Duy Nguyen (11531436) Assessment Task 1

a) What are the fundamental aims of teaching in secondary schools? What influences the development of these aims? In your answer, you may refer to: government policy, school systems, school based policies and other research The basic premise of education in schools is enabling and facilitating learning (Vinson, 2002). Schools play a vital role in promoting the intellectual, physical, social, emotional, moral, spiritual and aesthetic development and well-being of young Australians (Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs, 2008, p. 4). In the middle years, secondary schools enhance the development of the students where there is a high risk of disengagement. As students reach their senior years, the focus is on preparation for the future and the transition to further education, training or employment (Connell, 1985; Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs, 2008; Wiggins & McTighe, 2008). Through regulation and funding of school education, the government is able to proactively influence the aims of teaching in Australia (Harrington, 2011). It must be noted that government policy and reforms are based on changing societal expectations. As society changes, the aims of teaching will also change. For instance, the Gonski Review was set up to examine the way education is funded based on the demands on the Government to provide more transparency on the complex division of funding of education in Australia. Constitutionally, education is been the responsibility of state and territory governments. However, there is increased focus on national education priorities. The Melbourne Declaration, for example, was signed by all Australian Education Ministers and defines national priorities for education in Australia. This has been reaffirmed in the National Education Reform Agreement which will operate from 1 January 2014. The agreement is based on the provision of school funding provided to meet national educational outcomes for all young Australians. Further, performance indicators are used to assess performance against these outcomes.

Page 1 of 7

Duy Nguyen (11531436) Assessment Task 1

It is evident that the philosophy of what gets measured gets done is being applied to educators (Dowling, 2007, p. 1). There are various means employed through government policy to increase accountability of teaching. This includes the establishment of a national curriculum and standardised testing (Dowling, 2007). A curriculum is a published guide of what is taught and learned and often mandates the plan to the learning that takes place in the classroom (Tolhurst, 2013). Standardised testing is one means of ensuring that the national educational benchmarks are being met. It is argued that the emphasis of learning outcomes via testing is not only shapes what educators do but it also changes who they are (Ball 2003 as cited by Meadmore, 2004, p. 27). Standardised testing is often considered high stakes and is demonstrated to dominate teaching practice and thus the aims of teaching (Meadmore, 2004). Centralised testing is a widely researched and documented area with many studies purporting impacts to include the shifting the focus of broad education of students to outcomes and performance on the test and teaching to the test (Klenowski & Wyatt-Smith, 2011; Lingard, 2010; Meadmore, 2004; OKeefe, 2011; Polesel, Dulfer, & Turnbull, 2012; Thompson & Cook, 2012). Although the curriculum and centralised testing is mandated at the governmental level, there is still autonomy of school systems and school based policies to structure the learning environment. The concept of an enacted curriculum enables schools and teachers to interpret the curriculum document and develop lessons and activities based on it (Tolhurst, 2013). Vinson (2002) provides examples of educational innovations employed by schools such as unitised vertical curriculum to enable students to choose the sequencing of their units of study. Non-intellectual aims of teaching can be influenced through school based policies such as encouragement of healthy eating and physical activity to combat obesity (Booth & Samdal, 1997; Hesketh, Waters, Green, Salmon, & Williams, 2005; Mkoma & Flisher, 2004).

Page 2 of 7

Duy Nguyen (11531436) Assessment Task 1

b) What is pedagogy? Discuss this with reference to an example from your experience as a student. Pedagogy broadly refers to practices of teaching and learning (Marsh, 2010). According to Teaching Australia (2008 as cited by Marsh, 2010) pedagogy can be defined as the art and science of educating children, the strategies for using teacher professional knowledge, skills and abilities in order to foster good learning outcomes (p.195). Shulman (1980, as cited in Marsh, 2010) argued that pedagogical content knowledge consists of three elements; subject matter knowledge, pedagogical knowledge (how to transfer knowledge to others) and knowledge of content (needs on individual learners and the school environment). There is a large body of literature and debate on the pedagogy that a teacher adopts in the classroom and the effectiveness of different teaching and learning styles (Hickman, 2011; Houston, Osborne, & Toman, 2007; Kauchak, 2012). Individual teachers may have similar dedication to their profession and motivation to help students yet have different approaches to teaching or pedagogy (Connell, 1985). Two broad different teaching styles that can be employed is teaching the class and teaching the individual. As a student, these individual different styles of teaching were evident when comparing experiences between year 9 science and year 10 Science with two different teachers. In Year 9 Science, the teacher had a preference to teach the class and focus on ensuring that students had a strong grounding in the curriculum and materials required for the School Certificate. There were regular pop-quizzes to ensure that students were consistently revising material. However, in Year 10 science, a different teaching style was encountered. The teacher would often engage students with hands-on learning. On a regular basis, the teacher would attempt to find interesting science experiments such as creating a small rocket using a PET bottle. The teacher also was friendly with the students and was at times, viewed as a friend in deciding career options.

Page 3 of 7

Duy Nguyen (11531436) Assessment Task 1

Classroom management and conflict is a part of pedagogy (Edwards, 2004). Teachers are expected to deal with managing and reacting appropriately to large number of students, participating in daily routines and special events and carrying out mundane tasks (Edwards, 2004, p. 300). As classrooms are dynamic, the teacher has a responsibility for discipline of students and ensuring minimal disruption to the class. It is contended by Edwards (2004) that as students are unable to choose their educational program, they may assert their right to control it. An example of such incident was evident in year 9 commerce where a student used profanities towards a teacher. The student was sent to the subject coordinator to be dealt with where he state he felt he was unfairly treated by the teacher and argued that the profanity merely refers to a female dog. The teacher allowed the student to ask the class if they agreed with him at which point, even his friends did not support him. As the student was given the opportunity some control over the situation, he did not continue to behave in that manner towards the teacher when he found his actions were not supported by his peers.

Page 4 of 7

Duy Nguyen (11531436) Assessment Task 1

References Booth, M. L., & Samdal, O. (1997). Healthpromoting schools in Australia: models and measurement. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 21(4), 365 370. doi:10.1111/j.1467-842X.1997.tb01716.x Connell, R. W. (1985). Sheila Goffman & Margaret Blackall. In Teachers work (pp. 13 26). Dowling, A. (2007). Australias school funding system. Policy Analysis and Program Evaluation, 1. Edwards, C. H. (2004). Classroom discipline & management: an Australasian perspective. Developing your own classroom organisation skills, ch. 12, pp. 298-326, 2004. Harrington, M. (2011). Australian Government Funding for Schools Explained. Canberra: Parliament of Australia. Hesketh, K., Waters, E., Green, J., Salmon, L., & Williams, J. (2005). Healthy eating, activity and obesity prevention: a qualitative study of parent and child perceptions in Australia. Health promotion international, 20(1), 1926. Hickman, R. D. (Richard D. (2011). The art and craft of pedagogy: portraits of effective teachers / Richard Hickman. Houston, M. (Muir), Osborne, M., & Toman, N. (Eds.). (2007). The pedagogy of lifelong learning: understanding effective teaching and learning in diverse contexts / edited by Mike Osborne, Muir Houston and Nuala Toman. Kauchak, D. P. (2012). Learning and teaching: research-based methods / Don Kauchak, Paul Eggen.
Page 5 of 7

Duy Nguyen (11531436) Assessment Task 1

Klenowski, V., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2011). The impact of high stakes testing: the Australian story. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 19(1), 6579. doi:10.1080/0969594X.2011.592972 Lingard, B. (2010). Policy borrowing, policy learning: testing times in Australian schooling. Critical Studies in Education, 51(2), 129147. doi:10.1080/17508481003731026 Marsh, C. J. author. (2010). Becoming a teacher: knowledge, skills and issues / Colin Marsh. Meadmore, D. (2004). New questions for contemporary teachers: taking a socio-cultural approach to education. The rise and rise of testing: how does this shape identity?, ch. 3, pp. 25-37, 2004. Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs. (2008). Melbourne declaration on education goals for young Australians. Melbourne. Mkoma, W., & Flisher, A. J. (2004). Evaluations of health promoting schools: a review of nine studies. Health promotion international, 19(3), 357368. OKeefe, D. (2011). NAPLAN nightmares. Education Review (www. educationreview. com. au). Polesel, J., Dulfer, N., & Turnbull, M. (2012). The Experience of Education: The impacts of high stakes testing on school students and their families. Literature Review prepared for the Whitlam Institute, Melbourne Graduate School of Education, and the Foundation for Young Australians. Available online at: http://www. whitlam.

Page 6 of 7

Duy Nguyen (11531436) Assessment Task 1

org/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/276191/High_Stakes_Testing_Literature_Review. pdf (accessed 20 september 2012). Thompson, G., & Cook, I. (2012). Manipulating the data: teaching and NAPLAN in the control society. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 114. doi:10.1080/01596306.2012.739472 Tolhurst, C. (2013, March 25). States, teachers lock horns over curriculum. The Age. Retrieved from http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/states-teachers-lockhorns-over-curriculum-20130323-2gm29.html#ixzz2a64XfcWD Vinson, T. (Tony). (2002). Inquiry into the provision of public education in NSW: report of the Vinson inquiry: Curriculum and pedagogy, ch. 2, pp. 71-105. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2008). Put understanding first. Educational Leadership, 65(8), 36.

Page 7 of 7