"...thus reinforcing the belief in areas like Beaumaris, that state schools are child minding centres for delinquents."

Billie: My experiences working (both daily and on contract) in dozens of different schools (predominantly state) in Victoria are that state schools ARE child minding centres for delinquents.

Once we take the selective schools out of the mix, as well as those in more affluent suburbs (both of which function as de facto private schools that people don't want to pay for), we are left with what might politely be described as war zones.

A large part of the growth in the independent sector is precisely because of this (and despite the burden of fees), not because of teachers' pay. Teachers in both sectors don't do it for the pay (because any extra pay from the private sector is basically for time spent on extra-curricular activities). People don't become teachers to get rich, especially if they're qualified in something like the sciences, IT or even languages.

The largest problem in the state system is a lack of accountability all round. That's why people are moving their kids out of that system, and why there's a massive attrition rate amongst new teachers -- sometimes to escape the staff, but usually to escape the students and parents.

I currently work mainly for an excellent private school, but to get full time employment in this sector would require a massive time commitment, although perhaps no more or less than being mid-management elsewhere. As for the public sector, I'm done with that, and from what I've seen, I'll never send my kids through it or recommend that anyone else does. Nothing has turned me further from the left and their policies and ideologies than working as a teacher in the state system. I'm going overseas later this year, and upon my return, I'll either look for a full time job at a private school or leave the profession.

Shorbe the initial discussion was about whether teachers should participate in merit pay negotiations, and I have [tried] to make the cynical observation that the merit pay approach will save governments a lot of money in forgone pay rises.

As a product of the elite private school system I can see that the conditions offered to teachers are just good enough to lure teachers from the state system. I can attest that just because you pay big fees there is no guarantee that you are getting good teachers.

Having taught at brand new outer suburban schools and at elite private schools, I know where I would prefer to teach and where I would prefer my kids to go. The problems with any brand new outer suburban school are not with the facilities its sometimes more with the timetabling structure and the fact that the oldest age cohort have been the oldest all the way through school, for 6 years of high school. The teachers can be inexperienced and energetic enough to be able to survive jungle like conditions. Its up to the school deputy principal to instil discipline for the sake of less robust staff and to permit students to learn in a calm, safe, fear free environment.

Its my feeling that our education system is only as strong as our government schools. The private schools only have to aim to be a little bit better that the government school to attract students. Once the government school system is broken then private schools can let their standards slip. Hasn't there been a rise in proportions of students attending private schools in the USA?

Any way Shorbe have a nice time teaching overseas, presumably not the UK, the home of "work refusers".

If I have upset you Chris C its just because your argument reminds me of the sort of experiemce I had with a succession of union reps.

What I have found is that when it all boils down the responsibility for what is going on in a school rests with the principal. The buck stops at the principal's door. I have had many teachers and others say that "you can't trust the principal with hiring and firing". Then I have the same people coming in to my office with statements such as "something or other is going wrong", "What are you going to do about it?" In other words as principal you have the ultimate responsibility, but some who are on your staff don't want you to have any authority over them.

Well, you can't have it both ways. If the principal has the ultimate resonsibility then he or she needs to have the authority to hire and fire and reward those who do an outstanding job, as happens in the private sector. Naturally there will be checks and balances and someone who abuses their power will be accountable. Will it be a perfect system? No. Will it be superior to the current system? Absolutely.

In the end it comes down to common sense. As a parent or a student one needs to be able to approach the principal in order to sort out a problem. As a teacher or other member of staff one needs to be able to approach the principal to sort out a problem or find the resouces to permit some initiative to have the chance of succeeding. There has to be a principal, and that person, whoever he or she is has to be in a position to deliver, and that includes being competent to hire, fire or reward those who do an outstanding job.

Select the principal on the basis that they can cut the mustard and have the capacity to do the job, the complete job, and then give them the power to do it well and be accountable for the result.

Having worked for 15 years in a state education department, the word merit has quite a different meaning to that related to good performance, but seems apt on far too many occassions.
MERIT
Mates
Elevated
Regardless of
Intelligence or
Talent

Sniggid,

I am not upset because my argument reminds you of the sort of experience you have had with a succession of union reps, though that may be the explanation for your words. I am upset because you made assumptions about me which were not based on any evidence in anything I have said.

The pope is the servant of the servants of God. Leadership means service, not self-aggrandisement and arrogance. Principals appointed in recent years generally don't understand this. They need to see themselves as first among equals, but they tend to think they have a level of wisdom and intelligence which is invisible to those who have to work under their control.

The principal is ultimately responsible within the school, but a skilled principal will have the intelligence, insight, honesty and humanity to work with the teachers in the school, to lead by example, to be able to persuade, to listen. These qualities have become rarer since 1992 - for reasons which are obvious to any teacher in Victoria.

I was assisted in my Merit Protection Board hearing by an AEU official, but so was the acting principal. His AEU official argued that I should have been dismissed completely, suggesting that this union in fact supports bullying by principals in schools. Imagine that: the AEU arguing in favour of sacking one of its members because another of its members needed a scapegoat.

Following my re-instatement as timetabler, I was able to present a proposal that integrated a coherent curriculum structure with the best set of teaching conditions in the state of Victoria (basically a maximum teaching load of 21 48-minute periods). This proposal got 71 per cent of the staff vote, and not one person spoke up for what we had had, not even one person from those who had advocated it the year before.

You can argue that the MPB provided the checks and balance in my case, but none of this would have happened in the first place if leadership incompetence had not been evident at the beginning.

The debate between Chris C and Sniggid highlights the real problem in education and that is the curse of 'provider capture'. In respect of the performance of teachers, and the hiring and firing thereof, in neither case does the community, the payers, get a look in.

In a system in which communty governance is the model (in NZ, to some extent in Vic, and to a lesser in SA) it should be the role of the governing body to hire and fire the principal based on performance, and the principal's job then, in consultation with the governing body, to hire and fire staff - based on performance. After all schools are not activity centres for teachers, they are learning places for our kids, and the teachers worthy of suppport, encouragement, recognition and performance pay, are those that positively, and measurably, impact on the learning achievements of those kids.

It is time for the communtiy to have the big voice in education, not the providers (who should have a significant voice) nor the AEU which should be muted.