1.       On the argument of teacher quality, I am torn. On the one hand, I see excellent teachers doing amazing work every day. Teachers who put in huge amounts of their own time marking, preparing units and lessons etc. I would say that these teachers are incredibly capable of improving productivity, given the time and the right resources, and that there is absolutely no issues with teacher quality. 

On the other hand, I see teachers who have the same qualifications, who do not put in the same effort or are very negative about their work, or struggle significantly with behavior management due to either their attitude or personality. 

In terms of teacher quality, I almost think that what makes a good teacher is not really something that can be measured against a standard. How do you measure passion, effort and personality? 

So, I guess what I am saying is that I don’t really see what can be done to improve teacher quality. There are some amazing teachers out there, and there is something else letting them down (I don’t know what - syllabus restrictions or overload/workload??)

 

Student background on the other hand, is something that we face in class rooms every day. A student who shows up to class without having eaten properly, without the supplies they need and without a positive attitude towards education, is immediately behind the student  they are sitting next to with all of these things. To me this seems like something that could be more meaningfully addressed. 

 

 

2.       I think that this idea came up in the Bottery reading at the very start about why we need a global perspective. I wrote down the question ‘Where is the line between local meaning and global understandings?’ I think, like all curriculum design, it is a question of balance. I don’t think these things need to detract from one another, in fact educational outcomes like resilience are necessary for economic competitiveness. 

 

3.       On a surface level, I would say no, that the school does not emphasize SES; that it would be down to the individual teacher as to how they encourage and address engagement and performance. The teacher though, is supported by the school through the availability of supplies, discipline protocols, extra teacher support etc. I suppose that supports for engagement and performance are so built into the system, it is difficult to analyze their origin. 

 

There is a focus on SES within most of the schools I have worked in. The Student Resource Package (school funding) reflects consideration to SES and that funding is meant to be targeted towards addressing local concerns in this area. While there is the opportunity to allocate those funds elsewhere, in my experience, school leaders understand the great need for supporting these students and not only in that targeted funding channelled into supporting them, any other available funding is as well. Beyond funding, there are great efforts within schools to address the inequality. From breakfast clubs, cool clubs, fundraising to subsidise excursion/camps/incursions, accessing Target vouchers and extra support funding through SFYS through to the many modifications and adaptations teachers make within their day-to-day teaching on a daily basis – SES context factors are addressed to support and improve engagement and performance. 

 

There is always room for improvement I say that in terms of improving teacher quality, productivity and how we support all of our students and families. I believe we would be negligent to say we have done enough.

2.       In a society where economic competitiveness is the focus of education there will always be losers.  Capitalism and competition rely on those that have and those that don’t; the winners and the losers.   If rather we consider education as providing the tools that are needed to lead fulfilling and purposeful lives and to address the complex issues we are faced with in our world, then social-emotional learning and social and personal capabilities are critical.

3.       Increasingly many of the schools I work in place student wellbeing at the core of their work.  They operate on the belief that effective teaching and learning take place when basic needs are addressed.  In the school support agency I work in there are five key lenses through which we work – culturally and linguistically responsive, relationships based, trauma-informed, strengths based and community connected.