AUSTRALIAN COUNCIL FOR THE
DEFENCE OF GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS
PRESS RELEASE 352
TEACHERS AND PARENTS
UNITED ON
BANNING OF LEAGUE TABLES
21 January 2010
The Teachers unions and
parent organisations should be congratulated on the stand they have taken
regarding the publication of League Tables. DOGS have consistently warned
against the ‘naming’ and ‘shaming’ of disadvantaged children and schools in the
manner advocated by Joel Klein. The end point of the publication of League
Tables in the
What is particularly
galling for supporters of public education is Gillard’s refusal - indeed her
inability- to publish the total resource levels available to private religious
schools in both direct and indirect aid. As politicians demand ever greater
accountability and transparency from public school teachers and parents, they
divert attention away from their own shortcomings.
The Sydney Morning Herald has finally woken up to the fact that
teachers are what keep an education system going. The Editor (21 January 2010) admits
that
..the profession remains the missing part- the essential part, - of a
genuine ‘education revolution’. The most impressive school systems
internationally are those where teaching is a prestigious vocation, sought by
top graduates. So far we’ve got the tests, laptop computers and showpiece
buildings, not any discernible effort to build up the human resources. Does
Gillard really get it?
Angelo Gavrielatos
made the following report on the teachers and parents campaign to the Australian
Education Union annual Conference on 19 January 2010:
2010
Annual Federal Conference
President’s
Report on the
Stop
League Tables Campaign
19 January
2010
Angelo Gavrielatos
Federal
President
Conference, the campaign to stop league
tables represents one of the most important campaigns in the history
of education in
Because of the irrevocable damaged caused
by a high-stakes testing, low quality league table regime, the
campaign to stop league tables has united the
profession in a way never seen before.
Of course that unity extends beyond the
profession and it includes the national parent organisations.
In fact, opposition to league tables
extends across the country and includes the overwhelming majority of
parents. Extensive polling conducted by UMR, the
polling company used by the ALP, found that 63% of
parents with children at school want the Federal
Government to pass new laws preventing the creation and
publication of league tables.
Conference, we are solid in our opposition
to league tables and any other inappropriate, invalid ranking and
comparisons of schools because we know the damage
caused by the narrowing of the curriculum and
deepening inequality and segregation in schooling
that will follow.
Proponents of this agenda have this
perverted belief that the complex, social and human dynamic of teaching
and learning can be reduced to a single
artificial figure. Proponents of this agenda believe that the life of a
school and everything it offers a child can be
reduced to a single artificial figure.
Colleagues, in November 2008 the Deputy
Prime Minister held a “national conversation” with over 150
principals. Concerns about this narrow view of
teaching and learning and its consequences on the provision
of high quality teaching and learning were
raised repeatedly by principal after principal.
Julia Gillard’s response to these real
concerns came approximately 24 hours after the conclusion of the
“national
conversation” when she declared deridingly of the principals “...I actually
don’t believe our aim is
to have schools full of happy illiterate,
innumerate children."
That is what one calls a studied insult.
What the minister fails to understand is that if children are illiterate
and innumerate, they are unlikely to be happy
and if the child is happy in him or herself and happy at school,
they are more likely to be successful
learners. That comes from Education 101.
Conference, we reject the attempt by the
Minister to taint the profession with the cancer of low expectations.
We will not tolerate attempts to portray
us as proponents of low expectations. As teachers with our
fundamental belief in the transformational power of
education and what it means to each individual child and
the nation as a whole, we will continue to
strive for the very best for our students within the context of
genuine school improvement where teachers are
given the space, time and respect to engage in the
progressive refinement of teaching and learning in
the interest of setting high aspirations necessary for all
students to achieve their full potential.
This, of course, is only possible through
a rigorous, rich and rewarding curriculum, not one which is being
reduced to a dry husk courtesy of a high stakes
testing, low quality league table regime. To quote Ken Boston
on the effects of similar government policy
in
sucked the oxygen from the classrooms of primary
schools. It is not the tests themselves so much as the high
stakes attached to them, the archaic method of
delivery and marking and the multitude of invalid uses to
which the results are put. In all but those
schools principled enough to resist the pressure upon them, the
primary school curriculum has become a dry husk.
The teaching programme focuses on what is to be
tested
and on practising
for the tests, because the future of the school (not that of your son or
daughter) is
dependent upon the result.
Why do we continue to import failed
policies from the
Conference, it’s important to note and
make very clear, particularly for our friends from the media here
today, that our opposition to league tables is
not an opposition to assessment, it is not an opposition to
accountability nor is it an opposition to a “parent’s
right to know”.
As we have often stated, effective
assessment is at the heart of successful teaching and learning. It provides
information on student progress to students and their
parents and important diagnostic evidence that assists
teachers in planning for ongoing improvement. It
is the right of all parents to access relevant information on
their child’s progress. Of course, ethically,
information about student performance belongs to students, their
parents and their teachers.
School and teacher accountability is also
essential. Accountability measures should be aimed at creating the
preconditions that allow for constant evaluation and
improvement in all schools and the development of a
culture where everyone, teachers, parents and
governments accept and fulfil their responsibility.
To do
otherwise accepts a culture of blame shifting.
As we have already announced in our charter
of school accountability, improvement, assessment and
reporting, accountability processes must be driven by
a shared vision of schools as learning communities
where the primacy of teaching and learning is
understood and embraced. Successful learning communities
are of course characterised
by a culture of ongoing evaluation and the progressive refinement of teaching
and learning.
This process can be further supported by
external peer led, cyclical reviews of school operations and
performance. Conducted by panels consisting school
leaders, teachers and other education experts, the
purpose of the review would be to affirm the work
of schools against quality standards and assist schools in
setting new targets so that all students can
achieve their personal best.
We recognise and
support the view that parents, students and the public have a right to know
that schools are
implementing high quality, effective teaching and
learning programs. Information can and should be
meaningfully reported to each school’s community in
ways which will enable parents and prospective
parents to make an informed judgement
about the effectiveness of school programs. However that
information must be reported in a way that supports
school improvement. It cannot be provided in a way that
damages students, school communities and the
provision of education as a whole.
As a profession we collect and interrogate
data, formal and informal, every day. Some would say every
minute of the day. Governments and systems also
have an obligation to aggregate and interrogate data, and
they have an obligation to act on information
regarding student performance. They must act in a way that
targets resourcing
necessary to foster improvement in all schools in order to lift overall student
performance
and underachievement.
Conference, all of this, and more, is
reflected in our charter of school accountability, improvement,
assessment and reporting which I referred to a moment ago.
Charter of school
accountability, improvement, assessment and reporting.
1. The primary purpose of accountability
in education is to support the pursuit of excellence and the
highest standard education for every student. The
teaching profession is defined by this pursuit.
2. Accountability in education enhances
the capacity of teachers, school leaders, schools, systems and
governments to fulfill their respective roles and
responsibilities and leads to sustained improvement.
3. Parents, students and the public have a
right to know that school leaders and teachers are
professionally competent and students are engaged in
high quality learning. They need to know that
our education systems are operating at peak
levels of educational performance and administrative
efficiency.
4. Accountability processes must be driven
by a shared vision of schools as learning communities where
the primacy of teaching and learning is
understood and embraced. Successful learning communities
are characterised
by a culture of ongoing evaluation and the progressive refinement of teaching
and
learning.
5. This process can be further supported
by external peer led, cyclical reviews of school operations and
performance. Conducted by panels consisting school
leaders, teachers and other education experts, the
purpose of the review would be to affirm the work
of schools against quality standards and assist
schools in setting new targets so that all
students can achieve their personal best.
6. Effective assessment is central to
successful teaching and learning. It provides evidence that assists
teachers in planning and can inform students and
their parents on important aspects of their child’s
progress.
7. Parents have an absolute right to know
how well their child is progressing at school. Information
about the performance of individual students
should remain confidential and belongs to the student,
his/her parents and teachers.
8. Teachers, schools and systems have an
obligation to collect reliable data that can be used to judge the
effectiveness of teaching and learning; and to
interrogate that data objectively to ensure that high
professional standards are maintained. Information for
accountability purposes is gathered in a
variety of ways from all relevant sources, and
reported and used in ways that respect the limitations of
the data.
9. Aggregated test results should form
part of a comprehensive suite of data about the school reported to
the school’s community on a regular basis.
This data enables parents to judge whether the school is
meeting their expectations and allows prospective
parents to make informed judgements about the
school. The use of assessment results for other
purposes should not be permitted to impact negatively
on this prime function.
10. Governments have a responsibility to
enact policies that target the resources necessary to ensure the
ongoing development of new and experienced
teachers, support and improve overall student
performance and should report to parliament and the
community annually on the effectiveness of their
programs.
Conference our opposition to league tables
and other inappropriate, invalid forms of school rankings and
comparisons is based on the fact that they are
misleading, inaccurate, damaging, demoralizing and totally
unnecessary.
• Misleading:
Publicly ranking schools based on students’ results in mass standardized tests
presents
an invalid and misleading picture of school
performance.
• Inaccurate:
The NAPLAN national tests were never designed to be used to compare schools.
Margins of error and distortions created
by student attendance/ absence accentuate the inaccuracy.
• Damaging:
Schools where students do not do well in mass standardized tests will be
unfairly
branded as ‘failing’ schools
• Demoralising: It takes schools many years to throw off the tag of a ‘failing
school’ and it is
demoralising for students, teachers and parents. It
makes it much harder for those schools to
improve the performance of their students
• Unnecessary:
Politicians don’t need schools to be publicly ranked to know which ones need
help
and more resources. Parents can already
access relevant information on school performance by
directly contacting schools.
To illustrate this last point, I’d like to
draw your attention to some of the analysis derived from the 2009
NAPLAN results.
The analysis shows that the percentage of
students estimated to be working at or above the national minimum
standard is markedly lower for Indigenous students
than for non-Indigenous students in all jurisdictions and
at all year levels. Similarly, the mean
scores for Indigenous students at all year levels are substantially lower
than those for non-Indigenous students.
For example, in Year 3 Reading the
difference between the mean score for Indigenous and non-Indigenous
students in
Western Australian it is 99 points. In
Year 5 Reading the difference between the mean scores for Indigenous
and non-Indigenous students in
points and in
a whole is 71 points. The difference in the
points. In Year 9 Reading the difference in the
means for
the
territory is consistently 40 -50 points more than
the difference in WA.
Here’s the point. The
basis of attendance not enrolment. Rather than
staffing its schools in the expectation that all students attend
school, it staffs its schools in the hope that
they don’t attend. So much for high aspirations! Students in the
NT are being
denied hundreds of teachers! This impacts most
negatively on students enrolled in schools with
significant Indigenous enrolments.
This has been going on for years. You don’t
need a league table to rectify it. The situation continues
unchanged. It has not only been known by
governments, it’s been perpetrated by governments.
Conference, throughout the year
governments and Ministers have constantly stated an opposition to
simplistic league tables and that they themselves
will not be creating league tables. Well, I remind them that
the creation of league tables is only
possible because of their policies. Stating an opposition to league tables
and doing nothing about it is disingenuous
and hypocritical.
On the theme of disingenuous statements
and actions let me add this.
In departmental correspondence on behalf
of the prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister we are told,
and I quote, that “the concern in the
community is recognized about the possible misinterpretation or misuse
of information about schools, including
formulation of league tables. On 12 June 2009, the Ministerial
Council on Education, Employment, Training
and Youth Affairs agreed to protocols for school data
collection and reporting. These protocols support
meaningful and comparable data reporting and the
responsible use of information, including active
communication about proper interpretation of data and
making fair comparisons.”
The protocols referred to in that
correspondence replaced the protocols developed less than 12 months
earlier, in July 2008.
One of the most significant points of
difference in the new set of protocols is the omission of the following
“ethical
principle”:
The avoidance of harm to members of the
community: this could occur where the privacy of individuals
would be compromised or where the reputation of
an institution or group of people would be damaged
through the publication of misleading information
or stereotyping.
By omitting this principle, education
ministers conceded that there will be ‘harm’ to individuals and schools
as a result of the creation and publication
of league tables.
Conference, we take our ethical
responsibility, our professional responsibility to our students and our school
communities very seriously. We will not sit by and
watch our students’ test results become an adult
spectator sport, an adult spectator sport which
will result in ridicule and humiliation. We will not sit by and
allow the provision of education to be damaged
through a narrowing of the curriculum and a deepening
inequality and segregation of schooling.
A few months ago Professor Brian Caldwell
said “parents and the profession will be standing on high
ground if the language of radical dissent is
adopted on this issue”.
Conference, it’s
deeds not words that matter most. So let us be clear, in the absence of the
introduction of
measures necessary to stop the further creation
and complication of league tables, the profession cannot and
will not cooperate with the implementation of
NAPLAN 2010.
DEFEND PUBLIC EDUCATION AND STOP STATE AID TO PRIVATE RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS.
Listen to the DOGS program
3CR, 855 on the A.M. dial
12 Noon Saturdays