Posts Tagged ‘Politics’

Modern Educational Thinking: Comedy or Tragedy?

January 31, 2011

Most of us acknowledge that school systems worldwide are deeply flawed and require fresh, new and innovative ideas to get them kickstarted again.  What we don’t need, however, are bizarre, extreme and non-sensical ideas that do more harm than good.

Last week I wrote about the Nebraskan senator trying to pass a bill that would allow teachers and administrators to carry concealed weapons for protection.

This week it’s Florida’s turn to create headlines for putting forward horrendous educational policy:

As lawmakers continue to debate education reform, Florida Rep. Kelli Stargel has a new idea: give teachers a break and grade parents instead.

Stargel has submitted a bill that would let teachers grade parent performance along with student outcomes, reports CNN.

Stargel said that parents should be just as involved in the education process as the students themselves.

“We have student accountability, we have teacher accountability, and we have administration accountability. This was the missing link, which was, look at the parent and making sure the parents are held accountable.”

The bill would give the option of grading parents as “satisfactory,” “unsatisfactory” or “needs improvement.”

Grading parents?  Are you kidding?  Is this some candid camera trick?

Because Stargel so evidently has failed to do her homework, I feel obliged to fill her in on some important points:

1.  Teachers should never judge parents.  It is the teacher’s job to co-operate with parents and assist them, not to assess them.  Unless a parent is abusing the child or engaged in any other form of criminal activity, it is not the business of a teacher to make judgements on parental skills.

2.  Yes, there are parents that do not involve themselves with their child’s education.  Teacher’s should see this as an opportunity rather than an excuse.  The child that doesn’t have actively engaged parents relies even more heavily on their teacher.  This scenario should be seen as a fabulous opportunity to inspire, influence and reinvigorate the child.  Stargel’s idea takes what some teacher’s see as a great opportunity to make a real difference and asks us to see it only as a negative.

3.  By calling on teachers to grade parents, you are turning two crucial stakeholders in a child’s education against each other.  Education is best administered when all major stakeholders are on the same page, or at least can work together harmoniously.  To muddy the waters with negative ideas and forced judgments, Stargel has overlooked the most important ingredients to successful teaching.

In one week we have seen two law makers come up with insane ideas that deal with important issues in a simplistic and scattershot way.  What is it with politicians?  How can such seemingly intelligent people come up such lousy ideas?

The Latest Sport: Degrading Our Teachers

January 27, 2011

Don’t get me wrong, I am extremely positive about President Obama’s passion for education.  It is great to hear him talk of the virtues of this great profession:

“Let’s also remember that after parents, the biggest impact on a child’s success comes from the man or woman at the front of the classroom. In South Korea, teachers are known as “nation builders.” Here in America, it’s time we treated the people who educate our children with the same level of respect. (Applause.) We want to reward good teachers and stop making excuses for bad ones. (Applause.) And over the next 10 years, with so many baby boomers retiring from our classrooms, we want to prepare 100,000 new teachers in the fields of science and technology and engineering and math.” (Applause.)

“In fact, to every young person listening tonight who’s contemplating their career choice: If you want to make a difference in the life of our nation; if you want to make a difference in the life of a child — become a teacher. Your country needs you.” (Applause.)

But if the US really needed good teachers, why does it treat its current ones so badly?  Why does it constantly refer to disposing of bad teachers instead of offering support to improve teacher performance?  It may be “time we treated the people who educate our children with respect,” but until you do, I’ll take it as words rather than substance.

I am referring to three examples which highlight the lack of respect of American teachers.

1. The recent decision by a New York State Judge to release the performance ratings of thousands of New York teachers to the media:

The judge, Cynthia Kern of the Supreme Court of the state of New York, wrote in a nine-page decision that the UFT’s argument “is without merit,” adding that the court of appeals “has clearly held that there is no requirement that data be reliable for it to be disclosed.”

The data attempt to measure the progress made by students in fourth through eighth grades under specific teachers by comparing their state test scores in math and English in a given year with the previous year.

The Department of Education has such data applying to 12,000 teachers; overall, there are nearly 80,000 teachers in New York City.

2. The  “Last In, First Out” (LIFO) sham of a policy:

This policy dictates that when there are layoffs, the most recently hired teachers in the system are the first to be fired. These decisions are based solely on seniority, without regard for teacher effectiveness.  The policy has three major negative impacts: first, it removes many high-performing tenured and non-tenured teachers from the   classroom, while retaining those that are less effective but have more years in the system; second, it causes a higher number of layoffs, since junior teachers are paid the least; and finally, it disproportionately impacts the lowest performing schools, which have the largest number of new teachers.

3. The Teacher Bashing Website, RateMyTeachers.com:

This website invites parents and teachers to rate and comment on their teachers.  The comments are public and often extremely slanderous.  Whilst being a US website, teachers from all around the world, including my country, Australia, can be rated and commented on.  Each teacher’s comments and rating can then be shared through Facebook by clicking a button on the site.  This is absolutely disgraceful, and while the authorities know about it, they have decided not to intervene.

President Obama, I absolutely love your passion for education.  You most certainly have a vision and an expectation that things improve.  But for your words to ring true and your wishes to come to fruition there is a lot more you and your Government can do for teachers.

Let’s start by offering support to your current teachers instead of giving up on them in favour of new blood.  Let’s give good teachers the opportunity to feel secure in their job.  And finally, let’s consider the impact websites like RateMyTeachers.com have on teacher morale.

If you really want teachers to get the respect they deserve, the respect needs to come from your administration first and foremost.

Teachers With Guns

January 21, 2011

If it wasn’t in print, you would have thought it was pure satire.  A Nebraskan senator wants to pass a bill that would allow teachers and administrators to carry concealed weapons for protection.

And that will achieve what?

Sen. Christensen explains his proposal: “I think it’s a local decision, but I think it’s important if you think about a situation that opens up where someone gets shot, that particular individual can continue shooting until police arrive. Or, you could have a security guard armed or administration—whatever you would choose to do locally to defend the situation. It would probably take care of it quickly,” he said.

The notion that the higher the proportion of people carrying guns the lower the rate of shootings is false and utterly preposterous.  Teachers in certain schools face shamefully bad conditions.  School shootings do occur and should never be underplayed.  But arming the caregiver, is the worst possible response to the problem.

Schools have to deal with the issue through constructive strategies and the safety of teachers  must be considered at all times.  But teachers are there to model positive behaviour and good decisions.  They must be there for their students.  A teacher that carries around a gun is distancing himself from all his students.  The gun becomes a representation of an “us vs them” mentality which regardless of the teacher’s school or environment, does not belong in our great profession.

Meanwhile, Christensen is convinced he’s on to a winner:

Christensen doesn’t think giving people guns can become a problem.

“I’ve never seen a gun escalate a situation,” said Christensen, “Guns don’t kill people, people do. You’ve gotta have an individual that’s out of control and at that point in time, you can have someone be shot.”

Here’s my advice for any teacher hoping to one day bring a concealed weapon into their classroom.  Find another profession … quickly!


The Education Version of Groundhog Day

January 14, 2011

In the classic 1993 Bill Murray film Groundhog Day, Murray was forced to relive the same day over and over again until he learnt from his mistakes.  Whilst only a light-hearted comedy on the surface, Groundhog Day was a timely reminder that mistakes and there consequences are repeated over and over again until they are learnt from.

Every time the curriculum changes I think of Groundhog Day.  I’ve only been a teacher for a short time, yet already I have seen the curriculum change 3 times.  First it was the CSF, then it became the CSF 2, followed soon after by VELS. And the curriculum is about to change yet again!

Why do they do it to us?  Just when you get used to one curriculum, they change it from another.

The cynic in me says the Government is bereft of ideas.  They know that education outcomes are underwhelming, that there isn’t much satisfaction in the quality of schools and performance indicators are not painting a rosy picture.  Yet, they don’t have a clue what to do about it.  They neither have the money, vision or gumption to make any real change, so they go for the obvious alternative – perceived change.

When asked to reflect on their achievements in Education, the Government will proudly point to overhauling the curriculum.  In Australia’s case, they will triumphantly declare that by introducing a national curriculum, they have been able to do what previous administrations couldn’t.

But they will know the truth all along – you can’t change the fortunes of a countries academic performance by altering and renaming a curriculum.  In fact, from my experience you can’t expect any change at all.

Even if my cynical take is wrong, and there is some good intention behind this new curriculum, it wasn’t evident in the released draft, which like its predecessors, didn’t seem to be adding anything of substance.  A bit more grammar, a deeper focus on handwriting and a greater emphasis on history sounds good.  But when it comes down to it, it is just like my boss said both this time and last time, “Don’t worry. It is going to be very similar to our current curriculum.”

From reports the states don’t want their current curriculums meddled with. Critics like Chris Berg from the Sydney Morning Herald have slammed the draft curriculum:

The plan was to have the curriculum rolled out in the 2011 school year, but only the ACT will meet that deadline.

New South Wales and Western Australia have decided to delay the curriculum to 2013. The Victorian government announced recently it would do the same. But there are problems with what’s in the curriculum too. //

Take, for example, the history syllabus. After a full quota of compulsory schooling, Australian students will be none the wiser about the origins and central tenets of liberalism: the basics of individual rights, representative democracy and the market economy, and the importance of civil society.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but these are the absolute fundamentals of Western civilisation. And they are missing from the national curriculum.

One need look no further than how the curriculum purports to teach ”struggles for freedom and rights”, a ”depth study” for year 10 students.

The struggle for liberty against tyranny is one of the most important themes of the history of the past 500 years. From the English Civil War to the American and French revolutions, the proclamation of the rights of individuals has given us a rich inheritance of liberalism and civil liberties. That, at least, is how you’d think it would be taught.

But according to the national curriculum, the struggle for individual liberty started in 1945. Because that’s when the United Nations was founded.

To hinge the next generation’s understanding of individual rights on such a discredited institution is inexcusable. And it says a lot about the ideology of the curriculum’s compilers: as if individual rights were given to us by bureaucrats devising international treaties in committee.

At the end of the day, all we are really left with is a bad case of Groundhog Day.  The results wont change, yet the same mistakes are being made over and over and over again …

This is the Program You Want To Cut?

January 4, 2011

Governments are good at introducing programs that go nowhere and cost the taxpayer a fortune, but rarely institute a program that actually contributes positively to schools.  The schools chaplaincy program which offers pastoral care for students in need is a great initiative.  It gives schools the funding to employ a counselor or pastor to assist with students who require help with anxiety, personal, academic or social issues.

Surely a program like this would be a candidate for increased funding, right?  Well, apparently not:

THE schools chaplaincy program is being investigated by the Commonwealth Ombudsman after a highly critical report of its operation in the Northern Territory. At the same time, a High Court challenge has been launched by critics of the scheme to which successive federal governments have committed $437 million.

Critics don’t like the fact that such a large proportion of the pastors are Christian.  They argue that such a service undermines the separation of church and state.  Although most of the chaplains are Christian, some like the one working in my school are not.  The fact that such a large proportion is Christian has no bearing on the opportunity for a given school to use the grant to get a non-religious counsellor.

Critics also point to the fact that these pastors are not qualified.  To fund qualified counselors in 3700 schools would cost considerably more than the $437 million already invested in the scheme.  At least it’s something.  It may not be a Rolls Royce scheme but I can testify to its effectiveness.  Yes there are concerns of unqualified counselors having access to personal information, which is why my school makes the teacher and parents fill out forms before our Wellbeing Officer can start taking sessions.  It is up to the school to ensure that the parents are informed and co-operative not the Government.

The likelihood is that this program will be scrapped.  If so, I think it should be replaced with an even better version of the same thing.  Chances are, it will be replaced with something more costly and completely ineffective.

Finally, a Voice of Reason!

November 11, 2010

It is my vision that both private and public schools should be looked after and properly funded.  I am tired of the private vs public school debate over funding.  If our Government is really serious about education, they will invest in private education to ease the burden on the taxpayer whilst also ensuring that our public schools are appropriately funded and given every chance to thrive.

In steps a voice of reason.  Dr Kevin Donnelly, the Director of Education Standards Institute, makes the following points in defence of funding our private schools:

The facts are that non-government schools have been underfunded for years. While state school students, on average, get $12,639 in funding from state and federal governments, non-government students only receive $6,606. Schools and parents have to pay the rest.

The saving to governments is about $6,000 a year for each student, adding up to a saving of about $7 billion a year. It’s also true that the state school system would collapse if it had to enrol all those thousands of students currently in non-government schools.

Critics like the AEU argue that non-government schools are drowning in government funding. Wrong. Wealthier non-government schools like Scotch College and Melbourne Grammar only get 13.5 per cent of the cost to government of educating a state school student. Even less well off non-government schools only get 70 per cent of the state school cost.

Let’s put the non-government vs government school debate to bed, and focus our energy on making sure that all of our schools receive the appropriate amount of support.

Pay Attention to our Principals

November 10, 2010

Just a week after the damning State of our Schools survey that shone light on some of the challenges faced by teachers and schools, a new survey has surfaced. Actually, the survey which shows that principals thought students were being dumbed down by poor resources, red tape and stressed principals, is not new at all.  It was completed in 2008 and summarily ignored by the Victorian State Government.

The report was so bad the Government swept it under the carpet for two years until it was leaked to the Herald Sun this week.

In the 220-page report, principals complained of:

RED tape being a huge hurdle in teaching kids.

SCHOOLS crippled by a lack of resources.

UNDERSTAFFING being a major issue in more than half of schools and extreme stress affecting 42 per cent of principals.

A CHRONIC breakdown in Education Department decision-making and support for teachers.

PRINCIPALS being worn out by the pace of change forced by bureaucrats.

It is time politicians stopped talking about how passionate they are about education and started taking decisive action.

Don’t talk!  Pay attention and fix the problem!

Proper Reward for our Teachers

November 8, 2010

AUSTRALIA needs a more professional approach to evaluating and rewarding teachers than the promise of bonuses for just 10 per cent of staff in any year, according to a leading United States researcher on teacher performance.

Drew Gitomer, a director of Educational Testing Service in New Jersey, says policymakers should trust teachers to develop professional standards, rather than imposing standards and bonus schemes on them.

I’m not a big fan of bonus payments to teachers.  I prefer an across the board payment rise.  I think that the bonus system is flawed for the following reasons:

  1. It creates unnecessary competition amongst teachers.  Teachers are supposed to work together and collaborate, not compete against each other.
  2. What fair method can one possibly use to measure how good teachers are?
  3. Where did they come up with 10%?  What kind of message is that sending to the rest of the teaching fraternity?  Are they not worthy of extra pay for their time and dedication?

Teachers do a difficult job.  Many get burnt out.  Some leave because the pay is insufficient to meet cost of living expenses.  It’s time to stop using teachers as a scapegoat when dealing with the academic results of our children, and support them with a framework that helps them excel.

 

The Education Debate Continues

November 2, 2010

The debate between Private and Public schools is nothing new, and has been the subject of much interest this week.

The group, Save Our Schools, says their figures show that Australian governments spend about $15,000 a year on students at independent schools but only $10,000 on those at government and Catholic schools.

The Australian Parents Council, a group that represents students who attend non government schools disagree with the figures.  The groups says it’s actually private schools that seem to lose out.

The executive director Ian Dalton points to the “… latest available figures put out by the ministers for education throughout Australia, that demonstrates that around about $12,500 a year is spent on students in government schools across Australia and around about $10,500 on students in non-government schools and that includes all non-government schools including sort of low fee Catholic and Christian schools and high fee independent schools.”

So who do we believe?

I feel that the Public vs Private debate misses the point.  Both Public and Private schools have a great importance and should be given every opportunity to flourish.  I haven’t got a problem with Public schools asking for more funding, but pointing the finger at Private schools is wrong.

We in the Education industry need to support and foster both the Private and Public schools and not turn them against each other.   Funding Public schools should be about the needs of the students not about drawing attention to Private school funding.