李國章﹕教師壓力 學校有責

mission

  【明報專訊】兩名教師自殺惹起關注，教統局長李國章昨日認同教育改革增加教師工作壓力，但強調教改不能煞停，否則又會被人批評朝令夕改。他又指教師壓力大，校長、學校也有責任，因為局方沒有「逼」學校申請各項資助計劃及教改項目，但若學校取了局方資源，教師便要「交功課」，故校方事前應檢討教師的承受能力。

認同教師受壓 惟教改不能停

被問及這是否把教師壓力大的「波」（責任）推向校長，李國章說沒有人把「波」拋向其他人，指大家同坐「一條船」。至於承受過大壓力的教師有什麼出路，他說應該磋商，平衡多方面，出發點是為學生，「若他們（教師）不能接受挑戰，我們也有提早退休計劃。」那麼是否受壓教師應離職﹖李國章略為「勞氣」地指﹕「若你報道李國章要踢走所有教師，這樣做新聞，我也沒有辦法。」又說教育出發點是要幫下一代，並非歪曲局長的說話。

李國章昨日出席南九龍獅子會午餐會致辭時強調，以往的「填鴨式」教育不足以令學生應付未來需要，現時大部分教員均認同教改，局方投入資源到教改，教師便要「交功課」，「教改帶來特別多工作、特別多壓力」。

李被問到教改問題是否由校長層層壓到教師身上，導致他們自殺，李國章說不知道兩名教師為何自殺，但一個人自殺可能受很多不同因素影響，「若只單方面指教改（造成教師自殺），便沒有意思。」但他承認不能否定是由於工作壓力的可能性，惟再爭拗也沒有意思，總不能去問已死去的人。他強調對於兩名教師自殺非常難過。

沒逼學校申請資助計劃

他重申﹕「教改獲大家認同，沒理由要停止教改，（教改）方向是對的。」他舉例，像語文基準試，局方給予教師5年時間達標，其間已可能有5批學生被不合資格教師教導，他指相信全港沒有人願意讓不及格的語文教師授課。他說，推行教改被指導致教師壓力大，但若煞停教改，什麼也不做，又會被批評教育質素差，「大家都無win（贏）」。

不過，李國章說，有些教改方向可以不用做，或遲一點才做，例如優質教育基金，或即將申請撥款的語文基金，均會加重教師壓力，但這屬學校自願參與，局方沒有強迫他們，「學校應檢討教師可承受多少壓力及工作量才申請，我明白校長想幫學生，樣樣（措施）都想推行，但也要視乎自己能力。」

G-Ma

事實上導致教師有壓力, 學校當然有責任.  我個人係贊成基準試, 老師自己都不達標, 不敢面對考核, 又如何教得好學生呢.  有些學校為了增加學校吸引力弄來很多新花樣, 例如什麼電子書要老師重新編寫電腦課程, 指紋考勤系統, 又有d學校申請優質教育基金去攪一幅大壁畫, 這些才真正浪費老師時間.

leeleelumlum

G-Ma 寫道:
事實上導致教師有壓力, 學校當然有責任.  我個人係贊成基準試, 老師自己都不達標, 不敢面對考核, 又如何教得好學生呢.  有些學校為了增加學校吸引力弄來很多新花樣, 例如什麼電子書要老師重新編寫電腦課程, 指紋考勤系統, 又有d學校申請優質教育基金去攪一幅大壁畫, 這些才真正浪費老師時間.

同意g-ma
其實學校內都好睇校長啲智慧,策畧,同推行手法....
有學校選轉做直資去避免'殺校'...有學校選合併.... 有學校...
如果遇到個'唔係咁醒嘅', 都好辛苦... 正如跟老細咁口羅...

father_ho

At last, the officials state the truth that "以往的「填鴨式」教育不足以令學生應付未來需要" that imply those schools who claimed to teach one or two grade harder should seriously review their path. Parent should ignore those schools(in my view) and choose wisely which type of school will suit your kid.

The problem now is that there's seems 10-15% of unqualified teachers exists and 20-30% of stone age teachers who will not change or passively react to the reform. Together with the "shoes shinning" philosophy enhanced by our former leader that influence many of the principals(just listen to those who in line), the remaining teachers(~60%) of course be pressurized until deform. How to due with it will take a long long time, that's the reason I choose different type of school for my kids.

WYmom

Agree with G-Ma. Schools should use qualified and emphasiastic teachers rather than just continue using senior teachers who have taught for many years.  I heard that the system of teachers' employment is last in first out, so even the new teachers are very good, they will be the first to cut if necessary. If this is really the case, we cannot retain good teachers based on performance, and ultimately our kids will suffer.

father_ho

Dear WYmom,
It is difficult to say whether last in first out tradition is good or bad since it is following the civil servant practice. The point is there is no objective measurement to those teachers who did not perform well and there is no (or rarely implement) mechanism to dismiss them. Commercial world is rather easy since even though your boss hates you, if you can perform the target and make profit, dismiss you will be a trouble to your boss. Educational field is another thing since nowadays, principal has got the whole power but how to appraise a teacher. Will it be he/she continues study(a PhD-for the school to publicize)? or he/she leads a team and got an award? OR he/she help those marginal students to get a pass. The answer is obvious and that those people who raise the issue of study coupon should rethink. Also, back to the root of problem is the implementation of 9 years free study has the side effect that school will not repeat students even if they are substandard, then how can the secondary and tertiary institute can teach back all the knowledge down to the elementary level? I am not saying 9 years free education is wrong but the standard should be absolute rather than relative curve fitting which mislead those student, parent and society.

judy

At last, the officials state the truth that "以往的「填鴨式」教育不足以令學生應付未來需要" that imply those schools who claimed to teach one or two grade harder should seriously review their path.

Father_ho,

教改之目的，就是打破「填鴨式」教育，為教的折墙鬆綁，所以，教育之文化己改變，以前，只有少數名校重視多元智能，但現在己很多學校咁做，最少係claim咁做。

現時又有直資，直資本是最適合本港生態和體現港人自强不息之精神，又可提供另類選擇家長，這也是教改之成果。希望飯焦渡過此劫，不然，大碗飯派之氣焰會更盛，改革将中止。

另者:我不覺those schools who claimed to teach one or two grade harder should seriously review their path，因大家收生不同，以我阿大阿ニ為例，如果給他全港平均水準之英文讀本，佢地會覺得十分低B。因材施教，似乎是可取之策，同意否?

It is difficult to say whether last in first out tradition is good or bad since it is following the civil servant practice. The point is there is no objective measurement to those teachers who did not perform well and there is no (or rarely implement) mechanism to dismiss them.

反對，選擇最合適之教師，是校長之智慧和責任，只有好教師，オ能留任，這是原則。

father_ho

Dear Judy,

Please don't misunderstand that I against the reform, I 100% support it but the point is how to due with the transition period at least the teachers can adopt it. But uptill now I can't see when will it be stabilized, then can our kids wait for it?

因材施教 is a good term but hardly can implement in traditional school since what if there are classmates who cannot follow as well as your kids, then will the teacher focus on those socall "substandard" student and how will those student feel when they are labeled (that is why those students from top school will has great derivation) and the evaluation within school is just based on marks. ----THEY WILL GIVEUP.

WYmom

judy 寫道:
[quote]At last, the officials state the truth that "以往的「填鴨式」教育不足以令學生應付未來需要" that imply those schools who claimed to teach one or two grade harder should seriously review their path.

Father_ho,

教改之目的，就是打破「填鴨式」教育，為教的折墙鬆綁，所以，教育之文化己改變，以前，只有少數名校重視多元智能，但現在己很多學校咁做，最少係claim咁做。

現時又有直資，直資本是最適合本港生態和體現港人自强不息之精神，又可提供另類選擇家長，這也是教改之成果。希望飯焦渡過此劫，不然，大碗飯派之氣焰會更盛，改革将中止。

另者:我不覺those schools who claimed to teach one or two grade harder should seriously review their path，因大家收生不同，以我阿大阿ニ為例，如果給他全港平均水準之英文讀本，佢地會覺得十分低B。因材施教，似乎是可取之策，同意否?

It is difficult to say whether last in first out tradition is good or bad since it is following the civil servant practice. The point is there is no objective measurement to those teachers who did not perform well and there is no (or rarely implement) mechanism to dismiss them.

反對，選擇最合適之教師，是校長之智慧和責任，只有好教師，オ能留任，這是原則。
[/quote]

Judy, agree with you.  Yet in reality, teachers are retained based on seniority rather than performance.  

Principal has all the power in managing a school, he/she has the largest responsibility to teachers' work pressure, yet he/she of course will not admit that!