Anonymous #316

Submitter information

Name

Anonymous #316

Where are you located?

Victoria

What type of area do you live in?

Regional or rural

Are you an education professional?
(e.g. teacher, school leader, learning support assistant, teacher’s aide)

Yes

Which sector do you work in?

Primary

What is your occupation?

School leader

Elevating the profession

The actions proposed recognise the value teachers bring to students, communities and the economy.

Strongly disagree

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

This is a cosmetic device that will have very little effect. State governments have been advertising for teachers widely and there is still a shortage of teachers and it is getting worse. Advertising will not help to elevate the profession because the problem we face is that teaching has been so poorly attended to at ITE level that the skills of teaching are not what they should be. As a result parents are unable to trust teachers to know what they should know and no amount of advertising will remedy this. We all know the saying about what you can’t polish and parents are smart enough to see through slick advertising when it doesn’t, unfortunately, meet the rhetoric. I am not saying that teachers don’t put in effort, I know they do. But when you haven’t been given the skills to use you can’t produce what you need.
Having a one in 303,539 chance of winning a Teacher of the Year award doesn’t motivate me to teach; being suitably knowledgeable to do my job is what is most important. And waiting for my nomination for an OAM is not something that I will hold my breath for. Once again, it is my capacity to teach which should hold me in good stead for an OAM not my longevity in the career.
The profession has had multiple attempts to recognise advanced skills teachers (1990s) and Experienced Teacher With Responsibility (2000s) in Victoria but they failed because they didn’t really do anything to develop teachers, but rather acknowledge achievement and they often came with little financial reward and often a greater workload. We do not need to acknowledge Highly Accomplished and Lead Teachers, we need to produce them. Their skills will identify them. Using money on these processes is taking money away from chances to develop the skills of all teachers which is the only way to elevate the profession.

Improving teacher supply

The actions proposed will be effective in increasing the number of students entering ITE, number of students completing ITE and the number of teachers staying in and/or returning to the profession.

Strongly disagree

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

Of course these actions will increase the number of students entering ITE however that is the wrong goal. On the figures this is potentially a $268 000 000 commitment for 5000 (5000 x $40 000) graduates (but the allocation is only $56.2m. Looks like a shortfall) and 1500 HAT candidates. ABS figures show there were 9,581 schools in Australia in 2021. The commitment of 6500 “best and brightest” (which frankly is an insult to teachers already in the system) and HAT candidates equals a chance of 68% that a school will get one of these candidates. 32 % will miss out and therefore miss whatever advantage this will produce. It would be better to give each school the funding for this to focus on their own professional development. This would equate to $20 874 (based on 5000 x $40000) to each school. Money which would immediately impact the teachers currently in teaching who desperately need it.
However the issue isn’t about how many teachers we get into training but the quality of the training they receive, plus the quality of ongoing professional development they receive once they are employed, that will impact whether they become highly accomplished teachers or even stay in the profession. Currently teachers are leaving the profession because they don’t have the tools to stay in it.
As renowned educationalist Dylan Wiliam states, “it’s no use trying to hire better teachers, there are no better teachers out there.” Please look him up.
I don’t believe these factors will have any impact on teachers returning to the profession.

Strengthening Initial Teacher Education (ITE)

The actions proposed will ensure initial teacher education supports teacher supply and quality.

Somewhat agree

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

The actions set out for this objective are interesting and at the same time damning. Action 10 is inextricably linked to Action 13 in the following way. ITE has been failing for 30 years to produce teachers who have the skills and knowledge to complete the job to a high level. What has held it together has been the fact that the majority of teachers were in school before this decline and so have their own education at primary and high school to fall back on. Unfortunately the fads that education has followed over the last 20 to 25 years leads us to a position where action 13 is required. That is that the students and neophyte teachers of today need to be taught the skills that they were left to learn through osmosis by fads such as inquiry learning, whole language, balanced literacy and the 3 cueing system of reading. All of which are now shown to be ineffective and damaging to students. As a result we have teachers who do not know what area is in maths, have little understanding of grammar and no idea of phonics. Nor do they have the capacity to complete basic numeracy tasks because they were never taught the number facts they needed to complete these tasks. As a result they go into classes as teachers expected to teach something that they were never, or poorly taught. So strengthening ITE is extremely important and it must be based on the science of learning.
Unfortunately this is not going to help the teachers who are currently in the system who desperately need good quality professional development and because they feel unable to meet the challenges, they will continue to leave.
Also, as [REDACTED] points out, this process will have little effect for ten years and probably 15 years. Why? Because it doesn’t start for 2 years, the students will need 4 years in university and 4 years of experience to embed the practice. Add to that the fact that a teacher’s career averages 30 years therefore we will be 15 years of teaching before these teachers will be in the majority.

Maximising the time to teach

The actions proposed will improve retention and free up teachers to focus on teaching and collaboration.

Somewhat disagree

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

If you don’t know how to do something than having more time is not going to improve your ability. What improves a person’s capacity to teach is high quality ITE and ongoing professional development. What stops most of our teachers is there capacity to do the job. If I have more time to sit around a table to collaborate with colleagues who also struggle to understand how to best teach than I will be no better of. Targeted professional development is what will help the most. That way people will spend less time looking for pre-prepared lesson plans and be able to quickly produce their own.
Sure, less paperwork and more efficient ways of doing things will make a difference to teacher workload, but will not make a difference to their ability to teach. It might support greater collaboration provided the people they collaborate with know what they are doing.
The greatest thing you could achieve here is to investigate the ridiculous workload created by the NCCD process and cut that back.

Better understanding future teacher workforce needs

How effective are the proposed actions in better understanding future teacher workforce needs, including the number of teachers required?

Not effective at all

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

I’m sure this will help the bureaucracy but I can’t see it helping teachers. It is very damning that this sort of process is only being thought of now and shows how taken for granted teachers have been by State and Federal governments. The fact that this has to be done is an indictment on governments at all levels and of all political persuasions.

Better career pathways to support and retain teachers in the profession

The proposed actions will improve career pathways, including through streamlining the process for Highly Accomplished and Lead Teacher (HALT) accreditation, and providing better professional support for teachers to retain them in the profession.

Strongly disagree

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

Teachers want to be able to teach to the best of their ability, not hang commendations on their walls. It is telling that of the 28 actions listed it is only the last one that addresses professional development for current teachers and it only attracts $10m which is given to a university. This plan has completely missed the point for teachers who are currently teaching. They need good quality, science led professional development. The more capable of teaching they feel, the more likely they are to stay and yet this plan does almost nothing to support our current cohort of teachers. I am seriously flabbergasted that I have to say this. I will say again, this totally misses the point. Sure, it serves a purpose for the government to spruce all the money it is spending but that money will be wasted. This is a totally disappointing document and it needs to be started again from scratch.