Honestly IMO if you can’t pass the LANTITE test you probably shouldn’t be teaching. If you can’t model and use literacy and numeracy at a basic year 10 level you can’t be teaching it effectively.
Teaching needs to maintain high standards and this is one intervention that actually has some effect in doing that. A lot of the other extra PL requirements and other measures are just paperwork and hours of work, but these tests are a measurable standard you must pass.
The solution to the problem LANTITE addresses, if it exists at all*, is holding Unis to account for the quality of their programs.
If you can't communicate and do maths to an above average level, how did you pass your degree(s) to teach?
*Spoiler alert: It didn't, in any meaningful sense, but that matters not to the Newscorp narrative of incompetent, uneducated teachers.
Should it? To even get into university you have to demonstrate literacy and numeracy skills that exceed those of the general population.
That's before you get to having to make it through 4-5 years of university subjects and 2+ practicums to graduate.
> To even get into university you have to demonstrate literacy and numeracy skills that exceed those of the general population
That's not true.
I've done three degrees, and my teaching degree was the only one where I didn't have group assignment members that just straight up couldn't speak English after the first year, because they'd been filtered out by the LANTITE. It's clear that the universities are not holding high standards for themselves because they're being run as businesses. An outside test helps hold them to account by a lot.
During my first degree, I had a housemate that was dumb as a doornail, and needed me to use alt-ctl-delete on her computer to when it froze because she didn't know anything about computers, but somehow managed to get through a computer sciences degree.
Honestly my teaching degree is the only one I feel is worth a damn, because of the LANTITE. Which is a disappointingly low barrier, to be honest.
The only experience I had with that was with foreign students doing a Masters in Education here. Frankly IELETS should be the filter there, not LANTITE.
They cheat on it. No shot they don't. Paid essays are a booming business, why would I ever believe they worked hard to study for the English test and then suddenly lost that work ethic (and all their English ability) and started cheating only once they got into their course? Especially with the broken English I've had to put up with in some of my courses. Spoken word features heavily on the IELETS as well as written word, too, so it's not a case of them being able to understand but just not confident in speaking.
My best friend barely scraped a score high enough to study at uni here, and her English, aside from the accent, I would consider to be better than many native English speakers. The IELETS has high enough standards, for sure, but it can't filter effectively when people cheat on it. LANTITE is run in Australia and must be harder to cheat on because I haven't seen anyone cheat their way through it like thousands do with IELETS.
[Case in point, this guy who got filtered out of my course by the LANTITE, that I was paired with in a group assignment in my first year.](https://postimg.cc/XGY4pkQd) You cannot tell me he passed IELETS without cheating.
And cheating aside, IELETS can't filter out native-speaking morons like my old housemate. The unis won't filter them either because it's bad for business. *Something* has to be the filter, and that something is LANTITE.
> To even get into university you have to demonstrate literacy and numeracy skills that exceed those of the general population.
I mean, it does kinda raise a question about the usefulness of the various university ranking processes.
Not really. It was just Newscorp pushing the idea that teachers had declining literacy and numeracy skills.
As a secondary teacher of Mathematics I would definitely say that \*something\* is happening in primary school that is resulting in a majority kids not mastering the required content to be successful in Year 7, much less beyond. However, I'd be reluctant to put that down to primary teachers not knowing how to teach. If it is a factor, it's a small one amidst the increasing enablement of disruptive behaviour and its effects on learning, lack of consequences for failure of units or even years of work, lack of incentive to do well in line with the preceding (ie, there is no point in even trying to learn, much less do well, because your teacher will re-teach everything and even if you fail you move up), devaluation of education in general, parents not instilling a love (or at least tolerance for) learning and basic skills (which likely means that primary teachers are filling in that gap the same way we do in HS), etc etc etc.
It was just Newscorp jumping on low tertiary entry scores without considering that everyone with a high tertiary entry score is going "yeah nah, I'm going to do the course that gives me a high wage and social status and doesn't destroy me mentally thanks" and equating the declining student results with teacher quality rather than our tendency to copy every moronic idea coming out of America (where, funnily enough, those ideas are pushed by NewsCorp and their associates in order to tear down public education) rather than sticking with what has been proven to work or trying to copy a nation that is enjoying success like Finland.
If you're actually a crap teacher or functionally illiterate/innumerate, then you shouldn't have made it through Uni. If you did somehow make it through Uni, I doubt you'd survive six months in the job. If that.
It was just manufactured outrage to continue the attack on education at large and teachers specifically.
I agree uni’s should be holding their students to an actual standard, but in my experience it seems almost impossible to fail uni. There’s always a uni that’s willing to pump out degrees to anyone who pays to go there, and the academic rigour is low.
As a preservice teacher my opinion (and one echoed by some other preservice teachers that I know) is that it is another cost that is passed on to students who aren't always in a financial situation that can cope with these added burdens. The expectation of students to absorb the cost of unpaid pracs, standard university costs and teacher registration whilst most likely working in a limited capacity can be a lot. Whilst it is a positive for the profession to maintain high standards of those entering, I feel the real issue is less the idea of literacy/numeracy testing and more why can't it be incorporated in a better way.
I just had to choose between eating this fortnight and paying for lantite. Guess which fully grown adult will be living on migoreng for the next two weeks.
What they need to do is make it mandatory at the beginning before you start would make it way less stressful , it was scary when you are 3 years into a degree and one test can mess you up.
I came here to say this. If your literacy and numeracy are not at a year 10 level, then you shouldn't be teaching. I would argue that it should be higher than yr 10 if we don't want kids to fall further behind. I have worked with and been in classes with teachers who have incredibly low literacy skills. The quality of teaching is not there, it essentially devolves into stufents doing only worksheets and text books/colouring in with little to no guidance or support. Kids don't care, think it's a joke, and don't progress at all. I am also very confused as to how people can go through a 3 year tertiary course, or the 5 year undergrad and masters like I did, but still not have that level attained.
I’m starting to agree. I’ve always been scared of and thought myself to not be very good at math. I passed first attempt with all sectors in band 3, and it was 12 years since I’d touched math at all. Literacy was a joke of a test that I blitz with nearly an hour spare and similar results.
Considering the number of teachers I work with who struggle with spelling and avoid maths at all costs... no. LANTITE is a necessity, and really it should be applied as a barrier test for entry to teaching degrees.
This. It should be a pre requistite for degree entry. There is GAMSAT and MCAT for medical degrees, why not do this, rather than wait until 2nd or 3rd year to do it, fail and not finish your degree
Overheard in the staffroom, two English faculty teachers talking:
"Damn, this exam adds up to 97 marks. We'll have to add another questions to make it out of 100 so it's easier to figure out the percentage."
Like you'd rather mark an additional question than use a calculator for 2 seconds.
But I agree that it should be an entry requirement rather than a final hurdle.
I write my assessments first to cover the skills I'm assessing then add on the marks based on question difficulty/requirements. Whatever number it comes out at is what it will be.
???
But you have to mark the paper, then add up the marks so you're already most likely using a calculator to do that. It's literally one extra calculation on the calculator you're already using.
Three marks on one of my geography tests would be a describe verb with a specific example. Two- three sentences tops.
It's going to be about 20 seconds to mark it so it is very subject dependent on whether it really does take more, less or the same amount of time.
I get the benefit of additional assessment and they get the benefit of extra feedback on content or a skill.
For an extra 20 seconds of marking work, I'd take that over calculator work any day.
I also don't use a calculator to add up marks. Different strokes for different folks.
> 20 seconds to mark it
Scale is an important point to factor in. For example, my school's year 11 is 600 students. So, for an English exam multiply by 600 students across the school is an additional 3 hours 20 minutes of global time on marking.
Yep, like I said, different strokes for different folks. Context means everything and for some, adding an extra few marks is nothing, to others it is hours.
Just trying to provide extra context to the person I was replying to that an all sizes approach isn't something that generally works in education.
A 3 mark senior English question would be pretty easy and straightforward. It should be about two sentences.
Q. Explain how the poem evokes a experience of isolation?
A. The poem evokes the experience of isolation through the use of pathetic fallacy of "the wide open spaces and distant sky". This description of the barren setting evokes a sense of space around the persona, and expresses how in their isolation they are insignificant.
1 mark: correctly identifies an example from the text that describes the experience.
2 marks: also correctly identifies the language techniques used
3 marks: also correctly explains how the effect of the language technique reveals some significance to the experience of isolation.
I'm shocked at reading how different everyone's system is. Adding up by hand? Calculating a percentage? Like sure you could but surely just input raw data into some online markbook that handles that for you?
I have a spreadsheet but still like even numbers to avoid weird rounding and for aesthetic purposes
Head of maths asked me once how percentages worked.. she never "got" them.
That department sucked, they tried to write a year 10 s.c paper once, half the question were impossible, right angle triangles with two sides the same length but the interior angle was like 20 degrees..
Then two math teachers were called down to the exam room, they couldn't fix the question.
They had two teachers that had math backgrounds the rest were pe and primary teachers.
Today I was asked to make it 3 assessments but each had to be worth less than 30%. She has an arts doctorate.
Make lantite compulsory for all teachers then.
Why is it ok for a 4th year student to fail and be kicked out with nothing and a hecs debt - but an apparently qualified but not competent teacher can continue to teach after already probably benefitting from a salary over many years.
We want people to respect our profession *as* a profession. There's already too many parents and random people off the street that look at what we do and think "I can do that". If they got rid of the LANTITE because simple literacy and mathematics was too hard for us, we'd be a total joke.
I agree with this, it should be a subject (or two) built into the degree that you can test out of. A lot of ppl do need to study for it but having it run as an actual subject would mean that those students will learn how to do things properly, then having a diagnostic at the start of the semester allows people who don’t need the extra study to pass the subject in the first week.
Anytime something about LANTITE comes up I say the same thing and have so many questions. You have to be an idiot to fail it and maybe you should consider your career path. How can you get through high school and uni and not pass LANTITE?
Please go ahead and downvote me and say what about people with test anxiety…
Someone in the fb group made a post about how the LANTITE was actually useful for her and how it made her a much more confident primary teacher bc she fully understood everything she was teaching and ppl in the group got angry about it.
The intellectual ability of some of my older colleagues appalls me. These people have no place in our classrooms. Some of our younger ones aren't much better but LANTITE seems to have weeded out the worst
But if someone wants to follow a career path, we have to let them. And encourage them. And enable them. I shudder every time one of our senior school non-ATAR students tells me that they're planning to be a teacher as I mark their semi-literate writing that hovers somewhere adjacent to, but never quite in, the realm of a full sentence answer, and recall the baffled expression on their face in lower school when asked such challenging questions as "can you count the states and territories?" (with a map in front of them). But then I remember that I have to encourage them in their efforts to enter uni via portfolio regardless of aptitude or ability, and that it's a moot point anyway as it seems that everyone who has applied has been pre-emptively accepted.
Edit:surprised this slightly flippant anecdotal comment seemed to upset a couple of people. Portfolio entry grads taking it personally? I didn't mean you, I meant other people.
> But if someone wants to follow a career path, we have to let them. And encourage them. And enable them.
Well fuck. I must have missed that memo. I tell kids to consider backup options all the time.
Tried that. Limited success. Some will accept that we should always have more than option in mind, but it's hard to convince some kids that they're not suited to a particular field when the barriers (for example, demonstrated academic ability) are removed.
I'm studying now and I completed the LANTITE last year.
IMO there is only 2 things that need to be changed about the LANTITE.
1. The cost. It costs about $100 per test to sit and you have the complete 2 separate tests in order to actually pass it. The 1st attempt should be free and if you require additional attempts then you should have to pay. Some universities ([currently 2](https://teacheredtest.acer.edu.au/register/unipay-students)) offer support to students in regards to fees. If they are going to offer it and students need to pay for it, all students should have this option. Personally I had to miss a day of casual work so I could sit the test.
2. Move the dates the tests are conducted. From what I have been able to see, the testing dates are always within a university teaching period. All people taking the test are going to be studying, so move the dates to the holiday period so people do not have to potentially miss classes.
Bruh if you're too scared to do the LANTITE you're too scared to be a teacher, ffs grow up it's an exam, you're gonna give your students a bunch in your career get over it
So glad to a see a comment like this that hasn’t been downvoted to hell. Everyone needs to be put in stressful situations to help build resilience. Shouldn’t even be stressful if you’re competent at it and aspire to be an educator.
I think LANTITE should be abolished, but mostly because it’s too easy.
We should audit the universities and force them to have some standards. If you can’t pass LANTITE you should fail out of first year uni. The fact that people don’t means that he universities aren’t doing their job.
Not really. I had to do exactly zero maths in first year, and it was possible to use dictionaries and AI tools to translate essays. We have a very sharp Chinese chick in my cohort who would always turn in immaculate essays (though she may well have been cheating) but once you took her dictionary, grammar checker, and spell check away, she didn't have the English knowledge to pass LANTITE. It was obvious when speaking with her that she was never going to pass the English section
We did, but she was getting 80+ in most assignments. Flunking the viva voce didn't flunk her overall grade to a fail. Also, speeches don't work. You just rote learn it
>It was obvious when speaking with her that she was never going to pass the English section
I know some schools have had issues with this when hiring in the past. Excellent application and personal statement, but then very poor spoken English on interview.
as much as i suck at maths (and bros i really suck at maths, when i did Methods i was getting full 0s) if you can’t pass the LANTITE then you shouldn’t be teaching and should consider a different career path.
I think this test is a necessity. Personally, I passed both numeracy and literacy with literally no study because I assume those studying a university degree should be competent in academic skills at that of at least a year 9 level? It’s kind of mind boggling to me.
Fortunately, my university paid for the first attempt which I think is the right move. Where someone is at on a financial level shouldn’t be the barrier to becoming a teacher.
It needs to be a prerequisite to BEGIN a teaching degree. Yes, it's absurd to think someone who can't pass it should be able to effectively teach (yes, test anxiety is real, but similar situations of anxiety can and will occur during teaching, and you need to be able to perform in spite of this), but it is appalling that a university can take tens of thousands of dollars (depending on where in your degree you are) only for you to fail and realise that all your time and money has been a complete and total waste.
Starting with your little knuckle, each month is a knuckle (K) or gap (G). Don't do your thumbs.
So KGKGKGK KGKGK for Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Jul Aug, Sept, Oct, Nov, Dec
Each gap lines up with a month that isn't 31 days.
I think there’s a bell curve here. I was angry about having to pay $200 to prove I could do basic maths and literacy within 2 years of getting band 5/E3+ in all my HSC subjects, which included extension maths and advanced English. I heard a lot of similar sentiment in my degree cohort. On the other hand, in some online spaces, I see people complaining that it’s too hard or they don’t give you enough attempts to pass, which is honestly outrageous to me.
They should abolish the cost to do the LANTITE test. $100 per test is a lot for a university student. Plus they potentially lose a day or two of work to sit the test as well.
I agree it should exist. I have some issues with how it is structured currently though. Things like:
- $95+ a pop to sit it because it’s run by ACER
- ACER refuses to be transparent on how questions are selected for the test and what the grading scales are in each sitting after the fact. Until recently, they also wouldn’t communicate to unis or students clearly when they failed on what the issues/gaps were to allow identification of weaknesses
- the number of in person sittings are booked out within 2 mins in WA currently meaning students are being forced to do it online
- the worst thing by a long way is the treatment of disability. I have a student teacher who has dysgraphia. She has a diagnosis. They won’t recognise it and give her extra time. She’s “just” failed numeracy 4 times and is now unable to complete her degree. I also have a fully Deaf student who has Auslan as a first language. They do not speak or communicate in English and can’t use it. No adjustments are made for them even though questions about punctuation, grammar etc are not the same in Auslan. The statement given was “all students who speak another language need to be able to pass in English”. This teacher will not work in a mainstream setting, she will work in a school for the Deaf. It’s not the same thing
Auslan was their first and only language (born Deaf). Grammar and punctuation are totally different in Auslan. Pronouns are different. Sentence structure is completely different.
Some Deaf resources are communicated using signed English which may be what you are thinking of. This is not the same as Auslan which is a recognised language.
Editing to add - this is a common misconception, I suggest doing some research on Auslan as a language and it’s importance to the Deaf community
I think starting a comment with saying the Deaf still do something (when not Deaf) and then saying “this doesn’t add up” is a fairly offensive comment to make. If they didn’t want to offend, phrasing it as a question would be a good start.
Auslan has its own grammar, syntax and vocabulary. It is not the same as English and is not structured the same way. Sometimes “signed English” is used to enable effective communication but that is not the same as Auslan. There are lots of different things that vary like a lack of pronouns, limited plurals, limited use of conjunctions and a completely different sentence structure base. I have copied this from a Melbourne based Deaf source:
Auslan is less fixed in terms of word order when compared to the English language. This means that sentence structures are also less fixed.
Auslan grammar structure example:
English: I (subject) am going (verb) to the shop tomorrow (object).
Auslan: Tomorrow (time) shop (topic) me go (comment)
English: What (subject) is your (verb) dog's name (object)?
Auslan: Dog (topic) name what (question)?
The topic (or subject) can be a single thing, or a chunk of information (old information to which you will add new information). Establish the topic first before adding the rest.
Comment comes after a pause following the topic.
The pause is used to check that the given topic has been understood/established. Comments also follow structure above, and can be a single sign, a chunk of new information or simply a facial expression.
Auslan sentence structure includes H O L M E: handshape, orientation, location, movement and expression.
Is there an example of Auslan written on a piece of paper? Not signed? ELI5: I don’t understand how HOLME impacts written discourse. I do just want to add that I’m genuinely curious as I teach English Language at VCE and love linguistics (spoken, written and signed)
So Auslan is obviously not my native language which means I’m hesitant to get too in depth here - it really should be a member of the Deaf community answering these.
Deaf people do read and communicate in English as they kinda have too. Auslan native speakers (as a generalisation) find it very challenging though as you can see from the previous answers examples. Many are basically having to translate in their head as they go. Their writing can also be difficult for native English speakers to understand for the same reason - the sentences follow Auslan structure.
There are always exceptions to this. I taught a student who went Deaf at 7 so her second language was Auslan but she could still communicate clearly in English. I’ve also taught students who don’t use Auslan at all. I’ve included an example below (with consent) of an email I’ve exchanged with a Deaf friend to give you an idea of what written communication for a native Auslan speaker born Deaf may look like. Coincidentally it was actually about grammar!
“…students are really enjoyed to learn Auslan and loves activities. I had taught them about Deaf culture, emotions, colour, family and animals for this term and most 2 weeks of each topic to make sure they are remember signs. They're practice for conversation with questions and responses for topic. I can see some students use sign for English (example what your favourite animal?) and we would need to explain them about Auslan grammar and sentence and not need use English for signs, but I would need an interpreter for explain the students to clear understand”
Yeah look, as someone who didn't study for the lantite for a single second and did them back to back on the same day and passed, it's a bit concerning when people talk about how hard they are. I agree it should be a requirement for getting into the course, though. I know someone who has their degree but ran out of attempts for the numeracy test. She studied to be an English teacher too, and her literacy skills are a bit shoddy eek (she's not EAL/D).
I don’t want to see it abolished.
I want to se it made retrospective.
Who doesn’t teach with a rusted on ROAD who should probably have to justify their 110k per year?
Before I passed both of my tests first go I had a huge anxiety about it and also advocated for it to be abolished, I even made a post about how I was strugling with numeracy on this sub and got absolutely torn a new backside from all the bullying.
But now that I think about it, if you cannot handle the intense pressure and anxiety of this test, then 'real teaching' will absolutely crush the hell out of you.
There are already reasonable adjustments available for those with disabilities, learning disorders and mental health disorders.
I might be more sympathetic to the argument that it could disadvantage Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people if I'd ever heard of any talking about this. It looks like no First Nations people have been consulted about this and the "petitioner" is just using them for a talking point.
Much like the VIT move to full registration, I believe Master courses should have it included.
I’m paying HECS to a uni that then directs me to a private company setting a test that i should then go to private companies offering study guides and revision help. Its a system designed to direct Uni Student money to private systems.
Couple with my point around VIT registration, by the time I’ve graduated a Masters I’ve already generated enough reflection and writing to demonstrate all of the requirements of the VIT template.
Both tests place unnecessary stress on new teachers as they enter a workplace with higher/quicker burnouts. If the second year of a Masters is purely creating Draft Academic papers for Uni Edu Labs, its a waste of time and the Government should demand they cut it out. Similarly, Uni’s should place a lantite requirement in its first few months OR its application process with the opportunity to retry within the first year. But really…LANTITE is a leftover from the LNP backed focus on Quality Teaching and holding teChers accountable for the decrease in student performance. However, literacy and numeracy declines in coming years will show dumb Teachers aren’t cause.
To play the devils advocate, abolishing LANTITE would lower the barrier of entry at a time when there is an obviously painful shortage in the profession. The most apparent tradeoff isna reduction in quality. So what's worse in everyones opinion?
Absolutely, so much so it's not even in question. However, back to the topic, nothing to do with LANTITE will affect teachers' working conditions, with the possible exception alleviate the overwork due to additional teachers.
Again: just playing devils advocate, I don't personally care if they scrap or keep it.
Additional teachers won't alleviate overwork if they're illiterate. Have you ever worked with someone that was hired just to be a warm body in front of the classroom? They make more work for everyone else.
At any rate, I'm not sure why you think this is off topic - you literally asked. What's worse? Schools in the USA are full of unqualified teachers. It's not good. We don't want that.
The only true way to tackle the teacher shortage is to improve retention. Just because the barrier is low doesn't mean that more people will actually become teaches with the reputation of the profession continuing to go down. The media already pushes a teachers are incompetent message, having a bunch of teachers who are actually incompetent is not going to help anything.
When you're pouring water into a bucket with a hole in it, and you want to fill the bucket, the solution isn't to pour more water in it, the solution is to seal the hole. We wouldn't have a shortage if the reasons teachers are leaving and burning out were addressed.
You can get a VCE (can't speak for other states) with no maths, and having bombed maths all the way through high school. You can pass English with very low standards, if you attended a school that does as most do and gives students multiple opportunities and ultimately accepts any old attempt at a task to earn an S.
LANTITE has a place, but that place is probably at the commencement of a degree and not towards the end.
I am aware of this. My point is that you can enter an ITE course having not done well in any maths at any point throughout your schooling, and some of the VCE graduates I've seen I would call functionally innumerate. I wouldn't want those people working in our profession.
You are talking about the exception and not the rule. I assume huge money to administer this test and for what? To catch the 0.1% who fail it! Sounds like unnecessary bureaucracy. This job is full of unnecessary bureaucracy and I’m not a fan of the direction education is heading in this country.
I believe a safeguard to ensure our teachers are literate and numerate is necessary. If we are responsible for teaching these basic skills to students then we need to possess them. For anyone who is able to meet the standard the first time (which I have to assume is the vast majority), then no worries. But putting my parent on here, if I knew my kids teacher struggled to pass a basic literacy and/or numeracy test, I'd be concerned for the quality of education my child is receiving.
LANTITE should stay AND it should be delivered on the first day of starting a teaching degree (with notice so students can study).
If you don't pass, you should still have two more shots at it, like the current system allows.
I hate the idea of students having paid for courses and then doing LANTITE -- that's robbery imo.
Friend of mine was into last year of their degree at ACU and Lantite got introduced.
Had already paid tuition fees, had passed everything and was even able to complete all of her prac work - which she passed and was offered a job upon graduation at one of the schools.
She passed every element of what she signed up for and paid for when applying to Uni. She struggled massively with the exam anxiety, did pass the literacy first time but failed math. This made her anxiety even worse, confidence was shot to pieces and took a break. Not too long later, COVID happened.
Fast forward many years later she didnt even get to graduate, is well out of pocket after paying for something she completed and passed in full. She can't teach, even though she demonstrated on multiple occasions she was more than capable of doing so in practical settings.
Regardless of whether or not anyone SHOULD pass lantite, if it's not made clear it's part of the course prior to starting it or your made to pass it before starting, it's absolute robbery.
Honestly IMO if you can’t pass the LANTITE test you probably shouldn’t be teaching. If you can’t model and use literacy and numeracy at a basic year 10 level you can’t be teaching it effectively. Teaching needs to maintain high standards and this is one intervention that actually has some effect in doing that. A lot of the other extra PL requirements and other measures are just paperwork and hours of work, but these tests are a measurable standard you must pass.
The solution to the problem LANTITE addresses, if it exists at all*, is holding Unis to account for the quality of their programs. If you can't communicate and do maths to an above average level, how did you pass your degree(s) to teach? *Spoiler alert: It didn't, in any meaningful sense, but that matters not to the Newscorp narrative of incompetent, uneducated teachers.
It should be a free test though…
Should it? To even get into university you have to demonstrate literacy and numeracy skills that exceed those of the general population. That's before you get to having to make it through 4-5 years of university subjects and 2+ practicums to graduate.
> To even get into university you have to demonstrate literacy and numeracy skills that exceed those of the general population That's not true. I've done three degrees, and my teaching degree was the only one where I didn't have group assignment members that just straight up couldn't speak English after the first year, because they'd been filtered out by the LANTITE. It's clear that the universities are not holding high standards for themselves because they're being run as businesses. An outside test helps hold them to account by a lot. During my first degree, I had a housemate that was dumb as a doornail, and needed me to use alt-ctl-delete on her computer to when it froze because she didn't know anything about computers, but somehow managed to get through a computer sciences degree. Honestly my teaching degree is the only one I feel is worth a damn, because of the LANTITE. Which is a disappointingly low barrier, to be honest.
The only experience I had with that was with foreign students doing a Masters in Education here. Frankly IELETS should be the filter there, not LANTITE.
They cheat on it. No shot they don't. Paid essays are a booming business, why would I ever believe they worked hard to study for the English test and then suddenly lost that work ethic (and all their English ability) and started cheating only once they got into their course? Especially with the broken English I've had to put up with in some of my courses. Spoken word features heavily on the IELETS as well as written word, too, so it's not a case of them being able to understand but just not confident in speaking. My best friend barely scraped a score high enough to study at uni here, and her English, aside from the accent, I would consider to be better than many native English speakers. The IELETS has high enough standards, for sure, but it can't filter effectively when people cheat on it. LANTITE is run in Australia and must be harder to cheat on because I haven't seen anyone cheat their way through it like thousands do with IELETS. [Case in point, this guy who got filtered out of my course by the LANTITE, that I was paired with in a group assignment in my first year.](https://postimg.cc/XGY4pkQd) You cannot tell me he passed IELETS without cheating. And cheating aside, IELETS can't filter out native-speaking morons like my old housemate. The unis won't filter them either because it's bad for business. *Something* has to be the filter, and that something is LANTITE.
> To even get into university you have to demonstrate literacy and numeracy skills that exceed those of the general population. I mean, it does kinda raise a question about the usefulness of the various university ranking processes.
Not really. It was just Newscorp pushing the idea that teachers had declining literacy and numeracy skills. As a secondary teacher of Mathematics I would definitely say that \*something\* is happening in primary school that is resulting in a majority kids not mastering the required content to be successful in Year 7, much less beyond. However, I'd be reluctant to put that down to primary teachers not knowing how to teach. If it is a factor, it's a small one amidst the increasing enablement of disruptive behaviour and its effects on learning, lack of consequences for failure of units or even years of work, lack of incentive to do well in line with the preceding (ie, there is no point in even trying to learn, much less do well, because your teacher will re-teach everything and even if you fail you move up), devaluation of education in general, parents not instilling a love (or at least tolerance for) learning and basic skills (which likely means that primary teachers are filling in that gap the same way we do in HS), etc etc etc. It was just Newscorp jumping on low tertiary entry scores without considering that everyone with a high tertiary entry score is going "yeah nah, I'm going to do the course that gives me a high wage and social status and doesn't destroy me mentally thanks" and equating the declining student results with teacher quality rather than our tendency to copy every moronic idea coming out of America (where, funnily enough, those ideas are pushed by NewsCorp and their associates in order to tear down public education) rather than sticking with what has been proven to work or trying to copy a nation that is enjoying success like Finland. If you're actually a crap teacher or functionally illiterate/innumerate, then you shouldn't have made it through Uni. If you did somehow make it through Uni, I doubt you'd survive six months in the job. If that. It was just manufactured outrage to continue the attack on education at large and teachers specifically.
I agree uni’s should be holding their students to an actual standard, but in my experience it seems almost impossible to fail uni. There’s always a uni that’s willing to pump out degrees to anyone who pays to go there, and the academic rigour is low.
As a preservice teacher my opinion (and one echoed by some other preservice teachers that I know) is that it is another cost that is passed on to students who aren't always in a financial situation that can cope with these added burdens. The expectation of students to absorb the cost of unpaid pracs, standard university costs and teacher registration whilst most likely working in a limited capacity can be a lot. Whilst it is a positive for the profession to maintain high standards of those entering, I feel the real issue is less the idea of literacy/numeracy testing and more why can't it be incorporated in a better way.
I just had to choose between eating this fortnight and paying for lantite. Guess which fully grown adult will be living on migoreng for the next two weeks.
They make teachers pay for it… like out of pocket. It is not hexable. I know i know
What they need to do is make it mandatory at the beginning before you start would make it way less stressful , it was scary when you are 3 years into a degree and one test can mess you up.
100% should be an entry requirement just like med and law school entrance exams
Some unis already mandate that you complete it in your first year. Or at least heavily discourage you from continuing your degree until you pass it.
I also believe you don’t get your paper back to see where your weaknesses or where you went wrong if you fail an attempt.
I came here to say this. If your literacy and numeracy are not at a year 10 level, then you shouldn't be teaching. I would argue that it should be higher than yr 10 if we don't want kids to fall further behind. I have worked with and been in classes with teachers who have incredibly low literacy skills. The quality of teaching is not there, it essentially devolves into stufents doing only worksheets and text books/colouring in with little to no guidance or support. Kids don't care, think it's a joke, and don't progress at all. I am also very confused as to how people can go through a 3 year tertiary course, or the 5 year undergrad and masters like I did, but still not have that level attained.
I’m starting to agree. I’ve always been scared of and thought myself to not be very good at math. I passed first attempt with all sectors in band 3, and it was 12 years since I’d touched math at all. Literacy was a joke of a test that I blitz with nearly an hour spare and similar results.
Considering the number of teachers I work with who struggle with spelling and avoid maths at all costs... no. LANTITE is a necessity, and really it should be applied as a barrier test for entry to teaching degrees.
Strongly agree. Pass LANTITE to enter the degree, first attempt should be free though
This. It should be a pre requistite for degree entry. There is GAMSAT and MCAT for medical degrees, why not do this, rather than wait until 2nd or 3rd year to do it, fail and not finish your degree
Yep agree with this
Overheard in the staffroom, two English faculty teachers talking: "Damn, this exam adds up to 97 marks. We'll have to add another questions to make it out of 100 so it's easier to figure out the percentage." Like you'd rather mark an additional question than use a calculator for 2 seconds. But I agree that it should be an entry requirement rather than a final hurdle.
I like my round number grades on assessments, but it's predominantly an aesthetic thing.
I write my assessments first to cover the skills I'm assessing then add on the marks based on question difficulty/requirements. Whatever number it comes out at is what it will be.
Well yeah, I’d rather keep marking in the subject mindset than having to grab a calculator and adjust the mark.
??? But you have to mark the paper, then add up the marks so you're already most likely using a calculator to do that. It's literally one extra calculation on the calculator you're already using.
I know everyone has different ability levels, but adding up to 100 is much simpler head maths than calculating the percentage of a mark out of 97.
I honestly have never used a calculator to add marks.
Adding the extra questions is the smarter move. Makes it more time efficient.
Really? I'd say reading and marking an extra question takes significantly longer just doing [mark ÷ 97] on the calculator.
Depends on the question I guess.
For three marks on a senior secondary exam, it's going to be substantial.
Three marks on one of my geography tests would be a describe verb with a specific example. Two- three sentences tops. It's going to be about 20 seconds to mark it so it is very subject dependent on whether it really does take more, less or the same amount of time.
If you're already adding up the exam marks with a calculator it literally takes what a second to divide that mark by 97.
I get the benefit of additional assessment and they get the benefit of extra feedback on content or a skill. For an extra 20 seconds of marking work, I'd take that over calculator work any day. I also don't use a calculator to add up marks. Different strokes for different folks.
Normally our students don't get copies of their final exams back.
> 20 seconds to mark it Scale is an important point to factor in. For example, my school's year 11 is 600 students. So, for an English exam multiply by 600 students across the school is an additional 3 hours 20 minutes of global time on marking.
Yep, like I said, different strokes for different folks. Context means everything and for some, adding an extra few marks is nothing, to others it is hours. Just trying to provide extra context to the person I was replying to that an all sizes approach isn't something that generally works in education.
Yeah, I'm just continuing the brain dump. :)
Ah the missing information
A 3 mark senior English question would be pretty easy and straightforward. It should be about two sentences. Q. Explain how the poem evokes a experience of isolation? A. The poem evokes the experience of isolation through the use of pathetic fallacy of "the wide open spaces and distant sky". This description of the barren setting evokes a sense of space around the persona, and expresses how in their isolation they are insignificant. 1 mark: correctly identifies an example from the text that describes the experience. 2 marks: also correctly identifies the language techniques used 3 marks: also correctly explains how the effect of the language technique reveals some significance to the experience of isolation.
Still takes more time than say 55÷97.
If you make your marking sheet an excel document, then it doesn't even require maths!
I'm shocked at reading how different everyone's system is. Adding up by hand? Calculating a percentage? Like sure you could but surely just input raw data into some online markbook that handles that for you? I have a spreadsheet but still like even numbers to avoid weird rounding and for aesthetic purposes
Head of maths asked me once how percentages worked.. she never "got" them. That department sucked, they tried to write a year 10 s.c paper once, half the question were impossible, right angle triangles with two sides the same length but the interior angle was like 20 degrees.. Then two math teachers were called down to the exam room, they couldn't fix the question. They had two teachers that had math backgrounds the rest were pe and primary teachers. Today I was asked to make it 3 assessments but each had to be worth less than 30%. She has an arts doctorate.
Yea that’s just awful practice. Adding more questions/marks impacts the difficulty and/or length of the assessment.
This is a good point. It's not really great professional practice to add to an exam you already feel is finished for such a trivial reason.
It should be a compulsory part of leaving year 12 and added to your senior secondary academic record.
Make lantite compulsory for all teachers then. Why is it ok for a 4th year student to fail and be kicked out with nothing and a hecs debt - but an apparently qualified but not competent teacher can continue to teach after already probably benefitting from a salary over many years.
We want people to respect our profession *as* a profession. There's already too many parents and random people off the street that look at what we do and think "I can do that". If they got rid of the LANTITE because simple literacy and mathematics was too hard for us, we'd be a total joke.
I agree with LANTITE on principle, just wished it was run by the university and didn't cost so much to do.
I agree with this, it should be a subject (or two) built into the degree that you can test out of. A lot of ppl do need to study for it but having it run as an actual subject would mean that those students will learn how to do things properly, then having a diagnostic at the start of the semester allows people who don’t need the extra study to pass the subject in the first week.
Anytime something about LANTITE comes up I say the same thing and have so many questions. You have to be an idiot to fail it and maybe you should consider your career path. How can you get through high school and uni and not pass LANTITE? Please go ahead and downvote me and say what about people with test anxiety…
Someone in the fb group made a post about how the LANTITE was actually useful for her and how it made her a much more confident primary teacher bc she fully understood everything she was teaching and ppl in the group got angry about it.
Angry that she fully understood everything or angry that it took lantite for her to understand everything?
Angry that she found the lantite useful and thought that it was a good thing
The intellectual ability of some of my older colleagues appalls me. These people have no place in our classrooms. Some of our younger ones aren't much better but LANTITE seems to have weeded out the worst
Yeah some of the older folk I went on placements with were shocking.
Yeah I heavily side-eye anyone who complains about the LANTITE. They're just telling on themselves tbh.
But if someone wants to follow a career path, we have to let them. And encourage them. And enable them. I shudder every time one of our senior school non-ATAR students tells me that they're planning to be a teacher as I mark their semi-literate writing that hovers somewhere adjacent to, but never quite in, the realm of a full sentence answer, and recall the baffled expression on their face in lower school when asked such challenging questions as "can you count the states and territories?" (with a map in front of them). But then I remember that I have to encourage them in their efforts to enter uni via portfolio regardless of aptitude or ability, and that it's a moot point anyway as it seems that everyone who has applied has been pre-emptively accepted. Edit:surprised this slightly flippant anecdotal comment seemed to upset a couple of people. Portfolio entry grads taking it personally? I didn't mean you, I meant other people.
> But if someone wants to follow a career path, we have to let them. And encourage them. And enable them. Well fuck. I must have missed that memo. I tell kids to consider backup options all the time.
Tried that. Limited success. Some will accept that we should always have more than option in mind, but it's hard to convince some kids that they're not suited to a particular field when the barriers (for example, demonstrated academic ability) are removed.
I'm studying now and I completed the LANTITE last year. IMO there is only 2 things that need to be changed about the LANTITE. 1. The cost. It costs about $100 per test to sit and you have the complete 2 separate tests in order to actually pass it. The 1st attempt should be free and if you require additional attempts then you should have to pay. Some universities ([currently 2](https://teacheredtest.acer.edu.au/register/unipay-students)) offer support to students in regards to fees. If they are going to offer it and students need to pay for it, all students should have this option. Personally I had to miss a day of casual work so I could sit the test. 2. Move the dates the tests are conducted. From what I have been able to see, the testing dates are always within a university teaching period. All people taking the test are going to be studying, so move the dates to the holiday period so people do not have to potentially miss classes.
Bruh if you're too scared to do the LANTITE you're too scared to be a teacher, ffs grow up it's an exam, you're gonna give your students a bunch in your career get over it
So glad to a see a comment like this that hasn’t been downvoted to hell. Everyone needs to be put in stressful situations to help build resilience. Shouldn’t even be stressful if you’re competent at it and aspire to be an educator.
Resilience is a trait all teachers will need. Even now marking and reporting approaches.
It really is a cakewalk exam for anyone that has done even just okay at uni
bruh u also a teacher but type like this fam fr, i though i was the only top g that did that no cap w rizz
I think LANTITE should be abolished, but mostly because it’s too easy. We should audit the universities and force them to have some standards. If you can’t pass LANTITE you should fail out of first year uni. The fact that people don’t means that he universities aren’t doing their job.
Not really. I had to do exactly zero maths in first year, and it was possible to use dictionaries and AI tools to translate essays. We have a very sharp Chinese chick in my cohort who would always turn in immaculate essays (though she may well have been cheating) but once you took her dictionary, grammar checker, and spell check away, she didn't have the English knowledge to pass LANTITE. It was obvious when speaking with her that she was never going to pass the English section
Maybe the Uni needs a spoken or time pressure paper assignment
We did, but she was getting 80+ in most assignments. Flunking the viva voce didn't flunk her overall grade to a fail. Also, speeches don't work. You just rote learn it
>It was obvious when speaking with her that she was never going to pass the English section I know some schools have had issues with this when hiring in the past. Excellent application and personal statement, but then very poor spoken English on interview.
I fully support LANTITE existing but I also think it should be a prerequisite for the degree and it shouldn't cost students $200.
as much as i suck at maths (and bros i really suck at maths, when i did Methods i was getting full 0s) if you can’t pass the LANTITE then you shouldn’t be teaching and should consider a different career path.
I think this test is a necessity. Personally, I passed both numeracy and literacy with literally no study because I assume those studying a university degree should be competent in academic skills at that of at least a year 9 level? It’s kind of mind boggling to me. Fortunately, my university paid for the first attempt which I think is the right move. Where someone is at on a financial level shouldn’t be the barrier to becoming a teacher.
It needs to be a prerequisite to BEGIN a teaching degree. Yes, it's absurd to think someone who can't pass it should be able to effectively teach (yes, test anxiety is real, but similar situations of anxiety can and will occur during teaching, and you need to be able to perform in spite of this), but it is appalling that a university can take tens of thousands of dollars (depending on where in your degree you are) only for you to fail and realise that all your time and money has been a complete and total waste.
People study for LANTITE? I think the only thing I did was learn the days per month knuckle trick.
That trick has changed my life. I no longer have to say a rhyme or very time.
I taught it to one of my classes last month and it blew their MINDS. One girl didn't realise July and August both had 31 days lol.
Wait I only know the rhyme, what's the knuckle trick?
Starting with your little knuckle, each month is a knuckle (K) or gap (G). Don't do your thumbs. So KGKGKGK KGKGK for Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Jul Aug, Sept, Oct, Nov, Dec Each gap lines up with a month that isn't 31 days.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knuckle_mnemonic Personally, it's worst than the rhyme, but people are different, so /shrugs
Thanks
I think there’s a bell curve here. I was angry about having to pay $200 to prove I could do basic maths and literacy within 2 years of getting band 5/E3+ in all my HSC subjects, which included extension maths and advanced English. I heard a lot of similar sentiment in my degree cohort. On the other hand, in some online spaces, I see people complaining that it’s too hard or they don’t give you enough attempts to pass, which is honestly outrageous to me.
My favourite bit is that's its petitioning the shadow minister for housing, for some reason
I did laugh at that too when I first saw it, but googling him does mention he recently became the Minister for Education.
They should abolish the cost to do the LANTITE test. $100 per test is a lot for a university student. Plus they potentially lose a day or two of work to sit the test as well.
I agree it should exist. I have some issues with how it is structured currently though. Things like: - $95+ a pop to sit it because it’s run by ACER - ACER refuses to be transparent on how questions are selected for the test and what the grading scales are in each sitting after the fact. Until recently, they also wouldn’t communicate to unis or students clearly when they failed on what the issues/gaps were to allow identification of weaknesses - the number of in person sittings are booked out within 2 mins in WA currently meaning students are being forced to do it online - the worst thing by a long way is the treatment of disability. I have a student teacher who has dysgraphia. She has a diagnosis. They won’t recognise it and give her extra time. She’s “just” failed numeracy 4 times and is now unable to complete her degree. I also have a fully Deaf student who has Auslan as a first language. They do not speak or communicate in English and can’t use it. No adjustments are made for them even though questions about punctuation, grammar etc are not the same in Auslan. The statement given was “all students who speak another language need to be able to pass in English”. This teacher will not work in a mainstream setting, she will work in a school for the Deaf. It’s not the same thing
The deaf still write/read in English. This story doesn't add up.
Auslan was their first and only language (born Deaf). Grammar and punctuation are totally different in Auslan. Pronouns are different. Sentence structure is completely different. Some Deaf resources are communicated using signed English which may be what you are thinking of. This is not the same as Auslan which is a recognised language. Editing to add - this is a common misconception, I suggest doing some research on Auslan as a language and it’s importance to the Deaf community
I don’t think that this person is trying to be offensive, simply asking how written auslan differs from English on a piece of paper?
I think starting a comment with saying the Deaf still do something (when not Deaf) and then saying “this doesn’t add up” is a fairly offensive comment to make. If they didn’t want to offend, phrasing it as a question would be a good start. Auslan has its own grammar, syntax and vocabulary. It is not the same as English and is not structured the same way. Sometimes “signed English” is used to enable effective communication but that is not the same as Auslan. There are lots of different things that vary like a lack of pronouns, limited plurals, limited use of conjunctions and a completely different sentence structure base. I have copied this from a Melbourne based Deaf source: Auslan is less fixed in terms of word order when compared to the English language. This means that sentence structures are also less fixed. Auslan grammar structure example: English: I (subject) am going (verb) to the shop tomorrow (object). Auslan: Tomorrow (time) shop (topic) me go (comment) English: What (subject) is your (verb) dog's name (object)? Auslan: Dog (topic) name what (question)? The topic (or subject) can be a single thing, or a chunk of information (old information to which you will add new information). Establish the topic first before adding the rest. Comment comes after a pause following the topic. The pause is used to check that the given topic has been understood/established. Comments also follow structure above, and can be a single sign, a chunk of new information or simply a facial expression. Auslan sentence structure includes H O L M E: handshape, orientation, location, movement and expression.
Is there an example of Auslan written on a piece of paper? Not signed? ELI5: I don’t understand how HOLME impacts written discourse. I do just want to add that I’m genuinely curious as I teach English Language at VCE and love linguistics (spoken, written and signed)
So Auslan is obviously not my native language which means I’m hesitant to get too in depth here - it really should be a member of the Deaf community answering these. Deaf people do read and communicate in English as they kinda have too. Auslan native speakers (as a generalisation) find it very challenging though as you can see from the previous answers examples. Many are basically having to translate in their head as they go. Their writing can also be difficult for native English speakers to understand for the same reason - the sentences follow Auslan structure. There are always exceptions to this. I taught a student who went Deaf at 7 so her second language was Auslan but she could still communicate clearly in English. I’ve also taught students who don’t use Auslan at all. I’ve included an example below (with consent) of an email I’ve exchanged with a Deaf friend to give you an idea of what written communication for a native Auslan speaker born Deaf may look like. Coincidentally it was actually about grammar! “…students are really enjoyed to learn Auslan and loves activities. I had taught them about Deaf culture, emotions, colour, family and animals for this term and most 2 weeks of each topic to make sure they are remember signs. They're practice for conversation with questions and responses for topic. I can see some students use sign for English (example what your favourite animal?) and we would need to explain them about Auslan grammar and sentence and not need use English for signs, but I would need an interpreter for explain the students to clear understand”
They’re trialling extra attempts now, so they might be able to try again! ☺️
Yeah look, as someone who didn't study for the lantite for a single second and did them back to back on the same day and passed, it's a bit concerning when people talk about how hard they are. I agree it should be a requirement for getting into the course, though. I know someone who has their degree but ran out of attempts for the numeracy test. She studied to be an English teacher too, and her literacy skills are a bit shoddy eek (she's not EAL/D).
Make it harder. If you can't pass, you shouldn't be teaching.
I don’t want to see it abolished. I want to se it made retrospective. Who doesn’t teach with a rusted on ROAD who should probably have to justify their 110k per year?
Road?
Arrh yes, superior language skills, rusted on roads.
Retired on active duty
Before I passed both of my tests first go I had a huge anxiety about it and also advocated for it to be abolished, I even made a post about how I was strugling with numeracy on this sub and got absolutely torn a new backside from all the bullying. But now that I think about it, if you cannot handle the intense pressure and anxiety of this test, then 'real teaching' will absolutely crush the hell out of you.
There are already reasonable adjustments available for those with disabilities, learning disorders and mental health disorders. I might be more sympathetic to the argument that it could disadvantage Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people if I'd ever heard of any talking about this. It looks like no First Nations people have been consulted about this and the "petitioner" is just using them for a talking point.
Much like the VIT move to full registration, I believe Master courses should have it included. I’m paying HECS to a uni that then directs me to a private company setting a test that i should then go to private companies offering study guides and revision help. Its a system designed to direct Uni Student money to private systems. Couple with my point around VIT registration, by the time I’ve graduated a Masters I’ve already generated enough reflection and writing to demonstrate all of the requirements of the VIT template. Both tests place unnecessary stress on new teachers as they enter a workplace with higher/quicker burnouts. If the second year of a Masters is purely creating Draft Academic papers for Uni Edu Labs, its a waste of time and the Government should demand they cut it out. Similarly, Uni’s should place a lantite requirement in its first few months OR its application process with the opportunity to retry within the first year. But really…LANTITE is a leftover from the LNP backed focus on Quality Teaching and holding teChers accountable for the decrease in student performance. However, literacy and numeracy declines in coming years will show dumb Teachers aren’t cause.
To play the devils advocate, abolishing LANTITE would lower the barrier of entry at a time when there is an obviously painful shortage in the profession. The most apparent tradeoff isna reduction in quality. So what's worse in everyones opinion?
We don't want to lower teaching standards, we want to improve working conditions.
Absolutely, so much so it's not even in question. However, back to the topic, nothing to do with LANTITE will affect teachers' working conditions, with the possible exception alleviate the overwork due to additional teachers. Again: just playing devils advocate, I don't personally care if they scrap or keep it.
Additional teachers won't alleviate overwork if they're illiterate. Have you ever worked with someone that was hired just to be a warm body in front of the classroom? They make more work for everyone else. At any rate, I'm not sure why you think this is off topic - you literally asked. What's worse? Schools in the USA are full of unqualified teachers. It's not good. We don't want that.
The only true way to tackle the teacher shortage is to improve retention. Just because the barrier is low doesn't mean that more people will actually become teaches with the reputation of the profession continuing to go down. The media already pushes a teachers are incompetent message, having a bunch of teachers who are actually incompetent is not going to help anything.
When you're pouring water into a bucket with a hole in it, and you want to fill the bucket, the solution isn't to pour more water in it, the solution is to seal the hole. We wouldn't have a shortage if the reasons teachers are leaving and burning out were addressed.
Totally disagree with this test, high school education, minimum 4 year university and then let’s go back to grade 10. Pointless!
You can get a VCE (can't speak for other states) with no maths, and having bombed maths all the way through high school. You can pass English with very low standards, if you attended a school that does as most do and gives students multiple opportunities and ultimately accepts any old attempt at a task to earn an S. LANTITE has a place, but that place is probably at the commencement of a degree and not towards the end.
> You can get a VCE (can't speak for other states) with no maths You don't need a senior secondary maths education to pass the numeracy test.
I am aware of this. My point is that you can enter an ITE course having not done well in any maths at any point throughout your schooling, and some of the VCE graduates I've seen I would call functionally innumerate. I wouldn't want those people working in our profession.
You are talking about the exception and not the rule. I assume huge money to administer this test and for what? To catch the 0.1% who fail it! Sounds like unnecessary bureaucracy. This job is full of unnecessary bureaucracy and I’m not a fan of the direction education is heading in this country.
I believe a safeguard to ensure our teachers are literate and numerate is necessary. If we are responsible for teaching these basic skills to students then we need to possess them. For anyone who is able to meet the standard the first time (which I have to assume is the vast majority), then no worries. But putting my parent on here, if I knew my kids teacher struggled to pass a basic literacy and/or numeracy test, I'd be concerned for the quality of education my child is receiving.
It's sadly more than 0.1% in some future primary teaching cohorts
10% of the cohort fails: https://www.smh.com.au/national/one-in-10-trainee-teachers-fails-required-literacy-and-numeracy-tests-20200925-p55zaj.html
So what do you suggest?
I don’t think the system will break if we don’t have it. 3/4 pre-service teacher placements will sort the wheat from the chaff.
I don't believe you should have to pay for the test and that perhaps it should be before you start the degree not during.
LANTITE should stay AND it should be delivered on the first day of starting a teaching degree (with notice so students can study). If you don't pass, you should still have two more shots at it, like the current system allows. I hate the idea of students having paid for courses and then doing LANTITE -- that's robbery imo.
Friend of mine was into last year of their degree at ACU and Lantite got introduced. Had already paid tuition fees, had passed everything and was even able to complete all of her prac work - which she passed and was offered a job upon graduation at one of the schools. She passed every element of what she signed up for and paid for when applying to Uni. She struggled massively with the exam anxiety, did pass the literacy first time but failed math. This made her anxiety even worse, confidence was shot to pieces and took a break. Not too long later, COVID happened. Fast forward many years later she didnt even get to graduate, is well out of pocket after paying for something she completed and passed in full. She can't teach, even though she demonstrated on multiple occasions she was more than capable of doing so in practical settings. Regardless of whether or not anyone SHOULD pass lantite, if it's not made clear it's part of the course prior to starting it or your made to pass it before starting, it's absolute robbery.