Page 3135 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 17 October 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Four factors consistently affect student achievement—smaller school size (300-500 students), smaller class size (especially for elementary schools), challenging curriculum, and more highly qualified teachers all relate to higher student performance.
That makes sense to me. While school size has been the subject of much discussion and debate in the literature in relation to the achievement of learning outcomes, student achievement is a wider issue. It relates to the quality of facilities, the quality of teachers, having a rigorous curriculum, and class size. It is important to note that at the conclusion of the government’s reform process it is our expectation that the majority of schools in Canberra will fit within the small school range, as discussed in this research. The government will maintain its policy of maximum class sizes of 21 in the early years of schooling and that students will be operating under a new quality curriculum framework.
Mr Speaker, I am committed to an ongoing conversation and consultation with the people of Canberra about the future of our education system. But these conversations need to be based on fact, not on the misinformation spread by the save our schools group through Mr Cobbold’s report. This government is committed to a quality, sustainable education system. That is what our reforms are about—ensuring that the education dollar goes to where there is real need and that all students receive the highest quality education that they deserve.
MR GENTLEMAN: I ask a supplementary question. Minister, are you aware of any other misinformation being spread in the debate surrounding public education?
MR BARR: Just this morning I was given a copy of the report prepared by Miss Margaret Starrs, the P&C association’s independent consultant, into the 2020 proposal. This morning the president of the ACT P&C council, Ms Jane Gorrie, released a media statement making some assertions about what the government has and has not done. Of course, the devil is always in the detail, and if members take the time to read the report, they will see that Miss Starrs makes a number of comments about the 2020 proposal. On page 11, in the footnotes, she states:
… the benefits of education are not usually considered in analyses of school closures … This is not the case with the Towards 2020 … There are several papers on these topics available on the Towards 2020 website. We have not reviewed them to prepare this report.
The independent report did not look at the educational benefits of the 2020 proposal. The P&C commissioned a report to look at the 2020 proposal but did not look at the educational benefits. It acknowledged that there is a series of papers available as part of the proposal, but it did not look at them.
On page 12 of the report the reviewer goes on to outline some of the benefits of the proposal as they apply to teachers. The report states:
There is the potential for flexibility, greater interaction with other staff, improved teaching resources and facilities, and assistance with students with behavioural problems and administrative tasks.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .