The fact that another package of reforms is being foisted on the
education system, in the absence of a genuinely open debate, may
explain the siege mentality experienced by many teachers. Unlike the
mood among professionals at other ‘crunch times’, on this occasion, it’s
different.
To an outsider, there is an overriding impression that
teachers are consistently undervalued by ministers. In what should be
an open debate over change in education, it is clear to the casual
observer, the professional voice is being systematically ignored. This
is not a healthy situation to encounter when, if it is to succeed, the
major reform under consideration will require the cooperation of the
very professionals being marginalised. The increasingly hostile
environment is demotivating many teachers, adding to uncertainty about
the future, and that future belongs to the young.
We may only speculate about their fate in the face of uncertainty
over what that future holds. It’s not unreasonable to assume that their
capacity to respond to rapidly changing circumstances is likely to
become an abiding feature of their lives. Opportunities for them to
flourish in such uncertainty and live hopeful futures, will depend on
those occupying key positions of power today being able to take the
long-term view of what needs to change. As things work at present, this
is unlikely to happen. In the words of Professor Ken Robinson, "the system needs transforming." http://sirkenrobinson.com/
The ongoing climate of political/professional wrangling has the
capacity to damage young people’s life chances well into the future. It
is clearly diverting public attention away from the need to generate a
broad consensus about the aims and values that should underpin
future education reform. Get the latest from Reiss and White on a new approach to curriculum planning at An Aims-based Curriculum.
The benefits of changing the present system to
secure longer-term objectives in education need to be articulated. I question why teachers' professional bodies aren't doing this more persistently? The challenges
young people face will call for attitudes, skills and knowledge that are
not being systematically developed in the present stop-go approach to
education planning. If we are about to embark on further change, it
would be better if we were able to work together.
In future, if they so choose, people are likely to directly influence
decision-making at every level. Ordinary citizens already have the
means to do so via mobile communication technologies, as we have
repeatedly witnessed happening in other countries. Dictatorships and
democracies alike, will be similarly affected in future because of this
development and governments will find themselves having to listen to the
voice of the people or face the consequences. The old ways will no
longer deliver what we need.
Put simply, decision-making in our education system is out of step
with what is required. The task of preparing learners to meet the
challenges of greater participation in a changeable future is threatened
by the short-term agenda of politicians under current arrangements.
Tragically, the option that exists to change strategic decision-making
isn’t even being discussed.
The first priority, therefore, must be to take this debate forward.
The objective of doing so initially being, to re-frame the reform
process. Re-defining responsibilities, clarifying roles and agreeing an
appropriate balance between central and local decision-making will all
require our urgent attention.
Evidence clearly indicates, decades of education reform have failed
too many of our young people. Were this not the case, there would not be
the present clamour for further hurried changes, at the expense of
alienating the very people responsible for delivering reform.
In a changing global environment, decisions about education can no
longer be coupled to the existing system of parliamentary power
recycling, where parties need only a simple majority at the ballot-box
to entitle them to determine the future direction (for a few years) of a
crucially important service like education. The process we have, has
consistently failed to deliver lasting, longer-term benefits to the
service and to its users. Also, in recent years, successive governments
have vastly increased their own powers at the expense of local
democracy, despite their blatant denial of having done so. Too much
quick-fix reform has proved to be economically wasteful, systematically
demotivating for many working in education and ineffective in creating
genuinely equitable opportunities to improve life chances for all
pupils. Short-term solutions are no solutions at all.
To further illustrate the point, information and communication
technology (ICT) is set to change the face of education. Considerable
attention is already being focused on making individualised learning a
viable option. Teachers understand the importance of this but they know
that such a transition cannot be achieved over-night. Game-changing
approaches of this kind require time to develop, to evaluate and to
deliver. How, under the present system could there possibly be a
commitment to the long-term success of such an important initiative?
Politicians, quite obviously, do not have the time to commit to the
long-haul; quick-fix and move-on has been disastrous so far in reforming
education.
As new generations of educators expand their expertise, adapting
tested ideas in their own domain to deliver real results (not tests and
league table results), politicians should concentrate their energies on
the strategic task for which their mandate is actually best suited. They
should set global levels of funding for education in line with the
wishes of a better informed electorate and guided by balanced input from
highly committed professionals. Interestingly, it has been felt for
some time that the first nation to transform its education service along
these lines will accrue considerable lasting benefits for its citizens.
As to the past, it would be wise to preserve only what benefits the
future, as seen from our present perspective. It is time to change the
very culture of change in education. We owe it to our successors.
No comments:
Post a Comment