What do we need to make Victorian government schools more successful?

Notwithstanding the fact that the Victorian Government has the information to identify under-performing schools and teachers (based on state-wide literacy and numeracy tests and year12 results), such information is kept secret and failing schools are allowed to continue unchecked.

As stated by the head of the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority, after detailing the comprehensive range of information now available to schools and parents: “The information provided by the data service is confidential to the school and access to it is strictly controlled.”

The Australian Education Union also argues against parents being given any information that might allow them to rank schools, as some schools, because of students’ socio-economic background, will consistently under-perform. Overseas research based on comparing schools with a similar community profile is ignored.

In Victorian schools, the first time the majority of students face a high-stakes, competitive examination is during the final year of schooling.  Promotion from year to year is automatic on the basis that failing students is bad for their self-esteem.

Worse still, as discovered by many parents, our approach to assessing and reporting student achievement is generally vague and non-judgmental.  As noted in the study, Reporting On Student and School Achievement:

Parents consider there is a tendency, more common in primary schools, to avoid facing or telling hard truths…There is a lack of objective standards that parents can use to determine their children’s attainment and rate of progress.

This anti-competitive ethos is unlike systems overseas, such as the Netherlands and Singapore, where students are regularly tested and streamed according to interest and ability. Many American states have also legislated to ensure that students are only promoted after mastering the required standard of work.

The fact that Victoria’s education system fails to properly recognise and reward student ability is best demonstrated by this governments’ failure to promote selective high schools. NSW students in selective schools consistently outperform non-government schools in relation to Year 12 results.

Late last year, Minister Lynne Kosky launched a paper entitled Blueprint For Government Schools.  While acknowledging the system’s strengths, significant is that the Minister admitted all is not well.

Too many students leave school early with poor literacy and numeracy skills, educational disadvantage is concentrated in some geographic areas and, within the one school, there is often an unacceptable variation across classes in student performance.

Also significant, in order to raise standards, is that the blueprint advocates some of the measures listed above. 

The paper admits that the government system needs to better address diversity by providing multiple pathways, that how schools report to parents needs strengthening and that the curriculum needs to be simplified and focus on essential learning.

In addition, how well schools and principals perform is linked to student learning outcomes and, for the first time, there is a clear statement that the government will intervene if schools consistently under-perform.

On the level of rhetoric, much of what Minister Kosky puts forward should be applauded.  Whether the system can deliver improved educational outcomes, though, is another matter.  Take the issue of holding principals accountable for school performance.

On the surface a good idea, but if principals are not given the power to hire and fire staff and to properly reward those who achieve the best results, then their hands are tied.  Similarly, if the curriculum is reviewed, but still advocates such destructive fads as whole language and fuzzy maths then schools will be destined to failure.