Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I present the report of the Education, Employment and Workplace Relations References Committee Teaching and learning—maximising our investment in Australian schools, together with the Hansard record of proceedings and documents presented to the committee.

Ordered that the report be printed.

by leave—I move:

That the Senate take note of the report.

I commend the report to the chamber. I thank all who have been involved in the preparation of the report, appeared as witnesses and put in submissions. I particularly applaud the secretariat for the excellent job they have undertaken in the preparation of this report. There were 59 submissions to the inquiry, and there are 23 recommendations which emanate from the report.

The report is based around six pillars. The first relates to disadvantaged students. The second is parental involvement and the essence of parental involvement in the education of the child—along, of course, with the involvement of the school and the teachers. The third is a movement towards autonomy in the administration and management of schools. The fourth relates to student behaviour. The fifth is ensuring that we select quality applicants as student teachers and have the highest quality of education for student teachers. The sixth is professional learning for teachers in their classrooms. I will now speak briefly to these six pillars.

Australia stands very highly against international education standards. But we are not improving, despite expenditure of funds. It is recognised that there are four large groups of disadvantaged students—those from low socioeconomic backgrounds, those with disability, Indigenous students and students living in rural and remote areas. But the committee rejects the thinking that students from these four disadvantaged backgrounds need to be condemned to poor educational outcomes because of their demographic or whatever background. Recommendations point to areas in which, this committee believes, the disadvantage faced by students from these backgrounds can be addressed and overcome. It should not be the case that students from such backgrounds are condemned to not being able to perform to the best of their ability in the Australian education system.

The second pillar is parental involvement. It came through as evidence to the committee that chief among the influences on student achievement are parental engagement, parental as well as teacher expectations, effective behaviour management and teacher quality But of all of those it is critical that parents believe that their child will do their best at school, that they will experience success and that they will move into employment or a trade or a university qualification. I would urge those interested in this area to examine the evidence of the witnesses that speaks to those points. Education is a team effort. It is the parents and, by association, grandparents and others in the family; it is the school, its management and its teachers; it is the environment; and, at the end of the day, we also recognise that there is a role for governments—be they state or territory, which actually deliver education, or the Catholic or independent school systems and the federal government, which is involved in funding.

I will be brief because I know that others wish to speak. The committee was impressed by the argument from many of the submitters and witnesses that school autonomy, the role of the principal guided by a board, is the best model, where it is appropriate. They should be well trained, well skilled and well supported to be able to identify where the local needs are for students in that community. As I look at research into Finland, which is always placed before us as a country of excellence in education, what impresses is in fact the local decision making that takes place in the Finnish education system. There are recommendations in the report pointing to this.

I come to the question of student behaviour and very compelling evidence by a witness, who said:

[W]ell-behaved children learn a great deal better and a great deal more than poorly behaved children.

If there is one point to come out of this report over some of the 30 reports over 30 years into education in Australia, it is recognition that the teachers should be allowed to get on with the job of teaching in their schools and not be in the role of babysitters or disciplinarians. As one witness said to us:

If I have had to deal with a classroom bully, by the time I deal with that child, get them out of the room, when I go back into that room, I may have 25 or 26 scared children who are in no position to learn.

Again I am proud to say that the committee has made recommendations pertaining to behaviour. Again if I can draw the Finnish analogy, only last August did its minister for education introduce legislation into the parliament to allow exactly that—greater authority and greater stimulus for teachers to be able to teach in the classroom.

The fifth of those pillars is quality teaching students going into courses in Australia. We should select those who are most appropriate to teaching. The committee was impressed by evidence that there are definitely criteria for those applying to go into teaching and we can identify those who are most likely, both academically and in having an aptitude, to be the best teachers. There is no doubt at all that we have far too many people in teacher training in this country—100,000 bodies, representing some 66,000 full-time equivalents. The other interesting evidence that came before the committee was that, prior to their making a decision to go into that career, prospective students should be informed of which disciplines are in demand and which are not. We had evidence that in some schools only one or two teachers are qualified to teach mathematics or science in a secondary school, but eight or nine may have qualifications in the arts or in physical education and sport. We think it is essential that those matters are addressed.

The last of those six pillars I spoke of was the need for the ongoing professional learning and support of classroom teachers throughout their teaching careers. If teachers are being asked to teach out of field and if it is the case that the best teachers are those who are across their subject, then surely we must give professional learning to those who are being asked to teach out of field. The enormous benefit both to newer teachers and to more experienced teachers is having the opportunity to have someone observe them in the classroom, be they a mentor or be they a mentee. A lot came out of this inquiry, and the secretariat was good enough to provide in an appendix the recommendations of many of those 30 inquiries of the last 30 years. I am very pleased to say that by consensus this committee has come up with recommendations that are not over the top in terms of cost to the Australian taxpayer but that are designed to enhance teaching and learning in Australian schools. I commend the report to the Senate.

Penny Wright (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the tabling of this report of the Senate References Committee for Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, Teaching and learningmaximising our investment in Australian schools. I participated in this inquiry as the Australian Greens spokesperson for schools and education, and I would like to acknowledge the high quality of submissions received and the time given up by witnesses to the inquiry. I must acknowledge that there have been an inordinate number of inquiries into education and schools over the last three decades, but it is a matter of enduring importance and concern to the Australian community. Nevertheless, there is still always work to be done and consideration to be given to emerging issues.

I would like to thank those who took the time to contribute their knowledge, their experience, their wisdom and, indeed, their passion. One thing about the education area is that most people have an opinion and many people have passions about Australia doing the best it possibly can in this area. We heard from educators, primary and secondary teachers, some of whom were relatively recently admitted to the profession and others of whom were retired and looked back on a lifetime of experience. We heard from principals, teacher educators and other academics, non-government organisations and interested citizens. They all reflected the fact that education is so important to us as a society.

The recommendations of the report reflect the constitutional reality that states and territories are primarily responsible for education. But we also know that the Commonwealth government has become increasingly involved and has assumed an increasingly important role both in education policy development and in funding. There is certainly a role for Commonwealth leadership in collaboration with the states and territories.

It is a comprehensive report, so I will highlight just three themes which were of particular interest to me. But I encourage those who are interested to read the full report. The first theme of particular interest to me is covered in the chapter on Australia's performance, and it is the issue of testing—how we actually ascertain what Australia's performance is. There was a great deal of discussion about issues relating to what is currently quite a topical subject: NAPLAN testing, or the National Assessment Program—Literacy and Numeracy. This subject evoked strong views from witnesses and from people and organisations making submissions to the committee, both from those in favour of the current NAPLAN program and how it is being administered and from those against. Certainly many in the latter group, including many retired teachers and principals, expressed serious concerns, including that NAPLAN is causing more competition among students and among schools, to the detriment of some students and to the detriment of teaching and the curriculum. I suggest that people look at the submissions and the way the report has covered this subject, but I believe that there is sufficient evidence of ongoing disagreement in this area to suggest that it warrants further inquiry. We really need to look at the evidence for the efficacy of NAPLAN testing and whether it is achieving its objectives.

The second theme is the relevance of various factors in student performance and achievement, particularly the role of socioeconomic background in influencing educational outcomes in Australia. It is not the only important factor influencing outcomes for Australia students, but there is no denying that it is an important factor. This has been recognised by PISA. In their tests, they compare like countries in the OECD. Paragraph 3.42 of the report says:

PISA measures socioeconomic background by taking into account economic, social and cultural status. Across the three tests, the mean score for students from the highest socioeconomic quartile was much higher than the other three quartiles—indeed the schooling gap was between 1 and 3 years.

Basically, this gap was referable to the socioeconomic band in which those students were located. That was true for both literacy and numeracy.

The Smith Family is a notable Australian non-government organisation particularly devoted to assisting students of disadvantaged backgrounds in their education. It noted the importance of socioeconomic background and the fact that inequalities need to be addressed to ensure that all children can achieve their full potential, irrespective of their background. Paragraph 3.47 of the report refers to the Smith Family's submission and points out that, if we do not address this disparity in achievement levels arising out of socioeconomic background, there will be consequences for the whole nation as well as for individual students. It is not only inherently terribly unfair but also squanders the potential of those students—making us all worse off in the long run. The Smith Family stated:

The individual and collective impact of not addressing this situation is significant. Young people with poor educational outcomes are more likely to experience unemployment and poorer health outcomes, and rely more heavily on income support payments. This creates additional economic and social costs for individuals and the community as a whole.

The third theme I wanted to highlight is training support for teachers and their retention and development. It is obvious just how pivotal teachers are in our education system and in educational outcomes. There were some very interesting insights gained from the witnesses to the inquiry, and the recommendations reflect this. Particularly highlighted was the importance of mentoring for teachers, not only for new teachers and preservice teachers—although clearly it is particularly important for them as they find their way in this profession, one most of them have chosen with passion—but even for more experienced teachers. They too can gain from mentoring, support, collaboration and sufficient time to reflect and plan lessons. This is reflected in recommendation 19 of the report.

Having heard the evidence put before the inquiry, a particular issue of concern to me is the incidence of casualisation in the teaching workforce. Even in the case of very experienced teachers, there was evidence that this leads to insecurity. They lurch from contract to contract. There are obviously economic consequences for them, but as well as that it impedes a sense of security and continuity—really being able to commit to long-term development of the school knowing that they will be able to stay on there. It is unsettling, it undermines their confidence and it often means that professional development opportunities are not as available to contract teachers as they are to permanent teachers. There was anecdotal evidence put before the inquiry, but in my own visits to schools throughout Australia there was a constant refrain. I heard about this issue not only from those teachers being employed on contract but from their peers and from principals. Principals would often say things like: 'This teacher is wonderful, remarkable. We absolutely want to hang onto this person, but there is no guarantee from year to year that we will be able to.' It is quite corrosive of confidence and security. My view is that we lose highly qualified and high-quality teachers from the system because, ultimately, they feel undervalued and leave.

We know there is attrition in the teaching profession. Recommendation 18 of the report is for further research to be undertaken into why teachers are leaving the profession. Although it does not specifically refer to casualisation, I would be very surprised if the research did not identify it as an important factor behind teachers, ultimately, voting with their feet.

To conclude, I thank all who made submissions and attended hearings. I also thank the hardworking and enthusiastic secretariat. I commend the report to the Senate.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the tabling of the report of the Education, Employment and Workplace Relations References Committee entitled Teaching and Learning (maximising our investment in Australian schools). I take this opportunity to thank the committee secretariat, who have worked incredibly hard over a long period to bring something fresh to the public debate about teaching and learning in this country. Even this month, after 30 reports, we are still having fresh things to say, and that says something quite fantastic about our nation—that we all, on both sides of the parliament, see education providing great opportunity for all young Australians and, if we take the principles of lifelong learning into account, for all Australians no matter their age. This report does offer fresh insights despite, sometimes, the muddled and congested public conversation that occurs about education.

I would like particularly to put on the record my thanks to the chair of the committee, Senator Chris Back. He has championed this report and he has championed the terms of reference and the work we have done. This inquiry came about when the Education, Employment and Workplace Relations Committee had the opportunity to investigate the Chinese education system last year, particularly in light of the PISA results for Shanghai. We had discussions across party lines on education systems and what measures of success were needed, and indeed the different practices in classrooms, and those issues were highlighted for us as we looked at the Chinese education system not just in primary schools but right through to teacher training, polytechnics and universities. That had a big impact on us and the way we came back to start this inquiry.

As a National senator I obviously have particular concern for the one million students being educated in regional Australia—660,000 of whom attend state schools. I have a strong interest in a productive, well-funded, vibrant and quality state school education system right through our nation. I am rapt that our recommendations reflect that we do live in a federated nation and we are not expecting the Commonwealth to intercede and to override states but rather to work hand in hand with state education ministers to address our concerns.

I probably come to this place as a statistic in the research that we hope will be conducted into teacher retention. I no longer teach. I was a teacher and a very passionate mathematics teacher at that, in rural areas, and I hope that my number will not be counted. I have a lot more to say about this but in light of this evening's proceedings I will leave any further comments to a later date.

David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also wish to speak on the motion that the Senate take note of this report, and seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.