UNLEASH

ED

Tag: education

  • Untrained Teachers Coming to a School Near You.

    There’s been quite a lot on the go this week in educational politics.

    But this one is one that should have every parent, school, and child very concerned.

    Education Minister Hekia Parata defends trainee teachers in new legislation

    At the release of the plans for partnership schools, there was very little surprise that they could hire who ever they liked as teachers, so that specially skilled and experts in different fields could work in these schools. It was advertised for the likes of Willie Apirana or Tana Umaga could be in front of a classroom and motivate and inspire children across a range of contexts and learning. Quite why they would want to be in a classroom instead of what they already do quite well, I don’t know.

    However, at the same time, the Minister tightened the reigns over the Education Council, and the regulations around appraisal and registration were put under the spotlight.

    This week however, the Minister has made a quick amendment to the Education Legislation Bill, that will essentially allow unqualified people to teach in state schools.

    “The proposed amendment to the Education Legislation Bill allows schools to establish a “trainee teaching” position for a school.

    According to NZEI, the primary teachers’ union, a “last-minute” change lets schools cheaply hire an “unqualified person in an unsupervised teaching role” while they did an initial teacher training programme.

    There has already been a lot made of the Teach First programme, where after a ridiculously short training period, teachers are pushed out into the real world with qualification to teach in the classroom, and many criticisms have been made of it.

    But why does the Minister suddenly need more teachers? We’re told that only 15% of graduates land a full time job.

    It’s simple.

    Experienced teachers cost money through salary to keep on staff. By reducing the number of experienced staff with jobs (through whatever method) they can be replaced by beginning staff who are paid less, due to the step that they will be starting on.

    At a recent meeting, when discussing the negotiations between NZEI and the Ministry for the latest collective agreement where the Education Council will be paying for the registration of teachers, Hekia Parata mentioned that she finds it strange that teachers don’t want to pay money into the Education Council; and that instead of paying into the union (NZEI) we should be paying into the Education Council.

    (Side Note: I might actually consider this if I had some kind of say on the Education Council; but if all the members on the council are simply appointed by the minister herself, then it is undemocratic and does not warrant my ‘subscription’.)

    In addition to this, David Seymour has weighed in on a different factor, but also brought into question the place of unions in the Secondary sector. “But what I would say is that all good, hard working teachers up and down the country might want to ask themselves if they want to be a member of an organisation that puts ideology ahead of kids like this.” – David Seymour

    What does this mean? Well, quite clearly, Hekia and her understudy don’t want the unions to exist. If teachers began paying into the Education Council instead of NZEI, then the union would cease to exist. If teachers leave unions on ‘moral’ grounds, then they will cease to exist. With all the control held within the Education Council, the Ministry can begin to tighten the screws even more on registration, and essentially drive out existing teachers. This has already begun to happen by using the whole vulnerable children act and finding “predators” that exist in the system. Each new case of child abuse from teachers or workers in schools as fuel to the fire of tightening the registration process, until even those of us who are great teachers, trained fully, and have a wealth of experience will be forced out as well.

    But it’s okay. Because even before they have completed training (which is already so minimal it’s under question) those enrolled in the Teach First programme can begin teaching in permanent positions around the country to replace the teachers who leave.

    No doubt, Hekia will come out with her standard response “It’s simply not true”, and the fact that there is no evidence to suggest this will happen is not a reason to ignore this as a threat in the future. The logical steps and the progression of this thing called GERM is taking place, and we’re seeing it happen right in front of it. They are put in for good reason, such as the registration process to weed out ‘those’ teachers, but their bigger mission opens it up to much more deviant possibilities.

    Watch this space people. Watch this space!

  • ERO Shrine

    ERO Publications

    Over the last few months; actually since the start of this year, I have noticed a definite increase in propaganda…I mean… publications from our beloved at the Education Review Office (the independent reviewer of schools that is run by the government – who also runs the Ministry of Education – go figure!).

    So I headed over to their website and thankfully in this technology day and age, it has been incredibly easy for people to archive their documents as PDF’s and have them available for all.

    When I got there, I wanted to see just how many publications there were. I started counting.

    As I was counting, I began to wonder a few things. Were these publications on a schedule? Were there certain months or time of the year that these are released? How long do school leaders get to peruse these wonderful documents before the next one gets sent out?

    Getting Data

    So as I often do, I started gathering data (which we now know to be the silver bullet in saving the education of Maori children). This lead me to some interesting discoveries, especially as we go back in time.

    Initially, I went back to 2010 – the year I got my first full time teaching placement. Then I realised there were certain other things that occurred that year, such as the roll out of National Standards.

    It was also soon after this, in 2011, that the Minister of Education Hekia Parata took office after Anne Tolley was somewhat swept aside (having already done the damage needed in rolling out the Standards).

    So I went back further. Let’s say, 2007, then 2008, when the current government took office. That’s a good period of time.

    Findings

    Here’s what I found:

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    I wrote out the date of each publication and put it into a very simple graph.

    From this, it is quite clear to see that there is a significant increase in the number of publications ERO is sending out to schools about best practises, about leadership in schools, about review, inclusivity, inquiry, and a myriad of other pedagogical egregiousness.

    Volume & Numbers

    Look at the numbers alone. Schools have gone from having 2 – 5 documents to read each year, to suddenly up around the 20 mark. Proponents for these documents will suggest that it is for the good of all schools to read, that it provides a more vigorous form of guidance and the assimilation of best practise across the country.

    However, there are many other factors that these documents bring upon the education sector.

    Firstly, time.

    Time

    In 2007 and 2008 there were five publications each year. Counting up the number of days between each of these five publications, it gave school leaders and board of trustees a whopping 55 days (approx) to read, digest, mull over, and apply the findings in these reports.

    By 2010, schools had less than a month. By 2013, schools were having just over a fortnight to read these publications, as the number of publications balloons to 20 publications in the year – four times the amount of reading to do. By March 2016, Schools have already received 8 documents from the Office, with an average of 12 days between each.

    On average, the publications range from about 25 pages in length, to about 60, with varying degrees of content. The majority are around 30 pages in length.

    In addition to this, expecting only 5 documents to be read throughout the year is not out of the realm of possibility. If we were to pay Principals their time to read these wonderful documents  the cost would be somewhat minimal. The average reading speed of 200-250 words per minute applies to non-technical material. Unfortunately, as anyone who has taken the time to flick through these ERO publications, they are full of technical terms used with education, and the editors thesaurus gets a good workout as they condense twelve easy to understand words into two obscure words that generally require deciphering. For such technical material, the average drops to 50-70 words per minute. This translates to 5-6 minutes per A4 page. If the document has 30 pages, then we can safely assume that this will take the average school principal 180 minutes to read each document. That’s 3 hours of a Principal’s time to read through each document.

    3 hours.

    Let’s put that in context. That’s half of the school day (contact time).

    You can start to see how this might start to grow exponentially, especially when a total of 15 hours per year might be spent in 2007, to suddenly 60 hours needed in 2013. In the three months to March this year, a whopping 24 hours would be needed to get through all the publications to date. That’s a whole day.

    Cost

    As we all know, time means money, and we can see how looking at the time it takes naturally moves into the cost to tax-payers that these publications might take.

    In New Zealand there are a total of 2,538 schools. Let’s assume (for ERO’s sake) that each school only gets one copy of the publication sent to them. That’s easy maths. That’s 2,538 copies. A reasonable sized print run.

    In 2007, there were 2,590 schools. Multiply this by the 5 publications printed in that year, and there’s a total of 12,950 documents.

    Postage

    Assuming that it was sent out by fast-post to schools, the cost back for postage in 2007 was $1.50.

    It’s okay. I’ll do the maths for you. Its $19K and change. Yup. $19,000.

    Now, it may not be quite that bad. Maybe government departments get discounted postage rights, especially when sending in bulk maybe. But still….

    Fast forward to 2016. Postage for one document is $3 in a foolscap size envelope. Fast-post.

    In 2016 already, there has been 8 documents sent to the 2,538 schools (20,304). We’re at $60K in postage by March.

    Printing

    Printing costs are another matter.

    I haven’t been able to find out the company that the NZ Government or ERO might use for printing these documents.

    However, going to Print.com/nz, I was able to get a rough price for an A4 portrait document. Granted, the pages are glossy (ERO’s pages are matte), and only 120gsm (ERO’s pages feel more like 300gsm) but the price is $5.42 per document.

    We have to assume that the Government would get some suitable discount on this price, but this is about as good as I could find.

    So. More maths.

    If the cost of postage has doubled since 2007, then it is possible that the cost of printing has also doubled in that time.

    So for the 12,950 copies in 2007, this would cost $35K. Adding on the postage bill, and we’re looking at $54,000.

    By March 2016, using the current printing costs described above, ERO has spent $110,000. Add on the $60K postage, and there’s a whopping 170K bill to be paid.

    At it’s peak in 2013, there were 20 documents sent to 2,539 schools. Assuming printing and postage will be somewhere in between the 2007 and 2016 prices, we can surmise that Printing would be about $4.07, and postage at $2.25.

    All up, the ERO would be fitting a 2013 bill of some $465,017.85.

    $465K for a bunch of booklets that principals would be hard pushed to find 60 hours to set aside to read, let alone implement.

    Inaccuracies

    For reference, I do realise there are a lot of assumptions being made, and not only those that I have mentioned above. I’m very aware that not every principal or school would be required to read every document put out by ERO. For example, some of the documents are for ECE, some for Primary, and some for Secondary, and it’s fairly certain that ERO would not be expecting Primary Schools to be pouring over a document about Science teaching and achievement rates in Secondary Schools – and vice versa. There are other areas where the implications have been stretched – I will admit to that.

    But the reality is, these documents do need printing, and they do need sending, and they do need reading.

    And it seems like the number of publications are only but increasing. These publications are swamping principals desks, keeping them from their core business instead of providing insight, guidance, or help. Schools are being suffocated with the sheer volume of documents clogging up the leaders and bringing them to a grinding halt, staggering and stumbling until they can breathe no more; crushed by the weight of layers and layers of 300gsm matte paged booklets.

     

    Happy reading everyone!

     

     

  • Porirua children benefit from lawyers helping with homework | Stuff.co.nz

    Porirua children get homework help from a group of Wellington lawyers.

    Source: Porirua children benefit from lawyers helping with homework | Stuff.co.nz

     

    I actually can’t think of why such initiatives haven’t been encouraged or set up prior to this. Good on the workplaces that do allow its employees to give back to the community in different ways.

  • Post-Mortem: UK Public Schooling

    Post Mortem: UK public schooling.

    Family: UK Government – related to: US, NZ.

    Death: Terminated by family.

    Age: 100 years of publicly funded education

    References: http://www.bbc.com/news/education-35814215

    General Body Condition: Diminished frame with minimal experts. Main organs shut down. Donors needed.

    CLINICAL HISTORY:

    The patient had undergone a variety of surgeries recently, and had come under attack from GERM(s) in quite a severe way. The use of GERM had become quite pronounced and at this time, the although the doctors recommended further diagnosis be undertaken from specialists, the family has asked that the life support be switched off and the body be laid to rest.

    POST-MORTEM FINDINGS:

    • Poor academic results according to nationalised testing
    • Poor performing teachers at schools with poor results. (Unconfirmed)
    • Large quantities of GERM infecting the hosts (Department of Education)
    • MGD (Michael Gove Disease) present in host from 2010.
    • Morgan-Nicky Virus spread throughout workforce from 2011.
    • Strong discomfort from Local Authorities.
    • Records show that GERM had affected only 14.5% of the 16,766 Public Schools. It was based on this data that lead family to believe that terminating public schools was a good idea.

    It is with regret that Public Schooling in the UK will be terminated, as of Thursday 17 March, 2016.

  • That strange quiet kid

    But they do their work. They get on well enough with others. They coast through the year, and by the end of the following year you’ve already forgotten them.

    This here is a story of what I would consider one of those kids. She even describes her highschool years as “very dedicated, very studious, very disciplined” but also “a bit insecure” as she told in an interview, “I used to get made fun of for being either too provocative or too eccentric, so I started to tone it down. I didn’t fit in, and I felt like a freak.”

    Fast forward to 2016, and this eccentric, provocative, insecure girl has just performed the most loud, proud, and magnificent performance on a world stage.

    As the 50th Super Bowl kicks off, the voice of Lady Gaga, accompanied beautifully by the soft chimes of a piano, rings out around Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara as she sings the National Anthem of her country. There is no bravado. No arrogance. No ego. No overperforming. No bizarre meat dress. Nothing weird. Just a simple, humble voice piercing the aura of the occasion, and reaching in and touching hearts around the stadium and the world.

    [su_note note_color=”#f4f4f4″]Apologies, but the NFL has insisted that the content only be played on Youtube. Please click the video to watch it there.[/su_note]

    As tears roll down her cheeks, you can see that this isn’t just about singing the National Anthem. This isn’t just the sense of occasion on the world’s biggest stage. This isn’t a show, or even a performance. This is much more than that. This is that small, quiet, insecure, weird kid in the class making it.

    And making it big.

    Not a single note falls out of place. Not a note out of time, or a word unfinished. Not a miscued start, not a preempted moment. She conducts herself, and works seamlessly with her accompaniment throughout the stops, pauses, pianissimo, forte, and crescendos. She softens her tone and draws everyone in, then belts out the strongest line flawlessly. She connects with everyone in the stadium. The players forget about singing, and even the reason they are there. Their coach’s hearts melted, and tears appear in the eyes of the toughest of men on the field.

    As the middle of the anthem hits home, you get the feeling that the glamour and glitz of her career are now forgotten. The 28 million albums she has sold are incredibly insignificant, as are her 6 Grammy Awards.

    No. This is Lady Gaga making it on the world stage.

    So, I implore you, as a teacher; never ignore the weird kid. Never underestimate the quiet, insecure kid. Don’t quash the creative kid, just because they aren’t “academic”.

    Here is a determined, powerful woman showing the world how it’s done. She has embraced her individuality, enhanced her creativity, mastered her skills, and blown the world away with her passion, her drive, her voice, and her ability to make the most of the once in a lifetime opportunity.

    Hashtag: #Made_It.

  • The Cost of Free Education

    Families struggle to afford the rising cost of back-to-school requirements

    Free Education

    Firstly, I want to point out that this is purely my thoughts on this, and only using my view as a teacher and educator in my opinions of this. I believe education should always be free. I do not have children, and have come from a family fortunate enough to be able to afford education. I have never been in a position where I haven’t been able to make ends meet, and so this of course affects my views.

    I am, however, very aware and understand that the pressure and cost of school for some families is beyond their means at the present time, and I want to acknowledge that the beginning of the year can be an incredible hardship for them. I certainly do not intend to belittle that in any way.

    There are a number of issues that this article raises in its conscious or unconscious attack on schools. There are several inaccuracies from the outset, which are relatively clear from a schools point of view. Obviously, this article takes the side of the parents; as is much of the comments I’ve seen on social media about this. But hopefully your eyes might be opened to the reality of things for schools.

    The article begins by saying that the $35,000 spread out over each child’s years of schooling at a state school ($2.7K per year, $13.48 per school day) includes “…fees, extracurricular activities, other necessities, transport and computers, by the time they finish year 13.

    Fees

    State schools are not allowed to charge fees, yet many do. They are not compulsory to pay, and there have been several cases out there that have brought this to light. A certain school giving tags or badges out to show who has paid and who hasn’t comes to mind.

    A popular “fee” schools have introduced has been the ‘activity fee’. This often is to help cover or subsidise the cost of additional activities or programmes that the school is involved with during the year. This usually includes things like swimming, EOTC trips/activities, outside provider programmes, arts exhibitions or performances, etc. All of these activities are in aid of enriching the curriculum or learning experiences for the students. Schools cannot charge for accessing the curriculum, else it is not a free education. However, costs such as transport, instructors, tickets, or entry fees, are all too sizeable for schools to foot the bill themselves, even with an education rate or subsidy, and so schools often will ask families to help with this cost through an “activity fee”.

    Extracurricular Activities

    By its very definition, extracurricular activities are in addition to the curriculum. They are ‘above and beyond’ school time and school learning. Because of this they are, in their very nature, voluntary. Whilst I would strongly encourage such activities that are an addition to schooling; sports teams, musical instrument tuition, Kapahaka groups – they are in no way compulsory and should not be held ‘against’ a school by including them as a cost for free education.

    Other Necessities

    Other necessities is an incredibly vague term, but I assume that this relates to things like stationery and uniforms. These are not so much as part of the curriculum, but being part of a school. Unfortunately, there’s not much schools can do. Stationery is required to record, write, draw, detect, explore, share, and learn each and every school day. Unfortunately there’s no escaping this cost, and it seems unreasonable to hold this cost against a school from running a ‘free’ education. It’s almost like that free 14 day trial of the latest TV infomercial product, but you have to pay $9.95 in postage and packaging. The trial of the product itself is free, but there is still a cost to getting it to you for you to make the most of it.

    Transport

    Transport is a factor that has two sides to it. One, as mentioned, is getting students to and from activities, and buses are as cheap to charter as one would hope. The other aspect of ‘transport’ is getting to and from school. Sometimes this is by choice to send your child to another school further away than a local one, and sometimes the closest school is more than a walk away. Either way, this should not be considered a ‘cost’ on free education, in the same way that a plane ticket to a free concert in another city makes the concert any less ‘free’. You still have to get to it for it to be free!

    Computers

    Computers are an area that I am highly passionate about, especially in relation to education. Tech in classrooms has always been 10 years behind the times. And there is one reason for this.

    Cost.

    By the time a product or idea is ten years old, it’s become cheap enough for schools to get into the classrooms.

    Remember; for schools, yes there are some discounts, but in reality, the main factor is in the numbers. If each class at our school got an extra iPad for its use, the school doesn’t just have one iPad to purchase/lease. It has nine. And that’s just for one iPad between 28-30. For more usable numbers, you’d probably need at least 8 or 9 per class, making that upwards of 72 iPads. Not sure if you’ve purchased iPads before; but I can tell you that while education discounts help A LOT; 72 iPads is still a sizeable amount for a school to foot the bill for.

    Thus came the idea of schools introducing BYOD. Bring Your Own Distraction (device). By expecting each student to bring their own device, the school no longer has to pay massive amounts of money to have technology in the classroom that students can use for learning. However, this does come across as a ‘cost’ for education, but does come with the choice for students to bring any device; even ones they might already have, or that their family has.

    Once again however, schools can’t enforce this as compulsory. It is much the same as stationery in that it’s required, but comes at a cost for schools.

    Schools are pretty good at understanding situations, and will often have a selection of school devices available for students who don’t have devices to use throughout the day, should they be required for learning.

    I feel sorry for the mother who forked out for an iPad. The whole idea behind BYOD is that students should be able to bring their “own device”, regardless of brand. Enforcing that parents supply a particular brand, especially Apple products which are have a reputation of being among the most costly, is relatively insensitive of the school. It is also insensitive and bordering on illegal to put them on a stationery list as a requirement and not as an optional extra. I know some schools have put “computer usage subsidy” on stationery lists to help schools cover the cost of technology; but I’m told that this is also frowned upon by the powers that be.

    Getting Assistance

    Financial assistance is always an option in the many schools I have worked in. Schools are very aware of the cost they ask for, and are generally very understanding, especially with families with multiple children at the school, that it can be a struggle to make means meet. Many times, subsidies, reduced costs, sponsorships, scholarships, payment plans, and even waive the cost, are all possibilities that schools use to assist families. However; schools can only really help those families that they know of; and those that ask for help. Unfortunately here in lies the problem, in that there is certain social stigma, or whaka Ma around admitting to others that you dont have any money. But if schools don’t know, or aren’t told, there isn’t much they can do to help out.

    In addition to schools, there are also many other outside agencies and organisations that offer assistance, especially in the ‘back-to-school’ season. From stationery, to backpacks, to school shoes, there are a lot of options available; but once again, the stigma, shame, or pride get in the way. If they don’t know you’re struggling, then they can’t help out! I know the Social Workers in Schools has been able to assist in finding in and accessing these for people.

    Politics

    Weigh in the politicians. Chris Hipkins is right; there is an equity problem. There has become an expectation for schools to be at the forefront of technology like never before, and the idea of personal devices has increased the cost of getting technology into schools exponentially. Ms. Delahunty chimes in with overseas trips being offered as part of certain subjects, but again, these are always extra to the curriculum and while it’s “unfair” that not all families can afford to send their child on such trips, that is in-fact life. Some people are more privileged than others. Some are more blessed than others. That impedes not on the “free” education that state schools offer.

    In true Hekia form, she plays down everything and runs with a stock standard head in the sand response. She states that there is “no charge for education at state schools. “No child in New Zealand should miss out on an education because of cost.”.

    No child should. But some do. A lot do.

    She does make a factual statement I agree with in that most schools know the issues their community faces, and “…work hard to avoid imposing costs on them…”.

    “In addition, a range of support is available from the Ministry of Social Development for beneficiaries who are finding the start of the school year a particular challenge. My advice to any parent who is worried about the cost of uniforms, stationery or other school equipment such as electronic devices is to talk to their schools, who often have arrangements in place to assist families who are struggling financially.”

    I must say, this is the first and only time I have agreed with nigh on everything the Minister has to say. If cost is an issue – go and talk to the school. Meet with the teacher, principal, a board member, or even the office admin and ask. Don’t just blindly go and pay for the unaffordable if you are financially burdened, especially at this time of year.

    Every year an article like this comes out. The wonderful vibe schools get from its community heading into Christmas with the thanks and recognition of all that the teachers and staff have done throughout the year for their child is quickly forgotten and the media jumps on a bandwagon to hate on schools. For once the Minister is publicly defending schools in this case, which is a welcome change.

    The reality is this.

    Children cost money.

    An extra mouth to feed, an extra set of clothes, a extra health risk, an extra movie ticket, an extra holiday programme, and the list goes on.

    Yes, education and health care should be free. And yes, education, up until year 13 is free at all state schools.

    But yes, there are extra costs involved with schooling, like there are with having children in the first place. That’s life unfortunately; and it’s not school’s fault (not that it’s actually anyone’s fault – its just the way it is!)

    So let’s stop this back-to-school school bashing that goes on each year, and look for ways to help the situation for those who are struggling.

    To Help

    – Talk to your school. Be open and honest about your situation. Ignore the whaka ma because it is only in your head. Behind closed doors of the principals office, financial situations can be discussed and there is less judgement and more understanding than you’d expect. We always look for the worst in ourselves.
    – Education grants are often available for schools for certain projects. Some are easier to access than others; but the reality is, many schools and staff are busy and rarely have time (or energy) to go through lengthy grant application and approval processes. Maybe you could fill out the application for the grant on behalf of the school. Grants can go a long way into alleviating things like transport costs or increasing the budget for technology and devices within a school.

    – Offer to help with transport. I certainly wouldn’t recommend that every family do this to get out of paying for buses, but if you are out of pocket but have a car and license, I’m more than sure that arrangements could be made for you to transport your own child. In addition to this, it may be that the school may be able to reduce the cost of the trip if you come along with your child to supervise and support. Just an idea.

    – Education rates. Maybe you own a company, large or small. While the discounts offered to schools are sometimes sizeable and do go some way to alleviating the cost of things such as technology devices, if companies see the value in education rather than in money only, then put your money where your mouth is and offer them at import cost, so that your company isn’t taking profit from them, or even better, discount THAT rate aswell. I’m not saying make them free for schools (though I’m not going to stop you if that’s what you think you should do!), but discount them further than the 10 or 15% that schools usually get.

    – Make busses free for schools. This becomes a massive hurdle for schools to access other areas of education, such as swimming. With school pools being closed, and the local out door pool a) booked out during summer and b) closed during winter, we have about a 15-20km trip to the next closest pool. The biggest associated cost is not pool entry, nor is it the swimming instructors (both of which either the school pays for or we use grant monies for) but is the cost of the busses. Obviously bus companies have running costs to cover and driver salaries, but once again, there seems to be more than this put onto the cost for schools to offer the free education that our tamariki deserve.

    Free education is their right.

    Let us deliver on that for them.

  • Rangiora High principal ‘bullied’


    Rangiora High School’s principal alleges ”sustained bullying” by the school’s commissioner.

    Source: Rangiora High principal ‘bullied’

    This follows on from this ongoing saga for this school and this principal that has been happening since the start of last year.

    Finally someone in the media has hooked onto this. Quite ready for John Campbell to get back in the NZ Media spotlight! He would have been all over this!

    It seems like a very bad situation to be in, one that could only be seen in a movie.

    But it’s not. It’s real. And it is happening now.

    Kelvin Smythe has been a long time education reporter and writer, and has picked up on this issue since it happened.

    In cold blood: terror as an instrument of control in state education Part 1

    In cold blood: the Rangiora Horror Show Part 2

    Both of these articles are reasonably lengthy, but given the multitude of steps taken in this saga, it isn’t any wonder! I implore you to read them, and then form your opinion on whether you agree with what has happened. Obviously, Kelvin has his angle on any of these issues, but also gets his information from a variety of sources. However anti-government he appears to be, I do believe his intent is always to write the truth.

    And if this is anything to go by, its a terrifying series of events.

    It sucks to have to make my first posting of 2016 about something so horrific.

    Happy New Year everyone.

     

  • Education Act 1989 – My Submission

    Below is my submission to the Education Act changes. I’ve taken the time to write down my thoughts and views as best I can. In no way am I suggesting I have all the answers, nor that my answers are the best. But at the very least I have made an effort to curve some of the changes that the Government is trying to make. As expressed in my previous article, if you take some of these changes to their logical conclusion, it leaves for a not so pretty picture of our education system.

    You can make your own submission here:

    https://consultation.education.govt.nz/education/update-of-the-education-act-1989/consult_view

     

    1. What should the goals for education be?

    The goals for education should be to allow children to be children, and to learn as the individuals that they are, and to have success in the areas that are important to them.
    This takes into account all areas of a child’s learning, their culture, ethnicity, gender, socio-economic background, and individuality.
    It values Māori students as Māori students, Pasifika as Pasifika, Boy as Boy, and Girl as Girl and is inclusive of every child as an individual. It embraces students to be themselves, and to succeed as themselves; not by what is put upon them by a teacher, a school, a community, or a government.
    It does not allow for putting students within a box. It does not suggest that all students learn a particular way, at a particular rate, or in a constant and consistent way.
    Everyone learns differently, and the only way to acknowledge that is to value every child as an individual; and because they are an individual, success for them may be very different to success for another student.

    2. What process should be used for setting a national priorities statement for early learning and schooling

    Any process for setting any priorities across the country need to have a degree of democracy about them. There needs to be reasonable discussion and discourse about them, and those who are ‘on the front line’ need to be consulted. Any expectations of schools does need to be made clear, though each school or kura needs to be able to have the flexibility to make those expectations work for their learning community and wider community. Schools should be worked alongside by the Ministry to ensure that any priority on a national scale is able to be implemented and what it looks like for each individual school or kura.

    3. What should the roles and responsibilities of a school or a kura be?

    Making a board’s role and their responsibilities clear is a must. As the staff representative of our school’s board, there are many things that the board is doing that may or may not be their responsibility, and the guidelines around this is nearly always vague.

    The role of each board should be:

    • Ensuring that each learner achieves the best that they can. This includes working in partnership with their Māori whānau and community.
    • Working with and consulting the wider community to ensure that each learner is supported at school and at home.
    • Working with other boards and education services within their community to share ideas, resources, and initiatives that work, bearing in mind that every school and community is different, and what works for one community, may not work for another.
    • Consulting with the community over how to shape their school; as a learning environment, as a community hub, the atmosphere, the direction, and the culture of the school or kura.

    The responsibilities of each board should be:

    • Setting policies to guide and direct school and kura management.
    • Ensuring the school’s curriculum aligns with both the New Zealand Curriculum, the requirements of the Act, and the needs of each learner.
    • To be good employers of staff. This includes being involved in the appointment process and performance of staff, but always in conjunction with other professionals in the school, such as the Principal, Deputy Principal, or others in the school management team.
    • Providing a safe environment to learn in. This includes physical and emotional well-being within the school.
    • Setting a strategic plan that reflects the goals and priorities of the community and its students.

    4. What changes could be made to simplify planning and reporting:

    Boards should focus on the strategic goals of the school. This is an important part of their job as members of the parent community of a school, and as previously stated, is important for each school to have its own direction based on the community wishes. This should be carried out with suitable consultation.
    Removing requirements for “high performing” schools is ambiguous, because of the subjectivity of the term “high” and “performing”.
    Having boards work together does not necessarily mean less administration, and I know that each school has it’s own learners at heart, and any idea to work with other boards will be somewhat superficial.
    Boards should focus on their own school, and do what is best for their learners, without having to worry about other schools or communities.

    Should the Ministry see it fit, a report template for Boards to work through would simplify the process; though this template would have to be fairly generic to allow for the diverse nature of schools around the country.

    5. How can we better provide for groups of schools and kura to work together more to plan and report?

    As mentioned, this may or may not be a good idea. School boards should focus on their own school. Any planning should seek to improve their own school, and any reporting should be for their school, as this is the school that they know.

    It is also very difficult to comment on this particular question without seeing the obvious link and prompting to mention Communities of Learning / Communities of Schools, which fits under the IES – which is identified as a matter not covered in this consultation.

    6. How should schools and kura report on their performance and young people’s achievements to parents, family, whanau and communities?

    Schools and kura should report on their performance and young people’s achievements to parents, family, whanau and communities in ways that are deemed suitable or wanted by their community. This should be found out within the consultation process.

    A set of indicators should only be set if they are deemed necessary by the Board or community and should not be set by any government on a national level.

    Any performance report that is made for public should be done in a way that maintains confidentiality of its students. It should be written with the intention of informing its community, and not the general public. This will eliminate any temptation for the Ministry or the media to enter into creating league tables, and should provide each school community with a picture of what the school is doing well with, and what the school is working towards.

    There is huge concern around giving schools that are doing well more freedom, as this is entirely subjective. As mentioned, a set of indicators should not be enforced across every school in New Zealand, as they would need to reflect the schools individual goals, aims, and any direction set by its community as per its consultation with parents and whānau.

    7. What should the indicators and measures be for school performance and student achievement and well-being?

    These should be decided by each individual school and only by the school, based on the learning needs of its students, and upon the direction set by its community. This should be in an endeavour to value and invoke a school culture that is unique to each learning community, school, kura, or wider community.

    8. What freedoms and extra decision-making rights could be given to schools, kura and Communities of Learning that are doing well?

    Schools should be given the right on when, how, and what it reports to its communities. As mentioned earlier within this submission, it is a slippery slope when additional rights and freedoms are given based on performance, given that this is such a subjective and generic term.

    9. What ways could boards work more closely together?

    School boards could work together by having a shared resource that is used or shared between schools. This could include something like a shared community school pool, or sports ground. It could also include learning resources that are shared between schools, or even include digital resources that are shared online. Proffessional Development of each board could be shared and attended by multiple boards.

    10. What do you think about schools and kura having the flexibility to introduce cohort or group entry?

    It seems to me, having been involved in a school for 6 years now, that the only reason why this is on the table for discussion is because schools want to make it easier to report for cohorts of students, rather than individually when each individual completes a year of school. If National Standards was not a factor, I see no reason why schools would want this flexibility, given that if you had a family waiting to enroll their child for a term, that the family would probably go to another school.

    Seeing as any submission is not able to call into question National Standards, it becomes difficult to comment any further.

    It is also concerning if a child is already behind in their learning, and doesn’t start school for 3 months while they wait for the next cohort entry, how much further will they be behind?

    11. What do you think about making attendance compulsory for children once they have started school or kura before they turn six years old?

    This is a good idea. I was unaware that this wasn’t already in law.

    12. What additional supports or responses could be used to address problems that arise in schools and kura?

    Before one begins to start investigating into addressing problems that arise, one needs to identify what makes a “great” school. There are many great schools – one of which is the one I teach at (which is why I still teach there). We have an amazing community, a great ethos and atmosphere, and a fantastic, dedicated young staff. We struggle to live up to any measure in regards to the National Standards and the 85% expectation, but we do more than our best for the students that walk through our gates. We had students fly in from around the country and from overseas to attend the school’s 50th Jubilee, while another well reputed school in the wider area had to cancel their 50th Jubilee due to lack of interest. We have sports teams which has represented our school in local sports tournaments, and have won competitions both in sporting achievement, as well as in fair play.

    Our school is a great school.

    However, to those who look at our school purely from a data and assessment point of view, we wouldn’t be considered a great school. I am more than certain that we are just one such school with a similar story all around the country.

    Support for schools that could be used to address problems need to work WITH the school, working alongside it so that both the school community, staff, and the students feel valued and feel part of the solution, rather than the suggested “top-down” model of serving improvement notices, or auditing the school, or replacing people on the board. Any review of this, including those from ERO, are almost false, as they come in for a day to meet with the senior leadership team, and then start looking at data and paperwork. These would be more beneficial to “problem schools” if they worked in the school, alongside the staff and students and got to know the school, how it works, what the challenges they face are, and work with the staff and board to put suggestions in place to solve the problems. The “top down” approach does not work. It imposes a set of ideals on top of a school without taking into account any of the challenges that the school is facing each and every day, and are not excuses, but actual reasons behind some of the problems. This targeted approach is how teachers should work with their students, yet for some reason, this is not replicated in other areas of the education system.

    13. How should area strategies be decided, and how should schools, kura and communities be consulted?

    Each school needs to be directly included in any discussions around any strategies that apply to them. This should be done in a timely fashion, and be conducted with enough time for each school to reach a suitable outcome.

    14. What should be taken in to account when making decisions about opening, merging or closing schools?

    There are so many factors that should be taken into account when opening, merging, or closing schools.

    It should be based on:
    What the school feels should happen
    What the school board thinks should happen
    What the school community thinks should happen
    Roll growth or decline in the area

    It should not be based on:
    Academic performance of the school

    15. What do you think about the proposed changes to improve how enrolment schemes are managed?

    This should be left to a consultation between what the school thinks is best for their enrolment, what any Community of Learning agrees upon, in conjunction with the Ministry.
    I think it is dangerous territory we head into with any piece of legislation which starts to use the words “this discretion is very limited” when giving the Ministry the right to override any decision made by the school.

  • Updating the Education Act 1989

    Earlier this month, the Minister released a public document surrounding the public having their say on the updates this government are wanting to make to the Education Act. In it, they outline what they need to do to change the landscape of the education sector in this country. It is worded in an incredibly positive way, and they have been more than inclusive by ensuring the use of the word “may” throughout the document (which is at least an improvement on how they made changes with National Standards, Class Sizes, Christchurch School Closures, and Novopay!) However, there are some issues within it. Quite concerning things, that if passed, will allow for a lot of changes that we may or may not be interested in, but our chance to have a say will have gone. I’ve gone through and highlighted some of these things to hopefully shed some light on what is really being said.

    Achievement and Accountability

    The Education Act changes all centre around supposed “child’s pathway” through school, and focuses on “raising their achievement”. While a growth mindset is healthy for every classroom, at some point, there is a ceiling on what can be achieved. By having a law written that says that raising achievement levels is paramount, it means that there could be issues if a child HAS achieved, or schools already raise the achievement levels beyond any reasonable expectation. As will be an issue that comes up all through this, there is the ongoing issue around how this is measured. No doubt the Government will rely on data gathered through National Standards reporting, yet we already know that this is clunky at the best of times. In the seventh paragraph, the changes suggest that it will outline in law ‘who is responsible for what’. This seeks to allow the government to lay blame on individuals should things not go to plan. This may be a board, a principal, or a teacher. Of course, they are also quite clear that any submissions that suggest changes that would increase government spending on education will not be considered. Quite clearly the government thinks that it is already doing enough in this regard.

    IMPROVING THE WAY BOARDS PLAN AND REPORT

    Improvements can be made to the way school and kura boards plan and report on how they make sure the right things are being taught, how they are informing parents, whānau and communities about what they are doing, and how well children and young people are achieving.

    Red tape around planning and reporting could be reduced so that boards are able to focus on what is important in promoting student achievement and wellbeing. There are some things that are a ‘must do’ for boards, such as developing a strategic plan, providing annual performance information, and meeting statutory reporting requirements. But there are other requirements that could be removed, and some complexity could be reduced. For example, high performing schools could move to a four-year planning cycle.

    It may also be useful to let groups of schools and kura work together when they are planning and reporting. This would help a community plan more cohesively, share expertise and reduce administration. It could particularly benefit Communities of Learning and small or isolated schools and kura.

    In Other Words…

    In this section, it mentions ‘red tape’ which is very vague in what it means. Essentially, I think, they want to get rid of some of the bureaucracy that gets in the way from making decision and making changes. But as always, they label this as a way for Boards to focus on other things, such as improving student achievement. In the example, they state that ‘high-performing schools could move to a four-year planning cycle’. By “high-performing”, we can assume that they mean “high-achieving”. In the following paragraph, it says that it ‘may also be useful to let groups of schools and kura work together…’ making reference to their Communities of Schools model. We can safely assume that the word ‘let’ could also be taken to mean “make”, especially when schools are ‘not achieving’.

    RESPONDING MORE EFFECTIVELY TO PERFORMANCE

    With better and more timely information, parents, whānau and communities can have an active role in helping to improve achievement for their children and young people. The Act could allow for a set of indicators to be established so schools and kura know what areas they need to report on.
    For example how well students are doing, and how the school or kura is managing its money.

    The Update could enable schools, kura and Communities of Learning that are doing well to get more freedom and extra decision-making rights. This would be balanced by monitoring schools, kura and Communities of Learning carefully and clearly saying what will happen if things go off track.

    Responding More Effectively to Performance

    Firstly, what does performance mean? No doubt, when the Ministry talks about performance, they mean achievement. Regardless of “better or more timely information”, parents, whanau, and the wider community can all have an active role in a child’s education. It does not have to be made into law through the Education act. It’s called parenting. It’s called raising children. It’s called childhood. A set of indicators that the change proposes are either National Standards, or a new set of KPI for schools. The suggested example of “how well students are doing” jumps up and screams “League Tables”, seeing as this is talking about reporting to parents and the community. This is public information that will be out there for everyone to see and compare, even though there is no doubt that these KPI will not show the value and worth of a school. This section goes on to include the Communities of Schools who do well will get more freedom – rewarding the “high achieving” schools once again, with more decision making rights. It then makes it clear that, in balance, poor performing schools would have such rights taken away and decisions would be made for you “if things go off track”. Which is exactly what we want as a school who’s students’ struggle, we definitely need an outsider coming in with a top down approach of “you will do better”; tongue firmly in cheek. Page 10

    Enabling Collaboration, Flexibility and Innovation

    This pare of the document just looks at the idea of Communities of Schools that the government has brought about through the IES. Under Alternative Governance Arrangements, they state that some schools who are working in a Community of Schools, “…may want to share their governance arrangements”. This is already happening with the property side of funding in some areas. Also, as is with earlier parts of this document, where it says “may want to”, it is also saying that some schools “may be forced to” share their governance. In terms of flexibility, it is interesting that the only reason why schools would be wanting to have different intakes at different parts of the year is largely to make National Standards reporting easier in Years 1 to 3. Their anniversary reports would all be at once, rather than spotted throughout the year, and it would tie in with the senior reports a lot more often. The question really is, is if your child misses out by a few weeks for the intake, they might essentially miss out on 3-6 months of schooling. What’s more, if a school down the road isn’t having intakes at set times, that family may decide to take their child elsewhere. Isn’t it already compulsory for children to attend school? What’s more, how is the Ministry going to enforce this, especially when funding for truancy officers has been cut, and the Government doesn’t want to spend any more on education? No doubt it will be one more thing that schools will have to chase up on in their own time.

    What is a “great” school?

    What makes a school great?
    How is this measured?
    There is no question, given the rest of this document, what the Minister sees as a “great school”. High achievement.

    But the word “Great” or “Greatness” surely encompasses so much more than this?
    Take for instance a local school in my area. A well recognised and renowned school, with parents and whanau driving from up to ten minutes away to send their child there. It is a decile 8 school and has about 330 students on its roll. 75% NZ/European and 17% Maori. Their ERO cycle is on a four to five year review. From the latest review it states that “Most students are achieving at or above the National Standards in reading, writing and mathematics.”
    One would say this is a great school.

    At the school I currently work at, the same can’t be said. We are about half the size, and fit in a decile 2 bracket. We have about 60% Maori students, 10% Pasifika and 20% NZ/European. We recently managed to scrape through and get a three year ERO review, which we celebrated like we just won the Rugby World Cup. Half of our students are below or well below the National Standard across all three areas.

    However, this year, both these two schools had their 50th Jubilee. Both of them started in 1965, the same time that Porirua officially became a city.
    At our school, we had close to 180 ex-students come and celebrate over the course of Labour Weekend, 2015. Old students came from all around the country, from Auckland to Timaru. We even had some fly in from overseas to come and visit their old primary school. We had a school gala which had cars parked along the street as far as the eye could see. The atmosphere was buzzing and our school was the centre of it all.

    In stark comparison, the other school had to cancel it’s celebrations due to lack of interest.

    I leave you with that question to ponder. Which is the greater school?

    Making every school and kura a great one

    Every school and every kura has to be a great one, and while most are doing well, a small number need more help to get there. Some more options could be put in the Act to help schools and kura get back on track. These could include an improvement notice, or an audit of one part of a school or kura. At the more serious end, a board could be asked to have different people on it.

    Naughty, Naughty!

    In this section, the Act turns its attention to the so-called ‘off track’ schools. The Ministry will help them get ‘back on track’, through the use of an “improvement notice” (similar to an infringement notice, I guess) or an audit (ERO visit). The serious end, the Ministry can remove a board if a school is REALLY ‘off track’, and no doubt choose (or appoint) the representatives on it.

    Creating a Set of Guiding Principles for Opening, Merging and Closing Schools.

    What an interesting thing to amend within the Education Act. I wonder why this could have occurred? Maybe the Minister had too much trouble closing schools in Christchurch. Maybe she also had some difficulty merging some schools. And maybe they want to be able to open up new charter schools whenever they like. It has also made the provision for students to be forced to go to certain schools, and force certain schools to take certain students. Page 12

    In Conclusion…

    It is interesting the timing around this change. Reports are due, schools are winding down, half of the secondary schools are gone with exams, principals are drowned in end of year rollover for Novapay, and end of year activities. So it is unlikely that those who are working in the sector will have time or energy to fight the changes being proposed.

    No doubt we need to though, if we are unhappy with the proposed changes.

    Below are the details for how YOU can make a submission in answering the questions within the document.
    You need to do this. Answer, respond, challenge, debate. Talk over your ideas. The more responses they get, the more they might listen.

    Related Readings

    An easy way to make your submission is online at consultation.education.govt.nz. Here you will find an introductory video from Education Minister Hon Hekia Parata. There are questions to get you started, or you can upload a submission from your computer. You can also email your submission to education.update@education.govt.nz or write to: Education Act Update Ministry of Education PO Box 1666 Wellington 6140 New Zealand Submissions close on Monday 14 December 2015.

    PERSONAL INFORMATION AND CONFIDENTIALITY

    Submissions and documents associated with the consultation process meet the definition of official information and are therefore subject to the Official Information Act 1982. Please clearly indicate in your submission if you do not want your name to be included in any summary of submissions that we may publish.

    FURTHER INFORMATION

    If you have any questions about making a submission, or would like more information about the update of the Education Act 1989, please email education.update@education.govt.nz

  • Education Changes – 2008-2015

    In the last five years there has been a dramatic shift in Education. Since this government (National) came into power in 2009, they have been non-stop in making wholesale changes across the sector.

    WELLINGTON, NEW ZEALAND - NOVEMBER 14: Education Minister Hekia Parata announces a Government partnership with New Zealand Rugby League at Westpac Stadium on November 14, 2014 in Wellington, New Zealand. The partnership has been set up to improve the education, health and wellbeing of thousands of young people and families associated with rugby league in New Zealand. (Photo by Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images)
    WELLINGTON, NEW ZEALAND – NOVEMBER 14: Education Minister Hekia Parata announces a Government partnership with New Zealand Rugby League at Westpac Stadium on November 14, 2014 in Wellington, New Zealand. The partnership has been set up to improve the education, health and wellbeing of thousands of young people and families associated with rugby league in New Zealand. (Photo by Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images)

    There is an old Māori whakataukī that says:
    Inā kei te mohio koe ko wai koe, I anga mai koe i hea, kei te mohio koe. Kei te anga atu ki hea.
    If you know who you are and where you are from, then you will know where you are going.

    What I want to do is take what changes have been made since the start of the National Government, and track these changes to their logical conclusion. By using what changes have been made, we can follow the progress of the GERM in our country.
    GERM is the Global Education Reform Movement.
    The Government is trying to create a crisis in education and impose a business model on our world class schools. This model, known as the GERM (Global Education Reform Movement) has infected other countries by introducing standardisation, competition and test-based accountability. – NZEI

    National’s Education Timeline

    2008

    • National releases their education policy.
    • National: Overhaul NCEA; introduce national literacy and numeracy standards; extend 20-hours early childhood education subsidy to playcentres and kohanga reos; teach more trades in schools and set up five “trade academies”; ensure all 16- and 17-year-olds are in school, work or approved training courses.
      ACT: Scrap Education Ministry and replace it with new Education Authority; allow state funding to public or private school of parents’ choice; deregulate schools but require them to be licensed by education authority; move curriculum “back to basics”.The key part of these policies is getting rid of the current education schemes, and replace them with more privatised versions of them. National Standards introduced to help regulate and narrow the curriculum, including going “back to basics” of reading, writing, and maths. Collect and monitor this data in primary school, and use NCEA “overhaul” to position schools against each other, including league tables. Deregulated schools, or Charter schools are to follow very soon after the election as part of ACT’s coalition.
    • National elected into government, using MMP to go into coalition with Māori Party and ACT.
    • Education (National Standards) Amendment Bill passed under urgency, allowing it to bypass the Education and Science Select Committee where the merits of National Standards could have been debated. Government sets precedence of limited to no consultation with parents or the sector.

    Visit NBR.co.nz for more information on government policies from 2008 election.

    2009

    • Anne Tolley becomes Minister of Education.
    • National makes large cuts to Teacher professional development services. This leads to a rise in private companies offering courses for teachers, and schools having to fund their own education development of its staff.
    • $35million additional funds budgeted over the next four years for independent (private) schools.
    • Education Amendment Bill 2009 introduces the idea of a ‘…body corporate or corporation sole may be appointed as a limited statutory manager or commissioner’
    • ‘Consultation’ with the public over National Standards. Data somewhat ignored (38% against, 14% for). Teachers vilified by the media for ‘not getting on board’ with the government policy.
    • Changes made to National Administration Guidelines to essentially make National Standards compulsory in all primary schools.
    • The Ministry begins promoting teaching and teacher supply initiatives and TeachNZ scholarships, informing overseas teachers of employment opportunities in key shortage areas in New Zealand, and awarding 1,023 scholarships to student teachers to study across the early childhood education, and schooling sectors.

    2010

    • Schools expected to begin using National Standards from the first day of school.
    • Schools that oppose National Standards forced to adopt them through threats of charter rejection, enforced ERO monitoring, or even closure.

    2011

    • Lesley Longstone appointed as Secretary of Education. Ms. Longstone had been a key figure in the introduction of charter schools in the UK.
    • National win general election by a landslide, and are re-elected into Government. Partnership with ACT and Māori Party continue.
    • Hekia Parata appointed as Minister of Education.

     

    2012

    • Minister of Education Hekia Parata announces policy to increase class sizes in order to be in-line with Treasury to save $43million each year. Continues with precedence of announcing policy with no consultation of the sector. Teachers appeal on force, and show multiple flaws in the numbers suggested by the Minister (such as making exceptions for technical teachers at intermediate schools).
    • Ms. Parata makes first mention of performance based pay for teachers as an option.
    • Minister of Education Hekia Parata backs down on class size policy, due to incorrect figures presented by Treasury, and from widespread disagreement from teachers, and more importantly, parents. “Ms Parata said the policy had caused “a disproportionate amount of anxiety” for parents and she was responding to that.”.
    • Novopay introduced for all teacher’s pay with limited to no trial or testing, despite advice given not to roll out the system which wasn’t ready. Not surprisingly, the system causes widespread issues, with some teachers not getting paid for months on end.
    • School Report launched by Fairfax Media to make National Standard data publically available. First comparisons between school’s data begins.
    • School closures and mergers in Christchurch announced following the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes. Limited to no consultation with those affected.
    • The Education Amendment Bill to allow charter schools introduced on October 15, 2012.
    • Lesley Longstone resigns after 13 months in the position, sighting a breakdown in relationship with Hekia Parata.

    2013

    2014

    • Government announces Investing in Education Success. $359million put into education through expert teachers and lead principals to oversee more than one school in an attempt to bring better practise across all schools. Initially accepted by secondary and principal unions. Primary school sector unhappy with the idea. Once again, limited to no consultation with the sector. NZEI negotiates changes with the Ministry.
    • First five charter schools open for the school year.
    • Government takes over ownership of Novopay. ‘All issues’ finally sorted out, two years after it’s release.

    2015

    • Removal of teacher elected Teacher’s Council. Rebranded as Education Council, with representatives selected by the Minister of Education.
    • Decile ratings changed for many areas around New Zealand.
    • Rules around teacher registration changed to align with the Vunerable Children Act 2014, introduced in light of child abuse and indecent assault of children, by teachers and those in authority. Examples: 1. 2. 3. 4.
    • PaCT tool being rolled out across the country for schools to ‘opt-in’ and use.
    • NZEI announces adjustments to IES proposal and seeks teacher vote.

     

    Where things are headed

    image-key-privatisationFirstly, your guess is as good as mine. All we can do is speculate and take what has happened and take it through to its logical conclusion. We can assume that this government what to turn schooling into a business, and privatise as many assets as it possibly can. The rich will get richer, and the poor even poorer. These are some of the natural conclusions of the moves that have been made in the reform of education in this country.

    • PaCT to become compulsory for schools to use to assess student achievement in Years 1-8, essentially becoming a Nationwide assessment.
    • PaCT data to be collected by the Ministry, and ‘failing’ students linked with their teacher so they can be monitored.
    • Teacher performance becomes linked to student achievement (or lack there of).
    • Performance pay introduced as a ‘reward’ for good teachers.
    • ‘Bad’ teachers ‘weaned’ out through lower performance pay, and increasingly difficult registration regulations and expectations. Some of these ‘bad’ teachers, however, will be ‘good’ teachers who have struggling students in their class and who aren’t getting ‘good’ results according to PaCT.
    • IES to make schools with ‘failing’ students adopt ‘successful’ school principal and lead teachers. Aligns with performance pay, and the removal of ‘bad’ teachers and principals from the school.
    • ‘Good’ principals to manage and run more than one school. Much like a CEO of a company.
    • School funding changes, along with IES, where groups of schools receive ‘bulk funding’ or ‘pooled resources time and money‘. (See 5.)
    • League tables introduced and made publically available through the media for parents to send their children to ‘successful’ schools, and avoid ‘failing’ schools; even though the quality of the teaching may be the same or even better. Schools funding also begins to be based on results of Fairfax Media’s “School Report“.
    • Failing schools to be merged into charter schools with private ‘managers’. More privatisation of the education sector.
    • Experienced teachers on highest pay packet to be replaced with young, inexperienced teachers on a lower salary, to save money in the budget.
    • Increase of class sizes to be rolled out.
    Notes

    In my opinion there are very few ‘bad’ teachers in education in New Zealand. When I make reference to ‘bad’ teachers in this post, I am making it from the perspective of the government, who would have us think that any teacher who has poor achievement results in relation to National Standards is a ‘bad’ teacher.
    In addition to this, I fail to see how teachers can be assessed in their ability to teach by the results of their students. I have had some students from struggling situations and home life who have made amazing progress in a year, but are still below where the Government reckon’s they should be according to the ‘aspirational’ National Standards. Furthermore, I have had some students who have made no progress, but I would challenge the best teacher in the country to do a better job and get that student to be At the National Standard, while still maintaining the teaching of the rest of the class as well. Therefore, this definition of ‘bad’ or ‘good’ teacher is completely flawed.

    Some may call this post ‘scare-mongering’; except it isn’t. The majority of it is laying out the facts, and then extrapolating them to their natural conclusion based on the precedence set by this government, and its desire to reform education in this country.

    Related Reading