Uncategorized

Water: how much and how clean

Where the Manuherekia joins the Clutha.

Water is a major issue for Otago.

With most of the population living on the coast, there is little awareness of human impact on water in our favourite recreational areas.

For most of us water is where we recreate. We ignore the effects of sewerage, of stormwater. We do not understand what infrastructure brings water to our household taps, until it breaks down. It is the invisible essential.

Our ignorance of water has contributed to its steady degradation and growing scarcity. I write this looking out to the heads of Otago Harbour.

The issue of clean rivers and enough water for the health of our rivers is one facing the Otago region. There have been a range of attempts to manage land and water use over the years but this management has become urgent.

Sometimes the urgency is manifest in unwelcome algae growing in lakes, that can harm our pets and our skin. And while there might be some short term solutions, we must always look to what has happened on the land surrounding the lake. Have there been subdivisions, with consequent soil erosion and disturbance, which can cause the flow of sediment into lakes? That sediment might carry unwelcome chemicals such as phosphorus.

In those new subdivisions is there an infrastructure for sewerage, for stormwater. Or do we rely on septic tanks? Do they leak into the lakes? For so long we have regarded it as our right for that solo bach or crib. We have valued the independence of being free of rules …but those rules are to protect the balance between humans and the eco-system.

When it comes to rivers..well. Some argue the water is wasted if we let it flow out to the sea. We want to take some out of the river for human water use, for agriculture…watering the soil. The question is how much do we take from the river? How much does the natural life in the river need?

And just like the lakes….what is happening along the banks of the river. If water is taken from the river, when it returns as run-off from those fields, what else is being added to the river such as sediment and natural waste from animals, and residue from the products added to the soil?

This is what has been concerning me since the beginning of 2020. I have walked around Lake Hayes. I have visited a range of sites in the Manuherekia catchment. I have listened to the opposing views of irrigators and ecologists. We have some very difficult decisions to make in the coming weeks on the Otago Regional Council.

And then there are rabbits, and wilding pines, and dirty air in our Ports, and our campaign to get people out of cars and on to public or active transport.

To Bike the talk, I have bought an electric bike. And on my second day I fell off while waiting at the lights!! But now to the workshop to fix the bike, so as I can get back on it.

My first ride!

Standard
climate change, Uncategorized, water quality

Back in the Saddle

Much has happened since I last posted in 2015.

On the personal level I nursed my partner until his death in November 2016. And it has taken since then to regain some equilibrium…but many experiences have helped along the way!!

From my “Hobbitlearning” title, it will be understood that education is a driving force in my life. I loved teaching. I loved being a school principal just as much: same but different and equally creative. So I was thrilled to be asked by current Minister of Education to serve on the Guardians of the Education Conversation for the last two years. new Zealanders as users of the education system needed to share their reaction to what they experienced and it has been my delight to hear, watch, read all those reactions and then to check that the reforms proposed meet and measure up to those conversations. The reforms will take a while to settle in, but the work has been begun.

One of the sad things to observe has been the mistrust between public and government, such as teachers wanting to retain the competitive model because they did not want to cede power to a collaborative system where state agencies might have a role. Rebuilding trust in a  collaborative state system , rather than a competitive system is going to be an enormous task.

But in these intervening years, I have had two more grandchildren born, and my commitment to environmental improvement has become more urgent. So I stood for the Otago Regional Council, and won a seat and then was elected Chair of the Council. And now my work begins. I want to improve public transportation so as we reduce carbon emissions. I must work to clean up our lakes and rivers and restore wetlands. I want to restore and protect our biodiversity in Otago, New Zealand. There are other goals, but these are my main ones for the next three years.

I will try to blog on here weekly over the next three years to share what we as a Council have accomplished, the problems we face, and ask for ways ahead. So this is a move from major comment on education to local response to climate change, to water and to biodiversity.

I will welcome comment.

Standard
Uncategorized

No one has claimed that reducing classroom size is a magic potion, but…..

No one has claimed that New Zealand Labour’s commitment to reduce class sizes over the next three years will automatically lift student progress.

The Labour Party was quick to link reduction in class sizes with a range of other plans to support the training and continuing professional growth of all teachers, such as the building of a school advisory service and a College of School Leadership.

What class size reduction does do is reduce the workload for all teachers and increase the teacher contact for the students.  I keep hearing National Party spokespeople talking of multi-teacher classrooms….but the student work still has to be marked by one teacher. In these multi-class rooms, there is still one teacher responsible for a group of children. If I were back with a load of six classes, this reduction would result in an overall reduction of 18 “books” to mark over each week…and that is three hours saved. And marking is just one aspect….18 fewer reports to write and I could go on.

A classroom with 29 eleven year olds is often very squashed to get around: 26 students is easier to move around and be able to spend that much more time with each student.

What has happened to our schools in this mad campaign to prove progress has been unbelievable pressure on teachers. Labour’s commitment is a commitment to reduce that pressure. It is not a walk away from improving student learning: it is the reverse. The fear of the present emphasis is a constraint against risk taking to try different approaches with different students. Labour commits to reducing the pressure while working with teachers to support change and development.

One part of rebuilding that self-belief in teachers  is this commitment to reduce class sizes. Well Done!

 

Standard
climate change, climate change refugees, Uncategorized

So…climate change! Where do we begin?

Last night I went to a meeting in Dunedin where people gathered to discuss whether we should be agreeing to the exploration of our waters for oil and gas.

We did focus a little on the risks from exploration and later from the actual wells.

But something troubled me.

We seemed to be missing the basic question. Why are we actually looking for more hydrocarbons?

Why is not our focus on replacement of these hydrocarbons. Let’s manage this replacement as quickly as possible.

The only Green MP in England, Caroline Lucas has made a similar comment, but hers is on fracking.

“For Lucas, the big problem with fracking has nothing to do with the risk that it will cause earthquakes, contaminate the water table or pollute the soil. In fact, she thinks it possible that stringent regulations could minimise those risks. “It’s not that fracking itself is necessarily worse than ordinary gas extraction. It’s the fact that we’re just about to put into place a whole new infrastructure for a whole new fossil-fuel industry, at exactly the time when we need to be reducing our emissions.” The problem, in other words, is climate change”

In New Zealand, our households and industry are mostly powered by renewable energy, although we should be growing that percentage much much faster.

But it is our transport that is fuelled by oil and gas. Where is the research on alternative fuels? Why are we not harnessing the methane produced by hour livestock? What about the use of algae?

I want a clear statement from political parties on the way forward to reduce our dependence on oil and gas and the timeline in which we are going to do this.

Standard
Uncategorized

Further to Charter Schools…..

…….and why they distract and take from the many to support a few.

I have rarely ever met a teacher who does not want to change and improve either what is happening in their classroom, or school, or system.

And yet as TV3 presented its saga on Charter Schools last night, it made it look as though the system was deliberately not responding to the needs of certain students and that the only way through was to set up a free school and offer something different.

As I tried to show in my last blog, it is possible to do that within the system. The old way of an existing school sponsoring an experiment,  meant it could happen without endangering students in existing schools. But even then extra resources were needed. And that would need strong justification in today’s tight budgeting.

The best way is to support an existing school to change to meet the needs of its students. Or for a group of schools to combine resources to promote some specialised curriculum or environment for the students. A simple example is how schools combine to staff an outdoor education centre to provide what would be too costly for one school to do alone.

With fewer resources and a narrower curriculum, dominated by National Standards, this provision for the whole range of students is even less likely to happen.

That is what is enraging teachers. They get condemned for not meeting needs and yet see money siphoned away from their schools to support charter schools.

Kia kaha, PPTA! You are working hard for the many, for a better way of providing for all the different needs of our students.

 

Standard
Uncategorized

Thank you, Mister Robinson!

This week in New Zealand we have farewelled a servant of public broadcasting . Geoff Robinson presented the Morning Report news programme for forty years and today he stood down and headed into the new shores of retirement.

Many listeners have sent messages of thanks to Geoff for his service to the public, always being there during really hard times such as the Christchurch earthquake. He really was an anchor for the public. But it was far more than his long service that listeners appreciated. They loved his calmness and his ability to get answers without being belligerent.

For me, Geoff represented the face/voice of public broadcasting in New Zealand. He was there to serve the listening public. He was a public servant and served our country and its democracy with pride.

Thank you so much, Geoff. As politicians we used to pray outside the studio doors that we would get you, and not your partner…but I learnt that with your quiet manner you often got closer to the real argument or issue. You were not ever impressed with pretension. Nor did you treat us as royalty: we were and are human beings.

Public broadcasting is about keeping the community informed; about serving the community and meeting its diverse needs. It is not about making a profit for shareholders, or obeying the leader of the country, or pleasing certain sections of the audience at the expense of others.

For those of you reading this from England, I am tempted into that old cliche, that you may not realise how lucky you are with the BBC. While New Zealanders do still have a public broadcasting radio service, it does not have a public broadcasting television service. TVNZ is still owned by the government. It is , however a state-owned enterprise and is expected to return a profit. So it advertises around its programmes, and with that, the notion of service to the public takes back seat to winning an audience for specific advertisers and their products.

This sorry state of affairs began with the freezing of the television licence fee. And that immediately led to cuts and to looking at other ways to fund the service. The licence fee was finally abolished by the National Government in 1999.

So, to UK readers, does this sound familiar? the Tory backbenchers are always attacking BBC and urging that the Licence fee be abolished. And I think it has already been frozen which has seen the inevitable cuts to BBC programmes/stations.

Back in NZ,funding was allocated to a body, known as NZ On Air instead of directly to TVNZ. This body was to use the funds to ensure that  New Zealand programmes were made. And although that is so very important, as was the agreement to play 25% NZ music on all radio stations, it is not the only focus of what public broadcasting is.

The exception was Radio New Zealand which did receive money directly to provide not just for programmes but for the running of two nation-wide stations.

Apart from Radio New Zealand,  we the public of New Zealand are not served well by our publicly owned media. They do not provide objective analysis. The television is celebrity driven. There is no equivalent of Newsnight or the Channel 4 news.

So please do not ever be persuaded to look for funding for public broadcasting that is dependent on a government to provide or advertisers to pay for.

And to future Ministers of Broadcasting in NZ….I know that media has changed ( here am I writing a blog)…but maybe someone will get the urge to rebuild a real public service television channel…just one..and keep on funding Radio New Zealand.

Standard
Uncategorized

Support for caution re. Leadership proposals

This morning as I was struggling on my get-fit regime, I was so heartened to hear the news that NZEI (a teacher union in NZ) was working with their members on the proposals announced by the Government on school leadership. They were not just rolling over with hands outstretched for the money.

I have some real doubts on the model proposed. Because there seems to be an implicit decision to have an executive principal working with up to ten other schools. That was me doing the sums in the original announcement.

So who are these executive principals?

Are the other schools to be worked with to have any choice in the matter? If I had been asked to work with a Principal whose education values I strongly opposed, I might well have resigned.

In the group do we all have the same issues?

I tried to do something similar in Northampton three years ago. It only took off when the heads chose who would be members of the group. When I, as a Council adviser, tried to put the schools together, two school heads walked and went to other schools. But the school initiated grouping has taken off. And they have managed to stay away from being academised or taken over. I understand that similar things are happening in Birmingham.

Teachers know who they can work with. They want to see constant improvement. They want to work together…but like all other places of work they do not want to be forced to collaborate: it is an oxymoron!

Note to readers: I am planning to do more responses that are shorter as well as my more detailed essays. In planning is a response to the paper by John Morris and Rose Patterson.

My nervousness about the direction of New Zealand education is increasing. The Morris/Patterson report introduces performance pay.

Then there is a report that ERO are using a school’s national standards score as an indicator of success.

And yesterday the news that charter schools are exempt from the obligation to have trained teachers.

All these strands build into a floodtide pushing NZ down the way of worst examples from USA and UK.

New Zealand does not need this. Yes  improvement is a must on the agenda of every teacher and school.

And dear readers, any hints as to layout or topics would be greatly appreciated. I seek improvement in using this new tool.

Standard
Uncategorized

Meet Mick Waters

As I have been reading, I chanced on “Thinking Allowed on Schooling” by Mick Waters.

It is brilliant.

Mick explains the English schooling system in detail, as well as giving  an historical perspective. It is this perspective that resonates with educators from other states. You get an insight into the driving forces of politicians…and it rings true to me. I got involved with a political party when as a Principal I had become despairing of the nonsense spoken by politicians. But politics is very strange…I became Minister for Environment, rather than playing a lead role in education!…another story.

But not only does Mick put all the changes in English schooling into perspective, but he gives hope.One of the things that has worried me while writing this blog ( very much in the beginning stages) is how dismal a picture I paint of English schooling, when I am aware of how much brilliant teaching and learning does occur , in spite of the system.

Mick refers often to wonderful happenings in schools up and down England.

And not only that, at the end of each chapter, he concludes with a dot point list of  ‘What We Should Do?’ pertinent to what was discussed in that chapter.

Who is Mick Waters? I had heard of him from my colleagues in Birmingham City Council School Effectiveness Division. Mick has been in every part of the education system: student, teacher, head teacher, teacher trainer,local government education authorities ( Birmingham and Manchester) and before it was dismantled, the QCA ( Qualifications and Curriculum.)

I have never met him personally, but I am ever grateful to the Dunedin Public Library for purchasing a copy of his book for their collection. I have since bought my own online copy.

For teachers in England, he does give some ways forward at all levels…things to enact in the classroom, school organisation, and broader actions to take back the ownership of schools from the ideologues.

For New Zealanders and other readers of this blog around the world, you will find such connection with the concerns we all share and it will give you time to reflect about next steps.

This is not an advertisement as such, because Mick Waters is donating any profits to Shelterbox ( disaster relief).

from page 19:

” We need an ‘education spring’ – a rising of intolerance about the way schooling is being manipulated in a piecemeal and uncoordinated way to serve too many purposes with unclear measures. We need to build a rational, apolitical debate and ensure that schooling moves away from undue, short-term political influence.”

from page 170 on what good teachers do…

“Create limelight for every child. There are children in the school system who seem never to get noticed….they never get asked to sort out the cupboard, feed the fish or water the plants. They never collect money for Poppy Day and they never meet the mayor. Some get so fed up with this that they do bad things just to be seen. Surely every child should at some point be acknowledged, applauded, celebrated, praised or recognised by their fellows. Every child should experience the limelight on themselves.”

“Teachers are amazing people. The vast majority are extremely committed to the pupils they teach and believe they are part of the development of society. They enjoy being with young people and seeing them grow. They grapple with the challenge of making the world make sense to youngsters, whatever their background. However, many of them are worn out and many more are caught in a game they don’t fully understand.”

Just from these few quotes I hope you want to explore this book more. I did find it on line as well…..for those into e-reading…I now have to learn how to make notes as I read on line instead of annotating in pencil on the margins of a Paper book.   We never stop learning and adapting…that is the joy of living!

 

Standard
Accountability in education, education, New Zealand, performance pay, schools, Uncategorized

Performance Pay:Sounds good but does it improve learning for students?

Thanks for all the interest, particularly from England, although I am trying to attract New Zealand readers, because I do not want New Zealand to follow the English schooling model.

This is the third blog on education comparisons between England and New Zealand…it is on the vexed question of performance pay.

My major concerns are the unreliable ways and measurements to be associated with annual appraisals which affect whether the teacher gains a pay increase; the disconnect between performance pay and improved learning for students and the thorny question of what happens if all our teachers are outstanding all the time…can we afford this, or will the goalposts shift?

One of New Zealand’s teacher unions, PPTA, clearly acknowledges in their blog, Pigeonhole  of 24 January, that we all are engaged in a level of performance pay. If we do not turn up for work, we do not get paid. If we are appointed to Head of Science, we are paid for the extra  responsibilities inherent in the job. So obviously there is some performance pay.

And in England it has been similar.  When a teacher takes on extra responsibilities and is awarded a TLR, they are being paid for performance.

A subtle change was introduced in England when teachers had to prove that they were achieving prescribed standards to meet the threshold for the Upper Pay Scale. Again this had problems. because awarding this was dependent on the professionalism of the classroom observation systems extant in the school. If the proof depended on unsubstantiated judgements of an HOD, there could be issues. In recent years Ofsted has been asked to check the systems. In one school the report agreed with the process in one part of the report and in the other noted that there was no whole school action on graded lesson observations.So there was a lack of consistency in the judgement, or the members of the inspection team did not join the dots or ticks.

But from September 2014 all that has changed. Previously a teacher, in England, in his/her early years could expect to move up the pay scale automatically. That has now gone. And in September 2014 any movement will be determined on how well that teacher has performed in the previous school year.

And the performance appraisal is based on the revised Teachers’ Standards, which  came into effect in September 2012.

The Standards themselves are worthy, although a little daunting for a beginning teacher. Well I do not think I would have had the confidence to enter teaching if I had had to meet all these every day, for every class in my first years. In fact I have strong memories of my first Principal at Hillmorten High School, quizzing me on how many of the 28 lessons that I taught each week would be excellent. I staunchly replied that all of them would be. He looked me in the eye and said I would be lucky if two were!!! or otherwise I would be burnt out by end of the first term. And he was a principal who really understood about building excellent teachers and future leaders. At least four of his HODs became successful principals in their own right within the next ten years.

But, I digress. The problem with these standards is the alignment with pay progression and the turning of abstract goals into concrete proof for performance pay purposes.

As I left England and English schools , different schools were introducing appraisal grids for staff approval. These grids were to be the means by which core teachers would be measured  for their appraisals and  consequent recommendation for a pay rise in September of 2014. I saw schemes which stipulated that if you were going for your third pay rise in about the third or fourth year of your teaching then the last three lesson observations had to be scored as outstanding. And that would mean that all the students in those last three observed lesson had been making rapid progress in each of those lessons. Every English child has their progress expectation mapped out based on  previous recorded scores and other variants. As teachers in England you access these through Raise-on-line. So, no troubles at home for students or teacher, no weather events, nothing untoward in those last three lessons! This is unreal. In fact trying to make that into a measurement is dishonest.

Classroom observations were only one facet of the grids…the grades that your students made would also affect your pay rise chances. We all want students to make progress: we would not be teachers otherwise. But what of the English examinations of January/July 2012 when the grade boundaries were changed between the two sittings? Such inequity in the future could well affect student results and teacher pay.So if these grids are to work, everything in the system must also be working perfectly, which is a little unreal if my experience of the last five years is any proof.

I am not sure how you judge effectively whether your teaching has promoted children’s intellectual curiosity, especially if they have had to engage in rote learning of the monarchs of England.  But promoting children’s intellectual curiosity, a worthy teaching standard, also formed part of the appraisal that determined a pay rise. How is this judged objectively? As I write I am sure that right now some consultant will be designing a course to show how this can be assessed and how you the teacher can score an outstanding grade.

And in this judgemental environment, you would also be judged on how effective your relationships with colleagues was….another worthy teaching standard. I find this ironic, when the one matter which will militate against collegial support and development will be this pay performance routine.

The disconnect between performance pay and improved learning for teachers. Like every citizen I want to see learning improve. But the accountability systems being put in place to check whether improvement is actually happening, work against such improvement in reality.

A key measurement in England are the test/examination results. Summative assessment can have a stultifying affect on a student’s curiosity….well more on the teacher’s willingness to let such curiosity flower. I doubt whether any English  Year 10 classroom would allow a class to read several  plays by the same playwright as one extension class did at Hagley High, nor to spend time on the South Brighton  ( NZ) shore line measuring erosion. There was no exam attached…but teacher and students were learning successfully and they were negotiating what they explored, which in itself has value.  The examination prescriptions make a mockery of the wonderful ideals in the curriculum. But what teacher whose performance is now measured by exam results and lesson observations will leave those prescriptions aside and really develop a student’s curiosity and ability to argue. This is the risk of such a system.

It is like stating that a Cabinet Minister be measured by the quality of answers to oral questions in the House. Who judges? Who agrees the criteria for outstanding?… the Speaker, the Opposition, the Journalist? And what difference does this make to the health of our democracy?And if such a system existed, then the oddball who brings life and a different perspective will be shut out by the standard for outstanding politician and corresponding pay rate. As I write this I worry about how unfortunately similar some of our politicians are.

And the final issue with performance pay is to follow the stated reason for performance pay to its conclusion. The objective is to improve teaching standards.If the policy succeeds in practice, then all our teachers will be outstanding and on the top of the salary scale. Has this been budgeted for? Or will there be a ceiling applied and then comes the comparison between who is outstanding and who is not really as outstanding as the other, because the school budget cannot afford to have 100% outstanding teachers.

Mr Gove argues that he is trying to narrow the gap and lift all state schools to the level of private school. There is an assumption within that , that I do not agree with. But I might buy into it a little way if the funding per pupil was the same. That way a school can afford to have 100% outstanding teachers and the support systems and staffing to work with the full range of staff.

Performance pay in schools is a political construct. It has nothing to do with better learning opportunities for students. They are all different and need exposure to a range of styles. It is that range that is likely to disappear. The risk taking, the diversions will all go.

There is no need for the Associate Minister to go to Shanghai. England is well on the way to producing a one size fits all model that has nothing to do with learning and everything with accountability that purports to be measurable.

I believe that this system has crept up on the English schools, with all the different pieces of the jigsaw being introduced innocently. Each piece looks harmless, until aligned with the others. In new Zealand we need to be very conscious of the component parts that lead to this.

 

 

Standard
Accountability in education, Uncategorized

My Experiences in England: lessons for New Zealand education.

My aim is to write a number of blogs on different aspects of schools in England. Governments, both Labour and Conservative, wanted to see major improvement for all students in England. They therefore began the search for accountability, and in so doing have created formulaic responses that in the worst cases have taken the creativity from teaching and from learning.

I will focus on the following:

Judging a lesson

Performance-related pay.

Teachers’ Standards

Judging a lesson. When I left teaching in New Zealand (1996) we were edging towards improved lesson observations. We were building the expectation within schools that every term someone would come in to observe the learning in your classroom. I must admit that the emphasis was more on the teaching than on the learning. We were exploring hierarchical observations vs collegial observations. We were building programmes which focussed on teacher growth rather than on judgement.

So I was surprised to find in English schools a wealth of advice on how to judge a lesson, led by the published Ofsted guidance on lesson observations. Lessons were graded, as were schools: outstanding, good, requiring improvement ( was called satisfactory until 2011) and inadequate. In most schools these observations were carried out by HODs or members of  the senior management team. Sometimes the observations were announced and sometimes unannounced.

Until last year the quality of teaching/learning was not related to teacher pay. That has now changed. But the records of observations done by the school were asked for by the Ofsted inspectors and those who did the observations also did observations with the inspectors to have their ability to classify verified by the Ofsted team. So the  routine practice of lesson observation was seen as particularly important in assessing the school.

If you go online you will find many many guidelines, books written on what makes a good or outstanding lesson. Ofsted expected that such observations were routine within a school. In some schools that was not so, and school leaders had to learn how to observe. And so a wealth of courses grew up and consultants and books. It became an income source for many in the consulting industry, and a cost to schools particularly at a time when local government education support was being cut back. Such support is now privatised.

I am confident that I could always classify teachers into outstanding, satisfactory or needing support, and as a principal in New Zealand I did, but not based on one lesson and not using that terminology or recording it. And yet I did see this happen in England, although I do believe that that was very poor practice. Poor practice saw these observations become judgemental rather than supportive. Poor practice saw the judgements recorded, but the necessary support not eventuate, leaving the  judged teacher losing confidence in their teaching.

And even more serious is when that judgement is based on half of one lesson alone.So much can happen within a lesson. The teacher may be trying group work for the first time. Not all students are going to adapt to that with fully focussed learning from the very first group work exercise. Under poor observation practices and judgements, because all students are not showing progress in their learning the lesson can be judged as inadequate or needing improvement. That mitigates against risk taking and experimentation. You might be observed just when you are trying out a new way of student learning.

Another issue I became aware of was the fine line between a good lesson and an outstanding one. In an out standing lesson every student is making rapid and sustained progress. While I can make that assessment for a class of students over a term, I find it really difficult to make that judgement over part of one lesson. And maybe it would not matter so much if these judgements were not so vital to a whole judgement of the school or to one teacher seeking promotion or a pay rise.

Every classroom teacher In England is expected to have a lesson plan, detailing what they expect to be learnt in that lesson, and detailing what levels each student is currently at, and what specific learning needs different students have. And that is good, but it can be turned into an exercise to please the senior management, rather than a means to teach better. It is possible to have all that written out, ready to be handed to the observer, and the learning still not be meeting the different needs of each student, because the teacher does not know how to do this. So sometimes the tasks become a barrier, another hassle rather than a means to improving the learning. In a good school, the support would be in there before the observations had highlighted the problems.

When an observation is made it is now common practice to ask one or two students to describe what they had learnt in that lesson. Student voice is really important in lifting standards in schools, but  in the wrong hands it can be misused. On the other hand students can be wonderfully honest. I watched  as one student advised the Ofsted inspector that this particular lesson , in which the student was obviously bored, had been taught twice by that teacher in the last week and the student thought that it was being repeated for the inspector!

The other activity carried out by most lesson observers is to look at a range of student exercise books. The aim here is to look at the feedback that the teacher is giving to the student. Feedback is very important, and  parents often complain that their children’s homework is not marked. A tick alone is not feedback that can help the student improve. Again in England there are a range of guidelines and advice on the different ways to feed back positively to the student. Sometimes that feedback is tailored to how the student might attain their target grade for that term in that subject and where the particular piece of work fits in. So an exercise book where there are no grades or advice or targets mitigates against that teacher gaining a satisfactory grade for their lesson.

In a judgemental school where the senior team are trying to lay blame for poor progress on the teachers, the observation routines can become a means of putting teachers down, rather than of lifting the learning.

Lesson observation is a positive means to improving how we teach. But when  this tool  is used for pay  and promotion purposes and for judging the school, it becomes a whip, something to be feared, rather than something to be welcomed, because you, the teacher can learn from it.

I believe that where we were in New Zealand in the 1990’s where observation was collaborative and supportive, is where observation can be of most benefit. I value observations including the emphasis on feedback to students, the use of the student voice and evidence of knowledge of where each student is at in their journey, but I am very wary of how these good practices can be abused and actually work against good learning and teaching.

Most importantly, the purpose of such lesson observations must be clear. They cannot serve two different purposes: lifting the learning and teaching within a school AND a tool for pay/promotion progress. That confusion of purpose endangers the really good things that can come out of a positive observation practice within a school community. Sadly, it is in schools where their relatively poor student achievement indicates that improvement in learning and teaching is urgently needed, that the different purposes of lesson observations can become so confused and where poor practice in observations is the norm.

My next post will be on performance-related pay and what has happened in England.

Standard