UNLEASH

ED

Tag: policy

  • Teacher graduates to be bonded to schools | Stuff.co.nz

    Labour says “on the job” placements should be a bigger focus across all teacher training courses.

    Source: Labour is keen for all teacher graduates to be bonded to schools | Stuff.co.nz

    There is a certain degree of irony as we walked the uni halls going from drab lecture to drab lecture as the guiding lecturers encouraged us in the art of teaching and using different teaching styles, making it interesting, engaging our students, using cooperative groups, and yet maintained a ‘sit down, shut up, and listen’ teaching approach themselves.

    Therefore, when we were unleashed into the real world of classrooms, with 30 sets of eyes all looking at us like we’d fallen in from a different planet, we were all too eager to get stuck in and learn as much as we could.

    I still maintain, that the majority of learning that I did in my four year degree was largely, and even solely, from the practicums that were spread out over my time at teacher’s college. Nothing was more eye-opening, or realistic, than dealing with students, encouraging thinking, facilitating learning, and learning the ins and outs of actual schools, their rules, their expectations, and all that comes with them.

    Bonded to Schools

    I’m not really sure what Labour is hoping to achieve with this. Firstly, most schools are fully staffed. Taking on a student teacher, not only to be training them, but then supplying a job for them later on, is a little too much for schools to commit to, especially for first time teachers.

    Obviously there would need to be a generous amount of sorting this out, and will directly require universities to work a lot closer with the Ministry, and with the placement schools.

    What do you think? Are the current systems good enough? Will ‘bonding’ student teachers to schools lead to an equal opportunity for all applicants to positions?

  • CoL Mine

  • The True Cost of Charter Schools

    Its time to face some facts here. There is something terribly wrong with the current government’s focus for its funding, especially when it comes to education.

    I decided to do some comparisons on money spent (or not spent) and see if any of it makes sense. I wanted to compare the budget they approve for some initiatives, and deny for others. In particular, the comparison between keeping charter schools open, verses the Feed the Kids bill that was denied in March earlier this year.

    Embattled Charter School

    At the end of July, the Minister announced that she would keep a failing charter school open, even though she stated it would face closure, and even though clear evidence showed inappropriate use of funds and suspicious achievement results.

    “The Ministry of Education has directed a Northland charter school to replace its current principal with someone more “appropriate and experienced” or face closure. The beleaguered Te Pūmanawa o Te Wairua School in Whangaruru opened last year at a cost of $3million and has suffered a falling roll, truancy and low achievement levels in the year since.” – Feb 2015 – Māori TV

    Previously the Government could only confirm it would negotiate with the trust should it close. The Northern Advocate can reveal $4.4million has been spent on the kura, which opened last year, including a recent one-off payment of $129,000 to help remedy the ongoing issues. – July 2015 – Northern Advocate

    By keeping the school open, the ongoing cost of this school will have reached astronomical figures. By the end of this year, the cost of the school on the government will have surpassed $5.2million. It is important to note that this is the cost from its opening in 2014.
    The cost of this school to the government for it to remain open each year is only a mere $1.65million.

    There are 39 students at Te Pumanawa o te Wairua.

    That’s a cost of $42,271 per student each year (assuming the roll remains at 39).

    Feed the Kids Bill

    Let’s compare this cost with a recent bill that has been defeated by a mere 2 votes. This bill was nicknamed  the “Feed the Kids Bill”. It sought to provide breakfast and lunch for every student in Decile 1 and 2 schools across the country.

    Mrs Turei said the National-led Government is failing New Zealand children, as more are going without food than ever before.

    “They are funding some programmes, but not enough, so they accept that there’s a problem, why won’t they fix it?

    “It’s not that expensive either, it costs something between $10 million and $14 million to feed every hungry kid, every day in their school. What’s so hard about that?” – 19 March – Radio NZ

    Education Counts lists the July 2014 roll returns, which shows that the number of students in Decile 1 and 2 schools across the country; some 111,069 pupils.

    Doing some quick maths, I’ve worked out that using Mrs Turei higher estimate of $14 million, when spit among the number of students in Decile 1 and 2 schools, comes out at a staggering $120.

    One hundred and twenty dollars and five cents.

    That doesn’t sound right.

    According to FeedtheKids.org.nz, the full cost of the programme would be $100 million a year – including food, staffing, administration, monitoring and evaluation. That sounds a lot more than $14 million, but the reality is, that not every child at decile one and two schools will need breakfast or lunch. At the school I work out, I’d say close to 85% of the students come with suitable lunch each day. The 15% that don’t, would benefit from this service. This also works out with Mrs Turei says around the $14 million mark, being that it is 15% of the stated $100 million on the Feed the Kids website.

    Regardless, I did a little bit more maths calculations, and using the $100 million as the figures, the cost per student is a whopping $900.34

    Nine hundred and thirty four cents.

    Let’s just compare that to the one charter school that is being kept open for 39 students.

    Charter School: $42,271 per student
    Feeding Kids   :      $900 per student

    That simply cannot be right. Can it?

    Oh wait. Of course! The $900 per student is on top of their education cost, where as the $42,271 is the cost of their entire education for the year. We will have to account for the decile one and two student’s education.

    Taking an average decile two school, such as the one I currently work at, our figures per student work out at approximately $6,884.61 per student. Add on $900 to that, takes it to $7,784.61.

    Comparing this to the forty two thousand, two hundred and seventy one dollars spent per student at the embattled charter school, it puts some clear messages out there as to what is fair, what is equal, and what is right out there. It also shows us exactly where the focus is for this government – and it’s not for those that are struggling.

    What’s more concerning is that this is just one charter school. There are more in the pipeline. More that will take money away from the kids who, through no fault of their own, are going hungry this year.

     

  • Teacher Wellbeing – Got a Workplace Wellbeing Programme?

    Wellbeing programmes are commonplace in the corporate world, and even some schools, but not all. YOU can be the one who gets the wellbeing ball rolling at your place.

    Wellbeing is a relatively new concept, and schools don’t exactly have a reputation for being ‘before its time’. In general, Teaching is ten years behind the rest of the world, and with the increase of technology development, it may even be more. It may be some time before ‘wellbeing’ is accepted as an important part of the school environment.

  • Copyright for New Zealand Teachers – The Creative Commons solution.

    Back in June I was made aware of an issue surrounding Copyright and teaching. Essentially, any resources created for teaching, by teachers, are actually the rightful property of the Board of Trustees of that school. For any teacher to share or use those resources outside of that school is breach of the copyright, and permission needs to be sought.

    You can read the whole article here:
    Copyright for New Zealand Teachers > Unleash Education

    The Creative Commons solution

    Now; being a creative with my own views on copyright, and my own works that hold copyrights, I am very interested in the whole process. To me, as I move through my teaching career, I often see ideas, or think of ideas, and then go about doing my best to make my own resources that are better; whether through advancing functionality or simply putting my own aesthetic improvements on existing ideas.

    I also would want to be able to share these, and use these in any future teacher positions I might hold at other schools.

    So I quickly went about searching for solutions. In the process, it also surprised me how many teachers have no idea that this was the law.

    The solution as it turns out is actually relatively simple, but requires the board to make a deliberate policy change or addition. Creative Commons have made a ‘in schools’ page which outlines the issues quite well, but on top of that, they have developed a policy template for schools to use. I recommend using the ‘annotated’ version first, to get your head around the language of copyright, which can be relatively technical if you’re not used to it.

    Our board is currently in the process of adopting this policy for our school. I hope that this makes the situation around copyright for teachers clear for you, and that you can encourage your school to check its policy around this.

     

     

    The Policy

    This is a copy of the policy template that Creative Commons has provided. It includes the annotations, which I have tried to make a little clearer using fuller sentences than those provided by Creative Commons.

    Preamble

    SCHOOL wishes to encourage the open and free exchange of information, knowledge and resources, and support the collaborative production of copyright works that are freely available to all. SCHOOL encourages both staff and students to support free and open access to copyright works.

    The preamble gives the general purpose for the policy.  It also states the school’s position that it will be using Creative Commons licences to share copyright works.

    Policy

    The Board of Trustees of SCHOOL:

    1. Recognises that the Board of Trustees holds first ownership of copyright of works produced by the Board’s employees in the course of their employment.

    This states that the default ownership settings for copyright works produced by teachers and employees of the school under section 21(2) of the Copyright Act 1994 (NZ) belongs to the school/Board of Trustees.

    2. Applies by default a Creative Commons Attribution Licence to all teaching materials and policies in which the Board of Trustees of the school owns copyright.

    This is the key part of the policy, as it is referred to throughout the rest of the document below.
    It limits the default application of Creative Commons licensing to teaching materials and policies. While these are broad categories, the clause is intended to refer to those teaching or policy resources that would be of use to other schools, and is not intended to apply to every copyright work produced in the school.
    Note also that ‘default’ means that the school can make exceptions to the policy at its discretion.

    3. May apply a Creative Commons Attribution licence to other copyright works, aside from those described in (2), with the express agreement of the Principal. 

    This gives the school flexibility, should it decide to openly release works other than those outlined in the second (2) clause.

    4. May make exceptions to 2) at the discretion of the Principal. Any such exceptions should be limited by a specific time period and should consider the application of other, more restrictive Creative Commons licences, as opposed to simply reserving all rights in a copyright work.

    This will give the school some more flexibility, should it decide to be more restrictive than as outlined in the second (2) clause.

    5. Will transfer to the original creator the copyright in created works licensed by the school under a Creative Commons Attribution or Creative Commons Share-Alike .licence

    The Board of Trustees recognises the benefits of using the most open Creative Commons licences, and provides an incentive to employees to embrace the use of such licences.

    6. Does not make any claim over the ownership of copyright works produced by students. The copyright to these works remains with the creator.

    This simply clarifies that the school has no rights over copyright works produced by students, since they are not employed by the school.

    7. Recognises that this policy only applies to copyright works, and not to any other forms of intellectual property.

    This simply clarifies that Creative Commons licensing only applies to copyright works.

    8. Recognises that the copyright in works produced by an employee other than in the course of their employment by the Board of Trustees of the school remains the property of that employee. Where this is unclear, the process for dispute resolution, outlined below, shall apply.

    This is key for me and other creative type people. It recognises that there may be some uncertainty as to what constitutes a work produced in the course of one’s employment. It is intended to assure teachers that the policy only applies to works that are owned by the school, and to point to the dispute resolution process, below.
    For example; a teacher who creates a drawing or artwork at school, but hasn’t been “employed” or asked to do this by the school, the teacher owns the copyright. This applies to creative works outside of school; such as works created at home as a hobby or secondary employment, such as musical pieces or photography works.
    This also applies to written articles, such as those found on this website; which while are inspired and influenced by my teaching position, are not part of my employment, and so I retain the copyright.

    Definitions

    Creative Commons: An international non-profit that provides free open licences that copyright holders can use to share their work.

    Teaching Materials: Copyright works produced by employees of the school for the purposes of teaching.

    Policies and Procedures: Copyright works that determine, and provide guidance around, a course of action adopted by the school.

    The definitions around what is and is not covered by the policy should be adjusted by the school, as required.

    Disputes

    Where the first ownership of copyright in a given work is disputed or unclear, the following process will apply:

    1. In the first instance the dispute should be documented and presented to the school Principal. 
    2. If the dispute is still not resolved then the documentation should be presented to the chairman of the Board of Trustees. 
    3. If the dispute is still not resolved following 1) and 2), mediation with an appropriate authority will be undertaken.

    This should be replaced with the school’s dispute resolution process, where appropriate.

  • IES and the Poisoned Apple

    Over the next few weeks, primary teachers are meeting to discuss the proposed changes to the IES (Investing in Educational Success) announced last year.

    The changes are, to some, significant and, before I get too cynical, NZEI have done a good enough job even getting the Ministry of Education to make any amendments to their proposed $359,000,000.

    However, when this was first broached with the sector, a resounding 93% of NZEI members voted to have nothing to do with it. They saw the pitfalls of such a system, such as quality teachers no longer in their classrooms, teacher workload, and the fact when it comes to education one size does not fit all, and what works in one school won’t necessarily work in another, and voted appropriately. Still, NZEI remained in the negotiating tent; however smelly; to try and make the most of a sucky situation.

    Joint Initiative

    Now they have a working alternative, which has many changes which I won’t go into. You can read more here.

    However, it doesn’t address the fact that quality teachers and principals will essentially become part time at multiple schools, rather than full time in the classes and schools that benefit from their time and effort. The whole initiative makes busy teachers busier, and the so-called benefits it will bring to student success is hardly mentioned in any of the agreement negotiations, and instead all possible roles are discussed at length. It all seems to just focus around teacher busy-ness, and misses the point completely. This could just be because the agreement is between teachers and the government, but regardless; it somewhat surprises me that student success isn’t more of a factor.
    Let us not forget that this is hailed as raising student achievement, where there is little or no supportive evidence that this will work at all.

    Essentially all that has happened is turd polishing.

    The Poisoned Apple

    Let’s look at it like this.

    The government has offered the teaching community a nice, juicy, red apple. It shimmers and shines in the light and looks delicious to a hungry princess. The soft light glints off it’s polished skin, the deep red matches the crimson lipstick of her luscious lips.

    However, this current government’s education office is run by a witch with a mirror on the wall, and she has poisoned the apple with a curse, as she has done for the other apples she has tempted us with.

    Teachers realised this very early on, and did not want a bar of it. They could see the money spent to buy the apple could be much better spent on other things; like an orange tree.

    But the witch isn’t offering the orange tree. She’s offering the apple.

    Now, NZEI advisor comes to the rescue, or so we think, and the advisor to the king talks with the witch. They discuss at length the properties of the apple, and how it could be made better, so that the princess might eat it. They decide that turning it into a toffee apple might be more appealing. They cover it with the caramel coloured glaze that drips down and turns the apple into a gooey, sticky, goodness.

    While the toffee apple is much more appealing, and is somewhat irresistible in comparison with the delicious apple that was offered before. But deep down the princess knows that the apple is still poisoned and will be the end of her. Still, upon receiving advice from the advisor, she takes a bite. We all know what happens next.

    The only problem is the solution requires a huntsman with a large axe. Which we don’t have.

    Instantly Sceptical

    Essentially, with this government’s attitude and treatment towards teachers, they haven’t done themselves any favours. Add to this the class size fiasco, and you have a workforce which simply does not trust or have faith in anything you try to accomplish. The way they steamrolled out the National Standards turns out to be indicative of how they have continued to operate; make it policy, and then consult with those involved. We saw this again in the Novopay disaster.

    It is no wonder then that teachers were instantly sceptical of IES and picked it apart. It’s also no wonder that the Ministry seem to be rolling on regardless of the situation. I also suspect that it won’t matter what new policy the government bring out in education; teachers are simply going to oppose it purely because of this government’s track record.

    Essentially the vote this week isn’t voting on whether we want the joint initiative agreement made by NZEI and the Ministry of Education or not; it’s voting on whether we want what the Ministry proposed in IES, or the joint initiative (which essentially is a no-brainer for any teacher). In the past it’s quite clearly been said, when given the choice of Ministry backed options, or NZEI backed options, go with NZEI because at least they are looking out for and supporting teachers. They have the teacher’s interests at heart.

    But democratically, a vote like this is completely flawed. We’re choosing between a poisoned apple, and a poisoned toffee apple. At the end of the day, it looks the same, it smells delicious, it’s big, red, and juicy, but you wouldn’t want to take a bite.