In a recent newspaper article it was indicated that 11 government schools in WA, as a result of Education Department reviews by the Department's expert review group were deemed to be underperforming (Hiatt Bethany, "Reviews expose poor teaching," The West Australian, 24 May, 2016, p8).
I am worried for those principals having their schools so named for all to see. I am not critical of the journalist whose regular articles I find very balanced and informative. In the article to which I refer in this post Hiatt did note: "Many of the schools had since met improvement targets." The title of the article would have worried the teachers and I hope the principals concerned can keep up the morale.
The journalist also noted that all 11 schools receiving the negative reports: "....since the start of last year had a decline in NAPLAN results."
There is a lot of pressure out there on contemporary school Principals as I have noted in previous posts. Not the least of these pressures is the NAPLAN testing that can skew the normal operations of a school striving to ensure that its students attain the expected learning outcomes as set out in the required curriculum. Teaching to the test is very unfortunate but the temptations to do so must be great. The good news is that the NAPLAN test items are now to be based on the Australian National Curriculum which most states are taking on with state modifications.
I hope and trust that the expert review group as part of setting improvement targets for the 11 schools made sure that the total processes of School Development Planning inclusive of a focus on the criteria that indicate an effective school were in place. With these processes in place there is a strong chance that each school can be effectively self regulating rather than needing expert review panels. If government schools are to go independent they need to be very good at self regulation so that their independence means something.
GD
Amendment Information obtained on 9/06/2016 (Source: A relevant Education Department of WA Officer)
On this date I discovered that the Education Department of WA has a policy of releasing to journalists the type of information in the article I have questioned. It is discussed with the journalists making the request but the Department loses some control when the newspaper applies editorial license. However my source from the Department indicated that the Department does not shy away from the naming of the schools as this is consistent with the requirements for the principal to be fully accountable for the school's performance. It was also indicated to me that the journalists can obtain such information through Freedom of Information hence the Department likes to be as open as it can be and get on the front foot.
I also discovered that for the named schools there is a follow up from their District Director to assure the school to move on with confidence including making the improvements the expert review group suggested. This is laudable support for each school named.
The final piece of information that I was given was that the Independent Government Schools, as part of their charter agree to having a triennial review from the Departments expert review group and that movements are in train to extend this to the remaining government schools that have not taken on the Independent status.
***
Having discovered these things I still would rather that the schools not be disclosed so publicly. It seems to be unavoidable.
GD
Tuesday, 31 May 2016
Monday, 23 May 2016
Looking after members of your staff
Hi Principal colleagues! Mid year is approaching at break neck speed. I hope it is all going well for you?
Your staff consists of teaching and non-teaching personnel. At a general level every staff member needs to have a clearly defined role statement. See below on expectations.
Focussing on teaching I have found that it is a job that can have ill-defined limits. Conscientious teachers often carry a sense of never having done enough and can easily burn out as they strive beyond reasonable expectations. There is also considerable evidence that after about 7 years in the job many teachers wonder whether they could have or should have chosen another vocation. A restlessness sets in.
What can we do as school principals to keep our teachers happy and having a sense of satisfaction with what they are achieving.
At the risk of teaching you how to suck eggs here are a few suggestions that might help:
A top priority is to convince them that theirs is a profession in the true sense of the word. A profession is defined as having unique attributes that define it and for teaching these are:
Teaching is not something that one does because one could not do anything else. Hopefully this myth has been dispelled for contemporary teachers.
The expectations for teachers need to be a written policy of the school and be understood by all concerned. This should include a set of best practice teaching principles. As a principal the buck stops with you to ensure that all are performing to expectations. This is a subtle business which can be based on providing opportunities for teachers to demonstrate to appointed mentors how and what they prepare and how they operate in the classrooms. Inexperienced teachers will benefit from closer regular supervision by whoever is appointed to be their mentor but once a teacher consistently displays top professional standards in all aspects of their work such supervision can be reduced in favour of self evaluation.
Teachers should feel that at all times they are supported by their leader(s). This should extend to support if they are waning on meeting the best practice requirements and support if they are being subjected to unacceptable student misbehaviour despite their best efforts. On the matter of not meeting best practice teaching principles the teachers need to have full confidence that due process and natural justice will be applied by those seeking to help them.
In contemporary Australian schools there are the pressures for results as manifest in the NAPLAN testing regime. Much has been written about such pressures and the tensions that schools experience. It is a fact of life in schools today with the good news being that the tests are soon to be based on the Australian National Curriculum (ANC). The ANC is slowly being used across Australian schools with modifications at state and territory level at least for government schools. The NAPLAN tests based on the ANC should raise teachers' confidence that if they are having their students achieve the learning outcomes as in the ANC syllabuses the NAPLAN results will take care of themselves. It is perhaps not that simple but is a confidence booster. I don't envy today's principals having to keep a lid on NAPLAN pressures in their schools but it needs to be done to keep teachers from not stressing too much. The reality is that within the so-called normal stream there are students who will not achieve within an academic year the expected outcomes for their age/grade. I firmly believe that such students should not be moved on to new learning, especially in areas such as maths and English language skills until they have mastered the steps that are precursors to new learning. This is a big call but when one sees such students in say year 9 with huge gaps in their learning and struggling it is heart wrenching. I've written a lot about this elsewhere and it is too much to supply all the detail here. I can only imagine what it would be like for a principal to adhere to my mastery policy for these students knowing that they will struggle with the NAPLAN requirements. It would be a big job to encourage teachers to feel confident to adhere to the mastery policy despite NAPLAN, not to mention educating the parents.
Another factor in developing teacher satisfaction is for the principal to provide opportunities for distributive leadership. For example, teachers of say the years 1 and 2 classes in your school will benefit from opportunities to discuss in a group setting the syllabuses of the curriculum to see if they are all on the same page. It is a standards moderation exercise that works and provides leadership opportunities for teachers to chair such discussions. At secondary school level such discussions can occur within subject departments and not necessarily be led by the Senior Subject teacher. These discussions provide valuable spinoff of peers learning from peers. It's one of the best forms of inservice.
Improving your school year by year requires change and too much of this at any one time worries teachers whose focus is on the day to day classroom work. I was guilty as a principal at one stage of being over zealous and impatient to make the necessary changes. I had to pull my head in. A sound school development plan (SDP) over say a 3-5 year period where improvement is steadily achieved in a few select aspects of school operations each year is the way to go. Again I have written in detail on this but it is too much for this blog post. Teachers should be part of the process in developing the SDP.
Of course as a principal you will take opportunities to thank the teachers for their good work en masse or individually, whatever is appropriate. A useful idea is to write a brief thank you note and leave it in the pigeon hole of a teacher who has done things above and beyond the call of duty; has made a very special effort.
For the non teaching staff members most of the above also applies recognising that some non-teaching staff like guidance officers and bursars (accountants) are also professional people.
Enough already!
GD
Your staff consists of teaching and non-teaching personnel. At a general level every staff member needs to have a clearly defined role statement. See below on expectations.
Focussing on teaching I have found that it is a job that can have ill-defined limits. Conscientious teachers often carry a sense of never having done enough and can easily burn out as they strive beyond reasonable expectations. There is also considerable evidence that after about 7 years in the job many teachers wonder whether they could have or should have chosen another vocation. A restlessness sets in.
What can we do as school principals to keep our teachers happy and having a sense of satisfaction with what they are achieving.
At the risk of teaching you how to suck eggs here are a few suggestions that might help:
A top priority is to convince them that theirs is a profession in the true sense of the word. A profession is defined as having unique attributes that define it and for teaching these are:
- To be expert in how learning occurs;
- To be expert in knowing how to organise the detail within the subjects of a curriculum to ensure continuity of learning;
- To know the moment that a student is ready for new learning.
Teaching is not something that one does because one could not do anything else. Hopefully this myth has been dispelled for contemporary teachers.
The expectations for teachers need to be a written policy of the school and be understood by all concerned. This should include a set of best practice teaching principles. As a principal the buck stops with you to ensure that all are performing to expectations. This is a subtle business which can be based on providing opportunities for teachers to demonstrate to appointed mentors how and what they prepare and how they operate in the classrooms. Inexperienced teachers will benefit from closer regular supervision by whoever is appointed to be their mentor but once a teacher consistently displays top professional standards in all aspects of their work such supervision can be reduced in favour of self evaluation.
Teachers should feel that at all times they are supported by their leader(s). This should extend to support if they are waning on meeting the best practice requirements and support if they are being subjected to unacceptable student misbehaviour despite their best efforts. On the matter of not meeting best practice teaching principles the teachers need to have full confidence that due process and natural justice will be applied by those seeking to help them.
In contemporary Australian schools there are the pressures for results as manifest in the NAPLAN testing regime. Much has been written about such pressures and the tensions that schools experience. It is a fact of life in schools today with the good news being that the tests are soon to be based on the Australian National Curriculum (ANC). The ANC is slowly being used across Australian schools with modifications at state and territory level at least for government schools. The NAPLAN tests based on the ANC should raise teachers' confidence that if they are having their students achieve the learning outcomes as in the ANC syllabuses the NAPLAN results will take care of themselves. It is perhaps not that simple but is a confidence booster. I don't envy today's principals having to keep a lid on NAPLAN pressures in their schools but it needs to be done to keep teachers from not stressing too much. The reality is that within the so-called normal stream there are students who will not achieve within an academic year the expected outcomes for their age/grade. I firmly believe that such students should not be moved on to new learning, especially in areas such as maths and English language skills until they have mastered the steps that are precursors to new learning. This is a big call but when one sees such students in say year 9 with huge gaps in their learning and struggling it is heart wrenching. I've written a lot about this elsewhere and it is too much to supply all the detail here. I can only imagine what it would be like for a principal to adhere to my mastery policy for these students knowing that they will struggle with the NAPLAN requirements. It would be a big job to encourage teachers to feel confident to adhere to the mastery policy despite NAPLAN, not to mention educating the parents.
Another factor in developing teacher satisfaction is for the principal to provide opportunities for distributive leadership. For example, teachers of say the years 1 and 2 classes in your school will benefit from opportunities to discuss in a group setting the syllabuses of the curriculum to see if they are all on the same page. It is a standards moderation exercise that works and provides leadership opportunities for teachers to chair such discussions. At secondary school level such discussions can occur within subject departments and not necessarily be led by the Senior Subject teacher. These discussions provide valuable spinoff of peers learning from peers. It's one of the best forms of inservice.
Improving your school year by year requires change and too much of this at any one time worries teachers whose focus is on the day to day classroom work. I was guilty as a principal at one stage of being over zealous and impatient to make the necessary changes. I had to pull my head in. A sound school development plan (SDP) over say a 3-5 year period where improvement is steadily achieved in a few select aspects of school operations each year is the way to go. Again I have written in detail on this but it is too much for this blog post. Teachers should be part of the process in developing the SDP.
Occasionally teachers may need to be defended about the long holidays that they have. The holidays are essentially for the students, thus teachers get them by default if you like. The holidays are often used in part to improve their professional skills and to offset long working hours that include face to face contact with students and the long hours of preparation and time spent assessing student output. The holidays give a break from the pressures of intensive daily contact with students. It is important that as a principals we encourage teachers to spend time with their loved ones and to have pursuits outside work that provide relaxation and enjoyment. They are to avoid becoming slaves to a job that has ill defined boundaries of how much is good enough.
Of course as a principal you will take opportunities to thank the teachers for their good work en masse or individually, whatever is appropriate. A useful idea is to write a brief thank you note and leave it in the pigeon hole of a teacher who has done things above and beyond the call of duty; has made a very special effort.
For the non teaching staff members most of the above also applies recognising that some non-teaching staff like guidance officers and bursars (accountants) are also professional people.
Enough already!
GD
Friday, 20 May 2016
The Independent Public School (IPS) Movement in Australia
Been reading a very impressive article by Alan Reid from the Australian Association for Research in Education. Alan is very critical of the claims that the IPS movement will improve student outcomes in learning.
I support his view that the IPS movement has the worrying potential to get in the way of school Principals being educational leaders in their schools. I worry about the remaining small rural schools in my vast home state of WA. Could they function as IPS schools? I think not, and maybe the Eduction Department has quarantined them from moving in this direction.
Owing to the pressures that Alan sees IPS schools bringing on principals to be business managers, he expresses concern for their ability to bring variety to the curriculum. My view is to express relief that we now have the Australian National Curriculum (ANC) within which schools can innovate. Teachers do not have time to invent a curriculum and can feel a sense of security that they have the ANC within which to work. Non government schools can choose other than the ANC such as the international baccalaureate program but I worry if IPS schools can each choose their own curriculum.
Long before the IPS notion was around I was the principal of a K-12 government rural school. I was so lucky to be in this K-12 situation as it gave me the opportunity to explore the real application of providing true continuity of learning for each student as they moved through the year levels of their pre-primary, primary and secondary schooling. I confess that I could have made even more of this opportunity than I did.
This K-12 school existed in a context of a centralised Education Department and Regional District control, yet I always felt the I had a lot of freedom to be innovative within that structure. Maybe it was the distance from the centre that gave me that sense of freedom.
The jury is well and truly out on IPS schools. I hope with every fibre in my body that this is not another educational change that will falter. I have seen so much valuable fiscal and human resource wasted on change that did not improve student learning : on change that exhausted and demoralised the participants.
Whatever happens I know that my principal colleagues out there will be striving to remain as educational leaders. As the pressures grow it will be even more important to take recreational time out and to enjoy spending time with loved ones. I say again that the ultimate nature of reality is the association that one has with one's loved ones. I've been a bit repetitious on these points from an earlier blog but feel that this repeat is important.
GD
I support his view that the IPS movement has the worrying potential to get in the way of school Principals being educational leaders in their schools. I worry about the remaining small rural schools in my vast home state of WA. Could they function as IPS schools? I think not, and maybe the Eduction Department has quarantined them from moving in this direction.
Owing to the pressures that Alan sees IPS schools bringing on principals to be business managers, he expresses concern for their ability to bring variety to the curriculum. My view is to express relief that we now have the Australian National Curriculum (ANC) within which schools can innovate. Teachers do not have time to invent a curriculum and can feel a sense of security that they have the ANC within which to work. Non government schools can choose other than the ANC such as the international baccalaureate program but I worry if IPS schools can each choose their own curriculum.
Long before the IPS notion was around I was the principal of a K-12 government rural school. I was so lucky to be in this K-12 situation as it gave me the opportunity to explore the real application of providing true continuity of learning for each student as they moved through the year levels of their pre-primary, primary and secondary schooling. I confess that I could have made even more of this opportunity than I did.
This K-12 school existed in a context of a centralised Education Department and Regional District control, yet I always felt the I had a lot of freedom to be innovative within that structure. Maybe it was the distance from the centre that gave me that sense of freedom.
The jury is well and truly out on IPS schools. I hope with every fibre in my body that this is not another educational change that will falter. I have seen so much valuable fiscal and human resource wasted on change that did not improve student learning : on change that exhausted and demoralised the participants.
Whatever happens I know that my principal colleagues out there will be striving to remain as educational leaders. As the pressures grow it will be even more important to take recreational time out and to enjoy spending time with loved ones. I say again that the ultimate nature of reality is the association that one has with one's loved ones. I've been a bit repetitious on these points from an earlier blog but feel that this repeat is important.
GD
Tuesday, 17 May 2016
Principal's increased workload
An article on 17 May 2016, "Private students poached : union", p7 in The West Australian newspaper cites the State School Teachers Union and the WA Primary Principals Association indicating that the Independent Public Schools (IPS) scheme "...had led to a big increase in principals' workloads, with less support". As at 2016, 445 government schools have taken on the independent status with another 50 to be added in 2017. The article was focused on a claim that independent government schools are poaching students from independent non-government schools.
While the poaching claim is of interest my concern is the claim about the increased workloads for IPS principals.
I would be keen to read comments indicating the nature of the load increases in order to foster a discussion on this blog about the pressures and how they might be dealt with.
GD
While the poaching claim is of interest my concern is the claim about the increased workloads for IPS principals.
I would be keen to read comments indicating the nature of the load increases in order to foster a discussion on this blog about the pressures and how they might be dealt with.
GD
Tuesday, 3 May 2016
School Principals and Recent Federal Government Chat About Education Spending
I heard the Federal Minister for Education talking about two funding directions: one being performance pay for teachers and the other a focus on early childhood education.
Performance pay for teachers? Not a new idea and has a lot of pitfalls. I even got a performance pay boost back in the old days of the annual teaching mark awarded by the dreaded school inspectors. So what! Once you achieved a certain mark you jumped two to three salary grades. Surely at secondary school level to achieve a Senior Teacher position and the commensurate higher salary is performance based?
The performance pay is supposed to encourage expert teachers to remain as teachers rather than seek school administrative jobs. Let them become school principals with greater scope to influence teaching practice. We need all school principals to have been gun teachers.
I hope if performance pay comes about we see recognition as a gun teacher one who brings a Leopard (see earlier post) along to year 7 maths mastery when that Leopard is in year 9 by age.
As a principal I would rather see more money targeted to effective in-service that enables my whole teaching staff to become even more expert.
My standards moderation approach cited in previous posts is an ideal in-service platform for teachers to share how they go about things.
Testing the little ones on school entrance to see what they need? I always believed we should do this as a normal part of our teaching. We get them in at pre-primary and find out from all available sources where they are at. Formal diagnostic testing can be one source if needed. The federal Minister for Education sees this as a pillar for the attainment of better results in mathematics and literacy attainment as part of the national picture. When the overall school attainment picture looks bleak according to the pollies they bring out this refocusing on early childhood education. We've been there and done it and continue to do it. It beggars belief when we in the schools know that we are on full throttle for every child as soon as they enter our school. I wish Ministers of Education would recognise that teaching is a profession which means we are working at our best day in and day out and as professionals we accept the responsibility to keep up to date with best practice.
What do you think?
GD
Performance pay for teachers? Not a new idea and has a lot of pitfalls. I even got a performance pay boost back in the old days of the annual teaching mark awarded by the dreaded school inspectors. So what! Once you achieved a certain mark you jumped two to three salary grades. Surely at secondary school level to achieve a Senior Teacher position and the commensurate higher salary is performance based?
The performance pay is supposed to encourage expert teachers to remain as teachers rather than seek school administrative jobs. Let them become school principals with greater scope to influence teaching practice. We need all school principals to have been gun teachers.
I hope if performance pay comes about we see recognition as a gun teacher one who brings a Leopard (see earlier post) along to year 7 maths mastery when that Leopard is in year 9 by age.
As a principal I would rather see more money targeted to effective in-service that enables my whole teaching staff to become even more expert.
My standards moderation approach cited in previous posts is an ideal in-service platform for teachers to share how they go about things.
Testing the little ones on school entrance to see what they need? I always believed we should do this as a normal part of our teaching. We get them in at pre-primary and find out from all available sources where they are at. Formal diagnostic testing can be one source if needed. The federal Minister for Education sees this as a pillar for the attainment of better results in mathematics and literacy attainment as part of the national picture. When the overall school attainment picture looks bleak according to the pollies they bring out this refocusing on early childhood education. We've been there and done it and continue to do it. It beggars belief when we in the schools know that we are on full throttle for every child as soon as they enter our school. I wish Ministers of Education would recognise that teaching is a profession which means we are working at our best day in and day out and as professionals we accept the responsibility to keep up to date with best practice.
What do you think?
GD
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)