Making best use of teachers

Teachers are required to complete a range of duties other than face to face teaching time. Assignments and tests take time to be written and marked, programmes take time to be written, lessons need to be planned for, revision materials gathered, student teachers mentored, behavioural issues resolved, discussion is needed between moderating partners, coordination required for consistent judgements of student work. The first three alone take much of the time. You can normally spot an overloaded teacher because they are starting to wing more lessons and reduce the amount of assessment done or are reusing materials without tailoring them to the cohort.

Classroom first was a policy that quarantined teachers from duties other than that directly required by the classroom. It was a push back onto admin. It seems that that push back is starting to unravel and DOTT time is again being used for a raft of other things. The latest salary negotiation seems to be wrestling with getting teachers to do more.

You can't get blood out of a stone. We have high utilisation of teachers compared to OECD countries (see here page 406, albeit more appropriate statistics exist). Better lessons, better outcomes are not achieved by pushing untested rollouts, extended workdays, ill prepared curriculum directives and larger class sizes. It's done with effective management, good marketing and long/medium and short term planning with strong leadership and good morale.

Teachers work too few hours

Bethany usually writes well thought out pieces, but I don't understand the reasoning behind today's West article. If the intent was to start another round of teacher bashing then it will probably succeed. After all, teachers work between 9am and 3pm, forty weeks of the year. What a bunch of bludgers!

There are some flaws in this argument. Entry cost is high, with a four year full time course with practicum times devoid of income and a high attrition rate during university and in early years of teaching. The level of individual responsibility is high, including responsibility for curriculum, behaviour and teaching methods plus liasing with parents, teachers, CC, admin and other schools to maintain teaching programmes. Burnout is a constant risk, varying with the level of admin and collegiate support. Pay is not in this case a simple case of salary divided by hours worked.

When I hear an argument about teaching conditions I ask the following, "what would you have to be paid to give up your job for four years and then... work with reticent kids in a public school?"

I think many think I am mad and perhaps I am. A few of my friends that try and consider teaching as a possible profession, fall down when they consider that they present for six hours in front of an audience in an interactive manner. Imagine entertaining and engaging adolescents for forty weeks. The breaks are not optional, you can't do it without them. It's recovery time.

The problem is not being overpaid, it's establishing a fair equity position for teachers. It's not a job everyone can do, and to keep the good ones, they need to be paid enough to re-enter the trenches each year and seek the best for our children.

Populist arguments supporting positions that degrade working conditions and teachers position in society is not the pathway to a public education sector that can compete and contribute to education in WA. It's the path to a society where income governs your level of education - even more so than today. If we make teaching uneconomical or where the salary does not justify the conditions, it is unlikely we will end up with many vocational teachers in public schools. It will just get too hard for too little.

Laptop rollout in high school

I've made a number of attempts to utilise laptops within my classroom. The first three times were fraught with IT issues. The last time was not, but failed to be more effective than a teacher directed lesson.

I discussed this with Apple distributors today and they acknowledged that maths was a difficult area to implement laptops effectively for teaching purposes within the classroom.

It's not hard to imagine why.

The input mechanism (keyboard) does not lend itself well to handling symbolic expression, from fractions forward. Word is clearly inferior to paper/pen in terms of flexibility and execution time.

Math is highly skill and practice based rather than research and report based. The time to find applications specific to each skill exceeds the benefit able to be provided by an active teacher.

I did identify some areas where they may be beneficial.
A) repetitive simple skills such as tables
B) statistics in conjunction with autograph and Excel

I found propositions put forward by the distributor more marketing based than based in productive high school teaching practices:

A) As an alternate assessment tool(recording writing and reviewing) to judge performance (unlikely to be done other than as a gimmick or as part of formal research).
B) To implement a programming class (underestimating timetabling and student demand requirements)
C) To implement problem solving investigations (I think this still suffers the symbolic issue in non stats based investigations - particularly senior school ones)
D) As a way to promote cross curricular applications (with large time overheads to set up with questionable benefits).
E) That the focus needs to be middle school as the application in senior school was more difficult and required follow through from middle school. (I agree but am still struggling to justify the effort required for such low utilisation)

The meeting left me questioning whether anyone had anything more than a very superficial implementation of laptops at all. The distributor stated about 50% usage was possible across all learning areas (I would hazard to guess as a wordprocessor in most cases) and my guess is less than 5% in mathematics. Given the ATAR exams are written, I'm not sure promoting typing over writing and editing/ re drafting over planning/writing is a good idea.

Some things have worked. Mathsonline has more penetration. Kids are more likely to have a computer at home. They can complete homework using the digital copy of the text on the laptops. Once networking issues are resolved I could put worksheets and notes directly on their computers. I can dump Khan academy files for their review.

On the whole I felt that we were looking for a market for a product, rather than a product aimed to satisfy a market, indicating that the whole 1-1 student computer idea is a bit of a lame duck. I think the government has been suckered in by the promise without having an idea of what it could deliver in real results.

Given my background, I want to be positive about this idea. I haven't heard anything to date that justifies $100,000 per year of taxpayer dollars per school thus far. I hope someone can show me where to go next.

Afterschool classes

The Maths Dept runs four after school classes, two on Monday and two on Tuesday.  All classes are optional.  Students come that need help in particular topics, split by 9/10 and 11/12.  The senior school classes typically are seeking consolidation and the 9/10 class is typically those seeking extension.

Many afterschool classes are now becoming compulsory, especially at the end of the year.  I wish teachers wouldn't do this.  School is a complex organism and when you take freedom away, students are forced to make ill advised decisions.

This week I had to speak for students with excessive afterschool comittments, students that had options subjects in year 12 encroaching on class time (I doubt whether the student would appreciate my help either) and in study time.  I try and be supportive of options teachers and allow students to participate in extracurricular requirements but... stage 3 students in year 12 should be quarantined from them in the weeks leading to mock exams.   I'll be hard pressed to accept any argument that tries to say otherwise no matter how talented they are (or untalented in maths for that matter).

My thinking is this.   Students get into university based on an ATAR score or through portfolio entry.  Options subjects (at least at our school) are 2A or below in year 12.  Thus they are supporting cast when calculating an ATAR score.  3A scores are not, even low ones.  If we had stage 3 students in non MESS subjects that weren't scaled to useless, my position would be far different.

The argument that students will lose enthusiasm if not allowed to participate does not hold water either.  As a teaching body, it is our job to work with teachers to make sure these predictable situations do not occur.  It was a questionable teaching decision that put students there in the first place.

A student should participate because "they are helping market the school" is not acceptable either.  Year 12 mock exams are the culmination of 12 years study.  To jeopardise this by moving focus away from study lacks a little foresight and is not in the best interest of the student.

Don't think that I don't admire the option class teachers.  They are passionate about their subjects and passionate groups (even us maths dinos are passionate about our subject) will strive for what they think is right.  I'd rather have passionate groups striving for excellence than rampant apathy.   If people weren't discussing matters and pushing envelopes I'd be more concerned.  There are times where students can only continue in the academic subjects because they can vent using emotional and physical outlets.

MESS subjects do stupid things too.  We shouldn't be loading the end of the year with excessive assessment.  Identifying areas of weakness two weeks before exams is probably too late and of minimum benefit.  The words appropriate levels of study and revision need to be in the forefront of our teaching minds.  Student anxiety levels need to be kept at appropriate levels.

Coming back to the original point, this is why mathematics afterschool classes that I run are optional.  Students can choose whether they need the help or are in a position to enjoy extension.  They can prioritise their learning and optimise their potential.  Forcing a student to do something at this stage of the year is only creating a problem somewhere else.  Being able to make a decision is an important part of growing up, as is ensuring safeguards are in place when lack of maturity jeopardises their potential.

Responsible learning

There are many ways to motivate students to learn.  A common way is to provide extrinsic reward - "the bribery model".  This is a technique that is especially effective to provide short term performance gains, especially where the skill is not particularly exciting.  As the name suggests, its underlying value system is "I do something, I get something".  Immediacy is important as proximity to the reward  maximises the effect.  It is very now in its approach and is appropriate in many cases to kick start a learning programme.

A second model is an intrinsic goal oriented model, "education as a pathway".  It is the typical education model used by parents for the past 1000 years.  Be educated, have a future.  It is longer term and has elements of risk/reward.  Implicitly it has delayed gratification built in.

Where students do not value the goal oriented model and only work to instant gratification, the ability to maintain motivation fails.   The wall is hit earlier by students in an education lifecycle and the ability to be determined and seek excellence/success is greatly reduced whilst apathy or resistance to education grows.  Lacking resilience, the student is unable to bounce back fast enough after failure (a real issue caused by the no fail model at least until primary, if not middle school) and we produce students unable to cope with reality or that rebel not understanding options before them.

Part of the downfall of the intrinsic goal oriented model in WA is the failure to provide honest feedback regarding performance and the lack of effective career counselling (career structures have changed significantly in the past 15 years and schools lag this change).  Students are not aware of the possibilities in front of them and the consequences of their actions regarding learning in lower secondary.  Where all students pass, school graduation is not an indicator of an employable future.  Graduation becomes a hurdle rather than an enabler to access to the workforce.  Furthermore, the reduction in streaming takes away an important success indicator to students of their pathway towards employment and thus conceptually to their developing a concept of self (contrary to many views on streaming).

Discipline and setting clear behaviour boundaries (not just expectations) are safeguards to the success of the goal oriented model.  These are also being challenged by the incremental approach to discipline.   Students never reach boundaries thus have diminished ability to cope with limits.

To strengthen the goal oriented model we need to develop a range of appropriate pathways and more accurate indicators for students that they are on a pathway to a successful future.  National curriculum may provide some of the solutions together with positioning vocational studies properly within a school; strong leadership within schools, the department and universities need to provide the remainder.

Independent Public Schools

Now that the majority of government schools are either independent or becoming independent public schools, the rush is on for schools to examine their current practices as restricted by the department and seek ways to differentiate from nearby schools.

I welcome some things about independent public schools.  Without school boundaries, schools will live or die by their academic reputation.  This requires a broad strategy to ensure that students are enticed to each school.  NAPLAN scores, school reputation in the community and reputation with nearby primary schools will form a part of the drive of students towards a school.

Staffing will be a key issue moving forward as schools need to examine both their entry processes and how they wish their organisations to evolve.  The need for stability with driven, dependable, clever and caring staff will test the ability of schools to evolve into independent entities.  Promotional opportunities and the introduction of fresh staff with fresh ideas will be a key change issue in managing staff and developing the organisation.

It will be interesting to see how schools focus on both the long and short term requirements of keeping public schools as going concerns.  Schools that do not take a business approach to education may find that a superior academic programme is overshadowed by a lack of marketing ability.  Gloss and glitter, marketing tricks, making known extra curricular activities and wearing out shoe leather going to feeder schools may be required until parity is regained with the private sector.

I also wonder if short term focus on marketing will overshadow curriculum initiatives.  Ultimately short term tricks will not undo the damage done to education in the public sector through underfunding, mismanagement and poor curriculum direction.  Schools need to look to core business and identify how to raise education standards beyond that found in private schools.  Here again leadership will play a critical component in examining initiatives, encouraging successful attempts and marketing these successfully. Contrariwise unsuccessful initiatives will need to be redirected or discontinued.  Spending will need to be carefully evaluated in a way often ignored within schooling - often to the complete dismay and astonishment of observers from outside the system.

Do we need independent public schools?  Probably not... but we do require change and schools that can make the best of the opportunities have potential to benefit.  Now that the idea has had time to bed down, hopefully (fingers crossed) those that enter in the second and third rounds will not have too many transitory issues.

Professional Development

Any long time reader knows that I am a big critic of scheduled professional development days..  Most tend to be filled with administrative tasks and very little professional development is actually done.  Well, here I am now having to deliver a session to the local primary schools and I sit in the position of many presenters of not knowing what is expected by the primary teachers and having little time available to prepare a presentation of worth.

It's not that being asked to do it is a bad thing.  I am really looking forward to it.  My concern is that I could lose an opportunity to do it regularly by not being adequately prepared.  It's a bit of a fishing expedition as to how to create a closer relationship with the local primary schools.

On paper it should not be too hard.  Three of the five members of our maths department grew up in the area and two of them went to our school.  We relate to our kids.  The student profiles of our schools are very similar.  The results of both our schools are above like-schools in numeracy.  We both cater to the far ends of the student spectrum and have issues in the middle/bottom quadrant....  and we've taught much of the material now being pushed into primary.

I keep telling myself that it's only an hour.  It's an hour that could attract some of their top end to our school and give us an opportunity to do some extension work in primary.     I haven't done any adult training in the last five years other than practicum students and it's a little nerve wracking..   I hope at least some of the primary teachers are not as burned out with bad PD as I am and will see my ideas as worthy of consideration.

We'll wait and see.

Proofs in the classroom

Many of us have bad memories about proofs in the classroom and learned to switch off whenever they arrived.  After all, they were never assessed and the skill required always followed shortly after.   In texts today, the proofs are often missing and skills are instantly presented as the required content.

When writing assessment I tend to struggle with testing deep understanding vs trying to trick students into making mistakes.  I've read many external tests and they mainly use methods aimed at testing minute bits of content, "corners" of content areas rather than whether a topic is understood.  The wide splash of content that we are required to teach lends itself well to this method of assessment and it is quite easy to get a bell curve from it.

This is great for students that study hard and do lots of different types of questions.  It must be incredibly frustrating for naturally gifted mathematics students, the ones that enjoy delving into a new topic. I think this is where proofs need a more detailed treatment and where investigations in lower school can be repurposed.

The opportunity for delving into a topic is there for the picking.  Proofs for completing the square and Pythagoras' theorem are great ways of developing connections between geometric proofs and skills taught in classroom.  Developing conjectures about number patterns develops the idea of left hand side/right hand side of an equation and the setting up equations to solve problems.  Congruence, traversals of parallel lines and similarity are other topics that lend themselves well.

Having only taught upper school for awhile, it is interesting to see where the core ideas of geometric proof, exhaustion, counterexample, formal proof/conjecture/hypothesis and even induction can be introduced before year 11.  If 2C students can learn the idea of all but induction, there is little reason why we can't teach reasoning a little earlier.

Perhaps if they could reason more effectively they could then challenge their own results and complete investigations that developed into lasting learning events.

Last day of term

The last day of term was a lot of fun.  The praccies wound up their classes and went off into the wide world.  Students went off for break... .. and a long two terms finished on programme with tasks completed.  All good so far.

We were very lucky this time with two great practicum students in Math, both very different and bringing something special to the profession. I said to mine about half way through prac to name ten things that she did better than me.  She never came back to me with that list but here is what I came up with.

She has strong organisational skills
She creates a fantastic working rapport with students
Each task is well monitored for progress (macro)
She reflects diligently on each lesson
She actively seeks to monitor the progress of each student (micro)
Colleagues enjoy interacting and assisting her with issues she has identified
She thoughtful and caring
She is fun to work with
She is prepared and willing to take risks to promote learning
She has a great and appropriate sense of humour

As you get further into teaching, sometimes it gets harder to maintain these things..  It can be great to look back and see how bright and bushy tailed you were when you started.  When times get tougher, you can reflect upon areas to focus upon to regain that initial vigor.  Be confident and know that those awful teenage years finish, slowly you gain confidence and independence... things improve as you go through your twenties and thirties (I can't speak for the forties!).

After talking with the maths department, I won the praccie competition this term.

Well done you two..  We look forward to hearing about your progress.

Russell.

Developing educators

I've thought for a long time that we fail to appreciate that there are a range of teachers required in education as different teaching styles benefit different students.  Our teaching practicum system has a tendency to promote outgoing, gregarious teachers and discourage practicum teachers that are not.  This is a real shame as those that take time to build their skills and have a calling to teaching may need more help to get over that initial hurdle of conquering teaching practices and behaviour management but then excel in creating engaging, caring and developmentally appropriate learning environments.

I was once told that I had a lifetime of occupations crammed into my twenties, but even with this I barely made it through my ATP.   My final practicum was a train wreck (my only pass grade of my degree) but does this define me as a bad teacher five years later?  Well.. I'm still here and still improving my teaching.  I'm no teacher of the year but my classes are well defined, my students are achieving and as a team we are moving forward.  My growth from that point on ATP has been linear and I expect that to continue.

Sometimes I have to remind myself that the best teachers are not necessarily those that found things easy, but those that really had to deconstruct a problem, seek to understand it deeply and then work with others to find a solution.  This creates an understanding of the difficulty of capturing the nature of the learning problem.  It's hard to get this point across to practicum teachers as many come in expecting it to be as easy as we sometimes make it look, not realising that getting kids to the point where they engage fully may have taken a term (or in some cases a few years) of hard work, organising resources has taken hours of planning and that skills and knowledge used in the classroom took years of experimenting until things came together.  Reflection is a key component in this growth.

The first five years in teaching for me wasn't easy, but after the first couple of years, with good support it certainly is becoming easier.  It's one reason why I say seniority has its place.  You don't survive as a classroom teacher unless you can handle the pressure most of the time and have management structures to relieve the pressure for the remainder of the time.  Without a hierarchy of some nature, we can't give teachers time to grow, nurturing them in soft classes, mentoring them through difficulties without fear and then developing them into true educators.

Perhaps after a few more practicum students I'll think this is a load of drivel and that the system is right..  but I hope not.  I'd like to say that we can develop a system where students, teachers and administrators see teacher diversity as a key goal within the system.

National Curriculum and reporting

The lack of curriculum standards in WA worsens with the implementation phase of National Curriculum continuing to be a lukewarm affair.  Schools continue to drag their feet with implementation for fear of 'disadvantaging' students that have received an Outcomes based education over the past generation.  It is very clear now when comparing to national curriculum standards that WA education in mathematics has fallen behind other states. 

Report time has illustrated that next tier of issue in WA during National curriculum implementation.  The ongoing issue of students being given A grades that clearly have not met the C grade descriptors continues as schools grapple with how to assess their students.  A student that has not passed a test all year is given a C, students that have not reached 75-80% are given A's.  We no longer can say someone reaching a certain 'level' is an A (OBE levels have been abolished), nor can we say students are meeting C grade descriptors (these relate to national curriculum and students are clearly not reaching these - and schools are generally resistant to make the required changes to curriculum, homework and discipline policy to reach these new standards).  The Curriculum Framework gives little guidance to grading years and assessment.  The scope and sequence is a document rarely referred to.  The exemplars are sparse and difficult to apply over a range of years where schools vary greatly in materials taught from term to term.

Some areas (including large amounts of algebra and geometry) are missing from student capabilities as they have not been taught to any standard from years 7-9.  This is not good enough.  I would suggest it is not that students cannot learn this material - teachers lack guidance on what should be taught.

If your student has been taught and is not fluent in linear algebra in year 9 they are not a C student.  Ask them to draw y = 2x +1 for you or for the same equation find y if x = 4 or state the coordinate where it intersects with y=-x.  Similar tests can be made in quadratics in year 10.  Try some basic geometry with traversals and parallel lines.  If you really want to see the issues in WA mathematics test order of operations (2 - 4 ÷ 8 * 2 + 3 = ) across year 8 students and staff at a school.  I know I did and was horrified.

It is no wonder that students are not getting the intrinsic reward for effort to gain an A (it takes little effort and little demonstrated competence for a student with some ability in middle school classes) and these students cannot clearly relate to their grades - there is simply little direct reward for effort and little real consistency from year to year.  I may be a national curriculum skeptic, but we need to escape this no mans land we live in at the moment.  Implement it or not - but make a choice and let's get on with it.

Oh - and the answer to the order of operations problem above is 4.

Hierarchy

Schools have usually had quite fixed hierarchy, with about ratios of 1:7. Each 7 people have a direct line manager. In recent years I've begun to suspect that this is breaking down into more flat management structures.

In mathematics departments there are a number of structures that can be put in place. A common and traditional approach is to have a head of department(HoD) responsible for managing staff and curriculum(gaining .2-.4 FTE to do so) and then each year group being allocated to a teacher. The HoD manages performance issues, consistent judgements, liasing with admin and some behavioural issues. The HoD position is a level 3 position of responsibility within a school.

An emerging approach (in the last 10-20 years) is appointing a teacher in charge (TiC) and devolving responsibility for curriculum leadership, staff management and all of the HoD roles to admin staff such as team leaders. TiCs handle budgetary matters and the day to day issues of a maths department. No FTE is applied to such a position and a small monetary amount is given in addition to wages. Although this approach works in the short term on the momentum of past leadership (or if a person is found wiling to work a HoD role under the auspice of a TiC), it falls short when leadership is required to implement change. This model tends to lack responsibility for identifying and rectifying issues, leading to direct confrontation with admin over key issues where normally they would be resolved intra department. It also has the potential for conflict if the TiC is seen to be overstepping the bounds of their role.

A third model, worse than the TiC model is to rely on the professionalism of each individual teacher to self manage and monitor all processes via admin. The main issue with this model(prevalent in very small schools) is that admin does not have the skill to ensure that relevant curriculum is being followed, causing disjunct programmmes from year group to year group. It also causes feelings of isolation and dislocation from the collegiate group.

If regular time is not allocated to making a department work, they can be seen as dysfunctional rather than lacking leadership.

Streaming

From hits on previous pages, this is an active topic in teaching.  Leaving teaching college, we were all informed of the negative nature of streaming and how research showed that there was no benefit to students.   As discussed previously Hattie's extensive research showed that the benefit was small in mathematics.  Yet teachers of mathematics continue the demand for streaming and respond with extensive anecdotal evidence that shows otherwise.

Like many mathematics teachers I now agree with the anecdotal evidence.  If we don't stream, the average effect for all students is probably the same or better than streaming.  This, for catholic schools is a sensible position, where the rights of the individual can be compromised for the rights of the whole.

Yet, contrariwise, streaming has a detrimental effect on our top students as behavioural and academic requirements of the next tier, take away required teaching time, curriculum focus and effort from the top tier of students.  Only a small percentage of experienced teachers can prevent this effectively.  My observation is that top students, in an environment of top students, excel in a way that they cannot in heterogenous classes, especially in senior school when maturity kicks in.  It is not such a problem in higher SES schools as the gap between higher and lower performing students is much smaller.  It makes little sense not to stream in state schools as in upper school our marketing is driven by the performance of our elite (eg in league tables and media reporting) rather than by performing social good (as is the drive in other education sectors).

In low SES public schools, it also raises an equity position, as the brighter students are negatively effected by students that have no wish, need or demand for higher education.  For a considerable time, looking after our high performing students has been difficult as demands for average results has driven teaching away from the demands of excellence.  Furthermore, the retaining of ill suited students into traditional upper school classes has had a detrimental effect whilst schools devise suitable courses and exit points for these students.

At the other end of the spectrum it also raises equity issues for underperforming students that have little or no hope of meeting C grade standards (without help beyond that which is typically available in a heterogenous classroom).

It is a shame that this is not as readily recognised, as it is only from a drive for excellence does the majority have an aspirational goal and those in direst need receive the attention they require.

Retaining specialist teachers during half cohort changeover

Retaining specialist teachers when the half cohort reaches senior school is another challenge for state schools across WA.  Small schools will reach critical numbers where staff/student ratios will fall below that required to run core subjects.  Where year 11/12 student levels drop below 150, it is difficult to create a staffing profile in low SES schools that allows for students to access a range of stage 3 courses and also importantly for teachers to have access to these classes to ensure career progression.

A simplistic scenario for a maths team in a small school.

15% of a cohort is capable of completing stage 3 courses.

15% of 150 is about 23.  Assume all students are in a maths course.

17 in 3AB MAT combined year 11/12 (1 class)
6 in stage 3 3CD MAT year 12 (1 class)
 
3 in 3AB MAS combined year 11/12 (1 class)
3 in 3CD MAS year 12 (1 class)

To run these courses requires .8 FTE.

Assume all remaining students complete a maths course

62 in 1BC/CD MAT year 11/12 (3 classes)
42 in 2AB/2CD year 11/12 (2 classes)
22 in 2CD/3AB year 11/12 (1 class)

To run these courses requires 1.2 FTE (assumes 1DE/2AB does not run)

3 year 10 classes ~ 90 students

To run this requires .6 FTE.

Total 2.6 FTE (if MAS classes are allowed to run 2.2 otherwise)

This requires loss of a senior school teacher (.6 to be made up by teachers teaching out of area) or a senior school teacher teaching .4 in lower school.

This leaves schools in a precarious position of having limited capacity to overlap in cases of sickness or unexpected absence, limits subject knowledge into the hands of relative few and places load on senior teachers with regard to curriculum requirements such as small group moderation, curriculum monitoring, student preparation for exams and subject guidance.

I think to some degree risk management of increasing dependence of some schools on relatively few staff is an issue that requires urgent attention.  Where schools decide to drop MAS subjects, the ability for the school to direct students at earlier stages in preparation for these subjects diminishes as teachers may be unaware of the curriculum links to MAS courses.

When the half cohort passes through and senior school numbers again rise(and we now face the case of multiple half cohorts due to the lack of a decision to move year 7 to high school), we will also face the issue of a need for teachers in senior school, but will lack the numbers of experienced teachers to fill the roles due to teachers in the system lacking opportunity to teach upper school classes during half cohort years.

It is concerning.

Graduation figures

Maintaining 100% graduation is a constant battle in state schools.  It is a combination of students understanding expectations, good subject selection practices, identifying students at risk, providing intervention to put students back on the path to passing and providing effective alternate paths for those that will not pass regardless.

If any of these practices fail, 100% graduation becomes unlikely.  It is not something that is easily rectified when it fails and if anyone in the process underestimates the importance of their role, the graduation measure falters.

Some would say that 100% graduation is a furphy and strictly speaking it is.  All students should not graduate.  There are those that are intellectually incapable of reaching any standard set, those with insufficient support at home, those with behavioural and motivational issues, those that have failed due to sickness should not pass.  Seeking high graduation rates has one positive effect in that it promotes support for those that need it most, those most likely to fail.  Seeking 100% graduation in low SES schools is an incredible drain on resources and to my mind a bit of a folly.  Low SES schools face too many of the issues every year raised above and without parachuting every student out that looks like failing (which I think is wrong because struggling students deserve a chance to defeat the odds if they are determined), low SES schools are unlikely to consistently reach 100%.  Anything in the high nineties would seem acceptable.

One issue that is often grappled with is late assessment and avoidance of assessment.  Common strategies to overcome this include parent contact, mentoring, detention, suspension, deputy intervention.  Older style strategies (used in years prior to year 12) such as deducting marks for lateness and requiring medical certificates are pursued less often as this puts students at risk far quicker than allowing students extra time to complete stage 1 assignments, especially if they are likely to reach the required standard by the end of the year (but have only failed due to penalties).

I have grappled with the fairness of this approach for a number of years and have come to the conclusion that allowing students more time (and giving more "incentive" to complete assignments) is fair.  Students in low SES schools lack academic, intellectual and emotional development.  The extra time allows development to take place and maturity to kick in for many cases (and thus we do get them over the line).  It's a lot of extra work for senior school teachers to coerce, coach, encourage and force students to complete work at the end of the year - but it means that students leave school with their year 12 certificate, something that is difficult to get later in life if they don't pass the first time.  Repeating year 11 and giving students time to develop further is another effective response.  Students that do their work, are still likely to do better and will go on to greater things.  Those struggling do not deserve to be punished further.

It's counter intuitive, but I do believe it is right.

A good day

I don't normally look forward to being left in charge of the maths team but in short spells it can be quite enjoyable. There was a nice feeling in the team today that was jovial, yet productive. There was a combination of teaching students, assisting colleagues, developing skills in student teachers, finalizing marking prior to reporting and generally working collaboratively to promote learning.

The feeling of collegiality is something that can be lost under the pressure of deadlines. Opportunities to work together in a fun environment can be lost to immediate demands. It's nice to finally reach that time in my career where content and instruction practices become easier to achieve, freeing time such that intervention becomes more of a focus.

It's hard for practicum teachers to see the road ahead. We look at them and see the types of teachers they are growing into, a horizon they can't always see. If they can better understand how it gets simpler(if not easier), perhaps we can improve the retention rates of our young teachers. We need to make that collegiate environment that aids their transition.

Russ.

Leaving marking behind cont..

It was a nice idea leaving marking at school rather than bringing it home.. but it hasn't worked..

I'm just sitting here thinking about it.

bugger.

Taking marking for a holiday

A common problem of many teachers is taking a wad of marking home over the weekend and my best solution to date has been to bring it back unmarked and untouched. It's the 'taking exam papers for a holiday' solution.

Being focused on improving the middle can be a trying task. I really enjoy marking.. I really do.. Those around me though... not so much...

I've tried getting up early, doing it late at night, whilst the baby sleeps, a bit at a time, reserving a whole day. Marking the best ones first, last, randomly. They all end with foul tempered dad, saying multiple bad words with lengthy time considering how to improve mean scores further, talking to myself like the mad cat lady.

But.... I think I have finally solved the problem...

Don't take it home!!

Duh!



...I feel better already :-)

The importance of tone and volume

The teacher voice is something that many teachers are told they need to learn.  I think sometimes the 'teacher voice' is a catchall phrase that practicum teachers can have some difficulty learning.. I know I did as a practicum teacher.

Being soft spoken, it is something that I had to approach.  My first teacher instructor was a shouter - to her classroom control was maintained through a combination of fear and volume.  It was something that I was poorly suited to and found difficult to emulate.

My second teacher instructor maintained her classroom through warmth and caring.  She had an ability to develop a rapport with her students and her classes liked her - much of this I would attribute to her sunny, kinaesthetic Phys Ed inspired background.  Not being the warmest of people myself and a little awkward at times in new social occassions,  it too proved difficult to emulate, although I did take much away from that practicum that I have tried to incorporate into my teaching.  I could see how her approach made it easier to break down barriers and reach that zone of intervention.

My third practicum was nearly my undoing, where the teacher instructor was a disciplinarian - a person I highly respect for the results he achieved in his classroom.  I also taught the class next door once a week and found enforcing this approach was difficult - as setting bounds on classes not seen often was difficult - and is a regular issue in teaching high school.  Whilst being observed in this class, my practicum nearly terminated after a lesson failed to achieve lesson outcomes due to behavioural issues.

Yet from each I was able to take a little bit of what I wanted to do (and what not to do) and established my own style of teaching, authoritarian but with a degree of warmth used to encourage students to achieve above their own understanding of their ability.  Raising my voice a little into assertive tone brings attention quickly - raising my voice above this brings looks of shock and silence for half an hour.  I think my students realise that I care about their performance as long as they are pursuing the methods I describe for success and realise that I care about non compliance when it effects their grades.

Anyhow, assertive delivery is a powerful tool in the arsenal of a teacher.  Use of the tone usually requires a number of things

1. establishment of an attention spot at the front of the room
2. a quick scan of the room (seeking eye contact and indication that instruction will follow)
3. a pause (to give students an opportunity to finish and look up)
4. a statement to gain attention (eyes front, pens down, look here or similar statement) delivered without intonation at a slightly high volume level than instructional voice (a voice that can be heard at the back of the room).
5. a second scan of the room to identify non compliant students in conjunction with a number of low key responses for students that need additional attention (hand signals, name, indication to neighbour)
6. a willingness to discuss consequences with students and move students permanently that do not respond after multiple processes

Once attention can be gained and maintained easily, delivery of materials becomes considerably easier.  It's not really the obscure secret many teachers make it out to be nor is it an optimal strategy for all teachers.  It is one of the more successful strategies for practicum teachers to use during practicum where more reliable and effective rapport based strategies really take too long to successfully implement.

Being predominantly a rapport based teacher, I do empathise with practicum teachers that are not 'type A' individuals sport stars and fashion victims that students immediately warm to.  My fear with the current practicum system is that many of the highest potential teachers are lost to the system as they do not have the time to develop a reputation amongst the student population as a great teacher rather than as a new cool teacher.

I love being a math teacher - as sportiness and fashion are rarely problems for us.  No expectation of being cool here :-)

Practicum Teachers

There is another side of taking practicum teachers - the side where the teacher instructors benefit.  A good practicum teacher is worth their weight in gold.  Some of the reasons for taking a practicum student:

• They are the bees of education, cross pollinating ideas from one school to another and from their own educational background
• They bring enthusiasm into the classroom
• They are an extra pair of eyes, ears and hands
• They lack pre-conceived notions and challenge the status quo
• They bring fresh ideas, a level of innocence and hope
• They lack some of our cynicism and crustiness
• It forces us to re-evaluate our own teaching practices
• They bring youthfulness into teaching staff
• It provides some longevity to our own learning when seen in their teaching

Most of all they can be a lot of fun. Once in your fourth or fifth year, I'd heartily recommend taking one for a term.