Time for a National Approach to Teacher Quality

Stephen Dinham; Lawrence Ingvarson; Elizabeth Kleinhenz

Time for a National Approach to Teacher Quality

Stephen Dinham, Lawrence Ingvarson, Elizabeth Kleinhenz

Research output: Other contribution

Abstract

THERE have been a variety of (seemingly) simplistic, populist approaches to the challenge of improving teacher quality. These include “merit” or “performance” pay; payment by student examination results; raising entry standards to teaching; higher teacher pay generally; smaller class sizes; standardised testing; publishing “league tables” of school performance and sacking poorly performing teachers. These measures frequently lack finer detail on how they might operate, are not supported by evidence and represent an ad hoc, fragmented response. Earlier this year, the Business Council of Australia commissioned staff at the Australian Council for Educational Research to write a position paper for the BCA on quality teaching. Our paper, “Investing in Teacher Quality: Doing What Matters Most,” was released this week as part of a BCA publication Teaching Talent: The Best Teachers for Australia’s Schools. The report has received wide publicity and general support from the profession. Where the approach outlined in the BCA report differs from previous efforts in the area of raising teacher quality, and therefore student achievement, lies in the nature of the comprehensive, national, integrated approach that is advocated.

Original language	English
Publication status	Published - 27 May 2008
Externally published	Yes

Disciplines

Curriculum and Instruction
Educational Administration and Supervision
Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research
Teacher Education and Professional Development

Access to Document

http://www.apo.org.au/webboard/comment_results.chtml?filename_num=210058

Cite this

@misc{5cff6ec70e7a47cb8baeb6724aeeeab6,

title = "Time for a National Approach to Teacher Quality",

abstract = " THERE have been a variety of (seemingly) simplistic, populist approaches to the challenge of improving teacher quality. These include “merit” or “performance” pay; payment by student examination results; raising entry standards to teaching; higher teacher pay generally; smaller class sizes; standardised testing; publishing “league tables” of school performance and sacking poorly performing teachers. These measures frequently lack finer detail on how they might operate, are not supported by evidence and represent an ad hoc, fragmented response. Earlier this year, the Business Council of Australia commissioned staff at the Australian Council for Educational Research to write a position paper for the BCA on quality teaching. Our paper, “Investing in Teacher Quality: Doing What Matters Most,” was released this week as part of a BCA publication Teaching Talent: The Best Teachers for Australia{\textquoteright}s Schools. The report has received wide publicity and general support from the profession. Where the approach outlined in the BCA report differs from previous efforts in the area of raising teacher quality, and therefore student achievement, lies in the nature of the comprehensive, national, integrated approach that is advocated.",

author = "Stephen Dinham and Lawrence Ingvarson and Elizabeth Kleinhenz",

year = "2008",

month = may,

day = "27",

language = "English",

type = "Other",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Time for a National Approach to Teacher Quality

AU - Dinham, Stephen

AU - Ingvarson, Lawrence

AU - Kleinhenz, Elizabeth

PY - 2008/5/27

Y1 - 2008/5/27

N2 - THERE have been a variety of (seemingly) simplistic, populist approaches to the challenge of improving teacher quality. These include “merit” or “performance” pay; payment by student examination results; raising entry standards to teaching; higher teacher pay generally; smaller class sizes; standardised testing; publishing “league tables” of school performance and sacking poorly performing teachers. These measures frequently lack finer detail on how they might operate, are not supported by evidence and represent an ad hoc, fragmented response. Earlier this year, the Business Council of Australia commissioned staff at the Australian Council for Educational Research to write a position paper for the BCA on quality teaching. Our paper, “Investing in Teacher Quality: Doing What Matters Most,” was released this week as part of a BCA publication Teaching Talent: The Best Teachers for Australia’s Schools. The report has received wide publicity and general support from the profession. Where the approach outlined in the BCA report differs from previous efforts in the area of raising teacher quality, and therefore student achievement, lies in the nature of the comprehensive, national, integrated approach that is advocated.

AB - THERE have been a variety of (seemingly) simplistic, populist approaches to the challenge of improving teacher quality. These include “merit” or “performance” pay; payment by student examination results; raising entry standards to teaching; higher teacher pay generally; smaller class sizes; standardised testing; publishing “league tables” of school performance and sacking poorly performing teachers. These measures frequently lack finer detail on how they might operate, are not supported by evidence and represent an ad hoc, fragmented response. Earlier this year, the Business Council of Australia commissioned staff at the Australian Council for Educational Research to write a position paper for the BCA on quality teaching. Our paper, “Investing in Teacher Quality: Doing What Matters Most,” was released this week as part of a BCA publication Teaching Talent: The Best Teachers for Australia’s Schools. The report has received wide publicity and general support from the profession. Where the approach outlined in the BCA report differs from previous efforts in the area of raising teacher quality, and therefore student achievement, lies in the nature of the comprehensive, national, integrated approach that is advocated.

M3 - Other contribution

ER -