The article I came across in the Sydney Morning Herald continues the
debate between private and public schools in NSW. At a forum held on the
northern beaches in Sydney, Bronwyn Bishop (coalition MP for a northern beaches
electorate) said that “the high-achieving
schools of northern Sydney are in danger of being ‘dumbed down’ to one generic
Australian standard under the federalised education scheme planned by the Rudd
Labor government”. She further noted that those who live in the
northern beaches have “a special way of
life that should be protected” (Note the phrases ‘danger’ and ‘dumbed down’).
Ms Bishop’s comments about ‘dumbing down’ students seem very unfounded
to me. The article says that “Ms Bishop
said the schools in northern Sydney were the best in Australia and any move to
a federalised education scheme would lead to their "dumbing down"”.
Within this one comment there are a few different points we can gather.
Firstly, by saying that the schools in northern Sydney are the best in
Australia, this means all other schools are not as good and do not achieve as
well, and thus she no doubt agrees that inequality exists in Australian schools
(which is true). By highlighting her fear of these schools being ‘dumbed down’,
she shows absolutely no concern for the inequalities which exist, and no desire
or belief that something should be done about this inequality. In fact she
believes the opposite- she believes that the ‘best schools in Australia’ should
stay that way and she speaks of the
‘danger’ of these schools being at the same (assumedly educational) level as
other schools in Australia.
When she speaks of being ‘dumbed down’, she raises the issue of
intelligence. No doubt Bishop believes that the children who are attending the ‘best
schools in the country’ are themselves the most intelligent students in the
country. Perhaps Bishop thinks that intelligence is a genetic trait that
wealthy white children (who attend the northern beaches elite high schools) are
born with? To treat them in the same way that other children are treated around
Australia would be an injustice to their inherit intelligence?
This takes me on a slight tangent… I challenge the belief that children
of Sydney’s elite Independent schools are inherently more ‘intelligent’ than
children who attend low achieving public schools. What even is ‘intelligence’?
How do you define intelligence? Is it your NAPLAN results? Or your HSC results?
I would disagree with the notion that a test result defines your intelligence.
Perhaps it shows the strength of your memory- but I would argue there is a real
difference between just memorizing answers and actually understanding a topic. There are many theories surrounding the idea
of intelligence, the most well known being the theory of Multiple
Intelligences. This theory (probably well known to all education students)
divides intelligences into 7 different categories, and says that people are ‘intelligent’
in different ways- that is, not everyone is going to be good at the same thing,
and people excel in different areas. Gray & Viens (1994:1) put it this way-
“MI Theory offers a pluralistic view that inspires the question ‘In what ways
is this person intelligent’” as
opposed to just is this person
intelligent.
The ‘pluralistic’ or open minded view of the theory of Multiple
Intelligences is the direct opposite of the view that Bishop is insinuating- which
is that intelligence is fixed, inherited, and maybe even genetic. This point of
view is argued by those who believe in a ‘fixed mindset’. Dweck (2010) defines
this belief as individuals who “believe that their intelligence is simply an
inborn trait”. This seems to be exactly what Bishop insinuates in her comments.
In opposition to the ‘fixed mindset’, Dweck (2010) proposes the
benefits of a ‘growth mindset’, where intelligence can be developed over time;
that with proper help, guidance and instruction, ‘intelligence’ (usually
defined in terms of academic results) can improve and grow. People can get
better at things with effort! She believes this attitude is beneficial not just
for teachers but for students, as it can lead to “not just short term
achievement but also long term success” as it can create a culture of risk
taking and emphasises effort not
success- where it is okay to make mistakes, and you learn and grow from your
mistakes.
Bishop is unfortunately not very well versed in theories of
intelligence, or even of the ideas behind why
high achieving elite schools that makes them perform so highly (Ho’s (2011)
research provides some excellent statistics in this regard). It is a true shame
that someone so uninformed holds any type of position of power or influence in
the Australian government.
--------------
References:
Dweck, S. D. (2010) Even Geniuses Work Hard. Educational Leadership, 68(1): 16-20
Gray, J. H. & Viens, J. T. (1994) The Theory of Multiple
Intelligences. National Forum, 74(1):
22
Ho, C. (2011) Respecting the Presence of Others: School Micropublics
and Everyday Multiculturalism. Journal of
Intercultural Studies 32(6): 603-619
Maley, J. (2013) Bronwyn Bishop
says Gonski reforms will 'dumb down' schools. Accessible at http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/bronwyn-bishop-says-gonski-reforms-will-dumb-down-schools-20130830-2sw1z.html#ixzz2izJ1upUP
Hi Kenia,
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing your position on Bishop's quotes. Living and having been educated on the Northern Beaches I have a vested interest in what she has to say about the areas education practices.
I would argue that a national funding plan like Gonski will not dramatically alter the opportunities and privileges students at Northern Beaches schools currently have. Finland has one of the best education systems (academically speaking) in the world and private Finnish schools receive a government grant comparatively equal to that received by public schools. Private tutoring is prohibited in an effort to provide all students whether at public or private schools a similar opportunity to succeed and keep economic privilege from interfering with academic success. Finland's funding system has certainly served the education of their students well.
Bishop has a vested interest in maintaining the privileged position that the locality she represents has, but her fear of it changing is essentially unfounded and as you say based on a very limited understanding of what doing well in school means. There are so many contextual factors and aptitudes that contribute to a persons perceived intelligence, which is in the end just an analysis of their abilities at a particular time.