A few weeks ago I sought to have an interview with Australia’s Education Minister regarding the upcoming NAPLAN standardised tests. I am still waiting for a reply.
Luckily, I came across his op/ed piece over the weekend, where he tries to allay the fears of the parenting community and make a case for these highly pressured, incredibly unpopular series of tests.
In his piece, he claims that:
Parents and the community should rest assured that the NAPLAN tests are simply a way of measuring how our students and our schools are performing in the three key areas of reading, writing and numeracy. Nothing more, and nothing less.
I assure you Mr. Garrett that parents of 8-years olds subjected to 4 rigorous exams in 3 days understand that these tests represent much more than just a simple way of measuring child progress.
There is nothing in any of the tests that students need to learn above and beyond what is already being taught in the classroom, namely the curriculum.
I am not sure that is true. Whilst my students are expected to write persuasive essays, there is no mention of persuasive writing in the Grade 3 curriculum.
By measuring how our students are performing as they progress through school, we can get a clear national picture, for the first time, of where we need to be directing extra attention and resources.
This is just spin. This implies that these tests exist to help direct the Government in regards to spending and programs. There is no evidence of any Governmental response whether it be financial or a simple change of priorities based on the yearly NAPLAN results. Instead, the outcome of the NAPLAN is designed to expose failing schools, inept teachers and anything and everything that can divert attention from a Government good at measuring performance but poor at performing themselves.
It needs to be made clear to schools and teachers that excessive test practising ahead of NAPLAN is unnecessary. While it helps to be familiar with the structure of the tests, carrying out endless practices should not be encouraged. NAPLAN matters, but it is not the be all and end all.
Unnecessary to whom? If you and your staff were to be tested on the performance of your portfolio wouldn’t you take the time to prepare? When a class gets appraised, so does the teacher. Are we meant to sit back and watch 8-years old kids sit for their first formal exams without preparing them for the kinds of questions and scenarios they are likely to encounter?
Mr. Garett, your opinion piece tries to win over parents, yet it completely deviates from the very issue that parents are most concerned about. Parents do not like seeing their young children exposed to so much pressure. They don’t like to see their children who may currently enjoy learning, subjected to such a negative learning experience.
Today, one of my students was so frightened by the prospect of these exams that he was reluctant to get in the car. We are talking about a child that loves learning.
I have no problem with High School children being tested. But 3rd Graders? Is it really worth it?
At first glance, who would you think would be the least likely group to be calling for education against improper gambling?
CLUBS Australia is calling for responsible gambling education to be part of the national school curriculum.
“Youth are at increased risk of developing a gambling problem,” Clubs Australia said.
“Research has found that education programs can be an effective tool in preventing the development of problematic gambling behaviours.”
Clubs Australia said the program should dispel common myths about gambling and educate people about how to gamble safely.
It would also highlight consequences of problem gambling and promote avenues of help and ways to intervene, it said.
But the more you think about it, the more it makes sense. Clubs Australia achieve two important objectives by supporting gambling education.
1. They can boast about how they are all about social gambling and very much opposed to problem gambling. This is potentially a great PR coup for them; and
2. It’s not as if they will lose anything out of it. Since when does a three lesson program on gambling behaviour have any effect in later life?
They have argued that such programs have proven effective. I dispute that claim. I don’t think they really believe it makes much of a difference either.
The bigger question is how many “good cause” programs are we going to have to put up with in the new National Curriculum? It’s all well and good to adopt educational programs, but a teacher cannot afford to spend too much time on them. Not only are they dubious in their long-term effectiveness, but they can potentially hijack the curriculum.
I personally am sick of the abundance of such programs. It takes so much teaching time away from maths, science, reading, writing and history, that it ultimately, for all its good intentions, puts teachers under greater pressure to cover important skills in a reduced amount of time.
Clubs Australia will get a lot of good press out of this story. Ultimately, I wouldn’t be surprised if there will be more problem gamblers as a result of the positive spin of this story that there will be responsible gamblers as a result of educational programs.
Should we be the least bit surprised that teachers are generally not getting job satisfaction? Did anyone consider for a moment that the introduction of standardised testing would do little for student achievement and do even less for teacher morale?
Or better yet, an even more compelling question, does anyone even care about the plight of teachers?
As long as Governments keep on peddling their diatribe about how many poor teachers there are in the system and how they are determined to expose them before slowly weeding them out. As long as Educational bureaucrats have someone to blame for low achievement levels, then why should they care?
Sure there are more stakeholders in the educational system than just teachers, and it’s true that teachers aren’t the only ones responsible for disappointing academic figures, But who cares? As long as the public buy the spin about the poor state of the teaching fraternity, it doesn’t really matter that spending on education is mismanaged and misallocated, curriculums are inflexible and politically motivated and the paperwork expectations of teachers are extremely unfair. Why should it matter?
“Those hopeless teachers! All they ever do is complain!”
So, no, I am not surprised the teachers of New York are not enjoying themselves:
More than half of teachers expressed at least some reservation about their jobs, their highest level of dissatisfaction since 1989, the survey found. Also, roughly one in three said they were likely to leave the profession in the next five years, citing concerns over job security, as well as the effects of increased class size and deep cuts to services and programs. Just three years ago, the rate was one in four.
The results, released in the annual MetLife Survey of the American Teacher, expose some of the insecurities fostered by the high-stakes pressure to evaluate teachers at a time of shrinking resources. About 40 percent of the teachers and parents surveyed said they were pessimistic that levels of student achievement would increase in the coming years, despite the focus on test scores as a primary measure of quality of a teacher’s work.
Sandi Jacobs, vice president of the National Council on Teacher Quality, a nonpartisan advocacy group in Washington, said the push for evaluations, punctuated by a national movement to curb the power of unions, had fostered an unsettling cultural shift.
“It’s easy to see why teachers feel put upon, when you consider the rhetoric around the need to measure their effectiveness — just as it’s easy to see why they would internalize it as a perception that teachers are generally ineffective, even if it’s not what the debate is about at all,” Ms. Jacobs said.
More than 75 percent of the teachers surveyed said the schools where they teach had undergone budget cuts last year, and about as many of them said the cuts included layoffs — of teachers and others, like school aides and counselors. Roughly one in three teachers said their schools lost arts, music and foreign language programs. A similar proportion noted that technology and materials used in the schools had not been kept up to date to meet students’ needs.
“The fixation on testing has been a negative turn of events when the things that engage kids in schools are all being cut,” said Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers.
I could argue that unless teachers are given the conditions and freedom to thrive in their workplace the results are not going to come. But solutions have never been an urgent matter for politicians. They are far more interested in scapegoats – and let’s just say, teachers make great scapegoats!
As inconvenient as it is for a parent to pick their child up early from school, there are times when it is necessary to do so. Yes, there is a stigma with lice than can potentially embarrass both child and parent. There is no doubt about that. But schools that are sensitive to the needs of their students will make the necessary arrangements in a discreet and private fashion.
The political correct police obviously don’t trust schools to deal with internal issues themselves. Like in other instances, they like to overrule and impose themselves:
VICTORIAN schools have been accused of discriminating against students with head lice by sending them home from school when their nits are detected, the Herald Sun can reveal.
Federal and state guidelines say schools must not send children home if they have head lice, but merely send a notice home at the end of the day telling parents to treat their child’s hair that night.
Guidelines also say teachers should “exercise sensitivity” towards children with nits for fear of upsetting them.
But schools, preschools and childcare centres across the state are flouting these policies by immediately asking parents to collect their children. Children are often isolated from classmates until they are picked up.
One Melbourne primary school has been asked to change its approach after a complaint from a parent. In a letter to the principal, obtained by the Herald Sun, the parent said any child with head lice should not be “singled out, sent home and denied valuable education, only to return the following day to be reinfested”.
Whenever Government regulation overrules schools you know it will end up bringing undesirable results. Lice spreads so quickly and the children suffering with lice are uncomfortable and unable to concentrate. I will continue pressing my school for the right to send children home with lice. That doesn’t mean that I am unaware that children with lice often feel humiliated and ostracised. What it does mean, is that I will handle the matter in such a way as the child receives my care and support and the rest of the class is never made aware of the child’s condition.
The fallout of the Gonski Report into educational spending has resulted in the typically predictable bashing of private schools. There is a misguided notion that by funding private schools, Governments are robbing the needs of struggling public schools.
This is simply not the case.
I stand by my remarks from last year:
The continued debate between private and public school funding tires me out. I am a big believer of a well-funded (i.e. wisely funded) public school sector as well as a thriving private school sector. There is no reason why parents can’t be given choice and why supporting private schools must come at the expense of quality public education.
This is where the “Moneyball” analogy fits in.
Moneyball is the true story of Oakland A’s GM Billy Beane. Oakland is severely restricted due to the lowest salary constraints in baseball. Winning means beating teams with much better infrastructure and player payment capacities. Billy is presented with the unenviable task of finding a winning team with the miniscule budget offered. Together with a Harvard economics major, a system is devised that uses statistical data to analyse and value players they pick for the team.
Public schools need to take the same approach. Just like the big baseball teams of the time, plenty of money is spent on public schools, but much of it is wasted money. I look at education in a very traditional way. Whilst it is ideal to have the best sporting fields, technologies and building designs, none of these ingredients has been proven to be essential for teaching and learning the curriculum. The school across the road may be able to give each child their own i-Pad, but that shouldn’t explain a marked difference in maths, science or english results. A teacher should be able to deliver on the curriculum with or without such devices.
Whilst many get worked up when Governments subsidise private schools, there is a good reason why they do it.
1. It takes billions off the budget bottom line. This saves Governments money, resulting in reduced taxes and smaller class sizes in public schools.
2. It allows private schools to lower their fees. This is crucial for parents who are by no means wealthy, but are prepared to scrimp and save (and sometimes take on multiple jobs and a second mortgage) to get their children into private schools. These people should be commended. They work long hours, weekends, give up overseas travel and big screen TV’s, just to give their kids the best education possible. Government subsidies allow that to happen.
In Australia, the Government gives $13,000 to every public school per student. Private schools get $5,000. Factor in to the equation that many private schools are not elite schools with truck loads of money and resources (I work in such a private school, where I earn considerably less than a public school teacher), and you realise that the subsidy shouldn’t detract from a thriving public education system.
By constantly drawing attention to private schools, we risk bringing the private school system down to the public level. What we should be doing instead is trying to get the public school system improved to the level where it gives its private school equivalent a run for its money. That way, you have a private school that sets the bar for top quality education and a public school system that is structured to be able to go toe-to-toe with them based on prudent spending, good decision-making and a workforce of supported and fairly paid teachers.
There may exist a rule of patient-child confidentiality, but it just doesn’t seem right that such important information would be withheld from the parents. What makes it even tougher to comprehend is that this service is all done at school.
Girls as young as 13 are being given contraceptive implants at school without their parents’ knowledge.
Nurses insert devices into their arms which temporarily prevent pregnancy by releasing hormones into the blood.
Last year 1,700 girls aged 13 and 14 were fitted with implants, while 800 had injections which have the same effect.
The 2010/11 NHS figures also show that 3,200 15-year-old girls were fitted with implants, and 1,700 had injections.
Both forms of contraception can bring on unpleasant side-effects including weight gain, depression, acne and irregular periods.
The jabs have also been linked to bone-thinning, although experts say fractures are unlikely if they are used only for a short time.
The implants and injections are being offered to girls in nine secondary schools and three sixth form colleges in Southampton under a scheme run by NHS Solent. The sexual health clinics also offer other forms of contraception, advice and tests for infections.
There is no other job in a democratic country that is legally cautioned against venting or giving political opinions. Unfortunately, teachers have become the focus of regulations that are sensible for the most part, but contain some over-the-top directives.
TEACHERS have been warned against contacting students online amid fears too many are befriending their charges on Facebook.
In a major crackdown on social media use in schools, the State Government has released new guidelines designed to protect teachers’ reputations.
Educators say online smear campaigns by students have put teachers’ careers at risk, with some being forced to move schools.
The Government says the guidelines will also help protect students from inappropriate conduct by teachers.
“That boundary between being a teacher and a friend is one which teachers have to sometimes tread very carefully,” Minister for the Teaching Profession Peter Hall said.
“It’s important to provide parents with the confidence that their teachers have the knowledge available for them to do their job well.”
CONTACTING students by mobile phone or email “without a valid educational context”.
POSTING any “offensive or slanderous” material about students, parents or colleagues.
SHARING content from personal social media sites, such as their Facebook accounts, with students.
UPLOADING images of themselves that have “potential to negatively affect their reputation”.
“VENTING” about their work, or posting personal or political opinions.
I have no issue with most of these directives. What I don’t appreciate is being told what I can say and do by somebody else. Teachers have the right to exercise discretion without having to be regulated to do so (I am not referring to inappropriate contact with students). Being told I can’t express my personal or political opinion is not appreciated.
Parenting is a difficult job, and as much as I am not in favour of smacking, I think it inappropriate for me as a loving yet imperfect parent to impose restrictions on other parents. How they choose to discipline their children should not be up to me or our politicians.
I believe that smacking does little good in the long-term and can potentially do a disservice to the child. Yet, I was smacked by my parents and have nothing but respect for the way they reared me. They clearly disciplined me out of love and an unwavering determination to enforce healthy routines and boundaries, not out of frustration.
I realise that smacking can escalate into worse cases of abuse, and I naturally abhor the abuse of children. I must say, that I also dislike the spoiling of children and the indifference of some parents in setting boundaries and enforcing consequences for their childs’ unruly behaviour.
Advocate good parenting skills and practices by all means, but don’t stop parents from doing what they feel is right for their own children.
For a developed country like Australia to stoop so far as to allow cafes to give free food to children whilst their parents gamble is simply unacceptable.
CHILDREN are being offered free food as an enticement for their parents to play pokies, in what is being labelled as a gambling loophole.
The gambling watchdog is investigating as inducements for gamblers are banned in South Australia.
In one instance, Cafe 540 – on Port Rd, Allenby Gardens is offering the food to children of gamblers playing nearby poker machines at Tavern 540.
A spokesman for Cafe 540 said the business was a separate entity from Tavern 540 but acknowledged it was “under the same roof”.
He said the free food was served in an area totally separated from the gaming machines of Tavern 540 and was not an enticement to gamble. The Advertiser investigated the issue after a reader complained that the school holiday free food deal was offered “all day every day”.
