Anonymous #461

Submitter information

Name

Anonymous #461

Where are you located?

New South Wales

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?

Teacher education

What is your occupation?

Teacher education

Elevating the profession

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

Somewhat disagree

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

Over the last 25 years, ‘teacher-bashing’ has become normalised in the Australian media (Mockler, 202). This has, in turn, significantly impacted the status of teaching as a profession. While teaching-bashing must cease, an advertising campaign will do little to combat relentless negative media about the teaching profession. There have indeed been many teacher recruitment campaigns in the past, including the NSW Teaching Opens Doors Campaign and Queensland’s Teach Queensland campaign. There is no evidence that these campaigns have shifted perceptions of the teaching profession. This is because perceptions of the teaching profession run much deeper and are directly related to low-slung teacher salaries and intensified working conditions (Sahlberg, 2021; OECD, 2019).

Teacher awards and recognition are important but identifying ‘one teacher of the year’ is grossly inadequate. There are 4,030,717 students across 9,581 Australian schools primary and secondary schools, with 303,539 full-time equivalent (FTE) teaching staff (ABS, 2021). Rather than identifying only one teacher of the year, we recommend a Prime Minister’s Outstanding Teachers’ Honour List where many outstanding teachers are recognised. At Southern Cross University in the Faculty of Education, we have instituted a Dean’s Honours list (for the last decade) where all outstanding pre-service student teachers with a GPA of 6.5 (out of 7) are recognised and added to the Honours List. This is an equitable method of identifying academic excellence. However, what criteria or measures will be utilised to identify outstanding teachers for excellence awards?

Increasing the number of Highly Accomplished and Lead Teachers (HALT) in Australian schools is encouraged, but only if this includes further salary increases. More importantly, such salary increases must be applied to all classroom teachers if the profession of teaching is to be genuinely elevated (OECD, 2021).

In short, elevating the teaching profession is critical, but the identified actions fall well short of what is required to uphold the Australian teaching 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.

Somewhat agree

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

There is no doubt that there is a critical teacher shortage in Australia, with a clear need for lifting teacher supply. However, slogans such as ‘best and brightest’ devalue the profession. What evidence is there that the best and brightest are not already attracted. Indeed, many would claim that they already attract the best and brightest.

Teacher education providers play a critical role in improving supply. However, any High Achieving Teachers Program or fast-track program, must not reduce teacher preparation quality. Importantly, there is evidence that the latter programs can be costly with poor teacher retention rates (25% more likely to leave the professional early) (Clark et al., 2017). These issues of retention must be addressed. For example, Southern Cross University has introduced the new Southern Cross model, which is a six-week unit structure (term). There are six terms six times year. The shorter, more focused six-week unit structure gives students a greater sense of momentum and motivation as they achieve milestones quickly. To these ends, SCU’s ITE programs can be completed in shorter timeframes (at the student’s pace) without jeopardising quality. Thus, it is critical that any fast-track programs upload the same quality standards expected of any teacher education program.

In short, it is agreed that teacher supply must be improved. However, the actions as currently written require revision to ensure that they are research-informed and evidence-based.

Strengthening Initial Teacher Education (ITE)

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

Somewhat disagree

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

Teacher education is heavily regulated, with accreditation and annual reporting mandated to ensure that pre-service student teachers are profession-ready. There is no research evidence to support the claim that teacher education providers are failing in the delivery of “initial teacher education programs to deliver effective classroom ready teachers, with particular attention to teaching reading, literacy and numeracy, classroom management, cultural responsiveness, teaching students with diverse needs and working with families/carers.”

Furthermore, there is a significant conflict of interest appointing an Australian Vice Chancellor (with their own teacher education program) as chair of a proposed teacher education expert panel determining the “the link between performance and funding of ITE”. It is also perplexing that this action has already commenced (with terms of reference released), noting that this consultation process is not yet complete.

The work experience and skills framework would be a welcomed framework for teacher education providers.

The attraction of more Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander teachers is an important initiative. However, the acronym MATSITI could be perceived as culturally insensitive in the same way that ATSI can cause deep cultural offence (Korff, 2018).

In short, priority area three is not well defined, including misguided actions such as performance-based teacher education funding.

Maximising the time to teach

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

Somewhat agree

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

Decreasing teacher workloads is critical in the Australian teaching profession. Teachers are now required to perform many duties that fall well outside their remit (Gavin et al. 2021). An example of this is teachers retaining relief staff when they are on leave, including sudden leave due to illness. This also includes teachers having to navigate complicated systems to be paid for pre-teacher supervision, where this could be managed by school administration through invoicing universities. These are just two simple examples (of thousands of many possible examples) where teachers are performing work that was previously performed by school leadership, administration, or relevant departmental offices (OECD, 2019).

Teachers core business is curriculum planning. Prescribed curriculum is not best practice. Existing research reveals that such prescribed curriculum tends to diminish teacher creativity and autonomy (OECD, 2018), which is closely aligned with teacher performance and student success.

Action 18 is highly problematic. It is not the role of pre-service teachers to reduce the workload of teachers. Pre-service teachers are learners. Rather, teachers will have more time to focus on teaching if administrative is reallocated to leadership and administration teams.

In short, maximising time to teach is unequivocally agreed with. However, the actions presented do not address underlying intensification conditions as the primary drivers for troubling teacher workloads. Thus, priority 4 actions require significant revision to ensure that this important priority area is appropriated actioned drawing on the significant research-base on teachers’ work.

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?

Moderately effective

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

Developing “nationally consistent teacher workforce projections based on consistent standards, disaggregated at a regional level and by subject specialisation, to enable a national understanding of teacher demand” is welcomed.

The research base and comprehensive data on teacher retention is well established (Boyd et al, 2011; Casely-Hayford et al, 2022; Chapman et al, 1986; Geiger et al, 2018; Nguyen, 2021). How will the proposed action (23) build upon this substantive research evidence?

Graduate data is already supplied annually across states and territories. Publishing this data and linking it to performance-based teacher education funding (for example) is more likely work against any efforts to elevate the profession. In addition, it would be highly inappropriate to utilise this data to inform future university places.

Instituting great consistency across teacher registration platforms is welcomed.

In short, priority 5 is an important priority area, however further revision of the actions is necessitated particularly in ensuring that data across universities is not published.

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.

Somewhat agree

Would you like to provide feedback about these actions?

Priority area six and associated actions are well articulated. Supporting teachers’ mental health (teacher-related stress) is a significant omission in priority 6 and must be addressed. Contrary, increasing ongoing teaching roles is welcomed.

Developing micro-credentials is also welcomed where it may for example lead to a Graduate Certificate or Master of Education. It is important that such study (and professional learning) is supported and subsided by employers.

In short, priority area six is well defined and articulated, although supporting teachers’ mental health (including stress) is a significant omission.