Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

A weak State in a mediocre performing country

By John Ridd - posted Wednesday, 14 April 2010


Nevertheless NAPLAN testing provides an opportunity to measure value added to individual students’ learning over time. Recently, The Grattan Institute published Measuring what Matters: Student progress (Dr Ben Jensen, 2010). It is a well reasoned argument for a system of measuring value added. It melds well with relevant ideas in the Masters report written for the Queensland Department. I urge a careful look at Jensen.

There is no good answer to the pedagogic problem of ability/maturity spread (point 11). It is a choice between shades of grey. The blackest, the worst, is totally mixed ability. Streaming is (quietly) common in Queensland nowadays. That crude system consists of forming classes on student performances across all subjects and so ignores the fact that many students are much weaker at, say, English than Maths. Streaming is bad for such students (often boys, which is why “top” classes are predominantly female). Grouping within a class is very hard to do. Forty years ago I advocated a form of linear programmed learning. Now I vote for setting which entails timetabling all Maths classes, in Year 8 for example, at the same times in the week. That enables the Maths staff to divide the students according to their ability/maturity in Maths alone. Movement between sets is simple at any time.

Queensland Education department and the Minister need to accept that the terrible performance by our brighter students on TIMSS (point 2) is partly due to the fashion of mixed ability groups. Consequently strong advice will have to be given to the schools. Schools will claim that timetabling makes setting impossible. It used to be possible, so why not now? The key is to make Maths and English priorities (see point 10) and timetable in the “blocks” for those subjects first.

Advertisement

The relatively weak performance by boys is as serious an issue now as the weaker performance by girls used to be. As Pitman and Matters put it years ago: “When the boys beat the girls we changed the system. Now the girls beat the boys we expect the boys to change themselves.” There is no doubt that many boys, especially from lower socio economic backgrounds are relatively better at Maths than English. The increase in verbalisation of Maths and Science again discriminates against boys and the poor (as do “assignments”). It is important that in the future Queensland ensures that for all existing and new syllabi “assessment procedures in maths and sciences must, as a first requirement, provide information about students’ knowledge, skills and achievement on the subject, and not be a de facto examination of students’ English comprehension and expression”. (Commonwealth House of Reps Inquiry, Boys: getting it right, 2002). Obvious of course.

The Science syllabus is much poorer than the Maths one. The “content” is unclear and a vast rewrite is needed; the objective of which must be to indicate far more precisely what they intend should be taught.

There is almost no indication of, let alone statement of, the numerical aspects of Science.

Science, even more than Maths is afflicted with a constant stream of “assignments”. Even ignoring the inevitable widespread cheating, assignments are also socially discriminatory against students from weaker socio economic groups and are sexist.

As for Maths there is a serious problem with the lack of scientifically knowledgeable teachers at both Primary and Secondary level. That makes the necessity for a well defined syllabus all the more urgent. This National Science syllabus lacks adequate definition (but it is much better than QSA Year 11-12 syllabi!).

Given more detailed subject syllabi based on the skeletal National curricula, reliable oversight and assessments, major improvements to Maths and Science education in Queensland can occur.

Advertisement

But who or what will do the implementation, oversight and assessment? That is the biggest decision that the Minister, the Department and Parliament must make.

The problem is that the Queensland Studies Authority is a major part of the Education Establishment that has unarguably degraded standards (by two years learning remember!)

QSA syllabi meet none of the criteria suggested earlier: defined, validated and reliable. In addition to the lack of definition mentioned earlier, no student or parent has any idea what a piece of work is “worth”. There is no clear method to arrive at the final achievement level; there are no apparent “rules of the game”.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

9 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

John Ridd taught and lectured in maths and physics in UK, Nigeria and Queensland. He co-authored a series of maths textbooks and after retirement worked for and was awarded a PhD, the topic being 'participation in rigorous maths and science.'

Other articles by this Author

All articles by John Ridd

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of John Ridd
Article Tools
Comment 9 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy