Noreen Navin, Sydney
On August 21, the NSW Teachers Federation website reported that nearly 1000 schools and 16,000 teachers have sent resolutions to the state education minister, Carmel Tebbutt, opposing the new government-imposed A-to-E student reporting requirements.
For state governments to qualify for federal school funding, student achievement must be graded as A to E, or an equivalent, by the end of 2006. The NSW Labor government has determined, without consulting teachers, that it will comply.
The teachers' union is greatly concerned about these educationally unsound reporting requirements, and union general secretary John Irving has urged state school teachers to hold union meetings at their schools to vote against implementing them.
A government-imposed A-to-E grading system has no educational value. Placing labels on students does little to encourage them to engage with the curriculum or be motivated to continue on to higher levels of education.
In primary schools, children as young as five or six may be given E grades in key learning areas, such as mathematics and English, with a catastrophic effect on their self esteem and willingness to study. The grading system would brand some young children as "failures".
A system of performance scales or teachers' comments allows students' progress to be relayed clearly and concisely. An A-to-E grading regime does not account for the varying degrees of learning and certainly does not help parents of children with learning difficulties.
The federal government, which allocates just 26% of its budget to the public school system and has introduced some of the most draconian industrial relations laws in Australia's history, is continuing to try to implement its reactionary school agenda by promoting a pay regime and localised employment structure that would lower teachers' salaries and conditions. It is also trying to reduce teachers' ability to achieve collective salary agreements.
The July 10 Australian newspaper reported that federal education minister Julie Bishop said that "teachers were one of the few professions not accountable for their performance and it was high time they were held responsible for their students' achievements". She announced that performance pay would form part of the next round of funding negotiations with the states and territories.
Performance pay aims to turn schools into highly competitive workplaces. It fails to acknowledge that the educational development of each child involves more than the efforts of any one teacher.
In a performance pay system, would the teachers working in the selective schools or in schools where they can afford to choose their students — the so-called A students — get more money? Would teachers working in schools in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas — the so-called D or E schools — get lower take-home pay?
There is no evidence that a performance pay system would improve students' achievements, but there is plenty of evidence that it would create competitiveness amongst teachers — and open the way for the replacement of collective pay agreements with individual contracts.
[Noreen Navin is a NSW Teachers Federation state councillor and a member of the Socialist Alliance.]