacy programs.
■ Six out of 10 people in marginal federal seats perceive John Howard as "the private school Prime Minister" and two-thirds believe he has underfunded public schools for the past 11 years, according to a survey conducted by the Australian Education Union.
(with Harriet Alexander)
Friday, 18 May 2007
Julie Bishop on the 7:30 Report
Bishop talks up boost for education funding
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Broadcast: 09/05/2007
Reporter: Kerry O'Brien
Kerry O’Brien discusses the implications of new education funding with federal Education Minister Julie Bishop. She sheds some light on details of the endowment fund outlined in the Budget and explains how she thinks the Coalition policy allows Australian universities to achieve a world-class standard.
Transcript
KERRY O'BRIEN: I think we understand the situation. It is clear from your comments that you intend to use this fund to push universities to embrace your policy agendas for diversity and specialisation, in other words if they run the universities the way you want them to, you'll reward them with money from the fund.
JULIE BISHOP: Essentially, what we want to achieve is world class institutions. We want our students to be able to attend universities that can hold their own on the world stage. Currently, our universities over a number of decades have been pushed into a one size fits all comprehensive university model where all universities are offering the same courses to essentially the same students. We want our universities to compete on the world stage and they are recognising this.
Already we are seeing universities move to much more diverse mixes of courses and specialisation. If our universities want to focus on particular areas, whether it be Engineering or Medicine or online delivery, to be a diverse, vibrant, dynamic sector, then we will support that.
KERRY O'BRIEN: But, essentially, you are saying to them "if you go our way on this, if you meet us on this, our response will be that you are more likely to get money from the endowment fund".
JULIE BISHOP: Well, the endowment fund will be a competitive process. How it will work is the $5 billion that the Treasurer announced last night will be invested. The guardians of the Future Fund will make the strategic decisions to hopefully enhance the earnings from that fund. Then each year the earnings will be distributed to universities and I will seek advice from an advisory panel, a committee, of people who have vast experience in higher education and universities will submit proposals for funding for capital works and for research facilities. We want them to be diverse. We want them to specialise. We want them to focus on excellence. That's what students are looking for. That's what the academics and researchers and the universities themselves are seeking to pursue. We have now given them the means to be able to pursue those goals and those ambitions.
KERRY O'BRIEN: And you'll have the last word on who gets the grants? On who gets the money?
JULIE BISHOP: Yes, I will with advice from a panel of experts on higher education.
KERRY O'BRIEN: OK. On your plan to provide $700 vouchers totalling hundreds of millions of dollars to privately tutor children who fail literacy or numeracy bench marks, doesn't that amount to a huge vote of mistrust by you in the vote of public schools to resolve those problems?
JULIE BISHOP: What we are essentially saying to parents is that the Australian Government will provide a safety net for your child if your child does not meet the minimum standards required in literacy and numeracy in reading and writing and mathematics in years 3, 5 and 7 and 9. Now, states currently conduct their own testing. Next year for the first time there will be national assessments, the same test across the country for students in years 3, 5, 7 and 9 in literacy and numeracy. While many Australian students do very well in literacy and numeracy tests, there are a worrying number of students who are not meeting minimum standards. We are saying to parents, "if your child is in that category or eligible, we will provide you with a $700 voucher so your child can receive one on one tuition".
KERRY O'BRIEN: Privately?
JULIE BISHOP: Well it will be done on the basis of accredited tutors that can include teachers from schools, it can include retired teachers and professional educators.
KERRY O'BRIEN: But surely if you have some trust in the public education system it would be more efficient for you to direct those hundreds of millions of dollars per year to the education system which, arguably, would more efficiently provide the teachers within the system to bring those extra services direct to the students who need them?
JULIE BISHOP: Kerry, this funding is available for government and non-government school students. So I'm not making any distinction. What we are saying is if there are students that fail the national literacy and numeracy testing, if they fail to meet the minimum standards - we are talking about minimum standards - then we will provide funding for a voucher so they can receive tuition.
We are not going to ignore these children or let them fall through the cracks. We are going to provide a safety net, if you like, to ensure they are equipped with these fundamental skills that they need to go on to further education, training, to find a job. I mean these are the fundamental skills children need for the 21st century. Already we know from international testing of Australian students there are an unacceptable number of students who are not meeting minimum literacy and numeracy levels and we will support them.
KERRY O'BRIEN: Julie Bishop, thanks for talking with us.
JULIE BISHOP: Thank you.
The thing about this interview I found fascinating was Kerry O'Brien's obviously logical question about putting the money into the schools for better teaching support for literacy and numeracy rather than the tutorial system, and her response to that. My personal question about the whole thing is whether or not there is an income test involved. Should this not be, if it were to be, focused upon families who cannot afford tutoring? Would this be money 'wasted' if wealthy families sending their kids to wealthy schools were to access it, and how many low-income families in need would miss out if this were the case? Another question: would parents then be even more likely to rely upon the education system and the tutorial funding to teach their kids literacy and numeracy rather than take the responsibility for that themsleves (like 'our friend' whose daugther couldn't read)?
Howard at the Centre for Independent Studies
I watched Stateline tonight and saw excerpts from Howard's speech the Centre for Independent Studies. So I sought it out ... A real corker (not).
http://www.pm.gov.au/media/speech/2007/speech24321.cfm
Here is an example of the importance of taking into account the space in which a message is delivered. This speech was at the CIS, arguably, a right-wing think-tank, and Howard exhibited an arrogance he would only reserve for such a place (never if this was to be broadcast on populist commercial television, for example). Although broadcast in parts, perhaps, the milieu is so important, as the CIS is addressed as a sympathetic friend, a co-opponent of unions, academics, and leftists.
"Last Tuesday, the Government announced $457 million in assistance for students who are not meeting the literacy benchmarks at years three, five, seven and nine and parents will receive $700 vouchers to enable those children to receive extra, personalised tuition. We are also providing financial rewards to schools that achieve the greatest improvements in literacy and numeracy. As if on cue, the Australian Education Union is now arguing that literacy and numeracy tests are invalid because they cannot assess a child's sense of wonder. No, I'm not making this up. In 2007, the Australian Education Union believes that testing if a child can read, write and add up is wrong. I await the howls of protest from those on the so-called progressive side of politics who supposedly care about social mobility. I look forward to reading the co-authored letters and full-page advertisements attacking the AEU's outdated ideology from those human rights lawyers, academics and welfare groups who regularly criticise the Government for not doing enough for the underprivileged. This thinking is not simply a recipe for a failing schools system. It's a script for national decline. "
Somehow, I don't get the foreshadowed attack on the AEU by people who are often associated with it (am I missing something?), but what I do get is a message that no matter what anyone else says, it will be laughed at. What arrogance!
But why would I think he was doing anything for the underpriveleged, when there is no mention of means testing for the distribution of these tuition funds? Is Kevin Donnelly's daughter eligible for a $700 voucher even though her father is an 'education expert' earning very well, and an English teacher for 18 years? It would seem so.
Friday, 11 May 2007
And again with the performance pay issue...
Bishop spends $53m on apples for teachers
John Garnaut and Anna Patty
May 11, 2007
PRINCIPALS at more than 1000 schools will receive a reward fund of up to $50,000 to divide among their best teachers as part of a program to introduce performance pay next year.
The $53 million "reward" program would fund outstanding teachers who improved the academic results of their students, the Minister for Education, Julie Bishop, told the Herald.
"It will go to the principal of a school to use in ways to enhance literacy and numeracy in the school and that will include rewarding teachers who are responsible for that."
Principals will decide how the $50,000 will be spent, but performance pay is an option. The program will also include a $5000 bonus - plus travel and accommodation expenses - for teachers who are selected to attend a 10-day summer school.
"I've been signposting [performance pay] for quite some time. If people wanted to join the dots it's all there," she said.
The rewards will be delivered through state and private schools, with or without the co-operation of state governments.
The program puts pressure on the Labor leader, Kevin Rudd, to reveal his hand, since the party accepts the principle of rewarding good teachers but has rejected specific proposals.
It faces a hostile reception from unions, teachers and principals. The head of the NSW Secondary Principals Council, Jim McAlpine, said "offering bribes to teachers" would place principals in an impossible position: "It would be very difficult to ascertain which teacher out of a group of teachers deserved a bonus payment for improving student performance."
The $53 million will be split among 1200 schools over four years, beginning after next year's literacy and numeracy assessments. Schools and teachers will be chosen on the academic improvement - rather than the level - of their students. The scheme is designed to favour disadvantaged schools where students have the most room to improve.
Separately, Ms Bishop said "leading teachers" would be chosen to attend short courses in core subjects and rewarded with $5000 "bonuses", plus expenses. The $100 million program will apply to 1000 teachers a year who are recommended by schools and accepted by the Government.
Parents of students performing badly will receive $700 tutorial vouchers, at a cost of $460 million.
State and territory education ministers oppose any model of performance pay linked to student results. "It will be very divisive within schools and isn't a serious attempt to improve either student results or teaching standards," said the NSW Minister for Education, John Della Bosca.
The president of the NSW Teachers Federation, Maree O'Halloran, said performance pay "fundamentally misunderstands" what motivates teachers to work with their students.
Critics of the summer school program say that with only 1000 allocated places a year it will take more than 200 years for all teachers in Australia to attend.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/bishop-spends-53m-on-apples-for-teachers/2007/05/10/1178390470983.html#
________________________________________________________________________________________________
The collegiality issue is another problem. Pitting teacher against teacher in a competitive environment will do nothing to maintain and expand the co-operative nature of teaching. Pity the poor beginning teacher whose mentor is fighting for that five grand and summer school training. That teacher could quite possibly be more concerned about getting access to those funds and training than assisting a new teacher become more proficient.
On a related note, I heard a television interview (out of the room but the telly turned up loud) with the CEO of a public school support group. I have emailed the CEO to ask for detail on his plan, that teachers who are prepared to go out of their way to improve their qualifications and provide staff development to other teachers would be eligible for increased pay. I've asked him for more info and will post it if and when it arrives.
Thursday, 3 May 2007
The old gay and lesbian parents in books debate comes back
Schools are too left wing, says Stoner
from Anna Patty (SMH, May 2, 2007)
TEACHING materials in primary schools have become too politically correct in depicting single sex couples and a black armband view of Australian history, according to the NSW Opposition.
The Opposition's new spokesman on education, Andrew Stoner, accused the Labor Government of using schools as "a vehicle for left-wing indoctrination", saying it needed to "rein in the PC culture" within the Department of Education and NSW Board of Studies.
"Under Labor, up to half the curriculum in some subjects focuses on a purely indigenous perspective, including emotive terms such as 'British invasion', as well as 'Survival Day' instead of 'Australia Day'," Mr Stoner, the National Party leader, said.
"No one doubts the integral role indigenous people play in Australian history, but any teaching of our past must be balanced.
"Labor's political correctness in education also extends to gay causes, including the funding of reading material for children as young as five, regarding gay and lesbian parents.
"[The Premier] Morris Iemma should keep his promise and teach kids respect and responsibility, leaving controversial issues like same sex marriage and adoption to parents."
He said books about same-sex parents, used in some primary schools include My House, Going to Fair Day, Koalas on Parade and The Rainbow Cubby House, produced by the Learn to Include project, were funded by the Crime Division of the NSW Attorney General's Department.
The books tell the story of a young girl with two lesbian mothers and include a visit to the Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras.
A spokesman for the Attorney-General, John Hatzistergos, confirmed the department had funded the project in 2004 when the books were produced as a teaching resource to help combat bullying in schools.
The Minister for Education, John Della Bosca, said Mr Stoner had been highly selective in his use of examples from the curriculum. His strong views about Aboriginal history and sexuality "should be a case study on why you don't let a National Party politician desperate for votes write the primary school syllabus".
"This syllabus was designed in consultation with parents, teachers and many professional and community experts and has been successfully taught for nearly a decade. Historical events can be seen differently depending on your view and the syllabus requires teachers to always present a range of perspectives."
The president of the NSW Primary Principals Association, Geoff Scott, said principals and teachers had the final veto on which books were used in schools.
Books that simply reflected the gay lifestyle, as opposed to espousing it, would generally be considered acceptable for children.
However, each school would exercise discretion in consultation with parents to decide whether a book was appropriate.
"There would be a number of occasions when award winning books that are well written but have inappropriate content are not put on the shelves in schools," Mr Scott said.
"The principal and teachers would be up to speed with what community expected. The books in primary school libraries are not espousing a particular point of view or pushing values on to children. If a story written about people in same sex relationships, that's real life and provided it is at an appropriate standard, then it can be available for children."
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/schools-are-too-left-wing-says-stoner/2007/05/01/1177788142434.html
Wednesday, 18 April 2007
another article on teacher performance pay...
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=5745
The biggest problem I have with performance pay is the lack of recognition that collegiality plays in providing an effective workplace for both students and teachers. Ariel briefly mentions this when he discusses the recommendations made in 2006 in the US: "teachers who perform at high levels and spread their expertise to other teachers deserve extra compensation for their performance and accomplishments." (my italics)
This is a crucial issue for all teachers, particularly beginning ones. If the experienced teachers are serious about ensuring that their new colleagues are going to succeed, an emphasis on assisting them in their planning, assessments and modelling good teaching strategies is essential. In a system where teachers are competing for a bigger slice of the same sized pay pie (see Julie Bishop's comments last weekend about the fact that the education budget will not be getting any bigger as a result of her plans), experienced teachers may be less willing to help the newbies.
It's not just about dollars and cents, it's about common sense. Teaching is not like other professions. The continuum of learning through 13 years of school means that, unlike a commercial enterprise where there is a beginning and an end to a project, no one teacher can be held up as the "reason" for a student's success.
Thursday, 12 April 2007
A comment on teachers' perfomance pay
Teacher performance model won't perform
COMMENTJudith Wheeldon
April 07, 2007
FEDERAL Education Minister Julie Bishop's plan to improve school education through performance pay for teachers is no plan at all.
We need leadership and a proper, funded business plan that answers key questions for this new project.
The minister's report cites research showing that "quality teachers make a significant difference to improved student outcomes". We knew that.
What we still do not know is how the minister plans to ensure every Australian child has a quality teacher. Paying some teachers more will not give every child a better teacher. Higher salaries for all teachers would.
How much money will be allocated to pay more than the current salaries? Where will it come from? Not from the federal Treasury, says Peter Costello, even though education is a federal priority and the Treasury is fat.
Saying "it's up to the states" is no substitute for a plan.
If 40 per cent of teachers meet the criteria, will they all receive the higher pay? If 60 per cent do? If 85 per cent do? Or will there be an arbitrary cut-off line that ignores the quality of many deserving teachers?
How much will a teacher receive? In the US, performance pay ranges from as little as an insulting $15 a year to some thousands, but paid only to a small number. There, performance pay is committed to for a year at a time.
Will our teachers have to be assessed every year? Will they have security that once the higher pay is awarded they can agree to a bigger mortgage? Has anyone looked at the costs in professional time and money (huge) of continually reassessing teachers?
Will performance pay for teachers in Catholic and independent schools be funded too? Many already pay above the award rates to all teachers. In what way will government school performance pay for some teachers attract and hold the best?
How will performance pay be allocated among schools? Will schools with more "quality teachers" have more funding, or will all schools have an equal per capita allocation? How will equity of access for teachers be assured?
How will equity for students be assured? Could a student go through school never having a "quality teacher"? And what will be the opinion of parents?
Ms Bishop perseveres in suggesting that parents and students might have a say in the evaluation of teachers.
How will academic integrity be assured if giving a higher mark or relenting in discipline might influence a teacher's salary?
Since comparative quality of teachers is the criterion, how will parents and students be given the complex understanding needed to know not just that Sally's teacher is a good teacher but that Sally's teacher is better than the others across the school or state?
How will we identify "quality teachers"? Easy. They are the ones who get paid more for the same work.
And this is a pity, because the ensuing divisiveness in schools will detract from the potential success of other ideas in the minister's report.
If independent school principals are more successful than their government school counterparts, it is largely because of their power to hire and fire. They can select, shape and set standards for their staff. This, allied with a strong professional development program tailored for the individual school and teacher, is a dynamic formula that can change a school rapidly.
The complementary authority for the principal to design a budget that responds to the needs of the school is a sensible step that would solve many local problems quickly. Principals could implement creative programs instead of merely dreaming of them.
Changes in education policy must be quality, co-ordinated and collegial - just like the staff.
Judith Wheeldon is a former head of two private girls' schools in Sydney: Abbotsleigh and Queenwood
What do you think??
Wednesday, 4 April 2007
Donnelly on mathematics and falling standards
I'll be back ... and I am.
Donnelly continues his attack on OBE in this article by simplifying it as being a "feel-good approach to education", and bases his claims on an apparent lack of teachers' use of the word 'failure' and unwillingness to focus on mastery of topics within mathematics. Donnelly has AGAIN used his own oversimplified and over-emotional view of OBE to attack it. Mastery of knowledge and understanding is actually central to OBE.
This is totally unrelated to the rest of the article in which … Donnelly says "In order to strengthen mathematics teaching, the report suggests teacher training must be improved. Although it does not go as far as to argue that all teachers should complete an undergraduate degree in their specialist discipline, followed by a diploma of education, thus ensuring that graduates have a firm foundation in their subject, the report suggests that mathematical science departments should have a greater involvement in teacher preparation … Research shows that one of the key determinants of successful learning is a teacher's mastery of a subject. There is increasing concern that the type of general bachelor of education degree designed and taught by schools of education fails to provide such grounding. As Guttmann points out: "The training of teachers can be improved by making sure that mathematics teachers have a mathematics degree, followed by a diploma of education or equivalent. Their mathematical education should not be provided by education faculties, but by discipline experts." ”
Here Donnelly uses someone else’s words to perpetuate his own agenda, yet evidently knows nothing about teacher education itself. A one-year teaching degree does not necessrily a good teacher make, Kevin, despite content knowledge. Besides, a specialist degree does not, for the most part, address concepts to be taught at school at the level that they should be taught.
Monday, 2 April 2007
Tuesday, 27 March 2007
Are teachers parent replacements?
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21452562-13881,00.html
I'm finding this statement interesting: "The national umbrella group of parents and citizens organisations, the Australian Council of State School Organisations, yesterday supported a charter that refocused primary schools on the traditional core tasks of literacy, numeracy and socialisation".
Saturday, 24 March 2007
What's schooling for??
Here's where those interested in social justice and education come in. Recognition that MANY students are not advantaged by wealth, what they own or where they live is of paramount importance. However, there are many other forms of educational disadvantage! While I might agree with Donnelly that education can be "a springboard toward success in all its guises", there must also be a recognition that the potential differences between these disadvantaged students and others goes far beyond the financial.
What does Donnelly mean by "success in all its guises"? In other words, what is schooling for?
Is it for producing cohorts of people with skills and knowledge to perform tasks in our society, often related to economics or 'productivity'? Is it for keeping certain types of knowledge alive (eg, Shakespeare), and thus maintaining a cultural heritage? Is it for producing people who can adapt to various situations, thinking for themselves through the skills of analysis, critique and questioning? Is it for producing people who are in themselves content with the way they interact with the world, and want to be part of enacting world change?
Tuesday, 20 March 2007
Donnelly on Macintyre's book review - one point
Donnelly's 'glossary' was no more than an extension of his opinion, and cannot be called a 'glossary' as one should be conceptualised or named. For example, the 'glossary' had the term 'educrat' within in, and Donnelly's idea of a 'definition' was naming anyone that had views of education that you culd name as 'left wing'.
Sunday, 18 March 2007
Teacher education students unprepared
This article by Justine Ferarri links teacher retention rates to lack of practica in teacher education courses:
"The survey found almost half chose teaching as a second career, but one in four of all new teachers became so dispirited by the job that they intended to quit within the next five years"
Friday, 9 March 2007
Stuart Macintyre's book review in The Australian
Wednesday, 28 February 2007
"The more traditional approach "
"The more traditional approach to curriculum is based on the belief that not all students are equally motivated or have the same ability and, as a result, some will pass and some will fail. Classes are streamed in terms of ability or interest and students are regularly assessed to ensure they focus on what is being taught. Those students needing help are easily identifiable. Learning is often accidental in the sense that good teachers take the opportunity, when covering a particular topic or task, to explore ideas and responses as they arise" (Donnelly, 2007, pp.34-35).
Mmmm... Firstly, everyone knows, whether they are of the traditional or other persuasion, that students are unequally motivated! Secondly, the reference to ‘ability’ is something I personally can’t come at. Usually ‘ability’ is only measured by tests, and can, from my point of view, only be truly referred to as ‘achievement’. Thirdly, are students not regularly assessed by adherents of OBE??? Of course they are!
Anyway, my interest was piqued by the statement “Learning is often accidental in the sense that good teachers take the opportunity, when covering a particular topic or task, to explore ideas and responses as they arise”. WHY would good traditionalist teachers instigate learning that was accidental??
I don’t get it. Isn’t this what Donnelly accuses OBE adherents of??
Monday, 26 February 2007
Tonight's Difference of opinion
Saturday, 24 February 2007
Donnelly in the Australian, 24th Feb, 2007
“Imagine … English courses where great literature is on the same footing as Australian Idol, SMS messages, graffiti and movie posters” (Donnelly, 2007, p. 6).
“ … subjects like history and literature have been dumbed down and made politically correct” (Donnelly, 2007, p. 115).
It seems to me that Donnelly is a ventriloquist.
Besides, "a book launch" was actually Donnelly's book launch. Good on you John - you read the intro and said all the stuff you were meant to. And I love the free advertisement of the book, as well as its launch by Howard, at the end of your column, Kevin.
I'm also wondering if we could now change the three Rs to "recycle, recycle, recycle"??
A big welcome to Kevin
I can only see a positive in having the opportunity to share our points of view in a forum away from newspapers and populist current affairs where the public only gets told what to think from one point of view. Are you up for the challenge?
Thursday, 22 February 2007
On the social construction of what counts as knowledge
“Instead of accepting that what happens in education is inherently worthwhile or a natural part of things, the new sociology of education movement argues that what counts as education and how it is managed is a socio-cultural construct, that is, what counts as knowledge is subjective and relative to one’s culture and what those more powerful in society decide what should be taught” (2007, p. 16, footnote).
I can’t quite come at this statement, which is made to explain that education is in the hands of the Marxists. How on earth can what happens in education be a natural part of things when people decide what happens in education. People have varying points of view (case in point), so when something is chosen as a necessary part of knowledge to be taught, someone made a decision which runs counter to the decision someone else may have made. Thus, education as a socio-cultural construct is accurate. If Shakespeare is a natural part of things, then why might people from backgrounds other than Anglo-Celtic find it does not mean so much to them as other texts? I'm not having a go at Shakespeare, here, just making a point.
The very fact that Donnelly is even having this argument with everyone serves to prove a point he rejects.
I bought the book
I've also noted that in the glossary "fuzzy maths" is explained as maths teaching where teachers focus on real world problems, use cooperative learning, and apparently don't believe anything should be remembered or rote learned.
The back cover is most enlightening, and makes very clear not only Donnelly's stance but what he hopes to eradicate. He laments the apparent passing of rewarding merit or competition (huh?), and the English syllabus allowing Shakespeare and Big Brother to exist anywhere near each other.
I only wish he wasn't getting paid for my buying his book ...
Thursday, 8 February 2007
Saturation point
'Outcomes-based education', 'politically correct', 'left-wing', 'dumbing down' (mainly Donnelly), 'standards', 'literacy and numeracy', 'failing', 'quality' (both Donnelly and Bishop) are terms that feature over and over again in these diatribes.
The flawed logic expressed in the rhetoric of Kevin Donnelly has truly made it to those with the power to manipulate and instigate education policy in Australia, with John Howard (prime minister for those who don't know) launching Kev's new book today. This saturation point should really become a rallying point for those who know better, and for those who care about the possibility that the concept of education will regress to teaching words and numbers without current context, and without any hint of allowing our students to become critical thinkers.
Very little is heard from those who know there are serious flaws in this logic, and newspapers continue to feature it as if it is the only way of thinking about education. Is it because those who can stand up to these ideologues are unwilling? too busy? feeling powerless?
Come on folks - time to start writing in to newspapers, and having your voice heard. You don't need to be an expert, just a voice of dissent (er, with some good justification, of course).