Children well understand that competition is a part of life.
LAST Saturday afternoon I made the supreme sacrifice. Instead of going to see my Magpies trounce the Hawks I spoke at an education forum arranged by groups representing Victorian government school teachers and parents. As it happened, the forum was at the back of the Collingwood football ground and when I began to hear cries of "rubbish" during my talk I at first assumed that Hawthorn supporters were reacting to umpiring decisions. I quickly realised, however, that most of the audience was not entirely with me.
It emerged that the predominant group (government school teachers) strongly objected to an "outsider" suggesting that the reductions in teachers and closures of schools under the Kennett Government were fully justified and should not have adverse effects on the quality of education.
The audience was particularly taken aback by my statement that the reductions would even have been justified if Victoria had no debt problem. How could a person without experience of teaching in a government school make such a judgment? Would I be prepared, one woman challenged, to spend a week accompanying her around her teaching duties so that I could see what it is really like? The idea that no one from outside a system can understand it or make sensible proposals for reform has superficial appeal. However, history is full of disastrous political experiments that have been based on insiders thinking of themselves as the font of all wisdom.
The problem increases when one is told that it is not legitimate to compare different education systems. Such comparisons are admittedly made more difficult by the paucity of data on the output of government schools, a paucity which reflects the hostility of teachers' unions and associated groups to external testing and to the publication of test results.
The adverse reaction to the Government's recent announcement of limited testing of primary school children for basic literacy, numeracy and other skills is the latest example of the incredible inwardness that exists. Yet schoolchildren well understand that competition is a part of life and most are naturally competitive. The trick is surely to teach them how to handle competition and to put it in perspective.
The dearth of authoritative Australian data on the possible effects of differences in class size means that one has to make deductions based largely on overseas research. While this research is not completely conclusive, the overwhelming weight of evidence suggests that, within a range of about 15 to 35, differences in class sizes generally make no difference to students' results. This does not mean that smaller classes are never desirable or advantageous since it is an "on average" conclusion.
One can also draw on the fact that the smaller class sizes (and smaller schools) in the Victorian government school system have not produced any evidence of a better education than in other states' systems or in the private school system. Indeed, the large shift during the 1980s away from Victorian government schools into private schools (which generally have higher pupil-teacher ratios) suggests that parents have been voting with their feet. Certainly the New South Wales government school system retains a significantly higher proportion of total students and the HSC exam there has developed into a standard which is attracting an increasing number of candidates from Asian countries.
The truth is that, even with the large reductions in teachers employed in Victorian government schools and the school closures, pupil-teacher ratios and school sizes are still lower here than in NSW. In short, Victoria is not operating at the "best practice" levels which the Government's rhetoric would have us believe are its objective. Yet Victorian teachers' unions are now seeking to have the federal Industrial Relations Commission restore through a federal award the even lower pupil-teacher ratios (and lower student contact hours) they previously had. It will be a gross dereliction of duty if the Commonwealth Government allows the claim to proceed unopposed and another blow to state sovereignty if the commission accedes to it.
One other result of overseas research is that increased school autonomy produces an improved quality of education. Yet (as with all other reforms) we again see the Victorian teachers' unions strongly opposing even the somewhat limited extent of decentralisation of management being implemented under the Schools of the Future program.
Their pathetic criticism is that giving principals greater power over staffing carries with it the potential for abuse. But so it does in the private school system. Remedies for abuse are available.
For an outsider to the government school system interested only in obtaining the best quality education it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the trenchant opposition of teachers' unions to obviously desirable reforms is primarily motivated by concern that their power and influence will be reduced. Were it not for the hostility of the teachers' unions, the Victorian Government would not be holding back from the many reforms to teacher training, curriculum, external assessment and school management that are still needed to improve this state's government school system. These are the reforms that will raise quality, not smaller classes or less teacher contact with students.
ADVERTISEMENT
No comments:
Post a Comment