Volume 6 Issue 2

For the sake of this discussion, it is suggested

that there exists a paradox within the teaching

profession: one found in most schools. On one

hand educators know and believe that students

need role models and that almost every aspect

of teaching, even (or especially) including

discipline—is all about relationships. Yet on

the other hand we know that our school pays

us to teach—we’re not there to be a friend. The

teacher’s job is to teach and the student’s job

is to learn. Teachers acknowledge a duty of

pastoral care and that every student should

have a trusted teacher to speak to in time of

need. However, they don’t have time to chat with

students and if something is wrong, the preferred

option is to send them to the chaplain or the

counsellor. On one hand teaching is relational,

pastoral—some may even see teaching as a

ministry. Yet on the other hand, school is about

classroom management, teaching and learning,

timetables and assessment. Both concepts are

correct. Both are a descriptors of a good teacher,

yet one tends to be seen as an ideal and the

other as functional reality.

The brain is extremely complex. The brain has

the amazing ability to reshape and reorganise

its neural networks, depending on increased or

decreased use, making it malleable or ‘plastic’.

This plasticity allows for incredible changes to

take place, which were once thought impossible.

This article explores current research in this

area and offers brain compatible strategies

that teachers can employ in the classroom to

make learning more efficient, to raise student

achievement, and to facilitate a healthy learning

environment.

This case study responds to the debate over

‘toxic teachers’, tertiary entry ranking and

access to university. Implications for federal

and state policy are proposed. For 22 years

Avondale College of Higher Education has been

operating a tertiary pathway course designed

to widen access to higher education for nontraditional

applicants. The course, now known

as the Diploma of General Studies [DGS], has

been accredited as a 2-year higher education

sector diploma since 1995. Thus far, just over

1000 students have spent at least one semester

in the diploma. Not one has opted to complete

the diploma; instead students use it as a

pathway to a higher award, mostly Avondale

bachelor degrees in education, nursing, arts,

theology, business and occasionally science.

To date, 300 former pathway students have

completed an Avondale degree, and a further

250 are currently enrolled. DGS students

commence with Year 12 ranks (UAI, ENTER,

TER, now ATAR) ranging from 30 or less to

around 60; however, many have no rank. For

those who complete an Avondale degree, there

is no correlation between rank and average

college grade. Those who engage with the

academic program do well, regardless of their

entry rank; and those who fail to engage do

poorly, regardless of their entry rank. A low

Year 12 rank does not tell an applicant’s whole

story. A semester in the DGS pathway course

can open a new world of academic opportunity.

Some DGS students have gone on to complete

post-graduate study. Teachers can confidently

advise Year 12 students with potential, but

low tertiary ranking, to consider the option of

alternative pathways to tertiary studies as these

can provide a positive opportunity to achieve

their aspirations.

The educational system in Australia today is

radically different from the school systems of

the past. As Mark Porter (2010), Chairman of

the Independent schools Council of Australia

writes:

The expanding role of the federal government in

school education and the sustained growth of the

independent sector are major developments which

have influenced the nature of schooling in this

country. (p. 2)

The rise of the independent sector has given

parents choice when it comes to selecting a

school for their children. This increase in choice

has been accompanied by a change of focus in

Australian education. There has been a move in

two major policy directions, marketisation and

school performance. Both of these policies can

be seen through a lens of competition, choice,

the increasing emphasis on accountability, value

adding to the curriculum through the addition

of extra curricular activities, and the move to

make the consumers of education bear the costs

(English, 2009).

Principalship in the twenty-first century is complex and diverse. A principal is responsible across the domains of educational leadership, curriculum development, teaching and learning theory and classroom practice, spirituality / values education, student welfare and discipline, including reporting to agencies, school finances and budget, property management, risk mitigation, litigation management, staff welfare and industrial relations, marketing, selection and dismissal of staff and students, strategic planning and vision, outdoor education, and depending, on the governance of the school, reporting to statutory authorities, School Council, Church or denominational hierarchy.

Parents’ lives today are very busy and many

complain about being time-poor. Society seems

to be addicted to busyness, with people out of

breath trying to catch up and keep up. Busyness

even seems to be a symbol of success, but what

is the price and who pays it?

The placement of pre-service teachers in

schools to integrate theoretical learning with

practical experience is an integral component

of many tertiary education courses. Issues with

both the reliability and validity of assessment

grades in a workplace environment suggest

a call to strengthen the level of academic

rigour of these placements. In this study,

professional development lecturers in one

education program [Avondale College of Higher

Education, NSW] constructed a standardsbased

grading rubric designed to assist mentor

teachers assess the performance of pre-service

teachers. After implementation of the rubric

for two Professional Experience sessions,

mentor teachers were surveyed to assess the

effectiveness and usefulness of the grading

rubric. Results from quantitative and qualitative

data found the grading rubric to be a vital tool in

the assessment process. Benefits of the grading

rubric included accuracy and consistency of

grading, ability to identify specific areas of

desired development and facilitation of mentor

to pre-service teacher feedback. This research

asserts that the assessment grading rubric was

a useful tool for all three parties concerned: the

course supervisor, the mentor teacher and the

pre-service teacher.