Christopher Harris’ piece in the Daily Telegraph 27 Sept treads the tiresome path as to what passes for the ‘education debate’ in this country. That is, teachers are essentially to blame for the perceived inadequacies of the system, and that the profession is resistant to change.
Harris quotes Premier Perrottet claiming he wants professional development for teachers to be meaningful and not just “a box-ticking exercise.” Teaching quality, the argument runs, will be improved if we can just make teachers more accountable.
In the very next breath Perrottet goes on to acknowledge that the best teachers have an open door policy and employ “observations, team teaching, and other collaborative practice” to improve.
Why then is the go-to response from the government to addressing the complex issues in education further regulation of teachers?
Imposing an inspectorial process on time-poor teachers is hardly collaborative. It is also time consuming, costly in terms of the human resources required, and runs counter to the stated aim of creating an environment where collaborative open door policies are encouraged. In any case, it is highly unlikely that an authoritarian, command style method of classroom observations will effectively establish the level of a teacher’s competency.
Beyond being one of the most accountable professions in our society, the overwhelming majority of teachers, rather than shying away from open and honest advice, are all too often their own harshest critics. If the premier wishes to see increased professional collaboration in schools, working with compatible colleagues should not be seen as a “cosy option” as Harris dismissively claims, it is critical to the success of the process.
The fixation with “teacher quality” in previous decades wilfully ignores the fact that quality teaching cannot take place in an environment which is not conducive to such.
When schools are struggling to secure staff, when teachers are overwhelmed, and when the nature of teaching is now so complex that even our “best and brightest” choose to look elsewhere, blaming the teachers, yet again, is a lamentable response.
There is a role for inspectorial classroom observations in accreditation processes and where there are genuine performance concerns. However, no worker in any industry would be happy subjecting themselves to a performance appraisal when the deck is stacked against them.
Providing teachers with the breathing space that allows them to collaboratively engage with their colleagues in a professional environment, resourcing schools such that teachers can exercise their considerable skills, and re-empowering the professional voice of teachers would be a start.
The condescending tone of Harris’ article, and Perrottet’s insinuation that teachers opt for soft options, is deeply offensive. In truth, it is facile and ill-informed public debates of this nature which are at the heart of many of the issues facing the education sector.
Pat Devery is a professional officer with the IEUA NSW/ACT Branch