Willm,

While the general perception is that most teachers are hard working and competent, the perception by the general public is that for public schools:
- There is little to no accountability for the children,
- there is little accountability for performance for the teachers,
- the rules make it difficult for the teachers to do their jobs properly.

These are all easily fixable but require some review of the system which starts with actually openning to the public what is happening to their children.

RJohn
I enquired very high up regards the laptops going to the QLD teachers. I was told that only US software was being loaded onto the laptops, “because that is what the teachers wanted”.

I also enquired as to whether any teacher in the state had complained that no QLD or Australian content was being loaded onto the laptops, and the answer was “NO”

While the laptops were supposed to be for education, the software being loaded onto the laptops did not even include a dictionary or an encyclopedia.

It does appear that the only time teachers have any real interest in Australia, is when they want more money from the taxpayer.

But if they get more money to buy something, there is almost 100% guarantee that it will be spent on imports.

Have a look around your school, and try and find a “Made in Australia” sticker.

Vanna

Thank you for your response. I would be very interested to know how the "very high up" person/persons discovered “because that is what the teachers wanted”, as I am not aware of teachers' being asked.

I would also be interested to know what process was provided to seek out feed-back on the range of soft-ware provided.

Most of my colleagues use only the elements of Microsoft Office in their daily work, and, of course, OneSchool.

If OneSchool is not Australian-origin, you would need to take that issue up with Education Queensland, as EQ arranged the development of the database that is the core of the programme.

It is my understanding that EQ provides ON-LINE access to a dictionary and an encyclopedia. These days software that can be accessed on-line, when needed, is not loaded on to the hard-drive of a laptop to allow more space for document storage, with a backup on School and EQ servers. Laptop hard drives fill up quickly with teacher-developed PowerPoint presentations.

As you acknowledge, it is not easy to purchase "Made in Australia" in the educational, and electronics, fields, apart from the purchase and replacement of textbooks that consume much of a School's educational budget. Most textbooks are Made in Australia.

School Administration teams work hard to get the best value for the dollar for students, when purchasing equipment. Decisions are usually made to stretch out the available funding to the greatest benefit for students. The end result is that "Made in Australia" is often not a priority.

I agree with you that this is a sad outcome.

But then, look around people's homes. Made in Australia does not feature often on electronic items, including computers.

RJohn,
Here is the list of the US software loaded onto the laptops going to the teachers in QLD schools. You can follow the links to find the people responsible.

http://learningplace.com.au/deliver/content.asp?pid=36699

Nearly 30,000 laptops have now been delivered, and you yourself can enquire as to whether any teacher anywhere in the state has complained that no QLD or Australian content has been loaded onto the laptops (which were paid for by the QLD and Australian public).

For the education system to be sustainable, the education system has to be generating sufficient wealth inside the country to run the education system. That is not being done by the education system, and the education system seems to be operating on the concept that it imports everything it can possibly import with taxpayer funding, in the hope that one day, somehow, it will produce a student smart enough to export something.

Teachers can always apply to Microsoft for a pay rise, as Microsoft must love Australian teachers.

In terms of educational software, I can supply a link to some QLD produced science educational software that is now one of the highest rate science programs by the CNET media network in the US. The CNET media network includes CBS, CNN, the New York times, Tech republic, Download.Com and Z.net. However the teachers in this country won’t even look at that QLD produced educational software because it hasn’t been imported.

In terms of measuring and reporting, I once talked to a group of teachers about the concept of “Zero Injuries and Zero waste” for their school. They were all keen, until I mentioned that they would have to carry out regular audits and carry of quite intensive risk assessments on anything they purchased so as to reduce waste and eliminate hazards. Then they suddenly lost all interest.

Once they learnt that they had to change what they were currently doing, they immediately became comfortable with the waste and the injuries they currently had.

I believe it is exactly the same with teaching practices and student marks.

Thank you Vanna

I would be most interested to learn about your "QLD produced science educational software", as I am not aware of much broad-based science-curriculum software, and any software is worth evaluation.

I am not sure how I would get my School to authorise purchase of your software when "it hasn’t been imported", but, if the software meets a need, I will work on it.

I am not sure that I understand your comment, "For the education system to be sustainable, the education system has to be generating sufficient wealth inside the country to run the education system." Didn't every working Australian go to School, before they contributed to the economy of the country?

It's interesting that, when Australia was a booming economy, education did not receive a proportionate boost in funding. Now that Australia is in recession, we are receiving a boost in infrastructure funding to help maintain the economy, and overcome the lack from the boom years.

I read the list of software on school laptops. The list reads like the list of software that is on ALL computers at the point of purchase - and not specifically teacher-requested software.

Departmental requirements for the maintenance of "regular audits" and "quite intensive risk assessments" are justifiably time-intensive. When these tasks fall on teachers, as they tend to do, they become another burden in an ever-growing list of demands on teacher time.

Often, valuable programs fall by the wayside, because teachers, putting in between 60 and 70 hours a week, [on average based on a state-wide survey of teachers], would have to remove another valuable program from their teaching tasks in order to adopt the new program, or to reduce precious family time with unacceptable consequences.

Resistance to new programs is often seen as resistance to change.

Resistance to new programs is usually resistance to another time-demand, with an unproven benefit, in an increasingly time-intensive and stressful workplace.

I would ask you to read again my first comments [Page 1] in relation to teachers and the one-size-fits-all approach to educational policy in Australia, especially in schools in low-socio-economic areas.

Shadow Minister,

Insofar as your comments on the accountability of the education system is concerned I find I must, in a sense, agree.

When you say that there is no accountability for the children I find myself asking who the children should be accountable to. I would assume that you are not asking students to be accountable to the taxpayers whom foot the bill for education. It seems quite apparent that the children are not to be held accountable to their teachers. To me this only leaves their parents, and taking parents to task over their childrens poor performance in school is undoubtedly a slippery slope; I do not foresee any sitting politician wishing to tackle an issue like the relative merits of methods of child rearing with regard to an issue as sensitive as education.

With regard to the accountability and performance of teachers, the nature of the system at present is probably the greatest factor contributing to the almost total lack of reliable information.

A teacher receives one out of a required five items of assessment from a student, one would expect the student to be given a total of twenty percent of the available marks for the subject. In a case like this it is not unheard of, in fact it is quite common, for a teacher to be instructed by the schools administration faculty to grade the student on the strength of that one submitted assessment to ensure that the schools marks are not sullied by failures.

This can result in students who have done no work receiving marks equal to those who have worked diligently to gain marks required for university courses. I have witnessed the disillusioning and demoralizing impact practices like this have on teachers, particularly those new to the profession. To see a student who has shown no desire to progress given a mark on par with students the teachers have worked with undermines the concept of teacher job satisfaction utterly.