On being informed
Do Australian educators really know what they will be voting for in the next election?
There’s an election coming up and contrary to what some believe, I don’t think the outcome is already decided. As we saw at the last election, anything can happen. I fear that a lot of educators vote left, but the Labor strategy of just sitting and waiting till Scott Morrison singes his eyebrows on camera doesn’t give us much information on proposed education policy. I’m concerned that as a profession, we will be willingly voting blind in the absence of something better.
I’m a card carrying protest voter: I vote Greens. But it has to be said that I have more in common with Sarah Mitchell and Alan Tudge than the kind of opaque platform put forward by Labor. I mean, at least with Tudge and Mitchell, you might not particularly like the vision but the vision is detailed and clear. I remember not long ago being trolled on Twitter when someone asked me if I was Right Wing. I say ‘trolled’ because I’m certain that it was meant to be an insult. I think if I could just vote on education policy, I would vote Liberal, but I don’t have that choice.
After a bit of digging (thanks Glenn Fahey from CIS) I have found some information on Labor’s platform - bear in mind these are not commitments, but the ideas presented here give us an indicator about questions we could and should be asking. Here’s a selection:
Labor believes parents have a right to choose non-government schooling – this is consistent with a diverse and inclusive society. Non-government schools should be supported by public funding that reflects need.
If you’re a public school advocate, this seems to suggest that funding models may not be dismantled. I’m not sure about the definition of diversity here - do they mean diverse levels of wealth? Hard to say. Little has happened with Gillard’s Gonski reforms in the last 10 years. The implementation was soft and vested interests won out. What would change under Labor?
Labor will implement a properly funded national needs-based and sector-blind school funding model.
See the note on Gonski above. As we know, throwing money at problems in education doens’t have the greatest track record. There’s a lack of emphasis on outcomes here.
Labor will ensure school funding is linked to evidence-based reforms and practices that lead to higher academic achievement and better teaching and learning. All schools in all sectors will be required to meet national standards in curriculum, teaching and learning
It’s really difficult to know how accountability will be measured. Presumably with the presence of several national and state bodies (ACARA, AITSL, NESA) some standards are already in place. Does Labor have a policy on what they consider ‘sound’ evidence? I remember requesting the research underpinning the stage-not-age model at Lindfield Learning Village a few years ago. It was almost exclusively theoretical. Masters’ support for stage not age seemed to be a solo rogue school in the US. We have vastly different understandings of what constitutes ‘evidence’ in teaching.
Labor will oversee a national curriculum and national student assessment and reporting framework that is free from political or commercial influence and developed in collaboration with teachers and school communities
There are so many questions here. What is the role of Labor if a curriculum is free of political influence? Some of Tudge’s influence led to balanced literacy being relegated to the history books. Portuguese education departments collaborate with commercial entities to co-develop mathematics textbooks and their results are on a stellar rise. Will all sectors get a seat at the curriculum table? The emphasis on diversity reads like a warning about left leaning identity politics creeping into curricula.
Labor will work to lift the status of the teaching profession and support improved practice and continued professional development and recognise the knowledge and insights of classroom teachers by providing for elected teacher representatives on the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership board.
Teachers involved in decisions about their profession seems, on the face of it, a good idea. But we know there is a research gap shaping the views of teachers, where university education departments lead graduating students down a certain ideological rather than evidence-informed path. It seems that improving the status, knowledge and agency of the profession might start with ITE, something that the Liberals have long known.
So the questions remain - beyond throwing money at the problem and echoing Liberal policies, what is Labor offering? Can we advocate and agitate for detail from the individuals hoping for our default vote? My requests have gone unanswered.
