All we seem to hear about these days is failing teachers in failing schools. Those from business, government and the field of economics have all weighed in, criticising teachers, teacher educators and schools and offering often naive, misinformed or ideologically driven “remedies”.
So called evidence is being selectively used both to paint a grim picture of the “problem” and to prescribe quick-fix solutions.
These are worrying signs that decades of empirical research are being ignored in the discussion we need to have about teacher quality. The quality teacher movement is now in danger of being hijacked.
A long running debate
I have been involved with research into teaching and learning for more than 20 years – studying teaching expertise, recognising and rewarding it and above all, trying to improve it.
We know from research that the biggest in-school influence on student achievement is teacher quality. Developments such as NAPLAN, My School, the Australian Curriculum, the Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA), National Partnerships and AITSL have all recognised and led to a greater emphasis on teaching.
I was initially pleased to see the growing attention given to teachers and hoped that this would lead to significant investment in their professional learning. But it is now clear that rather than regarding teachers as our most important asset they are now being seen as our biggest problem.
The blame game
Important work has been misconstrued. John Hattie’s recognition, for example, of teachers’ importance has been twisted to imply that it is the teacher’s fault when students fail to learn.
We now frequently hear of the teacher being “the biggest influence on student achievement” but somewhere along the way a crucial term has been mislaid: “in-school”. Other school and non-school factors in total are more important.
Hattie’s position on direct instruction has also been misconstrued as advocating didactic, “traditional” teacher-centred approaches rather than its intended meaning of teachers having a clear intention of what they are trying to achieve with every student and orchestrating learning in their classrooms accordingly.
Instead of a collegial opening up of classrooms and professional practice, what follows is that because of their influence, some feel we need greater control and surveillance over teachers. Some principals engage in a growing practice of snap inspections of classrooms, sometimes accompanied by video-taking to “catch” teachers performing badly. Rather than useful constructive feedback, we see arbitrary and impressionistic “assessment”, with an unfocused demand to lift performance.
Recent Victorian and NSW government discussion papers on teaching paint a picture of a crisis that requires intervention from on high. The role of professional standards has been twisted to be more about judging and dismissing teachers than developing and recognising them.
Rather than being done with and for teachers, many hastily created measures are being done to them and without them, guaranteeing resistance and minimal compliance and making mutual understanding and collaboration almost impossible.
Where’s the evidence?
Compounding this issue is a growing chorus of ill-informed half-baked solutions to the “problem” of teacher quality, including sacking the “bottom” 5% of teachers, whoever they are, and somehow replacing them with better teachers; paying teachers by “results”, however these are determined and measured; punishing and rewarding schools on the basis of “performance”; giving principals more autonomy and power to hire and fire; bonus pay for the “top” teachers; raising entry standards for teacher candidates, and allowing non-teachers to become principals.
Nowhere in any of these solutions (“sticks”) do I see a way for teachers to develop and be rewarded for growth (“carrots”). What I do see is a blanket stigmatisation of teachers, principals, teacher educators and education system leaders.
All these “solutions” ignore the fact that Australia still performs well on international measures of student achievement such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA).
Of course, we can’t rest on our laurels as there are signs of slippage and as the Gonski report into schools funding pointed out, the equity gap remains an issue.
We are, however, well ahead of the United States on PISA, to use one measure, yet we still look to the USA as a model to follow.
A fixation with Finland, Shanghai, South Korea and the like represents the worst form of cultural cringe. We need to recognise and build on the strengths we have rather than “cherry picking” what appear to be recipes for success from vastly different contexts.
In the 1990s, everybody was talking about emulating the educational and business practices of Japan due to the strength of its economy. Nobody talks about copying Japan now.
Equity and quality
We cannot ignore the effects on learning and development of socio-economic status, family background, geographic location and the resources available to schools. Despite their best efforts, every teacher is not going to be able to bring every student to an average or above average level of performance – a statistical and practical impossibility.
Life isn’t fair, but good teaching and good schools are the best means we have of overcoming disadvantage.
The Gonski report showed we have a highly inequitable and inefficient means of allocating funding to schools which has been cobbled together over time. We need a lean, powerful and efficient system. But instead of Usain Bolt, what we have is more like Frankenstein’s monster.
Changing this system would be hard at the best of times, but the lack of political will makes it very difficult indeed.
Whenever this debate surfaces, politicians fear alienating voters and quickly guarantee that whatever the plan, no school will be worse off. This almost guarantees nothing will change and that inequities will be perpetuated if not made worse.
Time for teachers to speak out
We are at a crucial point in our development as an educated nation and we need strong, informed bipartisan support rather than baseless politicking.
We need to be aware of decades of empirical work rather than dismissive. We need to stop looking for quick fix solutions which have been found wanting elsewhere.
Above all, as a nation we need to recognise education as our most important investment, and not a cost.
It is time for the profession as a whole to speak up and to question from a basis of evidence so called remedies to the perceived problems of teachers.
Dennis Alexander
logged in via LinkedIn
Well argued Stephen. I would refrain from talking about "teacher quality" altogether as it is not the person that is the issue. As you say:
"Life isn’t fair, but good teaching and good schools are the best means we have of overcoming disadvantage."
Good teaching, quality teaching, quality professional practice is what is needed. Addressing these, making sure that teachers receive constructive and quality feedback on how to improve their teaching and students' learning is the key. When "quality teaching" is the focus, clinical rounds, videos of classroom teaching and peer feedback all become useful and constructive tools to improve professional practice and are welcomed by teachers.
To reiterate, it is about "quality teaching" not "quality teachers".
David Zyngier
Senior Lecturer Faculty of Education at Monash University
Time and time again so called experts on school education - so- called because their knowledge of school comes only from their own experience - and usually this experience is based on privileged private schools - want to import failed ideas from failed education systems. Think of Teach for Australia based on failed US and UK program's, think of NAPLAN based on the failures of NO Child Left Behind and think of MySchool based on the failed League Tables in England. That is Cultural cringe at it's worst.
Daniel Carr
Secondary Teacher
On what basis is Teach First a failed program? The UK's education standards body, Ofsted, has been glowing in its findings of the Teach First program. Whilst I agree that there may not have been rigour to the way in which education reforms were grafted from other nations in the past, increasingly we're seeing NAPLAN and PISA give us the data to see what can make a difference in a child's education. Cutting and pasting best practice isn't the solution, but if a program works overseas it should at least be considered in the Australian context - the Grattan Institute's recent report into education was a commendable effort to do so.
James Gutteridge
Teacher
Teach For Australia (TFA) has been given a lot of negative publicity due to having around 40% of its associates leave teaching after 2 years.
When I joined TFA in its inaugural year I was never told that we were expected to stay beyond the 2 years because that wasn't the point of the program. Even if people did leave it would be near impossible not to take the experience of teaching the lowest SES students in the country into another profession. The benefits of that experience might not be evident immediately but it definitely opens minds.
I agree with you that too many policy-makers are only basing their policies on their time at school, often a privileged private one. Perhaps TFA can be seen as a step towards changing this as we show future policy-makers what the lowest SES schools are actually like.
Here's a piece I wrote on how TFA changed my life: http://www.jamesgutteridge.com.au/2012/01/people-aresurprised-that-i-am-in.html
Tracy Heiss
logged in via Facebook
I agree whole heartedly, David.
Catherine Scott
Senior lecturer
I really like the Onion's take on TFAm alumnis' eulogising how TFA changed their lives. Funny, but very acute:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/my-year-volunteering-as-a-teacher-helped-educate-a,28803/
On a more serious note, in terms of the success of TFAust the latest report of the evaluation is lukewarm at best, describing TFA teachers as 'ineffective' in their first year.
Available from http://www.deewr.gov.au/Schooling/Documents/TfAPhase2Report.pdf
In addition, there are some very good reports from the USA that show that putting unqualified students in front of the neediest kids is nothing short of criminal. For example:
The press release: http://www.greatlakescenter.org/docs/Policy_Briefs/Heilig_TeachForAmerica.htm
The full report: http://greatlakescenter.org/docs/Policy_Briefs/Heilig_TeachForAmerica.pdf
Catherine Scott
Senior lecturer
And I did mean students. Teachers aren't teachers until they are changed. Before that they are student teachers.
James Gutteridge
Teacher
That Onion article is hilarious isn't it Catherine.
Jokes are always funnier when you're not on the receiving end of them.
According to you we mightn't be great teachers, but I know everyone of the TFA associates were good people who didn't make jokes at the expense of other people.
Catherine Scott
Senior lecturer
James, it's not 'according to me' it's according to the research. A great deal of research exists that shows that people who have not been trained as teachers don't make very good teachers. We would accept this of doctors, engineers or architects, for instance. Why is it so hard to accept it of teachers? Would we want to submit to surgery by someone who had done Cut For Australia?
If you concede reluctance to drive over a bridge designed by someone from Draft For Australia, why not concede that not preparing teachers before putting them in front of a class is improper?
That the TFA associates were, according to you, lovely people that didn't poke fun of others does not excuse putting untrained people in front of classes, especially in a situation where the explicit expectation is that they will not stay in teaching.
You have to admit from the outside it does look like a sort of 'gap year' for graduates.
Daniel Carr
Secondary Teacher
Hi Catherine,
Thanks for linking that DEEWR report. Alas I can't seem to find where TFA associates are described as ineffective - can you direct me to a specific page?
I did find the following comments in the Executive Summary:
"all participating schools indicating that they would take another TFA Associate if they had an available vacancy: a strong endorsement of the quality of the Associates" (ix)
"School personnel favourably compared them to other beginning teachers" (x)
To me it reads that the TFA associates are well-regarded by their schools and colleagues. Furthermore, I worry that people expect teachers to be fantastically effective in their first year in the job. That's unreasonable, and if you want to make a valid comparison to TFA, compare the associates to other graduate teachers in their effectiveness.
James Gutteridge
Teacher
I guess if we were ineffective schools wouldn't take on any more TFA associates. They are though.
Catherine Scott
Senior lecturer
Page xv
"It was clear from the comments of Associates and other school personnel that in the first one to two terms Associates were not highly effective teachers.
They were novices, finding their feet and requiring a significant amount of support. However, they were not considered to be a liability and they were favourably compared to other beginning teachers. They were enthusiastic and determined contributing members of staff, and they quickly earned the respect of students and staff.
Evidence provided by school personnel suggests that in their second year the majority of Associates were considered to be the same as other teachers in the school. Associates themselves were considerably more confident than in their first year. "
Comment removed by moderator.
John Nicol
logged in via Facebook
There are multiple experiences where very good teahing has been carried out by totally untrained teachers and very poor teaching is carried out by four year "trained" teachers. There is no doubt that some training is useful, but it is probably much more effective if it is given to students/teachers who have experience in teaching. A lot of the training in education faculties which involves history and psychology of teaching and learning, is of no benefit to studnets coming directly from school…
Read moreSimon Arthur
Reader
When "Leaders" start blaming their employees, they're showing their ineptitude. A leader is someone who can paint the big picture goals and give people the direction and inspiration to get there. When you start blaming the people you're supposed to be leading, then you create a culture where everyone tries to cover themselves lest they be hung, drawn & quartered, and this kills the initiative and positive role-modelling that will help our kids to succeed in life. This is not leadership, it's destructor-ship.
James Gutteridge
Teacher
The culture of a place is determined at the top!
Perhaps we can turn the conversation around from one of discouraging mediocrity, to encouraging excellence?
el don
logged in via Twitter
thanks for summarising what i have been complaining about for ages.
and in the process, outlining several of the reasons i am no longer a teacher.
at the same time, students need to be exposed to all kinds of teachers and teaching... teachers are people with life experiences as well as subject knowledge - their personal ways of bringing a subject alive and relating to students is something that should not be lowest common denominatored out of the system - some students react differently to some teachers. it would be absolutely horrible for some students to find every teacher exactly the same... or perhaps we should forget teacher training at all? and simply install instructional robots?
Dale Bloom
Laboratory Analyst
All the man on the street hears is dubious new learning theories that sweep through every decade and the latest statistics on falling literacy and numeracy.
When teachers can't agree with the 'theory' that underlies their job what are we supposed to think?
Teachers aren't to blame, Teaching is to blame.
Michael Shand
Michael Shand is a Friend of The Conversation.
Software Tester
Dude, everywhere I see your comments its always something grossly inept or backwards.
Are you a troll?
Daniel Carr
Secondary Teacher
As a teacher I found this an interesting read - however I must object to several points.
I agree the current funding arrangement is grossly inequitable - the Gonski reforms to funding should go ahead lock, stock and barrel. But I'm always aware that rejigging funding arrangements alone won't solve either the equity problem or arrest our sliding rank in the international league tables.
Teaching quality must be a focus. The recent Vic gov report into the teaching profession doesn't pull its…
Read moreJames Gutteridge
Teacher
I definitely agree Daniel. When I finished high school with a very high ENTER, teaching was not even considered, nor was it encouraged. In fact, when I became a teacher accidentally (through Teach For Australia) many people (old teachers included) severely questioned me.
This isn't good enough. Education is what prepares our entire future society and impacts many things beyond what is merely taught - including our compassion, creativity, determination, curiosity, critical thinking and engagement. Other countries such as Finland and Sweden have such a high value on education that only the best graduates are allowed to become teachers. Some people might be good at teaching content, but if they cannot draw out these qualities in our students our society will suffer badly and already is.
Andrew Worsnop
logged in via Twitter
Stephen,
What are the "full-baked solutions"? What should we be doing instead?
What would you do if you were made Premier/Prime Minister/Minister for Education?
I think there are a lot of voices in these debates that recognise the problems we need to solve (equity and continual improvement) and talk about the problems with the current reform agenda - but I don't feel I hear enough articulate alternatives that the Government should pursue.
Andrew Worsnop
logged in via Twitter
I bugged Stephen on email as well and he helpfully replied with these "fully-baked solutions":
- A new career architecture http://live.unimelb.edu.au/episode/let%E2%80%99s-get-serious-about-teacher-quality-need-new-career-architecture-australia%E2%80%99s-teachers
- Teaching Talent: The Best Teachers for Australia’s Classrooms http://www.bca.com.au/Content/101446.aspx
James Gutteridge
Teacher
Here's a piece I wrote about how teachers should be paid:
http://www.jamesgutteridge.com.au/2012/04/how-teachers-should-be-paid.html
Andrew Worsnop
logged in via Twitter
Hey James,
Thanks for your article. In answer to the points it makes:
About tenure vs merit (performance?) pay: There are a lot of people happy to pay people on merit, but have grave concerns about performance pay distorting incentives so that it actually degrades learning (by assessing on a limited set of variables). Tenure gets merit right in the aggregate (this is well supported in the literature) and doesn't have this distortion effect. Until teachers are satisfied with the assessment model…
Read moreAdam Richards
Teacher
"It is essentially merit pay, but without accountability. It is interesting that the same unions who are opposed to merit pay (where teachers are paid based on the performance of their students) are fully in support of tenure."
I am not sure this is completely true. It comes down to how that performance is measured, and the 'handicaps' from which the students begin.
"...but the best teachers are the most passionate ones who care about each of their students.", and just because you are passionate doesn't mean you are a good teacher. Enthusiasm doesn't equate to ability.
I could deconstruct your 'piece' further, but all I would like to say is that it isn't simple. Teachers with more experience, do have more skills. Being enthusiastic, doesn't mean you are doing a good job. I appreciate your efforts at explaining such a difficult subject, but your underlying assumptions are faulty.
James Gutteridge
Teacher
Thanks for your comment Adam. I try to avoid arguing or criticism so I'll leave your comment as is, especially as I'm assuming you are a teacher with experience.
I will further explain my article however: I wasn't stating that teachers with experience do not have skills, I was just saying that that's how our current pay system is based. Most schools clearly believe that the more experienced you are the more pay you deserve. Unfortunately many teachers are then encouraged to stay in teaching…
Read moreJames Gutteridge
Teacher
Hi Andrew, thanks for your comments.
Definitely agree that experience develops skills, but we should not be solely basing our pay on that. I see every day many teachers with much more experience than me who fail to engage their students, are not passionate about what they do, are not constantly learning new things, or are just tired.
What we need to do is have a combination of experience with other metrics to encourage young, passionate people to stay in teaching, or even enter it to begin…
Read moreAdam Richards
Teacher
Thanks for the clarification.
Adam Richards
Teacher
“The more I know the less I understand” is kind of an apt adage when it comes to education. When I first began teaching I thought the ideal of being the perfect teacher was achievable. By this I mean, “A teacher that could be all things to all students.” I now realise this isn’t the case. There are teachers out there that the majority wouldn’t accept as ‘good’ teachers. Yet, within specific circumstances, especially when dealing with those coming from less than ideal backgrounds, they are the best…
Read moreAdam Richards
Teacher
"This does not mean I do not believe there are teaches out there who should *not* be removed from the profession, just that there are ‘different horses for different courses’.
Sorry.
Philip Dowling
IT teacher
It is pleasing that the article and the comments do not reduce education to the usual private vs public and "send more money" mantras.
The comments about leadership are especially important.
The general public tries to assign each new issue to schools as a problem that they need to address, be it drug education, driver education, cyberbullying, etc. A day at the beach on a surf awareness is the most bizarre of those that I have been "funded".
Michael Shand
Michael Shand is a Friend of The Conversation.
Software Tester
Beware of "For-Profit" schools and colleges, they are very good at showing how much money you can make off education....however they dont have your childrens best interest in mind. This is where large privitisation of our school system will lead. A strong public education system is the foundation of a fair and free democracy as it provides equal oppertunity to all kids of all backgrounds and most importantly it provides these oppertunities to those who need it most, the poor, the disadvantaged and the troubled.
Stephen Dinham
Chair of Teacher Education and Director of Learning and Teaching at University of Melbourne
Thanks everybody for the comments. If I can make two observations, the first is that teachers and teaching can't be separated - they are two sides of the same coin or as Yeats put it, "How can we separate the dancer from the dance?'.
Read moreSecondly I am well aware that academics (and others) are good at highlighting problems but less so on solutions. As hinted in the article, I have been working in the areas for some time. In another post I'll detail this, but here are some concrete proposals arising…
Dennis Alexander
logged in via LinkedIn
Sorry Stephen, dancer is to dance is not the same as teacher is to teaching. Unless you want to insert choreographer and curriculum writers as a first step and then talk about composer and some other analog, the analogy falls at the first hurdle. No-one sees a professionally trained dancer who has been taught and then trained to do a particular dance, to a particular piece of music, in a particular context as somehow being a defective human being if they don't entertain them. But that is how…
Read moreStephen Dinham
Chair of Teacher Education and Director of Learning and Teaching at University of Melbourne
This was omitted due to space restrictions but the references might be useful.
Read moreA Growing Involvement With Teacher Quality
I have been involved with research into teaching and learning for more than 20 years. Much of my early work involved working in schools observing and interviewing teachers and students and surveying teachers about their work both in Australia and overseas. A former teacher, I was involved in projects investigating aspects such as teacher induction, communication in schools…
John Nicol
logged in via Facebook
At the risk of being labelled as someone who has no idea about modern education, I would have to say that in 1946 to 1953 I attended a school where few if any of the teachers had any formal education training - they had experience although many were only a couple of years away from their own Senior (Grade 12) exams. I have some experience, in "teaching" having spent 30 years as a University teacher. My own academic progress was "normal" and I cannot find anything for which I could criticise the…
Read morePhilip Dowling
IT teacher
John,
Read moreI am inclined to agree with most of your observations.
Good subject knowledge.
An interest in the subject.
Good presentation skills.
Basic classroom management skills.
These are all more important than the philosophy and psychology of education. (I found educational psychology a very poor relation to mainstream psychology.)
Despite all the great new means of success - slide projectors, 16mm movie projectors, cuisenaire rods, videorecorders, open classrooms, the new maths, computer laboratories…
Raine S Ferdinands
Retired
John, your comments here make lots of sense and reflect the reality about teaching. Congratulations! Your in-depth experience in this field is strikingly obvious.
I have just retired from teaching (by choice) and with both local and international secondary school teaching experience (Physics). I taught for a short while in the state system but the vast majority of my teaching experience has been in the private sector in London, Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur, Sydney and Melbourne. I can categorically…
Read more