A million thanks to bobd35 and hoHum for supplying the provocative sites. I was not familiar with the work of Sugata Mitra, but his work is most interesting, isn't it? Must check him further. He alerts us to crucial elements of efficient teaching strategies...certainly at the maieutic end of a continuum of strategies. I liked his quote: "Education is a self-organising system where learning in an emerging phenomenon."
Alfie K is another kettle of fish, isn't he? Like him? He and Susan Ohanian are on the same wavelength. Susan is worth checking for her forthrightness. Try www.susanohanian.org. She provides a pile of quotations, as does Bruce Hammonds of NZ at www.leading-learning co.nz
They can all be provoking.
Might I add a comment for those who converse about the national curriculum? A group of 'experts' writes the various syllabuses. Success in achievement of their measureable bits is judged by Naplan tests constructed by ACER's test experts. The more notice we take of the results, the more we ensure that the national curriculum is really determined by the measurment experts at ACER. It sounds like that little pest that keep going around in ever decreasing circles.
So ! Who does what to whom and why?
Filip

I will also add my thanks for the link to Alfie Kohn. Navigating away from the linked advertisement to his homepage, I found a wide range of interesting and thought-provoking articles. The article "From Degrading to De-Grading" was particularly interesting. While it critiques practices that are substantially different from those that take place in Queensland (I can't speak with any authority about other states), his arguments are compelling if a little lopsided.

For Grades 6 and 7, I attended a primary school that had long done away with grades. All feedback was written, and constructive criticism was the order of the day. It wasn't all feelgood stuff, either - the purpose of each written comment was similar to the "appreciative inquiry" trend in educational leadership today: identify what is good and work out what can make it better. Sometimes, that is harder to swallow than simply being told that your work isn't up to scratch. It also opens the void of "beyond the A" - had I written like Shakespeare, painted like da Vinci and sang like ... well, a really good singer, they still would have suggested new directions for me. The message was that life is all about improving rather than "becoming really good and staying that way".

The downside was that the principal appeared to be motivated largely by a need to prove himself. While he spoke vehemently against competition within the school, he pushed students into inter-school competitions to show how brilliant they were and how brilliant the school was. The winners (and not just the sporting winners) were afforded great acclaim, while the "losers" hid in the shadows. I will say this, though. The school produced an extraordinary number of high-achievers both in high school and in the post-schooling world. The community continues to be suspicious of this school and its zany ways, but I suspect that they are slowly twigging onto the fact that something they are doing is right.

Flip
"Who does what to whom and why"

If NAPLAN is what society wants and needs, then use NAPLAN.

The alternative is something such as the QLD system where the teachers began to decide what society wanted and needed.

About 4 out of 5 primary school teachers were female, and maths and science were almost completely elliminated out of primary schools (too male).

It was a system that consumed 10% of the state's budget, to produce probably the worst education system in the western world (and that would be supported by international tests).

It is also a system that will take years to put right, and get back to where it once was.

Otokonoko,
Your comments are inspirational. Your quotable quote " Life is all about improving, rather than becoming really good and staying that way",suggests that trying to fit all Australian children into the one mould [as Susan O says is what national testing does] restricts progress.
Your brief description of your school also suggests that schools can be of many, many shapes, whose products are achievement-oriented, still looking for learning challenges and satisfied with what they are doing.
I checked Sudford Valley School which then led to A.S.Neill's Summerhill and so on, so-called 'way-out' schools....but still have a message for those who wish to lift their game. Worth a google.
Thank you, Otokonoko
Filip

Filip,

Talking of schools being many many shapes - did you ever see a film titled "To Be and To Have" (Etre et Avoir)? It is a documentary of a small rural one teacher school in France - a beautiful film and well worth a look. (Made in 2002 and nominated for a BAFTA)

Poirot,
Why don't you have an Australian film?

I have a story. I had a retired uncle who did maths tutoring of primary school students after hours at the school.

He had no training in teaching, but the students thought he was fantastic.

He did it for free, but did a better job of teaching the students then the teachers who were being paid.