Professor Ridd

I must say I was very disappointed to receive your email.

Our process of syllabus development and system of school-based assessment is based on working closely with the teacher workforce, listening to their ideas and responding to their concerns where appropriate, wherever possible in face-to-face situations. This is a feature of the way QSA operates and is one we believe that the majority of teachers would not want to dispense with.

On the issue of making changes to the syllabuses, QSA will not guarantee that major changes will be made. At this stage, some teachers are expressing concerns about the syllabuses – and we are still to identify these concerns. If our evidence is clearly showing that most teachers are satisfied with the materials, why would our inclination at this stage be to make major changes?

We are, however, always interested in making improvements to our products and services, and the concerns and issues of practising teachers are of interest to us.

We are not the employing Authority for schools, and the system of assessment and certification we oversee has numerous checks and balances that would prevent any victimisation (as you suggest) from occurring. A number of the attendees of the Brisbane public meeting have consented to their emails being forwarded to me, or have chosen to email me directly, which suggests there is a cohort of practising teachers who are unconcerned about being victimised.

You have been a constant critic of the QSA and its practices – without foundation.  I note that you intend to be at the meeting however I must emphasise that the meeting is for practising teachers to discuss their issues and propose solutions.  I am happy to meet with you separately.

Peter Luxton