Great Scot Archive
Issues from 1998
Issues from 1998
 
 
 
 

Publications

Judgement, equity and autonomy – the real debate for education

Three words – judgement, equity and autonomy – should be at the heart of the current education debate.

Over the first two weeks of the School year, I attended the Klingenstein Heads Programme at Teachers College, Columbia University, in New York. Eighteen heads of school from around the world gathered with leaders of the faculty to consider the needs of students, and the associated nature of education and schooling, for the 21st century. The programme had three main components: philosophy, relating primarily to the nature of teaching and learning; recent studies in education (including school visits); and research into a particular area of education. I returned from New York affirmed in our vision and strategic intents, and bearing a number of thoughts on how we can get better.

This desire to innovate, to consider how we can improve, is very much part of the culture of our School and flows directly from our traditions. Our School was founded on Christian faith, and belief, from our Scottish heritage, in a broadly-based liberal curriculum forged in the tradition of Scottish reason and egalitarianism. Over the decades, these founding principles have been fused with Australian optimism that all is possible with hard work and innovation. Ours is a tradition of feeding the fire, not dying in its flames.

It was interesting, then, to have opportunity in New York to reflect on the nature of our profession and the alignment of the journey and ambitions of our School with the writings of some of the very best thinkers on education from earlier generations.

With this in mind, I am going to take opportunity in this edition of Great Scot to consider three words I believe should be at the heart of the current education debate. My chosen words do not include curriculum, assessment or funding – three words that have, to my mind, dominated the educational landscape for too long. Whilst all three have a part to play, they are, for me, more aligned with control and uniformity than a desire to see schools and teachers guide each student to the person they could become. I choose to reflect on judgement, equity and autonomy.

Education as a whole, and the passing of each school day, are both built on engagements. Engagements are the means through which teachers employ the levers of their craft; levers which hinge at the micro and influence at the macro. It is worth considering, therefore, what it is that influences the outcome of such engagements and the reach of their influence.

Here, I point the finger fairly and squarely at judgement and, in particular, the judgement of the student and the teacher.

I would contend that it is judgement which sits in the instant between thoughts and actions, connecting past thoughts and deeds with those to come; and that our judgements are determined by a rich mix of character and environment. In the school setting, whilst the student’s judgement is primary, it is the teacher’s judgement which determines the environment as he/she seeks to best influence each student at every moment when thoughts are connected. If this isn’t a tough enough ask, the stakes are set higher still by the knowledge that each judgement made feeds back to mould the student’s (and teacher’s) character and hence influences long-term learning outcomes. Judgement is the essence of good teaching.

The pursuit of equity is a powerful call to arms and one often taken as a quest for all to be treated the same. Whilst this carries a good deal of weight in Law, where generally we are looking to protect citizens from negative actions, education is, I believe, quite different. In education there must be a general acceptance that (through intent at least) our actions are aimed at doing good rather than ill. This allows a higher form of equity, moving from treating all the same to treating all quite differently and as best suits each individual’s need and possible futures.

tom batty in class

ABOVE: Principal Tom Batty with students from his Challenge Mathematics class

Such a view can be challenging in systemic environments and is, I believe, the underlying strength and purpose of independent schools. Equity directs good teaching to the person each student could become.

Post-modernity highlights individuality in a global setting of collaboration. The world of information is very different to that when many of the structures and routines of schools were established. Young people have grown up in a world where they do not need to wait for ‘the routine’ to align them in the right place and the right time to access the information they seek or require to unlock their learning block. Information moves in a continuum rather as a batch process.

A challenge such as this requires a good measure of adaptability from teachers, students and schools. Teachers need to be adaptable to the individual needs of their students in an ever-changing global environment. Students need to be able to pursue their individual interests and strengths in a collaborative setting premised on influence rather than direction. Schools need to be able to adapt to the delivery of an environment which best inculcates the above in an increasingly connected world. Significantly, this includes the recruitment and retention of teachers committed to such an education and skilled in making it possible.

Adaptability cannot be achieved in an environment of control. If the goal is autonomy for our students, this must be reflected in their education. This does not mean students, teachers and schools working in isolation: far from it – to my mind autonomy is the platform for lasting teamwork and capacity building. It allows all involved to focus on what is most important – the education of each student. Autonomy makes good teaching possible in a connected world.

To inculcate an environment engendering good judgement, equity and the adaptability which flows from autonomy, we seek to involve boys in activities which challenge and support just beyond the zone of comfort. Such a culture permeates our targeting the needs of each boy in our teaching and learning and pastoral programmes, and is the thread for the rich tartan of our co-curricular activities. It is no easy task, and we continue to research and adapt to better pursue this end.

And our commitment doesn’t stop with the people who make engagements buzz: our master planning for campus development involves spaces for interaction and study which keep conversations of learning humming amongst staff and boys across the campus, throughout the long Scotch day.

Indeed, the consideration of the agora, the places we gather, formed the basis of my research project at Columbia.

This commitment was again in evidence over the summer break as 73 members of our staff led some 600 boys in activities as diverse as the Nepal Expedition, the European Tour of the Symphony Orchestra and the Star Camp for children with severe disabilities. There were the more familiar camps for Cadets, Pipes and Drums, Sea Scouts, Christian Movement and Scotch at Cowes; and gatherings shaping minds and honing bodies for contests ahead, for rowers, cricketers, swimmers and volleyball and tennis players.

Rather than a process of control, perhaps, as understood by those who founded and have guided our School, education is better thought of as judging and nurturing the conditions best suited to develop the ongoing growth of the innate and acquired potential of each individual to the greater social good. If so, let us not be distracted; let the debate be one of good teaching premised on judgement, equity and autonomy.

Finally, I take opportunity, as ninth Principal, to note and thank OSCA for its remarkable contribution to Scotch, and to wish all members the very best for their centenary celebrations.

Updated: Monday 24 June 2013