The latest NAPLAN results have been published. Predictably, politicians and media outlets are lamenting the "terrible" results and urging instant action to rescue Australia's failing standards in literacy and numeracy from sinking in a sea of ignorance. Two points should be made at the start. First, the latest NAPLAN results vary very little from all other NAPLAN results over the years since 2009. Secondly, to class teachers, these NAPLAN results may be interesting but they are not very useful. The tests were administered in April and these result, published about five months later, in late August are ancient history.. Their classes have moved on quite a way since April.
What these NAPLAN results do show us, yet again, is that there is a huge gap between high achieving and low achieving schools. What these NAPLAN results do show, yet again, is that NAPLAN results are determined by the location of the school on the Socio-Economic Index. In other words, schools in the leafy green suburbs do better than schools on the wrong side of the railway tracks. This is not new. It was exactly like that when David Gonski proposed in 2008 that schools should be funded more equitably. In fact Mr Gonski went further than that. He said that schools should be funded according to their needs. It sounded great but it did not happen. In the decade after Gonski funding to private schools increased markedly in comparison to the funding of government schools. At the same time the achievement gap between high and low NAPLAN achievers grew wider.
Over all of that time the media and the politicians fretted over the yearly NAPLAN results They said our schools are failing. They said teachers are failing our children and they must work harder. This is akin to generals complaining that soldiers to whom they gave faulty weapons and scarce ammunition are losing the battle. If the problem is clearly the inequitable distribution of resources why do politicians and the media throw their hands but do nothing about the real cause of the achievement gap.
Dr. Pasi Sahlberg was formerly the Director of Education in Finland, one of the world's high education achievers. Dr Sahlberg is now a professor of Education at the Gonski Institute at the University of Sydney. Six Years ago Pasi Sahlberg tols us that three things needed to happen to address the problems in Australian education. FIRST: Stop the inequitable distribution of resources to schools. Provide extra funding to schools in need. Second: Make Wellness a priority in Australian education. Sahlberg said that it is difficult to perform satisfactorily at school if you are sick, tired, hungry or traumatised by physical, emotional or sexual abuse. Third: Avoid Quick Fixes.
The Quick Fix is what politicians favour because they believe it tells their electorate that they are doing something about the problem. Thirty Years ago Professor David Elkind, then Professor of Psychology, Psychiatry and Education at Rochester University, worried by the pressures being applied the schools, warned that politicians generally made changes in education, not primarily for the benefit of the children, but to impress their parents and obtain their votes at the next election.
The 2024 NAPLAN results have seen the politicians deliver another Quick Fix. The Federal Minister for Education, Jason Clare, has just announced that he has set up a review to examine early childhood education with the objective of providing quality education for al children fro birth to age five. Not only that all children will be assessed on their mathematical aptitude before entering Year One. Sounds like Minister Clare knows what needs to be done to fix our achievement gap.
Well not everyone thinks so. We shall have to wait and see what the committee sees as "quality education" for children from birth to age five. We can only hope that it does not involve formal instruction in literacy and numeracy, The President of the WA Primary Principals Association, Niel Smith described the proposed numeracy tests for children in the early years as a waste of time and money. Government schools are under resourced and teachers and principals know where precious resources could be much better spent.
The problem is that many politicians and some parents see education as a race. They believe the sooner you start the race the better you finish. Well, for years, educators have said that education is not a race. It is a developmental process. Thirty years ago Professor Elkind wrote “The Hurried Child”. In it he said that many problems arise because young children are involved in formal education too soon. He said children’s education is not a race and activities should be “developmentally appropriate.” Unlike our politicians, Elkind spent a lifetime researching the subject.
In August 2012, West Australian feature writer, Cathy O’Leary, wrote an excellent article warning parents that they should resist speeding up their child’s development and instead allow their children to enjoy their childhood (Warning on smart baby toys, The West Australian, Cathy O’Leary, 28/08/2012). Ms O’Leary quoted Associate Professor Michael Nagel, from the school of Science and Education at Queensland University, who warned that parents should resist speeding up their child’s development and instead allow their children to enjoy their childhood. Professor Nagel said that parents trying to advance their child’s development with enrichment tools or programmes may be doing them more harm than good. The process could cause children undue stress and hinder important brain development that will be detrimental to later learning.
Professor Elkind’s earlier warnings were much more dire. Forcing formal education on children not developmentally ready would produce some children,” whose academic self-esteem is all but destroyed during their formative years, who develop an antipathy toward learning, and a dislike of school and will never fully realize their latent abilities and talents” He added that these disaffected children would have “an antipathy to learning and a dislike of school. This will create an enormous educational and social debt that we will have to face up to and pay, at great cost, sometime in the future.“ That future has arrived.
NAPLAN forced the formal instruction of literacy and numeracy into Kindy and Pre Primary and maybe into Daycare. At an important time in their development, when young children should be engaged in enjoyable activities developing their creativity, their imagination, their social skills and learning about themselves and their environment, their family, their home and their school, they are being burdened with formal instructions in literacy and numeracy. We now hear of parents of Pre Primary children being advised to give their children homework to develop literacy and numeracy skills. There is talk of ” the pressure of Pre Primary”. There should never be any pressure in Pre Primary, or Kindy!
Sadly, it is not just politicians and some eager parents who are force feeding our very youngest children with educational and intellectual competencies for which many are not yet ready. State Education Departments and school administrators have been coerced into implementing the process. One sad outcome of this introduction of formal education to the very early years is that many highly competent early childhood teachers have resigned or taken early retirement.What they were being pressured to do was not what they signed on for a early childhood educators.
Over thirty years ago, Robert Fulghum wrote an international best seller, “All I really needed to know I learned in Kindergarten” There was no mention of formal lessons in numeracy or literacy.
Hopefully, the WA Principals Association will be a beacon of reason against all those who are intent on robbing our very young children of the enjoyment of their childhood. Oh. by the way, in Finland they do not start formal education until children are seven years old. They also enjoy an equitable distribution of education resources.It seems to work for them.
