UNLEASH

ED

Tag: principals

  • Five Year Limit – Enough time to make a difference?

    It could be a seismic shift in education, tearing apart the model schools have operated on for more than 30 years.

    School leaders are “cautiously optimistic” about radical reforms recommended by an independent taskforce last week, which said there was no evidence self-governance had helped schools improve equity or lift student achievement.

    Its proposals are open for public consultation until April 7, when Education Minister Chris Hipkins will consider what changes to pursue.

    The taskforce’s main recommendation is that New Zealand establish 20 ‘Education Hubs’ to act as the middlemen between the Government and individual schools.

    The hubs would take over many of school boards of trustees’ business and governance responsibilities, leaving them to focus on student achievement, strategic planning, community engagement and local fundraising.

    The idea has caused some uneasiness in the education sector, partly because it is not known exactly who or how many people would act as minister-appointed directors of these Crown entities.

    But the main cause of angst has been the hubs’ potentially wide-reaching powers over property, employment, advisory services, professional development, and funding for up to 125 schools each.

    “The one thing I do like is the personalisation and communication to communities that we currently have; I would hate to lose that,” Canterbury West Coast Principals’ Association president and Burnside High School principal Phil Holstein said.

    “It’s another layer of administration and I’m not sure how that would look.”

    Beyond a massive restructure of school governance, the independent taskforce has made several other game-changing recommendations.

    …

    The taskforce has proposed principals spend only five years at a school before they are moved elsewhere.

    The proposal came as a surprise to New Zealand Principals’ Federation president and Bathgate Park School principal Whetu Cormick.

    ​”We would all be thinking, what does this mean for ourselves? I would expect we would still have a permanent position within the hub arrangement,” he said.

    “The idea of us moving across and sharing knowledge in schools … is an idea we haven’t had for a very, very long time.”

    Under the taskforce’s plan, principals would be appointed by the hubs rather than by boards of trustees.

    Several principals welcomed these ideas as a way to keep them accountable – even if they lost some job stability.

    But it could take five years just to become established in a school community and “white knights” were rarely well received, they said.

    Read the entire article here.

  • Taranaki school principal resigns from increasingly stressful job.

    The principal of a top Taranaki school has resigned after 12 years in the role – and says other school leaders have congratulated him for getting out of an increasingly stressful profession.

    Charles Gibson is one of five Taranaki principals and deputy principals leaving their posts this year.

    While Gibson said he was mostly leaving Lepperton Primary School because it is “the right time to do something a little different”, he warned the stresses of the job, national standards, and a lack of respect for teachers from the Ministry of Education had all been contributing factors and were putting others off taking up top positions.

    “Many teachers and principals are feeling increasingly undermined not only by government and MOE but by some who feel they know better about how children learn.”

    He would like to see the end of national standards, he said.

    “Have the MOE support and respect us. Part of their brief should be to make our job easier. We need more wraparound support for our children at risk without having to spend ten hours on an application.

    “One of the biggest frustrations I have had is with the MOE and the rebuilding of our new school. It has been about eight years since approval and in that time it keeps going over budget and still not a single piece of dirt has been overturned.”

    Read full article here.

  • NZCER – National Standards in their seventh year

    National Standards in their seventh year – NZCER

    At the mid point of 2016, we were presented with a survey which was sent off to NZCER for the current views of teaching proffesionals views on National Standards. 6 months later, and NZCER have done the collation and inquiry around the survey results, and have presented the following report.

    National Standards in their seventh year (PDF 2.9Mb)

    As one of these teaching professionals who completed the survey (selected at random by the school principal) I was quite interested in the results and findings. Below are some of the key quotes from the report, and hopefully it provides a good summary and synopsis of the entire article for you.

    Key Quotes

    • While (the National Standards) are part and parcel of teaching and school decision making, questions continue around their impact for students, differences in their interpretation and their impact on the rest of the curriculum.
    • Over half of teachers and principals still feel they have not had the support they need to work with National Standards.
    • Over two-thirds of teachers reported a narrowing of the curriculum they teach, associated with National Standards
    • Many teachers indicated that their school has a shared understanding of National Standards that means that overall teacher judgements (OTJs) at the school are consistent…
    • Only 41% of the principals and 49% of teachers thought they had had enough support and guidance to feel confident about their work with National Standards.
    • Only 16% of teachers agreed the impact of National Standards on students’ achievement overall has been positive.
    • Most parents and whānau reported receiving clear information in their child’s mid-year report about their achievement of National Standards… Fifty-one percent of parents thought National Standards provide a valuable record of their child’s learning.
    • Nine percent of the teachers who responded to the survey had used PaCT to support their OTJs in 2016. PaCT is a Ministry-funded online tool that was developed to support teachers to make consistent judgements of students’ performance in relation to the National Standards.
    • Teachers’ support for National Standards remained around the same as 2013, when it was 35%. The proportion who agreed National Standards provide a valuable record of student learning was stable at 23%

    Principal Comments

    • In the comments made by 43% of the principals about National Standards, the unreliable nature of National Standards data was the most frequently mentioned theme (18% of all principals).

      NS are a joke. Data coming to us from schools when students enrol here is highly unreliable. Our view is that without a National Test (WE DO NOT WANT NATIONAL HIGH STAKES TESTING!!!!) there is no accurate way of assessing whatever the data schools are submitting is truthful/correct. We are hard in our marking, we do not overstate student achievement, most probably we understate it. It is obvious that schools are not being truthful in their reporting of data because of the high levels of inaccuracy. OTJs cannot be accurately moderated within a school, let alone between local schools and definitely not between suburbs/cities etc. NS data being published by the MOE on Education Counts cannot be trusted.

    • Nine percent commented that the focus should be on students’ achievement, rather than their achievement of given standards.

      (National Standards) Do not acknowledge the progress of students who are not achieving at the Standard but are making progress, but it is not enough to move out of the ‘below’ categories.

    • Seven percent of principals voiced concern about the negative effects of National Standards on students and their learning.

      Good idea but each child will have different abilities. What about the child who is ‘below’ from 5 years–12 years old. How do they feel?

      It is soul destroying for students who are well below—we used to celebrate their small achievements—now they are just well below! 🙁 Overall, National Standards have led to a deterioration in the educational deal our children are receiving.

    Teacher Comments

    • Forty-four percent of teachers wrote comments about National Standards, and concern about negative effects on students and their learning was a main theme (13% of all teachers).

      Labels children from an early age. National Standards has helped label our Pasifika and Māori students as ‘below’ achievers, it doesn’t take into account the added value of the child’s own learning.

      I find the whole push for acceleration very dangerous as many children are getting insufficient consolidation and fall down later because they do not have a solid grounding.

    • The other most frequently mentioned theme in teachers’ comments was that the focus should be on identifying and reporting a student’s individual progress, rather than their achievement—or not—of a set standard (10% of teachers).

      National Standards do not accurately recognise the progress of some students, in particular ‘well below’ and ‘below’ students. A student can arrive at ‘below’, work as hard as they can all year and still be ‘below’. National Standards do not acknowledge or show this progress. This can be very demotivating for these students.

      National Standards are a terrible way to measure student achievement as it does not include specific progress within a level. Students may make huge individual progress within their own ability, however parents/caregivers are only concerned if their child is ‘AT’ National Standards.

    In Conclusion

    • Overall, the picture from the 2016 NZCER national survey responses indicates that, while the National Standards have been incorporated into teaching and learning and used by school leaders as indicators of student need, experiences of using them continue to raise questions about their role in student learning and performance, more than 6 years later. To make the National Standards more productive for teaching and learning, it would seem that the recommendations from NZCER’s 2013 analysis of its national survey data (summarised on p. 6 of this report) are still applicable.

    Your thoughts?

    What are your thoughts on National Standards and their role in today’s education? Are they relevant or are they a distraction from your teaching?

    What did you think of the report above? Anything stand out for you? Please Comment below.

  • Taillight

    Over the last several months, we’ve seen an increase of ‘Principal-related’ jobs that have stacked on-top of the role that Principals already have to play. For one, I know that for many Principals, Novopay was one stress that has turned them greyer than ever, and continues to cause week in and week out stress as they become glorified pay clerks for their staff. Many Principals have off-loaded this role to their admin team; but many wish to take the responsibility of paying their staff on themselves, and won’t sleep soundly until they know each member has the right pay.

    Add to this the new legislation coming in such as the Health and Safety Act, and the Vunerable Children Act, which boards and Principals now inundated with new policies, new procedures, and paper work to sink HMS Bismark all over again.

    Some Principals are now facing the ongoing struggle to wrangle other local schools and boards together into a community of learning, even though they may or may not want to.

    Of course then there’s the ongoing pressures of financial audits, property regulations and funding, the charter and strategic plans, and that’s all to be done with the knowledge that ERO may or may not be far away depending on your school.

    Then, after leaving schools alone for the best part of a term, along come the senior advisors from the Ministry, who are meant to be a sounding board, a guide, someone who works alongside principals and schools. Do they ask how things are going? Do they ask what is on top? What is impacting the school? No. Do they actually visit the school and see how its going? Talk to principals, staff, children, to find out how the school is operating? No.

    No they are asking two questions.

    What is your data like? What are your target students results?

    Well, quite frankly; that’s like checking the taillights at a serious car accident.

     

    Don’t forget to comment below if you’ve heard similar stories! Share with your friends and colleagues.