Tag: CoL

  • NZEI: Not Zealous Enough. Ick.

    Three years ago the government announced their latest plan for collectives of schools to get together and share in the pot of $359 Million to share teachers, resources, and knowledge. Naturally, and rightly, NZEI took the initiative to their members. The following was the result:

    Primary Teachers and Principals vote to put kids first… 21 August 2014

    “Teachers and principals have voted overwhelmingly against the Government’s controversial “Investing in Educational Success” policy, including proposed highly-paid principal and teacher roles.

    A resounding 93 percent of teachers and principals voted “no confidence” in the government’s plan.

    When asked whether they wanted to try to reshape the policy or start again, 73 percent voted to reject the proposed new roles outright rather than try to change the policy through negotiation.”

     

    Since then, despite 93% of its members saying no thanks, NZEI have gone into negotiations with the Government, and come up with a revised outline for the IES, and a new label called “Communities of Learning”. But essentially they’ve ended up with the same turd, it’s just slightly more polished – as I wrote about here.


    Now, with the arrival of an election in September, the latest campaign from NZEI is to get more people in to vote, assuming that the more people they get in to vote, the more likely they are to get votes in ‘Teachers’ favour. The initiative is not targeting parents, it is in fact, targeting the students to get them to bring their parents along to vote.

    Quite frankly, I’m disgusted by this approach to working for Teachers.

    It is less than amicable, and has a range of issues that all lead to NZEI losing face. Big time.

    For a much more succinct account of these issues, head over to Whale Oil’s take on things. The fact that this has been picked up by Whale Oil, should be reason enough to look at this skeptically.


    As a teacher, I don’t pay NZEI to meddle in politics. I pay them to support me. To listen when we have a vote and do what we ask them to do (since they asked us what we wanted them to do). I pay them to negotiate on my behalf with the government, not go into political propaganda against them and try and influence votes through children. I find that intolerable.

    Some will say that if I don’t like it, then I should cease membership with them.

    While that’s fine in theory, I’m caught in a rock and a hard place. Don’t forget – I am a male primary school teacher. Few and far between – for a reason. It’s an incredibly risky workplace, and while I can safely say nothing is ever going to happen, I prefer to have the backing of NZEI’s lawyers than having to wrangle myself out of any false accusations. So unlike many who can, and have, and will, I can not just simply cease paying my membership, as it is security for me in my position as a male teacher.

    In conclusion; NZEI have lost any mana they might have had. I have no confidence in them, and will not be supporting them in any future plans.

  • Community of Learning: Devoid of Individuality

    Over the last few nights, I have worked away going through all 61 of the accepted and approved Achievement Challenges that active CoL’s have put out.

    I spent time going through each one and noting down the key aspects of each. This included noting if they were based around National Standards, NCEA, Curriculum subject, and any other factors, such as Ethnicity or Gender focus, or a mixture of everything.

    These Communities of Learning are all unique. They all represent different parts of the country, and the schools in them reflect the communities and whanau who they serve. They are made up of a myriad of individuals who teach and lead within them and who work tirelessly at solving a range of different achievement challenges daily.

    Yet, out of the 180 CoL’s, only 61 have been accepted so far. Many, many of them have had to be returned with a “FAIL” on the grade paper, and asked to resubmit. Countless have been adjusted and modified to include certain aspects that the Ministry and the Government want to see in them. The following infographic shows this beyond doubt, that there is a definite agenda behind what the Ministry will accept as appropriate achievement challenges. Very few of them take into account any kind of individual or creative focus in which a Community of Learning might wish to operate and instead, pushes and prods until that CoL fits into the pre-determined box, ready to be shipped off.

    [su_box title=”Communities of Learning – March 2017″]View the enlightening infographic I made here.[/su_box]

     

    In the initial stages, schools were gun ho, with vast varieties of creative innovations for what these challenges could be and what would lead to set one community aside from another. Many delved into what was important to them and their community when deciding on their achievement challenges.

    In a quiet hush of excitement and trepardation rolled into one as the response envelope was opened. A quick skim to see if the achievement challenges had been accepted.

    No. Instead what many CoLs got was a rejection letter of their achievement challenges, with some suggestions and examples of what might be a better challenge.

    The result of this is quite evident where two years of returned achievement challenges until the CoLs came up with one that would fit into the box that the Ministry aresqueezing is all into.
    Of the 61 CoL’s that have currently (March 2017) had their achievement challenges accepted, I worked out the following stats:

    83% have something about Maths.

    88% have something about Writing. Of those, 60% are about National Standards.

    70% of CoLs want improvement at Achieving Level 2 NCEA.

    36% are focussed on Maori achievement in some way, and 29% on boys achievement.

    10% focus on additional learning needs.

    Next to none have anything holistic, such as Hauora (wellbeing) or creativity, mindfulness or community focuses, or other curriculum areas such as Science or the Arts.

    Make what you will of that.

     

  • CoLs: Achievement Challenge Numbers

    Part of establishing a CoL has been the task of setting an “Achievement Challenge” that all schools in your CoL will aim for and target.

    In the initial stages, schools were gun ho, with vast varieties of creative innovations for what these challenges could be and what would lead to set one community aside from another. Many delved into what was important to them and their community when deciding on their achievement challenges.

    In a quiet hush of excitement and trepardation rolled into one as the response envelope was opened. A quick skim to see if the achievement challenges had been accepted.

    No. Instead what many CoLs got was a rejection letter of their achievement challenges, with some suggestions and examples of what might be a better challenge.

    The result of this is quite evident where two years of returned achievement challenges until the CoLs came up with one that would fit into the box that the Ministry aresqueezing is all into.
    Of the 61 CoL’s that have currently (March 2017) had their achievement challenges accepted, I worked out the following stats:

    83% have something about Maths.

    88% have something about Writing. Of those, 60% are about National Standards.

    70% of CoLs want improvement at Achieving Level 2 NCEA.

    36% are focussed on Maori achievement in some way, and 29% on boys achievement.

    10% focus on additional learning needs.

    Next to none have anything holistic, such as Hauora (wellbeing) or creativity, mindfulness or community focuses, or other curriculum areas such as Science or the Arts.

    Make what you will of that.

  • CoL: Corruption on Learning

    The next phase of the privatisation of the education system is in full swing, with a series of schools being lured by the promise of $365million into Communities of Learning.
    Although there was a slight majority of 93% of NZEI voters voting to exit the negotiation tent when the Corruption of Schools initiative was announced, they continued working with the Ministry to develop a watered down version that is supposedly more palatable version of it.

    Unfortunately, as I have written in the past, a poisoned apple is still poisoned even if you polish it up nice, red and juicy. Or in slightly more crass terms; I’m not going to be eating a turd just because you’ve put chocolate icing on it.

    Groups of schools were then asked to submit expressions of interest into forming or joining a CoL and many did to explore the options. However, an “expression of interest” was taken by the Ministry as a firm “yes” of commitment, and when consulted about whether a CoL was to be formed, the Ministry responded with “well you’ve signed an expression of interest so you’re in one”. Fantastic. This is of course a numbers game, and the Ministry will spin it whichever way it can to show that it is working. Take this map for example. It says where all the communities of learning are around the country and all the schools involved, and all the students from those schools – failing to actually realise that as of March 2017, 61 CoL’s have approved achievement challenges. As of December 2016 there were 180 CoL’s, so only one third have had the go ahead on an achievement challenge. These achievement challenges essentially set a direction for the CoL and until they have been approved, the CoL is somewhat rudderless and ceases to exist. Thus, the Ministry’s numbers are overly inflated as to how many CoL’s there are, and how many schools are actually participating in one.

    At the NZPF Moot last week, Whetu Cormick spoke of the plans the Government is making, with international visits to the UK where Communities of Learning models have been rolled out and the devastating nature of them has become evident. They all centre around privatising education, and will spell the biggest asset sale in recent New Zealand history.

    Of course, as Whetu states, all of this is presented to the public and parents as a way for schools to be equally equipped, for resources to be shared. It’s far too difficult to argue, because all of these things seem very appealing at face value. However, the implications of these lead us to the issues that the UK and US are facing; neither of which has raised any kind of improvement in the achievement results of students. Of course, using National Standards to measure this is completely flawed anyway.

    What I find somewhat amusing is that every opportunity the minister gets at the moment she seems obligated to say “parents should get the choice”. But under this CoL model, schools will have a set of expectations dumped on them and they will all conform to eventually all be the same, with no room for individuality or working with the community. No chance to build a school curriculum or focussing on what is important to that school’s culture.

    I would be very interested to hear from anyone who is in a school involved with a CoL;

    • What are your experiences of it so far? Positive? Indifferent? Negative?
    • What are your “achievement challenges”? How do they relate to your students at your school?
    • Is the CoL having a positive impact on your school, and on student achievement?

    Related Reading

  • Hekia Parata: Let’s be better learning

    I do love it when the Minister writes an open letter. It means she says what she thinks people want to hear, rather than what she actually does when people aren’t looking, taking the leadership stance of “Do as I say, not as I do”. In it, the minister harps on about providing better learning – a term that is so contrary to it’s original use. To learn is to aquire, receive, be given knowledge. To teach is to give, present, or to pass down knowledge. But there seems to be this trend to use “learning” instead of “teaching” which I disagree with; probably in an effort to degrade the skill required to be a teacher.

    The legendary Boonman took to his usual satire in response to this article, and as can be expected, didn’t hold back with the comedy; which although is somewhat hilarious, is also true – which is why we laugh (because if we didn’t; we would cry).

    However much I would like to be as satirical, I figured I would merely provide some teacher feedback, some next learning steps on the writing sample provided to us from Ms Parata’s pen. I hope that she will take the feedback on board, and work with her teacher to address some of the errors in her writing.
    Read the original letter here: Hekia Parata: All ears to anyone ‘seriously committed’ to improving kids’ learning.

    Let’s begin learning.


    New Zealand has a very good education system. That’s beyond debate. Can we make it better? Yes, we can and we must.

    We need to either work on your use of tense, or your spelling. You’ve used “has”, where as you need to have used “had”. Your sentence should read “New Zealand had a very good education system”. In addition to this, I’d probably shy away from Bob the Builder quotes, and rely more on tried and true cliché such as “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.

    As a passionate New Zealander and as a mum, I want to see an education system that delivers quality learning for every child and young person every day. Their achievement matters, to their families, their communities – and to me.

    There is a chance that this paragraph may come across as bragging or somewhat arrogant. I am a New Zealander (and one might question my passion for the title under the current government) but I am not a mum. But I still want to see a quality education system in this country. Is my opinion not as important or passionate as yours because I have not been with child? Yet becoming a teacher without this does make my level of passion for education and learning far greater than most given most don’t want anything to do with schools unless they have children.

    As a teacher, I can safely say that if we have a “very good education system” that you stated in part 1, then we have very good quality “learning” each and every day for each child or young person. However, to presume that their achievement matters to their family is a bit much, unless you have personally interviewed them all. Likewise, communities usually don’t focus around the achievement rates of their young people. From my experience, families are focussed on raising young children to be the best they can be in all areas of life. Sometimes sports become more important than achievement rates, as much as overseas holidays or trips do. They tend to want to provide experiences that will assist with creating well rounded individuals. Communities also tend to focus not on achievement rates, but solutions to keeping the young people off the street, running groups, clubs, or catching up with the latest gossip or what not. They tend to focus on them as people, instead of as data, numbers, and test takers.

    I visit schools right across New Zealand on a regular basis, seeing for myself what’s happening in our classrooms. I speak to teachers, principals and parents about what I, as the Education Minister, can do to support them to ensure our kids are achieving. 

    It’s refreshing to hear that you get to travel around the country visiting schools. It would be such a wonderful experience to go around and see what a hard job teachers actually have, and what a great job they are already doing.

    I would suggest the use of a wider vocabulary instead of “speak to”, you could use the term “ask”. However, as I know, you have very little interest in hearing what teachers, principals, and parents have to say about what you can do to support them. I suspect you would just tell them what you will do, and leave it up to them to change what they do so that what you’ve decided to do will be of benefit to them.

    The proposed changes that we’re making in education are all about putting our kids at the centre of the education system, lifting the educational success of every young New Zealander. 

    Once again, this is an incredibly presumptuous statement, that a) kids weren’t at the centre of previous education systems, (which would be somewhat bizarre if that weren’t the case) – and b) that the changes that you’re making with or without the support of the education sector will lift the educational success of every child, more so than what the current system is and has already been doing before you stepped into power.

    This means ensuring we get the right funding for the right children at the right time. That there are a wide range of education options that reflect our modern era, and that schools are supported in the best possible way to ensure that every child is learning the skills and knowledge they need to succeed in life.

    I applaud your efforts in providing the right funding for the right children. However, your actions speak louder than words, and so far, you’ve shown a tendency to waste money on failing charter schools rather than investing in children. I suspect also, that the “right funding” that you talk about will, in turn, mean more funding, which your fellow minister in finances may wish to have a few words to you about.

    Schools also need to be supported to know this learning is taking place to make sure they’re doing the best job they can for our kids.

    Another presumptive statement Hekia. You are obviously not very aware of your audience when you write, a skill taught and learned in Level 3 of the curriculum by 9 and 10 year olds. Schools are already very aware of the learning taking place and the knowledge and skills required of students in this modern age. However, the basics of reading, writing, and maths are unlikely to change, and while you continue to maintain the expectation that schools assess against the National Standards, schools will unfortunately be forced to spend their time teaching and “learning” in these three curriculum areas.

    Our education system is well funded. At $11.04 billion this year it is the biggest ever investment in early childhood education and schools. That’s more than we spend on police, defence, transport, conservation and foreign affairs combined.

    Please refer to my earlier comment regarding charter schools. Maybe that might free up some of these funds for police, defense, and transport all of which are asking for more government funding.

    As I’ve often said, “that’s a shipload of money”.

    A very good attempt at the use of a familiar phrase or “kīanga”. However, it is not a ship full of money that is coming into harbour, because ships can carry a full load worth a lot more than $11.04b in notes alone.

    And that “shipload” is growing. Funding hasn’t been frozen. Schools’ operational funding has increased by $12.3m for next year taking it to a total of $1.35 billion.

    Once again, please refer to previous comment about ship load. It’s “shitload”; meaning a heck of a lot of excreetment.

    Also, I’m not sure coming out with fictional information in such an open letter is appropriate. Please read this article re: funding freeze.

    Spending has also increased by more than inflation, and I’m not expecting that to change any time soon.

    Yet the teachers who teach the children who you have now put at the centre of your education plan and the support staff who help them are given minor increases that do not keep up with the increases of living? I strongly suggest rewording or even removing this statement from your piece.

    The Funding Review currently taking place is focussed as much on whether we are getting the best for all these taxpayer bucks, as well as what more we might need.

    I’m not sure if using the colloquial term for “money” is the best use of your Thesaurus, Hekia. By using “bucks” it makes it seem unimportant, unvalued, taken for granted, or even rudimentary to your audience. Once again, you should consider your audience when writing this, considering the majority of them will be taxpayers themselves and probably would like you to respect their hard earned money a little more than calling it “bucks”.

    There are seven proposals being looked at as part of the Review and leaders from right across education have been included in the early development of these potential changes.

    The legislation currently making its way through Parliament is about providing more flexibility, not only to schools and early learning providers, but to parents as well.

    That is one thing it is providing – more flexibility. However, you need to add more details about the other things that it will bring. Details such as larger class sizes, more work for teachers, a national database of students that will track them through every year of their schooling. It’s details like these that your readers are interested in, even if you are not too keen on them yourself.

    New Communities of Learning, or Kahui Ako, are also helping schools and services to work together for the benefit of their students.

    Once again Minister, you need to add more details to how this is happening, and how it is benefiting the needs of individual students in their individual schools. Maybe alluding to the fact that this will lead to one principal and one board running multiple schools. No doubt this will free up some more of that “shipload” of bucks the education uses.

    I’ve consistently listened to the teacher unions since I came into the education portfolio, regularly meeting with them and working with them on a number of important initiatives.

    For the first time you have considered your audience, though it is important that when you do, you come across as sincere and truthful, rather than making things up. Also; I don’t believe you come “into” a portfolio. I suspect you were given it. Maybe you could reword your sentence to be a little less fictional by saying “I’ve consistently listened to the teacher unions bleating on since I received the education portfolio, regularly seeing them banging on my door, and ignoring them on a number of important initiatives until they give in and I do what I want anyway.”. I also find it ironic that hours after writing this letter, you leave on a trip meaning, for the third time in five years, you have declined the invite to said teacher union (NZEI Te Riu Roa) conference. That’s another example where actions speak louder than words.

    I will work with any groups or individuals that are seriously committed to improving children’s learning and raising achievement. 

    This sentence is somewhat contradictory. I would say that it would be almost impossible not to work with yourself or your team on this. Will you have to demonstrate to yourself that you are, in fact, serious and committed to improving children’s learning before you will work with yourself? I know for one that the under-secretary of Education has no commitment to improving children’s learning, and if he does, it’s certainly not serious.

    Everything I’m working towards is about putting children and their achievement at the centre of the education system.
    It’s about lifting the learning potential of every child, so we can continue to grow as a nation, and prosper. It’s about preparing young New Zealanders for a contrary, challenging, exciting world.

    I’m not sure you have to continue to make things up and over-exaggerate about child achievement. I also think you should further consult your thesaurus regarding the words to describe the world. Contrary for example is a word that I would have thought you would be all too familiar with, especially with the number of backing down you’ve had to do in your time as Minister of Education. Maybe a “better, challenging, exciting world” might read better, especially as it provokes some sort of inspiration or hope for the young people who are lucky enough to be able to read this far into your letter without drifting off to sleep.

    Kids learning to flyI want our education system to ensure that every Kiwi kid can fly!

    That is a bold attempt with the use of metaphor  in your writing, Hekia, and definitely a great concluding sentence that really brings a climax to your points. However, I suspect that this will lead to some confusion as to the literal meaning of your sentence.For instance, if you’re wanting children to fly, they will need to evolve into a creature with wings, or maybe you are intending to use some of the shipload of bucks to subsidise the cost of airline tickets for children? Your intentions are not clear.

    * Hekia Parata is the Education Minister

    I suspect with Writing this poor with so many clinical errors, at this time in your political career, that in due course, you should be prepared to amend this line, using the past tense “was” instead of the present tense “is”.

    Teacher’s Note: I apologise for the over analysis of this Writing sample, though as you and your advisors have said in the past; data is the key to success. The more data I have on this Writing sample, the better success you will have. Though at this stage, you are still falling well below the expected level and unfortunately, this will result in you being required to find another school who are prepared to put up with your poor achievement rates. Maybe the charter school down the road will take you in.

  • Deathstar

    After another Ministry of Education hui for principals, a comment was made that the whole fiasco of the Community of Schools / Community of Learning negotiations with NZEI, have left teachers “…with the Deathstar, but we get to choose what colour lasers they use!”. I found it quite comical, and certainly falls inline with my views on the IES which can be found here.

  • Community of Learning Mincer

    In relation to Ministry comments at a recent Community of Learning hui for Board of Trustees.

    “The Community of Learning… is a pathway… to move a student through the pipeline…”