We have just been "EROed!"ERO defines children experiencing success primarily as documentation demonstrating that students who were "underachieving" are now making "accelerated progress" (defined as more than one years learning in a year.) The review criteria does not value the emotional, social, cognitive or cultural richness within a school (unless there is a problem with bullying.) The criteria to receive a 4-5 year ERO review (which Leamington received previously) is now reserved for those schools who can demonstrate via documentation there is no disparity in achievement between boys and girls, or between ethnicities, in reading, writing and math. While Leamington can show that by the end of year six there is no disparity for boys and girls, because it is not across all year levels or ethnicities we do not qualify for a 4-5 year review - the top prize from an ERO review! Are we ok with our children having great learning experiences but feeling a lack of emotional connections with peers or their teachers?In fact, ERO now reserves the statement "high-quality teaching happening in every class" for only those schools where there is no disparity in achievement. It is their position that high-quality teaching can only be declared if it is bringing equity to all students - irrespective of attendance, health, learning disabilities, transience, prior attainment, home life, cognitive development or a child's attitude, readiness or effort at school. The argument is of course flawed in logic! By the same rationale, car seat belts have to be classified as ineffective as when they are not put on they do not prevent many injuries. Gym memberships have to be classified as ineffective as they do not bring the same benefits to all members - irrespective of attendance, effort or dietary habits. Prescribed medication has to be classified as ineffective as when it is not taken it does not bring the health benefits promised. The list goes on! (In fact, the ERO office can only describe themselves as being ineffective as despite the suggestions they have given to schools over the years -they have not caused the disparity in achievement to reduce either!) The experience has provoked a sense of purpose and realignment within me that will not be quickly quenched. The children at our school are more than just learners - vessels ready to be filled with learning irrespective of anything else. They are not only learners or students - they are children who we are partnering with to co-author futures. "What are the indicators of success for our children at primary school?"We need to ask some questions that will ignite answers that will impact and give clarity for the way we do school into the foreseeable future.
Are we ok with our children making accelerated progress but being unhappy at school? Or would we rather our children be happy at school and making ok progress? Are we ok with our children having great learning experiences but feeling a lack of emotional connections with peers or their teachers? Naturally, if we had one, then surely the other should follow? But which one begets the other? But what if it does not? If we had to choose, what would we prioritise? This question is one that over the next period of time is essential that we answer in partnership with our community to be able to answer the question "What are the indicators of success for our children at primary school?" The answer will dictate the choices we make as a school and community together to help co-author the futures of the children at Leamington. Comments are closed.
|
AuthorMike Malcolm - Principal of Leamington School Archives
August 2019
Categories
All
|