By RACHEL POWER
Is education about treating everyone equally? Or is it about the pursuit of being the best?
My daughter has high level needs.
Her teacher does her very best to cater for our 7 year-old within her class of 25 kids but under current funding arrangements only a tiny proportion of those that need help actually qualify for extra support in the classroom.
Our kids attend their local state school in an inner-suburban area that attracts a lot of new migrants, refugees and a high proportion of Indigenous families.
This diversity is what we love and value about the school — but it also means our daughter is only one of a large number of kids with high-level needs.
It also means that our next nearest school — only two kilometres closer to the city but with a notably better-heeled parent community — can run a community fete that raises ten of thousands of dollars every year, while we struggle to make more than a few grand at our local event.
Just the other day I found myself comforting a mother who was sobbing hysterically in the school foyer. When she calmed down enough to tell me what was wrong, it emerged that her son’s glasses had fallen off and were accidentally trodden on by another kid. She had no idea how she was going to afford another pair.
Recently one of the world’s leading authorities on education reform, Pasi Sahlberg, visited Australia. I was particularly struck by his statement that in Finland, the education system strives for equity not excellence — but that the result of equity turns out to be excellence nonetheless.
As a result, Finland continues to blitz the competition on educational outcomes internationally, while Australia has been slipping further and further down the OECD scale every year. Sahlberg’s advice: Start with the equitable funding of the nation’s school system.
Last year, the Federal Government commissioned the most comprehensive review of schools funding in almost 40 years. The Gonski Review found that achievement gaps in literacy between those from disadvantaged and advantaged backgrounds could amount to as much as three years of schooling.
But what is the Gonski Report?
You can read the full Gonski Report here but in summary this is what it says:
- The shared funding of schools between Federal and State Governments is too complex
- Many Government schools need urgent funding for infrastructure
- There should be a minimum amount of funding that follows each student, with additional ‘loadings’ for students with special needs or certain characteristics
- All of the changes will cost around $5 billion
Its report recommended a comprehensive change to the way schools are funded — directing money toward those with the greatest need — and called for an extra $5 billion to be injected into schools as a matter of urgency.
The message from the Gonski Review was clear: the current funding system is broken, it’s failing too many of our students, and it is harming the prosperity of the nation.
But so far the Gillard Government, hell-bent on achieving a budget surplus, has refused to commit the extra funding or to implement Gonski’s recommendations.
Once I might have been blissfully ignorant about the important of this issue. Now I am acutely aware of what it means. My daughter is lucky enough to have educated parents who can invest time, energy and resources into trying to make sure she doesn’t fall through the gaps.
For three hours every day my partner and I take turns to leave work and take our daughter to a specialised learning program. Costing the equivalent of a family holiday to Bali (which would have been nice!), I am acutely aware that while this is a considerable sacrifice for us, it is a prohibitive price tag for most families.
Does that make those families’ kids, often with far more severe problems than our little girl, less deserving?
Hell, no.
Surely we can all agree that every kid deserves the best possible education, no matter their background or the size of their parents’ wallet.
Teachers know that in many if not most cases, school represents a one-off opportunity to maximise a child’s potential and give them a fighting chance in life. Imagine, then, the frustration at not having the resources to give a child the one-on-one attention you know could make all the difference.
This is what Gonski’s recommendations would make possible. Better funding would mean more teachers, smaller class sizes and increased attention for each child.
A society can only be as culturally rich, as productive and prosperous, as its public education system allows. The Gonski Report represents a once-in-a-generation opportunity to create a better future for Australia.
As parents, we have the greatest stake in the quality of Australia’s education system. For that reason, we also have the greatest power to push for change.
Rachel Power is a journalist, mother and author of The Divided Heart: Art and Motherhood (Red Dog Books). Visit http://igiveagonski.com.au/ if you’d like to register your support for the I Give a Gonski campaign.
Top Comments
I have just come across this site because I am very interested in the Gonksi report. It is excellent, but it is not perfect, and the current enthusiasm for implementing it as is will lead to future problems that are obvious already. You can read a detailed discussion of how the report needs to be changed at http://community.tes.co.uk/....
An amazing teacher who inspires their students can teach to kids at Cranbrook (Sydney private school) or to kids in the outback, sitting in a shed with no air conditioning - and get the very best result despite their surrounds.
With two children in primary school and in reflecting on my own experience as a student, I think the amazing, inspiring teachers are, disappointingly, the exception rather than the rule.
I think we need to focus our funding on making our teachers better, happier and inspired to make a huge difference in children's lives - not just turn up, teach the bare minimum of the curriculum, hanging out for the school holidays and thanking god for the fact that they such a secure job.
If we do that, it will matter less about whether the school has the latest and greatest facilities and fit-out - an enormous slice of the expected cost to overhaul the education system.
It would be great to see the schools that are in low socioeconomic areas -the schools that require a lot of building works and refurbishments - report exception results despite those needs? Because they had such amazing teachers that that stuff didn't matter.
Wouldn't it be great if the Education Minister called all of the teachers together and said, "look, we need xxx funding from the Government, but the Government isn't going to be able to provide that funding in the immediate future - but - how about we all lift, take on this challenge and inspire our students to do better despite that."
All a great teacher needs is a student, willing to learn.
I think you might be living in a bit of fantasy land. There are lots and lots of great teachers - the really exceptional ones are always going to be rare because they have a natural ability and drive that can't be taught. Few teachers enter the profession because it is secure and they get school holidays. If they do, they don't last because it is a hard job and the pay mediocre. Almost every teacher chooses the profession because they want to make a difference. You are right though, in that the government needs to do more to ensure that good teachers want to stay in the profession, and funding for infrastructure is not the answer. But you are a little bit in fairyland if you think a great teacher can get great results no matter what school they are in. I great teacher can turn the culture of learning in a classroom around for sure, but they can't always get that to reflect in the outcomes. Exceptional teachers are not the only barrier to learning for many children. Some behavioural and learning problems do not qualify for extra funding in a classroom. A child with ADHD who constantly disrupts the class and exhibits violent behaviour and climbs out the window every lesson, is a barrier to other children's learning. The child who is being abused and neglected at home (whose family may have already been reported to DOCS) and comes to school withdrawn and with no lunch and having not eaten breakfast and doesn't even have shoes on their feet is never going to be coming to school ready to learn like his/her peers.
And did you realise in some low socio-economic schools and in Aboriginal communities the single biggest factor in poor results is absenteeism? Is there any inspirational teacher that can deliver results when they have students who are absent from school more days than they are there?
The other thing to consider is our tool for measuring results. NAPLAN. Many children from low-socio economic areas and Aboriginal communities are not factored in when writing these tests in middle class Melbourne. What good is a question about considering the significance of a Pura Milk logo on the shirts of a basketball team, when some of the responders have never seen a basketball game and get their milk straight from a cow? That is just one example of a real Naplan question that has no cultural relevance whatsoever to a whole group of high risk children.
Anyway, just pointing out that there is a whole lot more to consider than how many exceptional teachers we have. It is hugely complicated.
Thanks for your feedback Lucinda. I agree my ideas are idealistic - I understand there are a lot of teachers who aim to inspire their students but I also think there are a lot who don't or who are jaded by their experience in the education system.
I observe the teachers in my children's school, which is a public school that would be considered to be amongst the best in the country. The sort of school where out of area parents start lining up to apply from 4am in the morning. What I see are only a handful of teachers who are energised, engaging and inspirational. The other teachers I find are simply going through the motions and appear disillusioned. A few have their eyes on retirement which is on the horizon and appear to be floating along towards it. There needs to be a complete shake up resulting in more energised and inspiring teaching.
I don't pretend to know what's involved in that shake up. But I do see with my own eyes so much disillusionment which is then reflected in the class rooms and in our children's lives.
Also, I understand what you are saying about the funding for special needs and this really what I meant when I say we should be putting money into human resources before we start shelling out for refurbishments. That can come later - engaged teachers, inspired teachers, teachers who feel supported in the classroom can teach anywhere - even, shock horror, in a classroom without air conditioning.
If there are so mnay jaded teachers, why are 'out of area 'parents lining up to b enrolled?? Let me guess. NAPLAN results on the "My school ' website!
Thanks for your reply Kristine. I think we are mostly on the same page - I do agree we have to keep teachers energised and inspired and ensure that they don't become jaded by the system. It does happen a lot. The average burn out rate for a teacher is 5 years. That is a big problem.
Just out of curiosity, what is it that makes you see many of the teachers at your kids' school as jaded and stale? What is it that is giving the perception of the school as being one of the best public schools around? Do you think it is because of Naplan scores. I'd be thinking they must be doing something right to have the repuation they have and for parents to be on waiting lists to enrol.