The need for sociable behaviour

Should unsociable behaviour be accepted in our schools?

I suppose this is the question that arises when we consider the role of schools in the community. Is it the primary role of schools to teach curriculum, do schools have a responsibility to teach children the limits imposed on citizens post-childhood or is it primarily the role of parents?

The Curriculum framework and its values places the answer firmly, for better or worse, with schools teaching sociability, with some parents unable to fulfil this role for many reasons. If a child comes socially ill-equipped for school, then it is up to the school to enable the child.

The statement, "this is the home environment mimicked at school " and "he only reacts this way until he knows a teacher" I don't really accept. To swear at the wrong person outside school or threaten violence with little provocation is to invite violence or incarceration in return. To condone such behaviour in school is to ill-equip these children for their time post school. A teacher is the token of authority in a school and all teachers deserve the same respect, whether known to the student or not, in the same way a policeman or judge is given the same respect in the real world. The alternative is to bring the justice system into schools - something to resist as it is a downward spiral or students to continue challenging authority in later life with dire consequences.

With declining community values, the acceptance of swearing and abusive language around (if not at) teachers, the abundance of emotional bullying by students of peers, the lack of effective strategies to deal with such bullying and the deferral of action until critical incidents occur is not teaching these kids respect for authority (in fact it is diminishing it), improving respect for others or ultimately creating respect for themselves.

I suppose it comes back to the niceness aspect of social interaction and the drift of community away from respect of the nice and considerate person to the glamorisation of the abusive idiot. Hopefully the pendulum will again swing back soon.

Sooner than later - as the perception that state schools have a bullying problem and an inability to deal effectively with students with social issues scares many parents away from our sector.

It is worrying.

Independent public schools

Wondering if your school has applied for independent public school status? Wonder no longer!

Click here!

Restricting the damage from League Tables

Here's acknowledgement that ACARA will make mistakes when implementing league tables and that league tables have caused issues in other countries for those implementing them. I hope the Federal government realises the potential effect on public schooling straight after the damage done through the tragic implementation of OBE in WA.

This being the case Dr Hill (head of ACARA), it would be a good idea to limit the damage and make sure league tables actually work in one state/territory (I'd suggest NT as that's where NAPLAN shows the biggest issue is) before inflicting it on the rest of the nation. It is utterly irresponsible to do otherwise. We need to learn in education circles from the OBE fiasco... (Learning in education?? Don't be stupid!!) Oh and by the way, progress is not the best indicator of effective change in a school, if your progress is defined by invalid statistics.

On that topic, well done WA, we've taught to the test and improved our NAPLAN scores (see Saturday's West, 12 September p.7). There is still an absence of statistically valid evidence of curriculum improvement and retention of skills and knowledge beyond the test - at least none that I have seen. I wait to see the improvement in year 10's next year that should follow great NAPLAN results (highly unlikely due to changing demographics within the suburbs I teach due to increasing concentrations of refugees & 457 working visas) - I hope I get a performance pay rise too for being "super effective" as our results improve dramatically once normal demographics return and urban gentrification continues.

I hate to say it, as I'm as impatient for change as anyone but let's get the league table concept right (I don't see how but I'm open to rational argument) before implementing anything systemically across the nation. This takes time, which means political time lines of four years with political implementation periods of 2 years against educational timeframes of 14-16 years before success can be measured effectively. I hope someone other than government is given ownership of this issue (institutions, Curriculum Council, WACOT listen carefully), someone financially or legally independent from government interference needs to control the education debate. I can't believe I'm promoting three ineffective bodies but the government nonsense has to stop, the damage is potentially worse as Party politics swing with the latest trend.

Bring on the next batch of teacher bashing - we're whingers standing the way of progress. What would we know, we only teach, have degrees and live the education debate. We can't run when policy is wrong. Blaming teachers for poor results in the whole of WA is a cop out - after all teachers are not responsible for the systemic mismanagement of education over a long period of time, government is. We could probably also blame the union movement for something - that's a trendy way to shift blame too.

Politics is again in the way of common sense and we will again have to jump through hurdles for political necessity rather than good practice. Whatever damage is caused should be placed squarely in the lap of Julia Gillard and the Labor party (in the same way they will celebrate any successes). It's a big risk given the failures in other countries that could easily be mitigated through running a simple prototype and having statistically sound evidence of the positive effects first. The teaching fraternity cost the Labor party the state election in WA. Perhaps federal Labor too are forgetting (or have been ineffectively OBE taught) lessons learned in History classes.

Update 8-10-09: Here's another link about validity of league table findings.

Class sizes

There was a passing comment on the end of the Channel 2 news stating that the only net effect of smaller class sizes was more teachers. This is a bit of a bizarre statement.

There is no problem with bigger classes as long as you accept the following:

• Classes must be fairly homogeneous - the is no way an average teacher can run 5 IEPs and manage students running a differentiated programme with 5+ levels of students effectively in a class of 30+ (and this is a likely requirement in a state high school with large class sizes)
• Discipline must be more rigid - expect more suspensions, timeouts and exclusions
• Intervention time per student is reduced - 30 students in a class + 15 mins instruction time per hour leaves a maximum of 2 minutes per student intervention/interaction time
• Marking time is increased or assessment frequency is reduced
• Decreased knowledge of individual students
• Increased chance that at risk/abused/neglected students will not be identified
• Additional needs students will need to be segregated out of the mainstream
• More teacher assistants will be required to manage the learning programme
• Reporting becomes more onerous
• Higher rate of disengaged students - dropout rates will be higher / graduation rates lower

The net result is that more students will fall through the cracks in the system. If you check the high performing schools in WA, class sizes are smaller and for good reason. It works.

To say that class sizes need to increase is ignoring the specific needs of low SEI schools that require individual intervention plans to redirect students back into the mainstream, or for plans for students that need higher levels of intervention (students with parents on working visas, refugees, indigenous students, additional needs, ESL, limited schooling, truants, drug and alcohol dependents, abused, single parents).

To accept blanket statements 'bigger class sizes is better' is like saying education was better in the 60's. It is possible to have bigger class sizes if you accept that the compromises above are acceptable. Australia is a tolerant and respected nation where people from all backgrounds can succeed in life - the basis of this premise is fair education. To offer low SEI parents a sub-standard education compared to high performing schools is breaking a promise with the nation.

It's not a fair go.