The Revolution in the Classroom Debate

The Four Corners program on Monday, 6 February 2012, presented by Kerry O'Brien profiled three schools, one independent and two government, who are paying close attention to teacher quality by focussing on instructional practice. The program has led to quite a debate, and in this article I profile the commentary from teachers and others.

Cameron Paterson

Like many other Australian teachers I watched the ABC's Four Corners 'Revolution in the Classroom' report yesterday.

It is wonderful to see stories like this receiving such prominence. Important themes in schooling were emphasised: relationships, community, high expectations, de-privatising teaching, and focusing on quality teaching. I can only guess at how confronting it would be to allow national television to view what is happening inside a classroom, so hats off to the schools that were featured and the ABC for recognising the merit of the story.

However, next time, I would like to see more models of mentoring or coaching that extend beyond evaluative models (instructional rounds anyone?), and there was a shallow focus on numbers and test scores. NAPLAN results and Band 6s seemed to be the only target, and more discussion about what quality teaching looks like, beyond test scores, was needed. Camera shots of a traditional didactic approach (even students with laptops were sitting in rows of desks facing the teacher) left me wondering where the revolution was?

Source: Cameron Paterson:  http://learningshore.edublogs.org/2012/02/

Greg Whitby, senior education administrator

The ABC's Four Corners program last night  ' A Revolution in the Classroom', was a genuine attempt to re-focus public attention away from the old public vs private school debate and on to the core challenges of schooling.  I don't believe quality learning and teaching in public, private or independent schools is a revolution but rather a necessary requirement in today's world.  While the program focussed on the results of Year 12 students at three diverse schools ... I believe we need to move beyond this industrial mindset that intelligence and good learning is defined by HSC or NAPLAN results. 

While the program offered great insight and certainly opened up discussion, what didn't come across to the viewer was the critical role of the principal as an instructional leader nor is there a formulaic solution to improving the quality of schooling in schools. We know from the learning sciences that core is understanding learners in their contexts - what they bring, what they know and what they need to know using and analysing student data.   The more we learn about learning and the more teachers learn about their students' learning, the more important and influential teaching becomes. 

 ....as educators we know that effective teacher learning leads to changes in practice that positively influence student learning outcomes and we know from Viviane Robinson's research that the involvement of the leader is critical.  We know from our work with Helen Timperley that we do this by continuous inquiry so that we are all continually learning.  The inquiry process enables us to strengthen the bridge between knowing and doing; between standardisation and personalisation and between novice and expert.

Source: http://bluyonder.wordpress.com/2012/02/07/a-revolution-in-every-classrooms/

Geoffrey Lowe, teacher librarian

The premise of the investigation was that Australia's secondary school system is falling behind in some key education indicators, such as reading, and that there are things that can be done about it.  The journalists advocate giving principals the power to hire and fire staff and that there is a need for quality teachers.

The journalists also suggest that a number of other things are needed to make the secondary school system more internationally competitive.

• Architecturally classic buildings such as one would see in a sandstone, wealthy, private school. If not this, then public schools with architecture that is out-of-date should be torn down and replaced with an entirely new school.
• More community and parental support for the school and the students.
• Teachers should be given ipads.
• Greater and more extensive funding of public schools so that they can at least match the funding that catholic and private schools are allocated by the government.
• Teacher training and accreditation.

It is important to note that despite the preface by Kerry O'Brien that the story would be objective and something like "Reality TV" the journalists seem to have a political agenda and keep steering the story so that this agenda is reiterated often: funding is not the issue, the issue is principals hiring and firing and better teacher training ....As a result issues, such as many of those in the bullet points, are just passed over, treated very simplistically, contradicted, or indeed dismissed.  Agencies with a contrary point of view, such as the teachers' federation or the department of education are just referred to (as seeming bad guys) but not consulted.  The Institute of Teachers is not even referred to.  The treatment of many issues such as "quality teachers" is not original and very simplistic.  The story does not really chart any new ground in advocating teacher librarians or more ICT for students, for example.  The journalists seem to believe in magic bullets.  The journalists give a very stereotypical view of students as largely passive, unknowing and not responsible for their actions.

Source: http://geoffrey-lowe.blogspot.com.au/2012/02/revolution-in-classroom.html

Magtty Pham

One comment stood out for me in the ABC telecast, when a teacher commented something along the lines of that it's easy to talk in class for 50 minutes, just to get them to be quiet, then give them the textbook and some exercises, ...  but that's not really teaching them. So I guess part of the challenge for teaching is stepping outside of the comfort zone and taking some risks in order to develop and maybe experiment a little. Definitely it was good to see emphasis on what could be done to engage students, which sounds like a daily challenge for any teacher, regardless of how good they are.

And I like the idea of peer review in teaching and getting feedback from other teachers who evaluate my own teaching strategies. Maybe the mentor-mentee relationship of the practical experience component this year will be a good exercise in challenging some of my assumptions about teaching.

Watching the telecast and reading that second article, I kind of feel like the media often put a lot of emphasis on the academic side of teaching, like numeracy/literacy outcomes and how students rank in HSC exams, etc and statistics on successful employment or tertiary level achievements after school...all of which are very important, but...there's still an emotional growing up aspect of adolescence and maybe I think there should also be some focus plus statistics on the mental and emotional well-being of kids and how well schools are supporting those kinds of needs as well. I don't know if things such as emotional intelligence are accurately reflected, on a student's report card.

Source: http://u112893.wordpress.com/2012/02/06/abcs-revolution-in-the-classroom/

The Four Corners Open Letters site also attracted a large number of responses - most of it in the evening after it first went to air.  Here is a selection of responses:

I thought the episode was great and agreed entirely with the issue of teacher performance and ongoing review. Instructors in the defence forces have been subject to this practice for decades...

Unfortunately there were two key points that were not mentioned.

1.     The stakeholders at Knox Grammar have the power to hire and fire their principal.

2.     The 47 schools in the NSW trial would not have been chosen at random and neither was Hume Central in Victoria.

My school teaching experience is with Education Queensland. It has tens of thousands of employees. In any group that large some will resort to unethical and under-handed methods to get ahead. They will play the system for their own ends and sometimes the consequences for the students in their care can be tragic.

Accountability is vital, but it cannot just stop with the teachers, it has to apply to school administrators as well.

It was a pity that 4 Corners presented such a one-sided view. The idea that schools will automatically improve if the Principal is given more power is absurd. Unfortunately many Principals are not up to the task and it is almost impossible to get rid of them in the public system. Giving them more power will only cause more problems. They will employ their mates, regardless of ability and the schools will suffer. Some of the pilot schools in NSW have improved, mainly because they have been given extra resources and extra money. When the so-called "trial" is over, you can bet the money will evaporate!

Victoria has had a coaching program for the past 4 years. Mostly this was made possible by funding from the Federal National School Partnerships and the State school Improvement program. For many schools not involved in the above programs employing a coach was beyond the school budget. Lots of lessons were learned. The quality of coaching has had a great impact on the coachees' ability to develop reflective practices to build/improve their capacities.

Now the DEECD is finishing the coaching program. My school has been very fortunate to have coaches for the past 4 years. I have seen the positive impact it has had with my staff and ultimately the students. My dilemma will be how to manage this in the future with very limited resources.

Both my kids attended Toronto High during what was described as the "dark years" and I consider the claims made in the program a serious libel on a leadership and staff who were working under difficult conditions.

There were major changes to the school population during this time and I don't think that this was mentioned in the program. There were resource problems with for example text books for senior students. These were beyond the schools control.

Both my kids went on to good courses at University and are progressing well. They look back at their years at Toronto with fondness.

As for the "new" teaching methods show, and their success I just have two comments. Firstly the "Hawthorne effect" seems to be very much in evidence. Secondly I'm suspicious at the "Union Bashing" aspects of the whole thing. It's only necessary to read the Education Sections of the online British newspapers to see what's going on here.

This was the most disappointing 4 corners program I have ever seen. I think it is not about a revolution, but about a reactionary approach to education. It reduces learning to the idea that you must have quality teachers and get top HSC results. It is a myopic view of education. At one point a teacher was inspecting a group of students and asking why some didn't have black leather shoes on. It was apparent from the looks on the students' faces that this was a humiliating procedure. It harks back to the bad old days when schools bullied and humiliated students if their uniform was in any way deficient. I think there is more to learning than this program was portraying. It was narrow minded and totally unconvincing to me. I expect a more progressive and thoughtful approach from 4 corners than this.

A great program tonight. I would like to draw attention to, and applaud, the many Victorian Govt. schools who have been focussing on Teacher Practice (especially schools in the Northern Region) for a number of years (and with excellent outcomes for students).

Teachers who have been involved in ongoing professional development have shown that they are committed to changing their own practice to engage their diverse range of students, improve their own effectiveness and improve student achievement for ALL students. What we need now is for the Government(s) to recognise the importance of improving teacher quality and to fund our Govt. schools to be able to develop our staff the way private/independent schools can. Well done to all teachers, regardless of the system you work in, for your hard work!

Victoria has had a coaching program instigated by the previous Labor Government that had a program of improving teacher capacity. This was supplemented with the Federal National Strategic Partnerships Program that also used a coaching program. This has been going for the past 4 years. The State program is now being wound up by the current Liberal State Government. Hattie and his mega-data has been a core reference for principals and leadership.

Victoria has led this area of building teacher capacity and i am very frustrated Four Corners was NSW egocentric. Did you come to my primary school in Victoria? All the rhetoric we receive is that Victoria is leading the way especially in Government Schools. I give you an open invitation to come to my primary school!!!!

Source: http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/02/06/3421391.htm