Fixing Education


CPDS Home Contact  
What is the Problem?

Recent reports suggest that international comparisons of student performance in reading, science and mathematics for year 4 and Year 8 students put Australia's performance in a bad light.

I would be interested in comments on whether there is a real problem, and if so what the causes of it are from a practical educator's viewpoint.

Some 'expert' views on the causes of problems in Australia's education system follow:

(Corrigan D. Are we headed for an educational disaster? Hardly: The Conversation, 12/12/12)

International literacy, numeracy and science tests should be cause for alarm. Victoria’s minister (Martin Dixon) has claimed that spending has increased, and that a lack of funding is not the problem. However money is clearly not going where it is needed. Most federal funding goes to private schools, whereas most state / territory funds go to government schools. Canberra now gives more money to private schools than it gives to universities, and many times more funds to high-fee private schools than to disadvantaged schools. Official data do not support claims by Victoria’s minister about increased government funding of education. International comparisons show Australia has a relatively low government funding of schools as a percentage of GDP (though some countries have little or no private funding to complement this). Government education spending has been falling as a percentage of GDP. There has been a drift (now a flood) from public schools for 20 years. In conservative states $1bn has been taken from public schools over the last two years, while private education has been maintained / increased. Claims of increased government spending on education need to be backed by evidence. Only full implementation of Gonski recommendations can channel resources to schools / children that need it most. (Zyngier D., ‘ Test shock: is our education system failing students?’, The Conversation, 13/12/12)

Badly designed curricula, low standards in primary teacher education and whole language methods for teaching reading are seen as responsible for poor test results. Sivanes Phillipson (Monash) blames poor curriculum. Ben Jensen (Grattan Institute) agreed that schools set low standards. A new national schools’ curriculum is being devised, but this is not lifting standards. Peter Sullivan (Monash) said that national curriculum is set at right level in maths but: students need more challenging tasks; parents need to be engaged in educating children; and teachers raised in status in community eyes. Universities should stop lowering standards for primary school teaching degrees. Kevin Wheldall (a literacy expert, Macquarie University) advocates phonetics based rather than whole of language methods. The problem, he suggests, lies in teacher training (Dodd T., ‘Blame starts for school results’, Financial Review, 13/12/12)

Geoff Masters (Australian Council for Educational Research) expressed shock and disappointment about poor test results. This parallels the warnings that others have given for years - though in 2006 (at the height of debate about `the dumbed-down Outcomes Based Education curriculum model) Masters argued that concerns about falling standards were misplaced. At that time there were: quotable statistics showing that performance remained strong; concerns about problems in Western Australia and Tasmania; and federal government concerns about literacy and the teaching of history. But those responsible did not react to emerging indications of problems - but rather suggested (eg Alan Reid, Australian Curriculum Studies Association) that a sense of crisis was being unfairly manufactured. Problems are also indicated by: (a) universities' need for remedial classes in algebra and essay writing; (b) primary students entering secondary school ill-equipped; and (c) flat-lining of literacy / numeracy standards (according to Andrew Leigh, ANU and now federal member for Fraser). Federal government's approach is highly centralised, statist and inflexible - while overseas research suggests that autonomy, diversity and competition is better. By imposing a national curriculum, national testing, national teaching standards and its National Plan for Schools Improvement the government is limiting schools' ability to manage themselves, and drowning teachers in red tape. Those responsible for the poor state of Australian education are the same 'experts' who advise the Commonwealth's agenda. The alternative is demonstrated by Australia's Catholic and independent schools - which often achieve world's best. The best way to raise standards is to properly resource such schools and to give parents a choice (eg by providing education vouchers). (Donnelly K., 'Writing is on the wall as standards trend down', The Australian, 14/12/12)

Australia's education system has failed to deliver an acceptable standard in the basic building blocks or reading, science and mathematics - as shown by a 2011 survey of year 4 students in 44 countries through Progress in International Reading Literacy Study. A mathematics and science study (TIMMS) for year 8 students reported relatively better news. The core of the problem lies in teacher performance and resources. More than half of all students are in schools affected by resource shortages 9ie by under-qualified teachers). This supports Gonski's proposals for additional resources for less advantaged schools. Results for indigenous students were worse than for others. The federal government's goal of lifting Australia to a 'top five' status by 2025 does not look promising. Sue Thompson (Australian Council for Education Research) points to dramatic improvements in maths and science performance in Hong Kong and Singapore (and also in the US and South Korea) - while Australia's performance stagnated. Geoff Masters (CEO ACER) says that solution lies in training and performance (ie an emphasis on teacher training and skills). Difficulties lie in community attitudes, school system structure (including many disadvantaged schools), and teachers' status. Models exist in Finland and Asia. Grattan Institute (in Catching up: learning from the best school systems in east Asia) provided a blueprint for improvement - suggesting that attention be paid to Shanghai, Honk Kong, Korea and Singapore - which focus on things that matter (according to Ben Jensen). This includes a culture of 'diagnosing learning and building a culture of teacher collaboration through classroom observation, peer feedback, mentoring and modelling good teaching'. This implies a relentless focus on classroom improvement. Australia's politicians are however obsessed with trivialities. Australians were once described as the 'white trash' of Asia - and 'uneducated' could be added to this (Walker T. 'Failing grade a shock to the school system', Financial Review, 15/12/12)

There is a need for a plan to ensure that all children learn to read proficiently in the first few years at school. The three tier Response to Intervention model could achieve this. The first tier includes tha implicit model of reading instruction, complemented by phonological awareness / phonetics / fluency / vocabilary / comprehension. This would be followed by other tiers for those who are found to be not coping.  (Wheldall K. 'The three-tier model will turn children into proficient readers, The Australian, 22/12/12)

A decade ago a group of literacy researchers warned about poor teaching of reading, and again yesterday wrote an open letter about this because of poor reading ability of 25% of year 4 students shown by international tests (Ferrari J., 'A decade of lost action on literacy', Australian, 22-23/12/12)

Australian students have been subjected to haphazard experiments in all aspects of education for years - so poor outcomes are to be expected. The poor position of boys was recognised in 2002 - and in some quarters this has been a cause for celebration. Education has been skewed towards the psychological and physical development of girls (Shanahan A., 'Education system is biased towards girls', Australian, 22-23/12/12)

 

 

Fiscal problems exist. Australia has been facing constraints since middle of last decade. And issues related to US fiscal cliff illustrate the international dimension of fiscal difficulties facing governments in developed economies

Teachers describe severe problems in classroom

The goals of education in East Asia are different

Fiscal imbalances in Australia are a major socure of difficulties (and cost escalation) in almost all government functions. Reform to provide tax sources appropriate to state functions, and which give states financial incentives to take economic development seriously . This is not the only source of problems in government

Reviews such as that by Gonski (which proposed …) which dealt only with funding are inadequate. There is a need for process es that are broader – which deal with ALL aspects of the problem incrementally and simultaneously. The key is research into all aspects of the problem; deconcentration of responsibility / financial capacity to enable initiative ; and building on what now works, rather than