Aside

How Professional Associations Support Teachers, a look inside the ETA

Our latest edition of the Teachers Education Review focuses on the role of professional associations for supporting and developing teachers. In this 2 part special, Cameron reports from inside the 2013 NSW English Teachers’ Association Annual Conference held on 22-23 November at the University of New South Wales. In part one, Cameron interviews the very inspiring president of the ETA, Karen Yager, and we also hear from Dan Haesler in his second edition of “Off Campus” where he discusses PISA and politics.

In part 2, interviews include Treasurer Susan Gazis, Executive Officer Eva Gold, Journal Editor Mel Dixon & Assistant Editor Stefanie Lia, VOX Pops, and discussions about Transmedia Narratives and the NSW English Studies course.

For more podcasts check out the Teachers Education Review Website or my Podcasts page.

 

Advertisements

Is it Time to Review the Common Grade Scale?

It’s mid year report writing time for teachers across NSW, and Australia.

The Australian Government requires teachers to provide written reports to parents twice a year. We must include comments for each key learning area or subject, and we are required to grade all our students against state and national standards on an A-E scale for effort and achievement.

One of the things I value about the report writing cycle is that it forces me to stop and reflect on each student as an individual. In order to report, I need consider where each student is against state and national standards, not just against my class standard. I need to consider not only what they’ve learned but how they learn, and set goals for each students future learning. While this is something I aim to do all the time, teaching is a busy job. I like that the reporting cycle forces me to take the time out to do that.

However, even though I’ve been using it for years, I find the A-E scale problematic.

The Common Grade Scale for Primary and Junior Secondary Students

A The student has an extensive knowledge and understanding of the content and can readily apply this knowledge. In addition, the student has achieved a very high level of competence in the processes and skills and can apply these skills to new situations.
B The student has a thorough knowledge and understanding of the content and a high level of competence in the processes and skills. In addition, the student is able to apply this knowledge and these skills to most situations.
C The student has a sound knowledge and understanding of the main areas of content and has achieved an adequate level of competence in the processes and skills.
D The student has a basic knowledge and understanding of the content and has achieved a limited level of competence in the processes and skills.
E The student has an elementary knowledge and understanding in few areas of the content and has achieved very limited competence in some of the processes and skills.

In the 70s, when I was in Primary school, a C grade was considered poor. In the Australian Common Grade Scale, C is considered sound and therefore should reflect the achievement of most students. This means we are constantly having to reeducate parents and students about the gradings. Year after year we reassure parents that a C is not a fail, and in fact means that their child is progressing well towards the expected grade outcomes.

The Common Grade Scale does not reflect the way teachers usually  provide feedback. Throughout the year, we focus on where each student is at, their strengths and areas for development. We set goals for further learning and differentiate our instruction. We are so used to looking at students as individuals on a continuum of learning. It feels wrong, and awfully final to pigeonhole them as A, B, C, D and E students.

One of the intentions of the Common Grade Scale was to allow parents to know how their children were achieving compared to national standards. A C should be the same standard, regardless of whether the student is at school in Sydney’s North or in a remote community in Western NSW. However, as much as we try, it is very difficult to get it right. It is  so easy to be influenced by the cohort you teach, and by the school you work in. If the cohort has a lot of high achieving students, students who are average, may appear to be achieving poorly. Similarly, if a cohort is weaker, then some C grade students might appear to achieving at a higher level than they actually are.

 

This year  I’ve  been considering how Bloom’s taxonomy fits in with all of this. When you look at the language that describes the different levels of the Common Grade Scale, it seems that sound achievement would only involve students working at the bottom 2 levels of Bloom’s taxonomy – knowledge and understanding. The grade descriptors only start talking about applied knowledge when it comes to the higher grades. This leads me to  question how well  the Common Grade Scale can really be used to describe student achievement. Bloom’s taxonomy is a fairly common planning tool for teachers.  I find it odd that the Common Grade Scale would consider all those higher order thinking skills to be above what is expected for sound achievement.

Critical and Creative thinking is now embedded in the new Australian Curriculum. Perhaps this is as good a time as any to review the way we report on student achievement.

 

 

 

Why I Went on Strike

Last week I, along with thousands of other NSW public school teachers, went on strike for 24 hours. Many sections of the media portrayed it as a dispute between teachers and the government, and questioned how long parents would continue to support teachers if the dispute becomes prolonged.

The thing is, this is not a dispute between teachers and the government. We are not asking for more pay, or for improved working conditions (though both would be nice). We took this action because we are trying to save our public education system. This is a dispute between anyone who values a well funded, quality public education system and the NSW government who seem to think that there are more important things to spend our taxes on.

A few months ago, the NSW State Government announced a radical restructure of our public education system called “Local Schools, Local Decisions”. The government claims that these so-called reforms will improve the quality of the education that is delivered in public schools across the state. As part of that reform, 200 positions were axed from our state office. Adrian Piccoli, the NSW education minister said in relation to the job cuts,

‘Taxpayers expect efficiency. Where we can reduce the bureaucracy and eliminate duplication we will, in order to maximize the resources going to schools.

Here is just one example of how Piccoli’s job cuts are eliminating duplication:

NSW is a large state, and we are divided into educational regions. Each region had a literacy consultant for primary and another for high school. Their role was significant. The consultants would run professional development courses across each region. They would keep us up to date with the latest best-practice models, would visit us in schools, working with individuals and teams to improve our delivery of curriculum. Whenever a new syllabus came out, the consultants would work with us, assisting us in understanding the documents adapting them to suit our individual school contexts. They were experts, and worked closely with many of us as mentors. I can honestly say, I would not be nearly as effective in teaching or leading literacy at my own school if it was not for the ongoing support of these experts.

In a remarkable act of efficiency, and to eliminate duplication, we now have just one primary literacy consultant for all of NSW.

That’s one consultant for 1, 605 schools!

I would very much like to know how reducing our support in this way is intended to improve educational outcomes.

Including the literacy consultants, 200 similarly important jobs were cut from our state office at the beginning of June. In yesterday’s  Sydney Morning Herald, it was revealed that a further 2, 400 jobs will go over the next four years.

The infrastructure that supports the delivery of quality educational programs is being dismantled, and our minister has not provided any information about how education will be supported in the future. It seems that this so-called reform is driven by cost cutting, rather than any true vision for education. Is that what we really want for our children in NSW? In the words of Eva Cox,

We live in a society not an economy

For more information or to send a message to the minister go to the Local Cuts website.

Related Articles

So, what is this teachers strike all about?

Education head office staff cuts done in secrecy

Why NSW teachers are striking tomorrow