Page 1880 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 22 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
in the ACT has led to its process of continuous assessment being taken up by a number of private schools in the ACT. So it is clear that because a lot of young people do vote with their feet and leave the private system to enter the public system at college level, it has been one of the things that private schools can see that they need to retain if they wish to retain students.
For some of us, of course, a winner-take-all exam at the end of year 12 is easier. Some people are good at cramming information and respond well to that sort of pressure. They will have an easier time and get better opportunities at the end. External exams favour students who can remember dates and names, at least for the few hours required of the exam, but they disadvantage those with a more discursive approach. But in the context of developing life skills, and, for that matter, university skills, the ongoing work habits of continuous assessment will be a great advantage. We know that students who have come from a continuous assessment system are likely—and certainly from our college system at the same time—to be able to make the transition to universities more smoothly and often do better than people from a more rigid, often externally examined, system.
But there is scope inside our colleges for more structure and support. That is why I agree with Mrs Dunne, that we should be fully implementing all the recommendations of the review. What has happened to teachers at colleges may well have eroded our advantage, and that should be monitored very carefully, because teachers are the strength of a school. We also need to take seriously the concerns about our UAI system of calculation. Just because one person says it does not work—backed up, of course, by lots and lots of evidence—it is really wrong of the government to dismiss the critic and the critic’s criticisms at the same time.
It is important that we make a stand for retaining the kind of education that delivers the outcomes that we want. We know that our college system does that. However, it should not be set in resin. It should be allowed to develop. We should be constantly reviewing. If we are going to go to the trouble of reviewing a system, we should take notice of the recommendations of that review. So if we put the amendment and the motion together, we might have a way forward. It is not enough just to congratulate ourselves on having a good system. It is true, we may have to fight for the right to retain continuous assessment—especially if the federal government gets returned after the next election, when I think things will come down harder—but, at the same time, we should not just be happily boasting about where we are.
MR BARR (Molonglo—Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Planning, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation, Minister for Industrial Relations) (5.00): I indicate that the government will not be supporting Mrs Dunne’s amendment. However, I encourage her to withdraw the amendment and move it as a substantive motion in next week’s private members’ business. I agree it is an issue worth debating and worth the Assembly’s time. So I hope she will do that. If she will not, we will defeat the amendment today. I hope she brings it forward for debate next week.
First, I put my clear position on this issue. The ACT government supports the system of continuous assessment in our senior secondary colleges. I thank Ms MacDonald for bringing forward this motion. It is timely that we have this debate, and it is important that people put their positions clearly for the people of the ACT so everyone knows
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .