The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Convenience of teachers or education of children? > Comments

Convenience of teachers or education of children? : Comments

By Des Treacy, published 4/4/2007

The main problems with education are not lack of funds, flawed pre-teacher education, rationalisation of curricula, et al, it’s the system!

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All
I couldn't agree more with this assessment. At our children's public primary school, a principal looking forward to retirement spends all his time shooting down the suggestions of parents.

He always appears to have a rational explanation, but it becomes clear after a while that his real motivation is running the school in a way that suits the teachers, not the students.

He fought tooth and nail against the introduction of language classes at the school, despite guarantees by parents that it would involve absolutely no extra effort by teachers and would be organised before and after formal class times.

The school's music program is a joke. The teacher given the responsibility for music education has the position because they couldn't cope with normal classroom duty. She has absolutely no interest or aptitude in music. She is a welfare case.

When parents suggested we use some of the money from our endless fund-raising to bring in more professional tuition, the obstructionist principal shot the whole idea down.

The worst thing about this situation is there is nothing we can do about this. We would like this principal removed, but we are told this is entirely in the purview of the NSW education department. And we have no say on his successor.

This is something fundamentally wrong with this system, when schools are run for the benefit of teachers.
Posted by Mr Denmore, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 9:48:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The “system” needs to change, but not the way Des Treacy suggests. I write as a highly experienced teacher and school administrator who has just taken early early retirement rather than endure the madness that runs Victorian schools or the even greater madness of the suggested cures.

The argument that schools are run for the benefit of teachers – good old “provider capture” – is run again and again, but no one ever produces any evidence. Teacher pay has fallen dramatically over the decades. (See my comments on http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=5617 for details.) As a direct result of the last EBA agreed to by the supposedly militant teachers, teaching loads in my last school increased, period length increased and the previously agreed advisory committee was abolished. The secondary pupil-teacher ratio has increased from 10.9:1 in 1981 to 12.0:1 in 2006. There are therefore about 2,000 fewer secondary teachers available to do the work. So, don’t give me “schools are run for the convenience of teachers” line – it’s rubbish.

Handing power to principals would be a disaster. They showed under the previous government that they had little interest in education. They took pay increases, bonuses, exemption from cuts to superannuation that teachers had to suffer and more power to exploit and abuse their staffs.

The only suggestion with any merit is that principals be appointed by a group of master teachers. Principal selection panels in Victoria used to have to have a majority of members with educational qualifications and a majority of members who were local. The previous Liberal government removed these requirements under the good old “provider capture” argument. The current government returned one teacher to the panel, but the principals’ club has now got two principals on a five-person panel, the idea being to keep everything in-house. How they got away with that one is a mystery.

Government education is potentially a system. There is no good reason to give up the advantages that come from economy of scale by reshaping it as a chaos of competing small businesses, all re-inventing the wheel – with some of them square.
Posted by Chris C, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 10:05:26 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bad parents is one of the main problems with schools. The breakdown of the family leaving tens of thousands of fatherless kids has contributed largely to classrooms becoming management centres. I have great sympathy for the great majority of teachers or are expected to do what most parents won't.
Posted by runner, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 2:07:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Teachers in one form or another, as classroom operatives, principals, district directors or departmental officers of one sort or another, run the education system. And when they aren’t, teachers in the AEU are, as the ‘alternate department’ seeking to run public education.

Provider capture – you bet.
I worked for 16 years in a state department of education and also took early early retirement because I could no longer stomach the hypocrisy, corruption and bastardry which characterizes ‘the system’.

I actively work against the idea of a system. It is anathema to good education for our kids, and reflects naught of what the community wants.

Should principals select their own staff? In principle, yes. But principals should be hired and fired, not by their own provider group (master teachers) but by the governing bodies of individual schools. The focus must return to the school with the system providing support, not omnipotent directives.

I have found that merit in public education is in fact an acronym rather than a noun or adjective. MERIT stands for Mates Elevated Regardless of Intelligence or Talent
Posted by Simon Templar, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 6:57:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What I can’t understand is why Education Department doesn't focus on the students and their needs. Best interest of the child should always be of paramount concern.

The Education system appears to be a system that is run by bullies.

My family has spoken out against the system and for speaking out we have paid the price http://jolandachallita.typepad.com/education/

Parents live in fear of getting off-side with schools and are to scared to speak out and say what they think because they worry about the negative impact it will have on the children. They have good reason to be scared.

Because the Education system is controlled by competition and they can manipulate at will you have to play their game or risk paying the price.
Posted by Jolanda, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 7:12:59 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Runner, you commented:

'Bad parents is one of the main problems with schools. The breakdown of the family leaving tens of thousands of fatherless kids has contributed largely to classrooms becoming management centres. I have great sympathy for the great majority of teachers or are expected to do what most parents won't.'

As a teacher, in one of Queensland's two recognised most marginalised schools, 'fatherless kids' is just pushing your own agenda, and not the cause of classroom disruption. It's all about the parenting skills of the parents, as you have stated.

No doubt there are fatherless kids who are disruptive in the classroom. But there are also just as many fathered children from intact families who are just as disruptive. As well as father led single parent households whose children are disruptive as well.

Then you get the single parent households led by a mother who are doing extremely well.

It's parenting skills, not gender of the resident parent that contributes to character development.

Many of my students from single parent households are living with their fathers instead of their mothers. The fathers face the same issues as Mother led single parent households. They find it overwhelming at times and need support.
Posted by Liz, Friday, 6 April 2007 5:53:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy