The teacher is my ‘guide’: devil for school performance is fads

It should not surprise stronger performing Asianeducation systems never adopt fads like child-centred learning.

The OECD’s Directorate for Education head Andreas Schleicher makes some good points when detailing what Australia can learn from stronger performing education systems like Singapore.

It’s true that what characterises stronger performing systems as measured by international tests cannot be simply transplanted from one system to another as culture and context often vary significantly.

Singapore’s population at approximately 5.7 million is far less than our population and the area covered by the city state is tiny compared to Australia. As a result, Singapore has a unitary education system covering a small number of schools in the one jurisdiction.

Unlike Australia where streaming has long since disappeared and which the OECD is opposed to, Singapore also has high-risk examinations. At the end of primary school, for example, children are channelled into either express, normal (academic) or normal (technical) secondary school courses.

Students in top performing Asian education systems such as Singapore are motivated by a Confucian work ethic that stresses meritocracy, respect for learning and the belief with hard work that success is possible. Again, impossible to simply transplant to our classrooms where all must have prizes and where nobody fails.

Notwithstanding such differences Schleicher is also right to argue it is possible to identify particular characteristics that can be adopted from one system to another in order to improve performance.

Such characteristics include: governments and parents valuing and prioritising education, high quality early childhood education, stressing local autonomy rather that imposing bureaucratic control and accountability and setting high expectations.

Schleicher is wrong, though, when he implies that teacher quality is one of the most significant factors determining educational outcomes. As noted by the Finnish expert Sasi Sahberg, even though Finland is a top performer internationally, half of prospective teachers are “academically average”.

While it might be counterintuitive it’s also the case that research proves that teachers do not rate highly when analysing what determines student performance. An American researcher, Douglas K Detterman, based on a number of studies over 50 years concludes “Teachers are responsible for a small variance in students’ educational outcomes”.

Detterman puts the figure at approximately 8 per cent, with the impact of schools at about 10 per cent and argues that the most significant factor influencing performance is student’s “cognitive ability or intelligence”.

When explaining why some students outperform others Detterman suggests that the “characteristics of students will account for most of the variance and general cognitive ability will account for a substantial proportion of that”.

Gary Marks from the Australian Catholic University makes the same point based on a number of overseas studies when he equates “the bulk of the variation in student achievement to inheritable cognitive ability”.

No matter how much the Australian Education Union and the Gonski school funding report argue that all students are capable of success with extra funding and more teachers, the stark reality is that not all students have the same cognitive ability.

To admit that teachers and schools are not as influential as students’ cognitive ability does not mean that nothing can be done to improve results.

Research associated with cognitive psychology shows that explicit teaching and memorisation are very important. Students, before they can be creative and independent learners, need to be able to automatically recall essential knowledge and skills.

Classrooms also need to be disciplined where teachers are in control instead of being “facilitators” and “guides by the side”. It should not surprise that stronger performing Asian education systems never adopted fads like child-centred learning, whole language, fuzzy maths and open classrooms.

Dr Kevin Donnelly is a Senior Research Fellow at the Australian Catholic University