Firstly let me say I am not a teacher. I also haven't done heaps of research on this and so Can be wrong on this. I will also be deferring to a far superior blog which I think everyone should read first here. I will be making some points on why I don't like the website.
My biggest problem is that it is based off National tests when each state has its own Education system. For example our year 7s are in primary school where most everyone else are in high school. Now everyone know that you learn different stuff in primary schools. So this rating is being based on a test which contains stuff our kids aren't even being taught yet.
Now that gives the teachers a choice. They are told at the begining of the year what focus areas will be on the exam. Do the teachers then say- Ok we focus on these areas to the neglect of other areas. or do we teach according to the queensland syllabus knowing that we wont cover everything before the exams but the students are better off all round. Which is the better teacher? The one who makes sure their kids know the exam stuff or the one who has good all round students. I think the later.
Secondly Do we take into consideration the factors which cause these results. Now can I just say school can fudge figures. For instance we have a census date where on day 8 funding is allocated to a school depending on enrollments. Some schools hold onto bad students- suspending them till after the date then expelling them to go find another school. The school where I work receives a lot of these kids who are normally the 'naughty' kids without receiving as much funding for that, hence a lot of times our resources are stretched and classes are skewed. For example if we do not get 6 more students by thursday a casual teacher will lose their job. However as soon as that date passes we get swamped with the worst kids from 'the better' schools because we have a reputation for correcting behavior. This means our class sizes are larger than most and kids placed into ability classes so the ones who need the most work have the least amount of one to one time. If those kids had been there from the begining they would have beeen another teacher placed with them. This skews the scores down for everyone despite how good the teacher is- we are swapped with kids other schools want to get rid of. Now can I just say just because we have those bad kids it doesn't mean you are getting a bad education. For example our schools has had more students enter into the Local high school's scholar program than any of the like sized private schools in the area. We have also won the 'Optiminds' (school science comp) 3 out of the last 5 years and have won Top of the Class competitions 4 out of the last 7 years. We also have a reputation for winning sport, Drama and instrumentals- all areas dominated by private schools normally. None of this will you find on the my school website.
Also we have a high level of indigenous kids. In our area we have huge problems with indiginous absenteeism. Also many of these kids come to school without breakfast or lunch. We tried starting a breakfast club but got swamped with over 100 kids coming. We do lunches for kids who don't have them but its a small drop in the bucket. What hope does a kid have of learning when he hasn't had anything to eat. (And there are many other issues) This is noted in small print the indigenous pop and absenteeism but the numbers are wrong. We as a school are trying to encourage kids to come to school but it isn't our job. That's a parents job and my school has won awards for working with the community to get kids to school but many kids don't even come for more than 2 days a week. When their score is averaged across the school our rating plummets. It doesn't matter how good or bad a teacher is- if you have a kid for less than 50% of the week you aren't going to teach them much. How then can you compare the results of our school to a private school.
Now can I just say I'm not against people finding out information about schools. but I think you should do that yourself. Go visit the schools. If you are a Christian I believe you can make a world of difference in a public school and your kids will have a far better world view and stronger belief system. After all can you honestly send your kids to the other side of a city and then say your honest about wanting to build an evangelistic relationship when your church is so far away. Simone wrote a bit of a blog which made reference to that here. But when God told us to go out to the world he didn't just mean to the good schools- he mean all the schools. I currently have 1 grade level with RE. The good school nearby has all but one covered. Bad Kids need God too and I think it is so much easier to have a good Christian chat to a kid who is crying out for attention.
I could keep going for days but interested to hear what you guys think- especially those who are teachers in state and private schools. There just isn't enough decent information to offset the scores on the site. people take things at face value. But here are some clips from stuff.
AEU federal president Angelo Gavrielatos urged parents to talk to schools directly to
get detailed information on school performance rather than relying on the website.
“While it is a worthy objective to give parents more information they should not be
given information that is misleading,” Mr Gavrielatos said.
“National test results were never designed to be used to compare schools and the
Federal Government has been repeatedly told they are not accurate enough to be
used this way.
“As one of the leading experts in educational statistics Professor Margaret Wu says:
‘It would be irresponsible for the government and education researchers to tell the
public that school performance can be judged from information provided on the My
School website.’”
“Schools cannot be compared on the scores of short, snapshot tests completed last
May, some in grades with as few as 5 students.
“It is misleading to claim ‘like schools’ are being compared when important factors
like school size, funding and resources and the enrolment policies of a school are
not even taken into account. They ignore whether a school has a selective enrolment
policy.”
The Facebook debate (I wasn't always being serious in some stuff I said--- Names Removed)
C thinks that the "My School" website was a very poor decision.
T
I just can't wait till we get to vote on our favourite teacher. Clearly I'm the best and most favourite chaplain at School X
L
me too. The idea of rating teachers is terrible too.
P
*To play devil's advocate* Why shouldn't teachers be rated? Every other professional is subject to intense scrutiny and ongoing assessment, pretty much for the duration of their careers. And teachers have an incredibly important job - we should demand a high standard from them. But I do have to agree C, basing school ratings on a few hours worth of tests from the year is pretty dumb.
C2
In Chicago, the schools balanced this table by recording everything the parents did or didn't do..as per school policies eg. did/did not provide healthy lunches, did/did not attend parent/teacher meetings, did/did not ensure home reading or homework was done and the list goes on...and it is all published online....That is the way to go...BECAUSE educating children is a two-way street which involves BOTH parent and teacher working positively together to ensure their child's future is bright and happy....
C3
I have no issue with rating Schools publicly and Teachers internally.
Schools should be publicly marked on their performance but it should take into account the various factors that are necessary to make an informed decision.
I think that it is hard to rate teachers publicly because they teach different grades, have different demographics and have been teaching for various levels of experience. ie it cannot be a single grade just like any performance review it should have a number of criteria which you are assessed against.
Schools should be publicly marked on their performance but it should take into account the various factors that are necessary to make an informed decision.
I think that it is hard to rate teachers publicly because they teach different grades, have different demographics and have been teaching for various levels of experience. ie it cannot be a single grade just like any performance review it should have a number of criteria which you are assessed against.
J
I think it's a good idea. The execution might not be great, but as someone who will hopefully have kids one day I want to know what options are set before me. Public companies are made to show their data, indeed they need to to sell their product. Why should something as important as education be left to word of mouth and hearsay?
Still, I'm interested to hear why you think it's a bad idea? I wonder if the teachers unions have gotten to you... :p
Still, I'm interested to hear why you think it's a bad idea? I wonder if the teachers unions have gotten to you... :p
T
P and J to put it in med term we going to compare doctors, how many patients died for the doctor in plastic surgery compared to the the doctor in emergency or the the doctor in oncology. Doesn't matter what condition they came in but do they leave dead or alive? Also doesn't matter if you have a small practice in the north shore of sydney and one in the battle zone of Afghanistan.
J
No T, that's an unfair connection to make. That's comparing apples with oranges, and it also assumes that people are too stupid to take variables into account. If you wanted to compare two different haematology departments, go for your life. You'll find that the Royal Brisbane has a much higher mortality rate than the Townsville hospital (I pick these two because I've worked in both). Is that because it's a worse department? Of course not. It's because Townsville send all their complicated cases to Brisbane that they can't handle, and so does everyone else in the state, so by nature the patients in Brisbane are more unwell and hence more likely to die. That doesn't meant that comparing the two is a stupid idea; it just means that you need to use the right measure, and mortality rates clearly are the wrong measure. Or at least if you do use mortality rates as a measure, you need to factor in things such as complexity of case load.
People know that they can't expect Hughenden state school to produce the same level of academic achievement as Nudgee College, but they aren't so stupid as to think that factors such as cost of schooling and distance to travel shouldn't be factors in their decision. What they do deserve is to have all the information at hand so that they can make an informed choice.
To flip it, what would you prefer? If you needed a complex surgery in Townsville that was beyond the skill of the generalist surgeons there, would you prefer that we hid the information that it would be done better at another hospital? Or would you prefer that we told you that you would likely have a better outcome elsewhere but you would need to travel and incur cost etc and let you make the decision yourself? It's simply unethical to not give you all the options.
People know that they can't expect Hughenden state school to produce the same level of academic achievement as Nudgee College, but they aren't so stupid as to think that factors such as cost of schooling and distance to travel shouldn't be factors in their decision. What they do deserve is to have all the information at hand so that they can make an informed choice.
To flip it, what would you prefer? If you needed a complex surgery in Townsville that was beyond the skill of the generalist surgeons there, would you prefer that we hid the information that it would be done better at another hospital? Or would you prefer that we told you that you would likely have a better outcome elsewhere but you would need to travel and incur cost etc and let you make the decision yourself? It's simply unethical to not give you all the options.
L
P, I think having teachers rated by professionals is a potential idea. Rated by parents is bad. Would you want to be rated by patients who have no idea what your job actually consists of? Think about this. A lot of parents are pretty blind when it comes to their kids. They think their kids can do no wrong, and when they hear bad reports from the teachers, they automatically assume it is something wrong with the teacher; or if the child comes home complaining about the teacher who gave him detention/failed his test, the parent sometimes assumes it's the teacher doing something wrong/picking on his kid, and not the fact the kid is actually misbehaving/terrible at maths.
You also need to consider this. Different schools will bring out different performances in kids, regardless of the teachers. Anna Bligh's gov came up with an idea a while back to pay teachers depending upon their performance. This is a very, very bad idea because you can have a fantastic teacher, but throw in a bunch of (often low socio-economic) students who have been taught to hate school/authority by their parents and don't have any parental support re: completing homework, no encouragement to actually behave or even ATTEND school, and you will still get kids who fail miserably. Teachers know this, and so would avoid schools in such socio-economic areas like the plague because they know their 'performance' will drop and so would their pay. It's the same idea. A lot more goes into a teacher's performance than simply their ability; a child's willingness to learn, and most importantly, family support, are vital parts in a child succeeding in either the academic, sporting or musical arena.
Of course you do get some outstanding kids who reject what their parents model for them, but they are the exception to the rule.
You also need to consider this. Different schools will bring out different performances in kids, regardless of the teachers. Anna Bligh's gov came up with an idea a while back to pay teachers depending upon their performance. This is a very, very bad idea because you can have a fantastic teacher, but throw in a bunch of (often low socio-economic) students who have been taught to hate school/authority by their parents and don't have any parental support re: completing homework, no encouragement to actually behave or even ATTEND school, and you will still get kids who fail miserably. Teachers know this, and so would avoid schools in such socio-economic areas like the plague because they know their 'performance' will drop and so would their pay. It's the same idea. A lot more goes into a teacher's performance than simply their ability; a child's willingness to learn, and most importantly, family support, are vital parts in a child succeeding in either the academic, sporting or musical arena.
Of course you do get some outstanding kids who reject what their parents model for them, but they are the exception to the rule.
L
When I said ' A lot more goes into a teacher's performance', I should have put "performance" in inverted commas - because what they would be rating is not the teacher's true performance, but how it simply appears on the outside.
L
Actually J, you do get people so stupid as to not take variables into account. Sad but true.
T
to stop filling up people's walls I'll blog about it and we can debate there--- sorry all
P
I know this is a very, very long comment thread, but I wanna make a few statements:
1. No-one is suggesting we assess teachers without taking into account socio-economic status, rurality, funding, etc. That would be complely non-sensical and unfair.
2. Teacher assessment should be based on objective standards, not simply parent opinions, etc.
3. Parents have an extraordinarily large role to play in their children's education and in many cases teachers are wrongly blamed for the parents lack of interest/discipline/etc.
4. That being said, teachers should have to have a basic level of understanding - I've heard of English teachers failing on basic grammar, which is simply appaling. University entrance and course requirements should be raised to make sure we are getting a sufficiently high standard for our kids....
Sorry to spam you again C
1. No-one is suggesting we assess teachers without taking into account socio-economic status, rurality, funding, etc. That would be complely non-sensical and unfair.
2. Teacher assessment should be based on objective standards, not simply parent opinions, etc.
3. Parents have an extraordinarily large role to play in their children's education and in many cases teachers are wrongly blamed for the parents lack of interest/discipline/etc.
4. That being said, teachers should have to have a basic level of understanding - I've heard of English teachers failing on basic grammar, which is simply appaling. University entrance and course requirements should be raised to make sure we are getting a sufficiently high standard for our kids....
Sorry to spam you again C
L
The thing is P, to take all those things into account, you would need the teachers to be assessed by some sort of professional, which I think is a perfectly acceptable idea. But the "My School" idea is that teachers are assessed by parents, which I think is a very bad idea. You are very right that there are teachers out there with awful basic skills - in my opinion, they shouldn't have been allowed to pass their B. Ed. But there's a difference between a professional making that assessment - "Teacher X has a below average understanding of Grade 8 English" - and a parent's possible assessment.
Looking forward to Tim's blog so we can move the discussion off C status ;) haha.
T
P I agree with your point one but they are being judged off this regardless. I also want to make some comments about some doctors who also shouldn't be doctors but I wont :D
Looking forward to Tim's blog so we can move the discussion off C status ;) haha.
T
P I agree with your point one but they are being judged off this regardless. I also want to make some comments about some doctors who also shouldn't be doctors but I wont :D
8 comments:
Lol I know this first comment isn't really on topic, but I had to laugh Timmy when I saw you'd removed the names then the first comment was:
T: I just can't wait till we get to vote on our favourite teacher. Clearly I'm the best and most favourite chaplain at School X.
Three guesses what 'T' and School X stand for... :P
Stuss here, blogger won't let me sign in to comment so I had to comment anonymously.
Can I join your discussion?
I've got a few things to say. I was going to blog about it, but haven't got around to it.
The whole idea of the site is possibly good. I can't quite work out what for, but it could be good.
BUT
1. It is such an inaccurate picture of school achievement. Comparing schools based on one test sat in May? Really? There is so much more that goes on in a school than literacy and numeracy, and as far as I can tell is that this is only going to serve to minimise the importance of the non-measurable benefits a school community can provide students.
2. People are looking at the red squares and not seeing that this school's average is below average, but that this school is failing all of their students. Txt the Editor would back me up in my thinking that that is happening.
3. Yes, teachers do need to be held accountable and assessed like in other professions. Under public scrutiny like every other job. Hang on, I don't know many other professions where the employees are held under public scrutiny.
4. Some schools will teach to the test. That is a bad thing.
5. The national testing, in my view, should be used for individual schools to know where they need to prove, and for individual students and families to know where they need to improve. Not to compare and rank every school in Australia.
6. Just to pick up on something in your facebook discussion, I think this site encourages people to expect the same results from all schools, whether it is Nudgee or hughenden high.
7. We need better teachers. We need a society who respects teachers, so that better teachers want to work as teachers.
I'm just being consistant P :D don't want the media to quote me :D
Just random comment... Optiminds is not purely science :) It just has a science category ^_^
I think pretty much all your points are spot-on. So much goes into a child's academic/sporting/musical performance, and teachers are responsible for a fraction of it. For example...
- Health and nutrition: kids need to be healthy and fed for their brains to operate properly. This is their parents' responsibility.
- Effective teaching: obviously kids need to be taught the subjects well. This is teachers' responsibility. Parents can contribute to this too. Pretty sure I would have failed some maths and chemistry units if my dad had not taught me the stuff. I had a good chemistry teacher in Gr 11 but because I hadn't understood the basics I couldn't get the other stuff, and because I couldn't get it I wasn't trying very hard and so my teacher and I didn't get along. By Gr 12 though (same teacher) we got along great and I learnt heaps because Dad had taught me the basics I hadn't understood previously (I think I'd missed one crucial lesson) and so everything worked a whole lot better after that. My teacher could not go back and re-teach one or two lessons when he had 22 other kids to teach.
- Support and encouragement outside school hours: for stuff like doing homework and practicing their instrument, and making sure the kid actually ATTENDS school... this is the parents' responsibility. Also, when kids see their parents are proud of their achievements, they try harder. If their parents don't care or belittle them, they won't try at school.
- Discipline: badly disciplined kids won't concentrate, they'll distract others, etc etc. While teachers are responsible for a certain amount of discipline, I think the discipline that affects kids most is that from their parents. This is another area which is primarily parents' responsibility.
On the topic of RE however, that's largely dependant upon schools. Your school will only pay for 2 grades to have RE - another certain school I'm familiar with (possibly the one you are referencing) gets the kids to pay for it themselves (an RE levy at the beginning of the year) so it doesn't come out of the school's pocket to have RE in every grade.
I do think teachers need to be held accountable for the job they do, but the fact is, a teacher's job probably makes up 1/3 of a kid's overall performance - yet it is the overall performance that is being advertised by the My School site. Indeed, it's only the overall academic performance, and doesn't even look at musical, sporting, performing arts or other achievements.
Stuss again. Blogger still doesn't like me.
Leah, I would argue that it isn't even academic achievement that is being compared. It's just literacy and numeracy. Reading, writing, spelling, grammar and punctuation, and numeracy. Oh, and some school demographics.
There is also paragraph about the school that covers what else goes on at the school, but I suspect it is provided by the school so it's hard to use it as a comparison.
Education is definitely a partnership between parents and teachers. Sadly, I think our society is forgetting more and more about the role parents play, especially by expecting parents to return to work once all their kids are at school.
Stuss - that's very true. It's a fraction of the school's academic achievement. My point in saying it was displaying only academic achievement was that there was nothing aside from academic stats.
I think you're right about the 'paragraph'. The one I read about Pimlico sounds pretty similar to what I've read in other literature about the school.
Carly Laird Hey guys, thanks for the comments. So sorry, I went to Ingham on a whim and left the conversation. I'm now sick, so please be nice to me if my comments don't make a lot of sense :)
There are a few reasons why I don't like the My School website, and I'm sure that there will be more once I research it a little further. I suppose the best example I can think of is if you look up Vincent State School, which is where I work. Vincent has lots of red marks, and even more very red marks (I'm going to assume that you all know how the site works), which isn't really surprising. Vincent is a hard school with hard kids. It has a high population of Indigenous kids (as the site will tell you) and a significant number of special needs students. Those red marks don't reflect the incredible work that the teachers do at that school, in very difficult circumstances. They don't show you the way that those teachers care for those kids, persist when they struggle academically, never give up even when the kids don't show up. They don't show you the social and developmental progress that many students are making, which allow them to eventually advance academically. If I had a young child with special needs, I would very seriously consider sending them to the Vincent early childhood special needs school, despite all of Vincent's red marks. I agree that teachers should be held accountable because their work is hugely important, but this isn't the way to do it. This kind of website distorts what education is really about. I'm not diminishing the importance of academics, but this certainly isn't the sole factor that parents should consider when choosing a school. I'm really disappointed to see that this perception of education is becoming more and more prevalent, it's just the first step to a steady slide.
There are a few other things that I disagree with, but I think that will do for now :)
I'm left wondering if the red marks are actually an indication of the socio-economic status of the school (or the area the school is in) rather than anything about academic achievement!
The site does fail in presenting the improvements that kids have made. I hope they can fix that up somehow.
Post a Comment