Science Education News (SEN) Journal 2017 Volume 66 Number 4 December 2017 | Page 34

ARTICLES
Australia’s Education Asset (continued)
to encourage participation, and the combination of young,
university-educated teachers available in all subjects, teaching
both Australian children and a number of overseas students who
were well aware of their parents’ sacrifice, developed a competitive
hierarchy that soon included a number of ‘selective’ government
schools. (Several of these actually existed beforehand, but were
officially denied until the competition heated up, and some State
Governments decided it was essential to compete to avoid
government schools becoming non-competitive with the top
private colleges.) However, graduates demanded higher salaries than non-
graduates at the same level of experience. MPs in both Federal
and State spheres looked at the soaring costs of educating their
students with more and more jaundiced eyes. Every claim for
salary increases was met with opposition and delay. Demands
were made for “improved productivity” in the teaching profession,
just as for workers in almost every other industry (apart from
politicians). Like so many of my colleagues, I accepted the pay
rise, realising that the days of increasing class sizes were almost
over, and the attempts to add to the number of classes taught
per week had been defeated by bitter strike action in 1970 and
1971. It seems very different now! Almost all schools have ‘Open
Days/Nights’, a larger number of parent-teacher events; the
recess and lunchtime playground duties have not changed, but
in many cases the recess and lunch breaks have been reduced.
However, what most oppresses modern teachers, old and new,
is the amount of paperwork – records, results, absentees, home
groups, communication with Year Heads, Subject Heads, etc.,
along with an increased amount of testing, recording and reports.
As most teachers sigh, “We are testing so much, so