Samantha Maiden, The
Weekend Australian, November 26, 2005
Five-year-old children will be tested for basic reading skills twice a
year under a national plan to help struggling students.
Describing the current state of early childhood and kindergarten education
as "a mess", Education Minister Brendan Nelson said the literacy tests
would provide parents with results while their children were still
identifying words and developing reading skills.
Pre-empting a national literacy report to be released soon, Dr Nelson
backed the investigation's recommendation of a national testing regime for
under-8s.
"When a child comes into the system, you have got to have some idea of
what their reading skills may be," he told The Weekend Australian.
"How is a teacher to know who to concentrate on?
"You worry about them all but you've surely got to identify the ones you
have got to start from scratch on."
The long-awaited report, Teaching Reading, was commissioned by Dr Nelson
amid fears that current teaching methods were failing Australia's
children.
The minister is expected to announce a shake-up of teacher training in
universities when the report is released on December 8.
The report's author, Ken Rowe, said yesterday there was no national regime
to test children when they first attended school.
"South Australia and Victoria have been doing this for quite a few years,"
he said. "Some children are even tested when they are 4 1/2.
"The idea is they get some sort of indication of their cognitive
development - whether they can identify letters, whether they can
recognise their own name.
"There's currently no national consistency on this. This would give
teachers the basics of what they need to know about a child's skills."
His report is expected to include an explicit warning that Australia's
schools should embrace "systematic, direct phonics instruction so that
children master the essential alphabetic code-breaking skill required for
foundational reading proficiency".
There has been a controversial debate over which of two approaches is
better - the phonics instruction method or the "whole language" method, a
"holistic" approach in which children are immersed in language and words,
instead of learning first to break down words.
Opposition education spokeswoman Jenny Macklin said: "If Brendan Nelson is
going to impose a new test on five-year-olds, he must accompany it with
additional resources for teachers so that the students requiring extra
help actually get it."
Dr Nelson also signalled debate over a shake-up of early childhood
education.
"Personally, I think that early childhood education is a mess," he said.
"It's a question of luck, in many cases, as to where you live in Australia
and whether your child will get access to early childhood education and,
if so, what the quality will be.
"Some of the parents have said to me: 'What are you going to do about
children who don't know what a book is?'
"I've often said to the university people, who have a voracious appetite
for money: 'If you had serious new money to invest in education in
Australia, would you get a better human and economic return for it if you
invested it in universities or early childhood?' That's a good question."
Dr Nelson also revealed that preliminary results from a controversial
tutorial voucher scheme for children have shown a rapid improvement in
their reading age of between 12 and 18 months after one-on-one help.
Outlining a timetable to work towards a national Year 12 system, known as
an Australian Certificate of Education, by 2007, Dr Nelson also indicated
that his reform agenda was beginning to secure the support of previously
hostile states.
The proposal would build on the existing state-based exams, rather than
force students to sit more tests. But it would deliver a national approach
on key subject areas such as maths, chemistry, physics and English.
Parents forced to move interstate for work could be confident under the
new system that their child would have a better chance of settling in,
without the stress and upheaval of a different curriculum, Dr Nelson said.
"Why can't we have common language, common units of assessment, common
standards in core areas?"
Dr Nelson maintains that the changes, which would require the agreement of
the states, would not require a rigid, inflexible national curriculum
across all subjects. "But in some areas, surely, elements of mathematics,
physics and chemistry are common to everyone," he said.
