"The Discussion Paper identifies three fronts on which the Victorian Government will take action over the next ten years. As a general observation, each of these areas for action is important. The diagnosis of areas requiring action is accurate. However, the prescription is weak in some areas and needs to be strengthened.
”the Paper itself is silent about this complex history and how the Paper represents a new departure from what has gone before. For this reason, there is a danger that some of the suggested actions may repeat the mistakes
of the past.
The Paper is also surprisingly silent on the current national context. There is little mention of the COAG National Partnership on Teacher Quality, even though this program has funded several, if not most, of the projects listed as “What Victoria has been doing”.
Overall, the Discussion Paper needs a stronger vision of what it means to be a profession. This is reflected in the fact that it main sources of advice appear to be to management consultants and economists. Although the Paper is about new directions for the teaching profession, teachers’ own professional associations do not appear to have had any input to the Paper."
Your new post is loading...
Ingvarson's personal response to this discussion paper is well-presented, well-argued and well-referenced - spot on. Thank goodness for this voice for the teaching profession.