Changes to the Post Compulsory Curriculum in Western Australia

by Education and Health Standing Committee [29 June 2006]

A Synopsis of Key Points

This majority report represents the views of the three Labor members of the committee [Mrs Guise, Mr Hyde and Mr Whitely] and its Labor chairman [Mr Stephens].

The three non-government members [Dr Constable, Dr Hames and Mr Waldron] produced a Minority Report that class for the delay of OBE in Years 11 and 12.

Terms of Reference:

That the Committee examine, report and make recommendations on the proposed changes to the Years 11 and 12 curriculum. The Committee will pay particular attention to:

1. The merit and basis of the proposed changes;
2. The readiness of the education system for the proposed changes;
3. The financial implications of the proposed changes;
4. The effect of extending to upper secondary education the outcomes-based curriculum, assessment and reporting;
5. The effect of the amalgamation of TEE and non-TEE subjects and assessment; and
6. Any related matters that the Committee considers necessary to investigate.

The Committee will report its findings to the Legislative Assembly by 30 June 2006.

From Chairman's Foreword

Much of the public debate has concentrated on the merits or otherwise of ‘OBE’. The Committee has rejected the notion that the change process was inevitably an ‘either/or’ and we have welcomed the integration of aspects of the original proposal and the existing system into what the Department of Education and Training and the Curriculum Council refer to as ‘Outcomes and Standards Education’ - OSE.

Through an imperfect process of public debate, disagreement, negotiation, understanding and compromise a better system for Year 11 and 12 education has emerged. It contains much that is familiar and represents, amongst the changes, significant continuity - it is now truly
‘evolutionary’, rather than ‘revolutionary’.

The application of both outcomes and standards through the new Courses of Study in Years 11 and 12 provides greater flexibility and more pathways beyond school to further education, training and employment opportunities.

This process of change was embarked upon to secure learning through good teaching. OSE aims at producing a focus on what is being taught AND what a student actually learns. It has been introduced to make school more creative, inspiring, relevant and meaningful for students.

Spelling, punctuation, grammar, accurate calculations, good reasoning and reading skills will be as important as they have always been in school.

There is no move to ‘dumb-down’ content and no shift from the intent to inspire achievement and give students the best education they can get.

This Outcomes and Standards approach benefits students by providing:

• consistent standards - across all courses;
• options for teachers to use marks, or the course standards, in making their assessments;
• more control over learning - students learn to think for themselves;
• an array of educational choices - catering to the needs of all students;
• greater employability skills - the development of critical thinking skills, as well as the opportunity to develop skills in specialist areas that provide a direct pathway to tertiary courses, training or the workforce;
• recognition of all student learning - in and out of school; and
• course content - new courses to build on content of current subjects.

Included amongst the key differences to the former system are:

• students will know what they need to do to achieve higher standards;
• courses are designed to be more relevant and challenging;
• all learning will be valued - both in and out of school;
• the new system provides multiple pathways for all students;
• every new course can now lead to either university, TAFEWA, apprenticeships, traineeships or employment; and
• introduction of new courses means students can now study areas they intend to pursue after school (eg. aviation, media, psychology, health and physical education etc).

[from the 5 page Executive Summary]

There is an ongoing debate within the educational community regarding the relative merits of OBE. This is not a debate that the Committee can resolve; it is both philosophical and historical, and it is unlikely that any arguments put forward by the Committee will change the views of either OBE proponents or its detractors. This does not mean that the debate is not an important one, nor does it imply that many of the concerns of those who oppose OBE are not valid. However, in the Committee’s view the label used to describe these changes is very much less important to Western Australian students than the development of a successful education system...

The Committee found there were serious issues affecting the existing TEE/VET/WSA system which required substantial reform. With the lowest retention rate of upper school students in Australia it was evident that there were problems with the existing curriculum for Years 11 and
12. These problems were likely to become more acute with changes to the school leaving age, requiring young people to remain at school longer.

The Committee believes that there was merit in some aspects of the original proposal, including its capacity to give those students who are bound for university the breadth of subject choice that is available in other States and to provide opportunities for more students to gain a TER. Currently only 37.3 per cent of WA students obtain a TER; almost half the rate in other states.

However, the Committee also found that there was a lack of refinement in the original ["pure OBE'] proposal which hindered its capacity to accommodate consistency and comparability of student results, when this is seen as integral to assessing students’ capacity to successfully take on more academic pathways. Fears of substantially increased workloads for teachers as a result of the new curriculum were also realised with the implementation of the four Phase I Courses of Study in 2005 and 2006. Creating further difficulties, the documentation prepared by the Curriculum Council for the Courses of Study was unnecessarily longwinded and full of jargon that confused and frustrated students, parents and even competent and experienced teachers.

Recent adjustments have been made in response to the concerns raised about the original proposal. Adjustments announced by the Curriculum Council on 10 May 2006 focussed on changes to the proposed assessment processes and enabled teachers to use numerical marks rather than outcome levels to assess student performance, and involved the external examination being used to moderate the school numerical scores for university entrance purposes. These adjustments, however, were insufficient to ensure widespread acceptance amongst the Education community and particularly teachers tasked with the implementation of the proposed Courses of Study.

As a result consultations occurred between the Premier, the Minister for Education, the Director General of the Department of Education and Training, the Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Curriculum Council, the Director of Catholic Education Office of WA, the Executive Director of the Association of Independent Schools WA, the President of the State School Teachers’ Union WA and the Secretary of the Independent Education Union. These consultations led to further modifications in regard to the new Courses of Study and professional support, and have enjoyed more widespread support.

The Committee believes that the modifications to the new courses offer clarity and protect the validity of assessments. With undertakings that ‘Teachers will be able to use their existing teaching programs or lesson plans for those new courses that have been derived from existing
TEE subjects’ and that all syllabi will be in the format of the existing TEE syllabus for each course, with specific subject content in the language of the discipline, these modifications should also significantly reduce the demands on teachers. Importantly too, the process of moderation and the introduction of a General Aptitude Test (GAT) under the new curriculum should enable students who perform with equivalent levels of competence to achieve the same TER. This will encourage students to choose Courses of Study for which they have an aptitude and interest rather than choosing courses because they are perceived to be relatively less demanding.

[The SELL-OUT] The Committee accepts evidence from both the Department of Education and Training and the Curriculum Council that a delay in implementation would not only result in the continuation of the disadvantages inherent to the TEE/VET/WSA curriculum but would disrupt school and students who have already acted on the implementation of Phase II Courses of Study for 2007. Recent adjustments should mean that:

• most new Courses of Study have retained the majority of the material of existing
  subjects;
• students will not be tested on any new content in Courses of Study during the
  transition period in 2007; and
• increased support will be available for teachers.

In light of these adjustments, the Committee recommends that the current timetable for the implementation of the proposed new Courses of Study for Years 11 and 12 should continue. The Committee also recommends that these be closely monitored and adjustments made before the implementation of Phase III in 2008, if necessary...

The development of the original proposal for curriculum change was motivated by the desire for there to be a single system with the capacity to cater for diverse needs yet allow students the flexibility to move across academic and vocational pathways. Whilst acknowledging the need for change and accepting there was merit in aspects of the original proposal, the Committee believes the original proposal was significantly flawed. Indeed had the concerns about assessment, the lack of clear unit syllabi, teacher workloads and the values and ethics components of some courses, not been addressed, the Committee would have called for a delay in the implementation of Phase II.

However, the Committee welcomes the agreed modifications that address these issues and has concluded that the timetable for implementation of the new curriculum should continue. Much of the public debate surrounding the new curriculum has concentrated on the merits or otherwise of OBE. The Committee rejects the notion that it is ‘either/or’ and welcomes the integration of aspects of the original proposal and the existing system. The Committee believes these adjustments, backed up with a valid scaling and moderation process, have the capacity to deliver a refined system that incorporates the best features of the current system and OBE - a system now referred to as ‘Outcomes and Standards Education’.

The majority report makes 25 "Findings" and 8 "Recommendations"

Finding 3:

The Committee considers that the shift to Courses of Study does not lead to the ‘dumbing down’ of subjects. With different units available in each Course of Study, based on levels of complexity, the Committee expects that it will be easier for students to work at their appropriate level than they can in the current system.

Finding 5:

The Committee shares the view that the original proposal would have involved a permanent increased workload for teachers, with the assessment processes being more time consuming than current processes. The first four Year 11 courses introduced in 2005 and 2006 (Aviation, Engineering Studied (sic), English, and Media Production and Analysis) resulted in an increased workload for teachers, especially in the area of assessment.

Finding 6:

The Committee considers that the standard of communication during the development and implementation stages of the changes to the Years 11 and 12 curriculum has been somewhat haphazard and has contributed significantly to the current level of anxiety among teachers.

Finding 7:

In the Committee’s view, the most significant cause of anxiety and stress amongst teachers and the community has not been the underlying principles of the changes, but their implementation.

Finding 8:

The Committee accepts there was a need to change the curriculum for Years 11 and 12. The Committee also believes that there was merit in some aspects of the original proposal, including its capacity to recognise that the vast majority of subjects should be valid for entrance to university, particularly when the study of those subjects is available at university. However, the Committee also finds that the original proposal for changes to Year 11 and 12 subjects was significantly flawed. In particular the lack of refinement of the original proposal hindered its capacity to meet the needs of students pursuing different educational pathways.

Finding 9:

In order to meet teachers’ concerns, there have been significant adjustments to the proposed reform of the curriculum for Years 11 and 12. These include:

• There will be a syllabus for each course.
• The existing TEE [Tertiary Entrance Examination] syllabus format will be used for all new courses. Course specific refinements will be made.
• Teachers will be able to use their existing teaching programs or lesson plans for those new courses that have been derived from existing TEE subjects.
• Some adjustments will be made to content to allow for the semester unit structure and to ensure that content is updated.
• No new content will be assessed in the examination for the first cohort of Year 11 and Year 12 students for those courses replacing TEE subjects.
• Course design will be modified, where necessary, to suit specific course disciplines.
• Language used in each course syllabus will be discipline specific.
• Content will be made more explicit and clear for teachers.
• The nature and weighting of outcomes will be clarified and adjusted on a course by course basis.
• Course standards will be refined to guarantee clarity of student progression.
• Schools will submit a mark out of 100 for a unit and provide an indicative judgement of a level and band for the unit.
• Teachers will not be required to submit assessment evidence plans; however they will still be required to have evidence of their students’ achievements during school moderation visits as they do now.
• Teachers will be provided with specific exemplars of assessment items, work samples and a template program for each new course, which will set out the teaching program for the course content, together with appropriate assessment items.
• Teachers may choose to adapt the template program as they see fit.
• Modifications to course design, content, assessment and course standards will be explained and exemplified at Day 4 Professional Development (PD) sessions.

[Note: These "Compromises" are NOT presented as "temporary measures" for 2007 only, or for 2007-08 only. If they are permanent features of the implementation, they represent a major victory.]

Finding 10

In the opinion of the Committee the outcome levels outlined in the Courses of Study of the original proposal were vague and imprecise. The Committee considered the number of levels and bands of performance within a level in the original proposal were inadequate for the
purpose of fine-grained ranking inherent in establishing a Tertiary Entrance Rank (TER). The Committee welcomes the modification that as well as providing an indicative judgement of a level and band, teachers are obliged to provide a unit score out of 100.

Finding 11

With the retention of plain English, content-specific subject syllabi, students and teachers will have a clear guide to what material is assessable and how it will be assessed.

Finding 12

The Committee welcomes the guarantee that no new content will be assessed in the examination for the first cohort of Year 11 and 12 students for those courses replacing Tertiary Entrance Examination (TEE) subjects. The Committee believes this will allow time to ensure that if any values or ethics components of the physical sciences and other subjects are introduced they are relevant and have an appropriate weighting.

Finding 18

It has been difficult to provide teachers with definitive professional development while the new curriculum was changing and evolving. Although this has allowed the development of the new curriculum to be responsive to teachers’ needs and concerns, it has not provided them with
timely answers to their questions about the new curriculum. The sense of uncertainty about teachers’ capacity to implement the new curriculum without detriment to students was aggravated by the late scheduling of professional development days relative to the implementation of new Courses of Study.

Recommendation 2

The Committee recommends that the State Government fund the Curriculum Council, to work in partnership with the government and non-government school sectors, to put in place a major communication program with the teachers and their school communities aimed at securing an understanding of the nature, direction and detail of the new Years 11 and 12 curriculum.

Recommendation 4

The Committee recommends that there be investment in the development and distribution of comprehensive and interactive DVDs to all teachers in Western Australia free of charge, along the lines of the ‘NSW HSC Standards Packages’ CD ROMs in NSW.

Recommendation 5

The Committee recommends that the current timetable for the implementation of the proposed new Courses of Study for Years 11 and 12 should continue and be closely monitored, particularly in the area of assessment processes. If necessary, adjustments must be made before the implementation of Phase III in 2008.

Recommendation 6

The Committee recommends that the State Government ensures support for all classroom teachers by providing sufficient funding for the Teacher Development Centres and the equivalent support activities in the non-government school sector.