Why conservatives don’t support school league tables

Introducing Labor’s new faction – the Greens

by Sophie Mirabella

110
Five ingredients of a good advice column

by Lucy Kippist

210
How to be a good parent at 100 miles an hour

by Damien Leith

310
Ambassador for the Australian mentality

by Matt Smith

410
Punch on: Open thread 03/09/2010

by Lucy Kippist

510
Abbott’s Fatal Austin Powers Moment: One Billion Dollars

by Leo Shanahan

610
The national policy agenda which nobody voted for

by David Penberthy

710
Enough with all the meat eating all ready

by Ian Wallace

810
We need to get over our poll addiction

by Mark Colvin

910
A hung parliament is good news for business

by Jannette Cotterell

1010

02 Jul 05:40am

Filed under: Education, League Tables, Schools

Thank goodness Julia Gillard and Verity Firth don’t coach the Wallabies. If they did they would be looking to the minnows of world rugby – Canada or Samoa – for ideas on how to improve Australia’s rugby performance rather than a powerhouse like New Zealand.

This is exactly the approach they have taken to our education system. Their big new idea has been the introduction of League Tables, basically the crude ranking of individual schools on basic testing.

The two countries that have most actively used League tables are the United States and the United Kingdom.

To put this in context, in a survey of childhood conditions carried out for UNICEF, the UK was ranked bottom of 21 countries. Furthermore, the 2006 OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment shows that average scores in reading, mathematics and science have seriously declined since 2000.

Countries that do not use League Tables include Finland and New Zealand – two countries that consistently top international benchmarks for student performance.

So why would we want to follow the lead of education systems that Australia clearly outperforms, and ignore the lessons from those education systems that do it better than ours?

That was the question that faced Members of NSW Parliament last week. A majority of the Upper House, and the entire Lower House voted to stop the publication of league tables in NSW in an attempt to protect the integrity of our education system.

What the Bill stopped was ranking of schools from best to worst. A ranking system that is simplistic and wrong because it does not take into account the challenges that individual schools face. Issues like isolation for schools in western NSW, the level of wealth of families, or the fact that kids come from a non English speaking background all effect school performance in tests.

This ranking might make great media headlines but they can also do significant harm to the schools affected. Some of the toughest schools in NSW have the best Principals and the best teachers with the hardest working kids working from a low base. They do not deserve public humiliation by being the subject of simplistic league tables.

Our position is supported almost unanimously by every serious education stakeholder, but it is a position that has earned harsh criticism from journalist and stalwarts of conservative politics such as Brendan Nelson.
At the end of the day, what the debate in the media has revolved around has been what limits can Parliament put on media in terms of what they can report. This is of course a serious debate that deserves serious consideration.

Currently we have limits on publishing the names of juveniles charged with criminal offenses, a law designed to protect young people. I understand the concerns of the media about limiting their right to publish what they see fit and I can see their point.

Perhaps what has been most frustrating throughout the debate is the liberty some commentators have taken in defining what are core Liberal & Nationals values. We value the integrity of what is a world-class education system. We value the reputation of schools and the kids that attend them. We value the effort of teachers and principals, especially those who work in the most difficult and challenging schools in Australia.

These are the core values of the Liberal & National parties, and all are undermined by league tables.

Share post:
Print page:
- Print Article

Most commented

244The national policy agenda which nobody voted for

238On the PM's own test, the numbers now favour the Libs

191Abbott's Fatal Austin Powers Moment: One Billion Dollars

183Admitting that you may be a monarchist is tough

170Big breasts are back

170Here's to the funniest movie ever made

120How Labor lost its mandate to govern

117Who needs enemies when you've got a Party Room

114Enough with all the meat eating all ready

20 comments

Show oldest | newest first

- Peter says:
  
  08:33am | 02/07/09
  
  Barf.
  
  Seriously, this guy is kidding himself. The amendment agreed to in the Upper House only limits the publication of league table in ‘old media’. Why not the internet?
  
  Don’t get me wrong - I’m a big supporter of league tables. But a better system of assessing schools and teachers would be state-wide standardised tests, one at the start of a school year, one at the end. Then evaluate the educational gain that has come about becuase of the practises of that particular school.
  
  That way you could truly determine which schools do a better job of ‘teaching’, irrespective of the base level of the students themselves.
  
  Reply
- Adrian says:
  
  08:56am | 02/07/09
  
  Barf, we acknowledge that NSW Parliament has no jurisdiction over the internet or over other states. We did what we were able to do. Furthermore, what you say about ranking improvement is a totally different concept to league tables. Measuring improvement is fantastic and to some degree that is what will be posted on the Cth website when all of this data about schools is published later in the year. We havent stopped any of that data being made public.
  
  Reply
- anna says:
  
  09:17am | 02/07/09
  
  what are the arguments FOR leaegue tables, taking into account the non-standadised facilities accross the board??
  
  Reply
- Marty says:
  
  09:31am | 02/07/09
  
  Anna,
  
  Hopefully they’d improve standards in spelling, punctuation and grammar for a start.
  
  Reply
- realto says:
  
  09:52am | 02/07/09
  
  There seems to be some sort of amnesia happening here. Putting aside the merits of the arguments, it seems to me that conservatives were once all for education league tables and lost their enthusiasm for them around the same time that Labor gained wall to wall government and started to talk about adopting the tables. In other words, naked political opportunism. Voters are not that stupid as to fall for the conservative’s tricks however.
  
  Reply
- Zeta says:
  
  10:08am | 02/07/09
  
  It’s not commentators taking liberties with core Liberal & National Party ideology, (assuming the Nationals even have one) it’s you.
  
  The integrity of our education system should run a close second to the freedom of parents to choose where and how and for how much their children are educated. If you’re a real conservative that is.
  
  Why not tell the truth: that the NSW Lib/Nats smell victory in the wind and will run as fast and as far from the values of their founders to acheive it? We undertand. Everyone hates NSW Labor so much you could abandon 100 years of classical liberalism and still win. So why this deception? Why pretend like somehow your backflip on league tables makes you even better conservatives than you were before?
  
  It would be better if you just said: “The NSW Labor Government is the worst Government in the history of federation, and we’ll do anything to beat them in 2011.”
  
  Reply
- Lexi says:
  
  10:29am | 02/07/09
  
  How can you compare children from advantageous backgrounds with those from disadvantaged homes and communities? Simplistic league tables will only lead to more front page headlines like “The class we failed”. Some schools have higher rates of *DOCS intervention *learning difficulties *disabilities *non-English speaking families *low income families *indigenous families. Of course those schools will fall to the bottom of such league tables - and be vilified for it. It will be a downward spiral - those parents who can afford other schools will withdraw their children leaving only those who have the highest needs and least ability to change either their school or circumstances.
  
  Anyone who thinks the results of league tables will lead to increased funding and resources still believes in the tooth fairy.
  
  Parental information and transparancy can still be achieved without resulting in dinner parties with parents saying “well my little Johnny’s school did better at NAPLAN than your little Lucy’s school” in addition to “my post code is still more expensive than your post code”.
  
  Let’s be honest - the parents who are interested know how prospective schools are performing before they enrol their children. Communities talk.
  
  Reply
- Peter says:
  
  11:01am | 02/07/09
  
  Lexi,
  
  Only those ‘in the know’ or who have friends who can pass that sort of information to them know the truth. Others go on heresay an rumour.
  
  Isn’t it better to know how a school is actually performing with objective, publicly-available data rather than rely on Chinese whispers?
  
  Reply
- Lexi says:
  
  11:26am | 02/07/09
  
  Peter, how do you define “performing” if you can’t compare aples with apples? “Performing” cannot be quantified as children are not made the same and all reach different developmental milestones at different times in different ways. You are also not comparing schools within the same communities. Teachers, too, are not made from the same mold and teach the same curriculum and syllabus in different ways - the methods often depend on the individuals within the class being taught and their preferred learning methods.
  
  With these tables, which will inevitably appear online, you’ll compare remote one-teacher schools (like Capertee or Clare) with schools in wealthy, well educated suburbs like Mosman. You’ll compare schools in artistic, cultural, educated and employed suburbs like Balmain with schools educating children who are rarely fed breakfast, whose parents may be uneducated and disinterested, children who have a higher risk of abuse and neglect - like schools in suburbs overwhelmed with public housing.
  
  How is that objective?
  
  I seriously don’t think you have to be in some conspiracy to know how local schools are performing - by the time you’ve been through play group, day care, pre-schools and school open days, you should have some idea.
  
  Most importantly, this information won’t help those who need it the most - people who have no options. The children in rural, regional and remote communities and those from low SES groups.
  
  Reply
- John says:
  
  11:45am | 02/07/09
  
  Thanks. I thought I was a voter with conservative values. Without your clarification of what it takes to vote liberal, I could have voted for the wrong side next election
  
  Reply
- Marcus says:
  
  12:40pm | 02/07/09
  
  Well, every conservative I know is very concerned about school performance. In fact, they invariably cite the advantages of the private school system by listing their academic, sporting and other achievements. In my experience, they love league tables.
  
  Having said that, your point about comparing our system to the US and UK rather than actual effective school systems is a good point. League tables won’t necessarily improve quality, but they might enable us to identify where the poor quality is. Although then you have to decide what to do next. Do we have a league like the English Premier League, where the rich schools buy the best players and the poor ones stay permanently down the bottom, or like the AFL, where a draft system is in place to consistently inject the best new talent into the weaker teams, ensuring a cycling of who is “best”... What is the conservative position on “choice?”
  
  Reply
- Jeff says:
  
  01:09pm | 02/07/09
  
  Comparing all schools using simplistic league tables is like having one Aussie Rules league table, which would then “prove” what crap teams Norwood, Swan Districts, or the East Widgemooltha Under 18s are and how they needed their funding cut, and how Geelong deserved more funding.
  Besides being just plain unfair, it is illogical, unscientific and unhelpful to try to measure the complex nature of education using one-dimensional testing.
  And when will we get parental league tables? If we want to get all corporate and accountable and measure schools’ performances, let’s measure the performance of the people supplying the ‘raw material’ with which schools must work.
  
  Reply
- stephen says:
  
  01:09pm | 02/07/09
  
  The conservatives may be afraid the league tables will expose the poor academic performance of the wealthy private schools which receive a swag of taxpayers’ money.
  
  Reply
- Steve B says:
  
  04:46pm | 02/07/09
  
  Marcus says: What is the conservative position on “choice?”
  Pretty much the same as the progressive’s.. you may freely choose between the options that we have provided for you.
  
  Reply
- S. Slamming Sam says:
  
  07:24pm | 02/07/09
  
  Do not judge the NSW as the example for all Liberals. This is like comparing Rees Labor to Rudd Labor.
  
  The NSW Liberals are not your run-of-the-mill conservatives. They are a sham. A joke. Barry O’Farrell should hang his head in shame for playing politics instead of sticking to Liberal principles.
  
  True Liberals believe in publishing school league tables. True Liberals believe in parents having the freedom to choose between schools, and to have access to the knowledge and competitive data of how their child’s school is performing. Moving towards this was started by Brendan Nelson as Education minister in Howard’s Government in 2004, though it fell over quite a bit under Julie Bishop.
  
  To have a headline ‘Conservatives Don’t Support School League Tables’ is just plain misleading and should be retracted.
  
  Reply
- John Greenfield says:
  
  08:13pm | 02/07/09
  
  The AEU and their Luvvie vanguards really need to be told quite firmly to Get Knotted on this. What possible reason can the state have for not publishing every single piece of raw data it has on its website. If individuals or institutions wish to slice and dice that raw data in 234,876 ways to tickle whatever fancy they might have, this HAS to be a better society than a state bureaucracy which hides all data in cubby-holes.
  
  The real scandal is that so many of The Luvvies have good connections and they get hold of all this data. So they KNOW Burwood Girls High and Homebush Boy’s High in Sydney, for example, have the state’s highest value-added as the kids move from Year 7 to 12, and both schools are government comprehensives.
  
  Why can’t we ALL have this data?
  
  Reply
- Ralph Buttigieg says:
  
  07:39am | 03/07/09
  
  This is just a stupid article. The government is not obliged to use or publish league tables. They can use some weighted system if they like. What the issue is the government banning newspapers and others publishing tables. Its just an effort to prevent comparisons it doesn’t like and an attack on free speech.
  
  Reply
- John Greenfield says:
  
  12:06pm | 03/07/09
  
  The government is under no obligation to publish tables of any sort, BUT is absolutely obliged to make public ALL data it has. It is up to we, The People, to then decide if and how we wish to aggreggate parts of that data.
  
  When the Charter of Human Rights is passed, we will all be able to make this whole AEU/Education bureacracy collusion against thye citizenry a thing of the past.
  
  Reply
- Charlie says:
  
  04:34am | 04/07/09
  
  For gods sake why doesn’t this website put the author’s affiliations on the same page as the article. It’s ridiculous that the casual reader has to click through to another page to discover taht the author is a sitting member of the Nationals.
  
  Reply
- Ben says:
  
  08:30am | 04/07/09
  
  As a teacher in training, I can tell you that the opposition that teachers have to the publication of league tables has nothing to do with its effect on teachers. League tables can only serve to further reduce the self esteem of the most disadvantaged students and also reduce their employment prospects.
  Any arguments about funding or accountability are pointless, the government already has all the information and can rank the schools themselves.
  League tables simply mirror socio-economic status. They are not an indicator of the performance of the teachers and the school. The best way to measure teacher performance is by making assessments of their knowledge and ability, usually through an examination of their lesson preparation and sometimes by actually watching them teach.
  I’m deeply saddened by the selfish attitude of some of these comments, declaring that the public have a “right” to know what is actually very personal information about children.
  It is the children who are hurt by the publishing of league tables.
  
  Reply

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Enough with all the meat eating all ready

Edward James says:

Reducing the consumption of meat and sea food by 15%. What about the world population is it not increasing each year by the same or greater percentage? Those extra people are not all vegatarian they are eating meat and fish too. There is something strange about the maths message in your story. Our world… [read more]

From: The national policy agenda which nobody voted for

thatmosis says:

This whole process has gone from the sublime to the ridiculous. Here we have a Nation held captive by independants and a so called independant party called the Greens, aka the Raving Looney Party, whilst money is being wasted daily on public servants doing their usual thing, nothing but with bells on.… [read more]