Thursday 4 May 2017

Australian Prime Minister announces large increases in spending on schools

Malcolm Turnbull the Australian Prime Minister (PM) has just announced large increases in spending on schools to be allocated on a needs basis.  He is reported to have also admitted "that spending billions like this had failed already" the reference being to the falling performance of Australian students in reading, science and maths (Andrew Bolt, "School cart before the horse", The West Australian, 4 May 2017, P10).  Bolt also indicated that the PM "revealed he hadn't yet figured out how this money would make students smarter."

Bolt's point was that the PM should "find the best way to lift standards and only then tell us the cost". My friends would be amazed that I have quoted the ultra conservative Andrew Bolt as I am not often comfortable with his views.

For international readers of this blog I should indicate that our Federal Government politicians are in a constant state of panic that Australian students are being outperformed by students of many other countries in maths, science, reading and writing.  This has occurred in a context of Australia wide regular compulsory testing of students in these areas.  Each year the years 3, 5, 7 and 9 are tested in literacy and numeracy and the results posted on the my school website for all to see.  Science testing is done on another schedule. Schools coach students for these tests and as I walk around shops that sell educational books I see coaching manuals that schools can use.  For  me it is the tail wagging the dog.  The results of this compulsory testing are used to enable schools to devise strategies to improve student learning however they are also used to judge the effectiveness of schools.

I strongly suspect that this testing regime creates pressures on teachers to move students to new learning when they have not mastered the prerequisites for that new learning.  Even with the best teachers on the planet this is a recipe for disaster.  In my own state of Western Australia we now test year 10 students in literacy skills and they must pass this test to obtain high school graduation.  This test is in addition to the compulsory testing regime mentioned above.  For me it is an admission that we have  failed badly in the earlier schools years and I have given what I suspect to be the reason.

We now have an Australian National Curriculum (ANC) which from all of my experience over some 40 years I find to be an exciting document. I'd relish the chance to be a Principal again with the responsibility for implementing this curriculum in my school.  Part of what I would do is to create time where teachers can together work through the prescribed learning outcomes of the syllabuses to ensure that they on the same page about what they mean and what mastery would look like for these outcomes. The ANC contains work samples that would assist with this process.  I've done this sort of inservice work in schools and the teachers move very quickly through the syllabuses and in so doing learn a lot from one another as well as defining the standards that mean mastery. Many believe this is amongst the best forms of inservice for teachers.

At the primary (elementary) school level I only recommend this for maths, science and literacy skills as the generalist class teacher model could not handle a larger inservice load of this type. At the secondary school level subject departments would just need the specialist teachers to focus on their specialist learning area (subject).  I might expand on how I would treat the other learning areas at primary (elementary) school levels in a future post as there is too much detail to do so in this post.

Then within the school there would be a dogged insistence on mastery of prerequisites before a student is moved to the new learning that requires these prerequisites. This would require considerable courage by the school Principal in the face of the pressures of the compulsory testing regime described above.  Convincing parents to support such an approach would be a challenge.  The results of the compulsory testing program could still be valuable as another source of diagnostic data to guide the next moves for each student but it should not stop the application of the mastery principle.

If my approach is applied in schools we would see less of the students with cumulative gaps in their learning.  These gaps mean the students begin to struggle badly as they proceed through the school years.  My mastery principle rests on my faith that in general we have great teachers out there in the schools.  The inservice I have described will make them even greater.  Principals could spend some of this extra school funding described by the PM creating these inservice opportunities which cost money and time.

I need to comment on two further points made by Bolt.  The first is his criticism for the push for smaller class sizes which he views as a "pro-union con which led us to hire more teachers - inevitably including many of lower ability - simply to bulk up the numbers".  He goes on to write" Consider:  would you rather have your child in a class of 25 led by a gifted teacher, or in a class of 17 taught be someone who barely passed their own exams?" He calls for more thought being given to setting higher admission cut-off levels for teacher training courses.  He also shows a liking for principals being given more power to hire and fire.

On the point of class sizes, 25 in my experience would be very acceptable and there was a long struggle to reach that number which is not uncommon in contemporary schools.  17 would be heaven but unnecessary. We have come a long way from the classes of 50 and 40 that I and others faced as teachers.

On the matter of principals having more power to hire and fire, in my own state of Western Australia there is a comprehensive movement to make centrally controlled government schools independent.  My understanding of this independence is that principals can hire and fire.  What Bolt does not understand is that this is a very time consuming process requiring considerable expertise.  For small to medium size schools it creates a big drain on a principal's time and could well blur the focus they need to have on the learning of the students. The great joy of being a school principal is taking ultimate responsibility for the learning of the students no matter how large the school.

May the Force be with you!


GD






No comments:

Post a Comment