I guess my chief concern with OP standards for teaching is that OPs indicate success within a system of education. I would hazard a guess that the recipient of an OP 20 or thereabouts has experienced little success within that system but, in four years, will be allowed back into it as a leader.

You are right about the standards of some teachers, as well. I, for one, have never taken a drink into my classroom, but I know many teachers who wouldn't dream of going to class without one. And many who seem to think it is OK to have a heart-to-heart with their students about matters that really should be kept private.

Don't get me wrong - I'm a big fan of Productive Pedagogies. When we discuss them in meetings, we talk about them as things "every teacher knows (or should know)". Yet there are so many teachers out there who present pathetic lessons. Teachers who do not help kids in any way at all. Interestingly, without wanting to judge my colleagues, I would say that these hopeless practitioners are often the "favourites" of Year 8, 9 and 10 students. "Mr X doesn't make us line up." "Can't you give us an extension? Ms Y doesn't care when we hand our assignments in." "Mrs Z always takes us out for a game on Fridays, because she's cool. Why can't you be like her?" Thankfully, senior students tend to appreciate the teachers who actually educate them a bit.

Hmm . . . a bit of a vent there. I'm getting a bit off-track. The thing is, those of us who work ten hour days, six or seven days a week (for 25 hours' pay) receive no incentive whatsoever to continue striving for excellence. No extra money, no thanks from kids and even less from parents. They may appreciate our work, but they rarely tell us about it. Tacky as it sounds, I only keep going because I care about my students, want them to do well and couldn't live with myself if I got in the way of that.

Sorry Mr. Ridd,

you are only a little bit correct. After 35 plus years as a Maths teacher in QLD I have my own theory about the demise of education standards in our state.

When I first started teaching in state schools the English and humanities departments handed out assignment tasks and the Maths department coached students to pass tests. Very little teaching took place and a great deal of the learning was incidental.

If your English teacher thought you were attractive you may have received some assistance.

If you were in the Maths HOD’s class you usually got to practice very similar examples to the hard, process or application type questions just before the tests. One morning I walked in on the Maths HOD going over the test questions with selected students only minutes before the test was to start. (My unwanted transfer papers arrived before the end of term.)

The system was a joke. Young and/or enthusiastic educators who spoke up about the emperor’s lack of clothing were quickly transferred away from friends and family or given impossible and demoralising timetables.

The syllabi that school’s worked from all those years ago were rigorous and educationally sound. The problem was with the delivery. Something had to give.

Now we have poor syllabi and those enthusiastic individuals who would have been wonderful educators are working elsewhere.

Poor leadership and poor teaching have lead us to where we are now. I just hope it won’t take another 35 years to turn around.

So Mr. Ridd you are a little bit correct. Unfortunately, only a little bit correct is good enough these days in QLD schools.

Otokonoko & The Observer... both teachers by the sound of it, both offer something to this string that is appreciated here.

I have no idea if the 'old' curriculum was better or not or even if the new one is no good at all. When I've inspected what has been written by the QSA, in its broad and general terms, it generally sounds as if an intelligent person could make something of it.

When it arrives at the school though, maybe to cater for such a wide range of abilities, there seems to be not much left.... so the delivery of QSA hopes is very poor.

On top of that, poor school management, poor continuing training, no colleagiate atmosphere in schools, a desire to exclude parents and marginalise students... there ain't much left really is there?

As for the OP score being a reliable measure...hardly. It only works for compliant students who 'get on' with their work and meet the generally marginal expectations. For those students who are 'brighter' but who do not apply themselves for a range of reasons, they simply show the student has a low OP score.

I have come across young people with very low OP scores who are doing well at university, gaining GPAs of 6&7, who become motivated once outside the feudal constraints of our school system. Most people do not get 6&7 marks, so it's not a 'lowering of standards' going on here.

The OP system may, or may not, be better than other systems but it is no measure of ability, other than an ability to follow-the-leader.

Besides, with all those parents in private schools doing their childrens assignments.... what can it really measure?

I suspect there are myriad causes of 'poor education' today but I'd bet that the 19th century structure all schools have, public and private, does not help one bit.