Why do ATAR scores allow for "degree of difficulty" DOD ? Maybe " difficulty ' has more to to do with disinterest in some areas . While this doesn't apply to History which unfortunately no one wants to do , it might apply to languages as ---You get points for doing it when you don't get points for music . Some comparisons are onerous and most onerous if used by people who claim they are interested in a broad education ( what incentive do we need to get children to study history?) Physics is "difficult "but if you do it slower its very difficulty can drive great achievement and make it easier and more fun. The key driver we want is not DOD but FUN and help in DISCOVERY in a hard landscape full of bricks and brick walls - not the dumber rating system that relies too much on DOD .
Howard Gardner describes 7 types of intelligence ; how many are we encouraging ? Spatial is a critical one for growth in the future -- ART and history can help develop thinking skills in this area.
Does ATAR importance end in mere institutional concerns? Because there is so little focus in "the education revolution" on the " world beyond ", we all talk hypocritically talk about "Jobs" instead of actual Careers.
Teachers seem to need no high ATARS . Teaching is a great career but are we preoccupied with mere stats and not providing the right incentives to encourage competence . Have we sold our souls to the bookeepers ; Columns of figures that don't account for any competence ?
No comments:
Post a Comment