Page 4713 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 19 October 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
responsibility for your policy failings? As previously mentioned, the decision at Weston preschool was reversed, but I acknowledge that it is only a deferral for now. Those parents are not about to let you off the hook, Mr Barr; they know who is ultimately responsible for the lack of consultation, and 12 months will not make any difference to their resolve.
Again, there is the ongoing saga of safety for a student at Woden school. Between the Chief Minister and the education minister, this has been an appalling failure to protect vulnerable children. Again I note that the reversal of the earlier decision to not provide nursing staff at Woden is only for the remainder of 2011. But the issue will be at the forefront of debate again in 2012; I can guarantee you that, Mr Barr.
I move to the less fictitious parts of this motion. The motion talks of the importance of the national assessment program known as NAPLAN. In reading the various reports, let me be clear: NAPLAN is a significant tool for parents and teachers in assessing how students and classes are progressing. As an aside, in reading this motion one could be excused for thinking that NAPLAN was the brainchild of the ACT government and Mr Barr.
There is much to commend in this motion. As I said, NAPLAN is important for parents and teachers to receive feedback on student strengths and weaknesses, and our schools should perform well because successive governments have invested significant amounts. But the picture is not all rosy; we need to be careful how NAPLAN is interpreted and what it cannot do. Over the years NAPLAN has had some interesting press, and many organisations and individuals with particular barrows to push have used NAPLAN results, not always appropriately or accurately, to further their cause. There is no doubt that NAPLAN is a valuable tool but, like all tools, it should not be used without instruction.
ACT Labor should not be so complacent as to suggest that NAPLAN is saying that Canberra schools are performing exceptionally, because we can do better. For example, I draw the Assembly’s attention to an article headed “Students let down by the system” by Nicholas Stuart in the Canberra Times in October 2010. The article talked about the My School website and asserted that our education minister does not really appreciate what it is saying about the state of our schools. My School features students’ NAPLAN performance over a number of years and, together with financial information and other facts and figures about each school, is intended to provide parents with some assistance in selecting a school for their child.
Mr Assistant Speaker, I am about to run out of time. I would simply like to say, as I said at the beginning of this debate, that this motion is good in parts but much of it is misleading and some of it does suggest complacency. I move:
Omit paragraph (2), substitute:
“(2) supports ongoing specialist teacher services for students and schools in the ACT.”.
MS HUNTER (Ginninderra—Parliamentary Leader, ACT Greens) (5.46): The Greens will support the motion today, and we will also be supporting Mr Doszpot’s
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video