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
No comments:
Post a Comment