Editorial: Jacob Marley was right - Beware "the core business of education"
Queensland Teachers' Journal, Vol 124 No 8, 8 November 2019, page no. 5
“Core business” – a managerialism term used most commonly to argue AGAINST pursuing this idea or that. It is an argument for a narrow focus rather than broader, the essentials rather than the extras. In the private sector, it translates to “will it make money?” But what does it mean in education?
Let me be clear: I am a student of management, but not a managerialist (I hope!). Management theory and practice is a necessary tool, but it is not the master.
When I have heard talk of core business in education, it has always struck a chord in my memory – I worried about that and finally chased it down.
It reminded me of a passage from “A Christmas Carol”, the first and best known of Charles Dickens’ Christmas stories. For those who need reminding, before he is visited by the ghosts of Christmas past, present and future, Ebenezer Scrooge is visited by the ghost of his former partner, Jacob Marley. Jacob appears wrapped in a heavy chain to which are attached cash-boxes, ledgers, deeds and heavy purses.
After an unsettling conversation, Scrooge ventures: “But you were always a good man of business, Jacob.” (In my ears, I hear “a good man of core business.”)
“Business!” cried the ghost, wringing its hands again. “Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence, were, all, my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!”
There is no better or more elegant argument against too narrow a focus than that written by Charles Dickens in 1843. It is quite a short book, and if you have never read the original, it would make a great addition to your summer recreational reading.
What then in education?
Defining a narrow core business of education has proven not only elusive, but impossible. The term “core business” should be banished from our discussion, and its use should make us not only alert, but alarmed.
The goals of education are broad. A current, widely accepted statement of them is contained in the Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians:
- Goal 1: Australian schooling promotes equity and excellence
- Goal 2: All young Australians become successful learners, confident and creative individuals, and active and informed citizens.
The goals are brief but hardly narrow. I hope it is not only me who can hear echoes of Jacob Marley’s “comprehensive ocean of my business”.
The goals are subject to revision, perhaps at the Education Council – the meeting of Commonwealth, state and territory education ministers to be held in Alice Springs at the end of this year.
There are two comments about a change in goals. One is borrowed from Verity Firth, who was the NSW Education Minister who signed the Melbourne Declaration: wouldn’t it be a better idea to have a go at the Melbourne Goals before they are changed?
The second is to complain that, once again, the goals are being revised without reference to the teaching profession. Ministers may adopt goals, but teachers and school leaders reserve the right to assess them as wrong.
Broad goals and workload
The QTU has adopted an objective for at least the next two years of reducing excessive teacher and school leader workload. How can we simultaneously support a broad definition of educational goals and a realistic and sustainable workload?
A favourite sociologist of mine has been R.W. Connell, who wrote “Teachers Work” in 1985. At pages 71-2 of my edition, he produces a long list of “conventional classroom work” of teachers, followed by an even longer list of work beyond the classroom. “There is no logical limit to the expansion of an individual teacher’s work into this yawning gulf.” Teaching is described as a labour process without an object and “…the lack of an object allows a limitless intensification of teachers’ work”. And then there is the process of the possible refinement of each of these tasks as part of a craft of teaching – again a bottomless pit.
It is not broad goals that are the cause of excessive workload. One root (for there are many) of excessive workload lies in a noble unwillingness to accept that we cannot do it all, even less that we can do it individually, and even less that it is solely our responsibility.
We make ourselves slaves to unjust and unrealistic expectations from others, and sometimes from ourselves. No-one is going to stop a teacher going an extra step, but when extra steps become involuntary, an expectation and excessive, it is exploitation, not professionalism.
Broad goals and realistic workload are not inherently incompatible. Our challenge is to make it so in practice. And that involves the profession taking charge of their professional lives.
Best wishes for your summer vacation.