It’s our professional learning

Professional learning funds shouldn't be spent on compliance training, writes DAVID FERGUSON.

It is two years since the Department of Education and Training (DET) released the Professional Learning Policy for Schools and Using and reporting on Teacher Professional Learning Funds Guidelines for Schools. While the policy and teacher guidelines reflect some improvement on previous practices, members continue to raise concerns. These concerns include potential breaches of the policy and guidelines, particularly around the processes in place for the allocation and use of professional learning funds and meeting time. Some of the questionable practices relate to school based management while others arise from impositions made on schools by DET senior officers. While the Department's policy should not be confused with Federation's policy on professional learning, it is useful to revisit the Department's policy to assist members to stand up for proper process in decision-making around their own professional learning. Two significant areas of concern are outlined below.

Professional learning teams

On release of the professional learning policy, the accompanying DET memorandum (February 27, 2004) said: "Each school will establish a professional learning team which will determine the allocation of funds to best meet staff needs in support of student learning." A principal or executive teacher on their own cannot constitute a team. Neither is it appropriate for the professional learning team to consist of a small number of self-appointed members. The policy says: "Staff membership on the professional learning team should be representative and determined according to agreed practice within the school."

So staff must be represented in an "agreed" way on the professional learning committee and the decisions of the committee must reflect the views of the staff being represented. This includes decisions about staff development days and whole school priorities, not just the distribution of professional learning funds.

Professional learning priorities

The guidelines for teachers state that a "collaborative" planning process is required "taking account of professional learning needs identified by teachers, school self-evaluation data, and school and departmental priorities". Note that the Department's priorities are but one item in this list. In addition, the requirement for a "plan" means that schools should not be asked to make significant changes to their planned priorities as drawn up using the collaborative and representative processes outlined in the policy and guidelines.

Student reports

Federation has received disturbing reports arising from 'briefings' on the proposed new student reports. In the first instances, the attendance at these briefings by school executive seems to be 'expected' (read demanded) by the Department and yet schools are given no funding for release. Instead, the school's professional learning funds are pointed to with the assumption that they are always available to meet the latest DET edict. In this context it is even more important that members attending these briefings exercise their professional responsibility to raise all of their concerns about the proposed student reports, as advised by Federation.

Of equal concern to teachers is that some executive are returning to school with the message that teachers' professional learning meeting time and budget must now be given over to various activities associated with the introduction of the new reports. Members will be well aware of the objections of Federation to these new reports, with many schools having sent their objections to the Minister. Teachers oppose the content of the reports (mandating A-E in years 1 to 10 has no educational rationale) and the rushed timeline for implementation (which should be optional until 2007).

In actively opposing the rushed introduction and flawed requirements of these student reports, teachers can draw on the Department's own professional learning guidelines and policy. Decisions about whether or not to spend time and money on activities such as consistency of teacher judgement must be made on educational grounds, in the interest of students and the needs of teachers.

Action in schools

Teachers are professionals, not technicians. Teachers should refuse to spend their own time and school funds on activities that amount to compliance training and instead insist that professional learning is collaboratively planned and collegially implemented. Not only is this Federation policy and advice -- it is consistent with the Department's own policy and guidelines on teacher professional learning.

David Ferguson is a City Organiser

.

For further information

April 2006 contents