Editorials on National Standards
Three editorials on this topic today – all agreeing. First the NZ Herald:
Mrs Tolley is surely right to suggest the unions’ arguments are now purely philosophical. This has underpinned their resistance from the start. It has endured despite the Government concessions and despite the public support for national standards. It is the only reasonable explanation for the dragging of feet and the increasingly radical demeanour.
The Schools Trustees Association has made clear its distaste for the letter from the unions trying to influence boards. It is, it says, irresponsible and unprofessional to incite boards to act as principals’ mouthpieces. Any that succumbed would have forgotten their duty to parents.
Similarly, teachers have a responsibility to heed the policy of a democratically elected government. That is a lesson they, and their unions, seem to have yet to learn.
The Herald also reminds us that the date for reporting to Government on performance has been delayed until 2012. There has been loads of compromise already.
The Dom Post says:
A government is entitled – nay, is obliged – to enact policy on which it went to the country and which voters tacitly endorsed when they chose it to take over the Treasury benches.
Yet school teachers and principals seem hellbent on undermining what Education Minister Anne Tolley, strongly backed by Prime Minister John Key and Finance Minister Bill English, told New Zealanders last year the Government wanted to enact – national standards at primary school. For months, the primary teachers’ union, the NZEI, and the Principals Federation have joined forces to try to derail Mrs Tolley’s plans. She refuses to budge.
Now the NZEI is preparing members to strike over the issue, though they can’t do so without penalty until their employment contracts expire in July. Such action would be outrageous. …
Agree with the Government’s education policy or not – and this newspaper happens to believe that parents should be able to get plain-English reports about their children’s progress, and that the wider community, which funds state schools, should be able to tell which among them are best equipping young citizens for life – Mrs Tolley must be allowed to enact the policy on which National campaigned.
Teachers obviously need reminding that it is a government’s prerogative – not a trade union’s – to determine education policy. Mrs Tolley – admirably – wants to stop one in five children who leave school poorly equipped for tomorrow. Teachers are behaving like the worst of their pupils who can’t get their own way. They should grow up.
As I have said, the NZEI could become the equivalent of Mrs Thatcher’s miners union. They will not have a lot of support for their actions.
Finally the ODT:
It is untenable that the democratically-elected Government of the country be held to ransom by elements in the education system intent of sabotaging a well-flagged national standards policy.
As Education Minister Anne Tolley has repeatedly pointed out – indeed it has become something of a mantra – the National Party campaigned conspicuously on addressing the distressing and unacceptably long “tail” of pupils failing to achieve even basic literacy and numeracy standards in our primary schools, and received the mandate to do something about it in the last election.
December 15th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Who are the authors of these ‘editorials’?
December 15th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
I can’t believe this National Government wants to introduce a structured system into our already working education system.
Arbitrary achievements and unstructured learning are needed to improve childrens self worth and ensure future generations strive for a BA, rather than become another rich business mate of Key’s.
December 15th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
I’m going to go with editors.
December 15th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
As someone who agrees 100% with what National is trying to do, I still can’t understand why individuals and groups are not entitled to try to undermine government policy, refuse to cooperate in implementing it and try to persuade others to do the same. If teacher unions had tried to undermine the NCEA in the same way I would have cheered them on and defended their right to do so.
December 15th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
“Who are the authors of these ‘editorials’?”
Editorials are usually written by senior journalists but the editor takes responsibility for what’s in them.
December 15th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
NZEI/PPTA/PF. The last bastions of mediocrity and feather-bedding whose only real purpose is to protect their members from the harsh glare of assessment of their lack of ability. Bring it on folks–go on strike. Remember President Reagan and the US air traffic controllers!
December 15th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
The simple fact is that this government has already shown a willingness to buckle under public pressure, and I predict a face saving compromise will be arrived at.
And in response to this: It is untenable that the democratically-elected Government of the country be held to ransom by elements in the education system intent of sabotaging a well-flagged national standards policy one could reply:
“It is untenable that a democratically elected government, intent on sabotaging a high achieving education system with worldwide recognition, would terrorise almost every education professional with the threat of punitive action for having the courage to assert the primacy of their skills and experience over an eclectic group of people mainly skilled at getting elected.”
Meantime, I see our PM states the case for Tolley’s standards by saying, “I personally believe that unless you measure, monitor and report something you won’t effect the change that you need.”
Now aside from the fact that I think if the best evidence JK can present for Tolley’s is just a belief then he is failing us, but, regardless, it ignores the fact that the cause of the “tail” is well known, it has been measured, monitored and reported on ad nauseum, and that it includes factors such as race, poverty and poor parenting that neither kids not teachers can fully address without government action on those factors.
If it is true that the last 20 years, as asserted by JK, have been wasted, then, if he gets his way, we will waste the next 20.
December 15th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
Luc: race is not a factor. Idiotic cultures and beliefs are.
December 15th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
And if the Standards aren’t a success, will Tolley resign? I doubt it.
Below is a recent Herald article. it suggests that the Standards won’t work. And it’s academics, not unions, who are saying this.
A system of new national educational standards to assess primary school students is doomed to fail, academics across New Zealand say.
Their doubts over the new standards-based system to rate children join those of teachers and parents expressed earlier this month.
In an open letter to Education Minister Anne Tolley, four education academics from Otago, Waikato and Auckland universities highlighted “fundamental flaws” in the hastily developed system.
Professor John Hattie, from Auckland University, Professor Martin Thrupp, from Waikato University, and Otago University’s Professor Terry Crooks and senior research fellow Lester Flockton submitted the open letter yesterday.
Prime Minister John Key previously said Professor Hattie introduced the idea of the standards-based system to him, though the academic now warned the system was flawed.
The standards had been developed too quickly and were not ready to be brought in over the next three years, the group said.
Schools would start using the system from next February.
“It will not achieve intended goals and is likely to lead to dangerous side effects.”
They expressed their concern over public reporting of the standards, saying similar overseas measures involving national testing had been damaging.
“We stress that such reporting of results at each year level will distort and impoverish the culture of teaching and learning and assessment within schools.”
Likewise, a system assessing students against a standard could add New Zealand onto the “damning” record of failed national testing systems.
“Our understanding of why national testing has such adverse effects convinces us that the intended national standards system will suffer most of the same problems.”
They were concerned the system wrongly assumed children were failing if they were not meeting standards for their age.
“This will lead to the repeated labelling of many young children as failures and will be self-fulfilling because it will damage children’s self-esteem and turn them off learning,” the academics wrote.
The group suggested instead a system where students were assessed against the progress they had made.
Last week, teachers’ union New Zealand Educational Institute called for the Government to at least trial the system before ordering its adoption.
It criticised the system’s “one size fits all” approach, the unworkable implementation times and said teachers did not fully understand how it worked.
A New Zealand Council for Education Research report released earlier this year analysed 5000 submissions, 3000 of which were from parents. When asked for further comments or suggestions, 38 per cent of the parents made negative comments about system. Fourteen per cent commented positively.
“[Parents] raise some quite legitimate concerns… That doesn’t mean that they didn’t like the standards,” she said.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Alan Wilkinson (716) Says:
December 15th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
Luc: race is not a factor. Idiotic cultures and beliefs are.
*****************
Alan, spoken like a true racist.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:13 pm
No Luc. You are the racist. I believe anyone can succeed irrespective of their racial genes. You don’t.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:20 pm
“They were concerned the system wrongly assumed children were failing if they were not meeting standards for their age.”
Hmm, I think the system rightly assumes schools are failing if they are not meeting the standards for other schools in similar socio-economic areas.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
Alan, I fail to see how you take that outrageous and highly offensive slur from the facts I presented about who constitutes the “tail.”
Nearly two centuries of unabated racism has had an effect on Maori achievement that is reflected in our jail population and our socio-economic statistical tables. If you don’t think racism is an ongoing problem for Maori, just reflect on the fuss when Maori TV white-anted Pakeha TV over the world cup.
And Pacific Islanders were welcomed into New Zealand as cheap labour; a concept now almost obsolete so they are thrown on the scrapheap of the deliberately impoverished.
The facts are that those two groups largely constitute the “tail” we speak of, and those kids are the product of their whole environment, not just the schools.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:54 pm
Luc calls Alan a racist (‘Alan, spoken like a true racist.’) and then goes nuts (‘I fail to see how you take that outrageous and highly offensive slur’) when Alan calmly and objectively reflects the criticism (‘You are the racist. I believe anyone can succeed irrespective of their racial genes. You don’t.’). Truly desperate stuff from the anonymous commentator.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Luc, utter twaddle. Pacific Islanders have not had “two centuries of unabated racism”. Neither, for that matter have Maori, many of whom have succeeded. And far more have succeeded in Australia, not because of lesser racism but because they have escaped from the destructive peer pressure of their “culture”. And, blatantly obviously, Asians suffer much more racism and succeed despite it because they have a much better “culture”.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:16 pm
Alan, good on you, you are truly expert in distorting comments. Tiresome, really.
Recent Asian immigrants have suffered from racism, it is true, but not after nearly two hundred years of institutionalised racism as Maori have endured. That’s a big difference.
Alan, of course many individual Maori have achieved well, as have many individual Pacific Islanders, but just look at the jail stats and look at the socio-economic stats, assume, as I do, that it is not because of genes or some inherent inclination that they fair so poorly there, and ask why this is the current state of affairs.
Of course, this will require some thought.
Are you up to that?
Getstaffed, you need to get a job.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
Luc, it is simply because, like you, they suffer from bad ideas and beliefs – both those they hold personally and those held by their family and friends.
Those who succeed have better ideas and better people around them. Simple.
December 15th, 2009 at 11:51 pm
Alan
For every complex problem, there is a solution that is clear, simple, and wrong. (H.L. Mencken)
Pat yourself on your back.
December 16th, 2009 at 6:34 am
I’m afraid this debate has no substance, only a power struggle. There is nothing proposed in the bill that hasn’t already put in place, but any productive outcome is likely to reflect the proposed ‘national standard’ therefore the government.
Key and Tolley against an informed group sustains the nature of dictatorship already surfaced elsewhere. It is the manifestations of Helen Key Clark!
December 16th, 2009 at 6:58 am
getstaffed, it is interesting to see you comment on slurring and reactions. Yesterday you went a lot more nuts than Luc because you felt “besmirched” after I calmly asked you a question. The “anonymous commentator” dig from an anonymous commentator is also interesting.
I was surprised with your apparent sensitivity to being besmirched, but perhaps that is because you normally feel safety of numbers here. Besmirching and outright abuse and blatant misrepresentation is common for some like Luc and me and a few others. If you dare to question the majority view here you get savaged, Kiwiblog has a deserved reputation for bullying by bunches of blog thugs. The exchange between Alan and Luc here has been very mild in comparison. If you are concerned about being reasonable why didn’t you comment yesterday when side show bob went mental at me?
December 16th, 2009 at 7:27 am
$9m plan to improve behaviour in blogs
Blog posters with behaviour problems will be offered free blogging programmes every year under a long-awaited Government plan being unveiled today.
Education Minister Anne Tolley says she will introduce standards testing on blogs to identify those posters who are failing basic levels of behaviour.
“I’m not saying this is it from day one. But we have to get started because this is about posters failing in the system. I’ll do whatever it takes to make this work.”
December 16th, 2009 at 8:20 am
The teachers unions supported by the Labour Party think education policy belongs to them. That any change they do not agree with will be resisted to the hilt. They do not want accountability, they do not want parents to have a role in education policy, they do not want standards that could in any way reflect on individual teacher performance. With 20% of students failing to attain basic standards then parents have a right to know. And if a child is missing out then parents should get vouchers to pay for supplemental lessons.
December 16th, 2009 at 8:48 am
Luc – That was unnecessarily harsh of me. I retract and apologise.
I’d like to make some comments about the performance of Maori and Pasifika students. Mrs getstaffed recently ran a “Home School Partnership” evening for the parents and teachers of a decile 2 school in Wellington. This school has >90% Maori and Pacifica students and the evening was for classes in years 7 and 8. The intention of these evening is for schools to help parents support the in-classroom activities, in their own homes at evenings and weekend.
60% of the students had one or both parents attending this evening, seen as something of a success by school principal. The attending parents had students who were mostly performing better than the students whose parents did not attend. When surveyed at the beginning of the evening most of the parents expressed a desire to know more about how to help their kids improve.
Analysis: Parental eagerness for their kids to learn more, even without technical proficiency, is sufficient to help their kids gain a better education.
A few weeks later the three teachers involved in these classes reported (anecdotally) improved understanding and recall from the students whose parents attended the evening, with little or no change in the achievement of the other students despite all students receiving the normal in-classroom tuition over that period.
Analysis: Kids learn better when their own parents get actively involved.
So I simply don’t by the post-colonial guilt or lurid suggestion that skin colour or genetic coding inhibits learning. It is the expectation level of parents that appears to promote better learning. That, and as I’ve commented recently, the quality of the teaching staff.
If anything is missing from the schooling system (and National Standards IMO) it’s better tools for increasing parental engagement in the education of their children. Parental contribution to Board of Trustees on MoE compliance, self-review and school policy is red-herring IMO. Educational outcomes would be better served if those parents, and all others, were actively involved in partnering with the school at the curriculum level.
December 16th, 2009 at 9:28 am
As a parent I would welcome any initiative that enables me to understand how my child is doing at school. Are they passing their subjects, are they below average, are they above average or are they very good? Secondly I want to know are they working hard and to the potential or are they just cruising?
Having moved around a bit over the last 10 years and having had my children go to schools in three different cities I can confidently say that after seeing their reports I am none the wiser. I think they are doing well? However I am expected to wade through different marking systems for each subject, trying to understand education theory — sometimes with a full page trying to just explain the marking system for this one subject, and frankly confusing grading.
NCEA is a good example — my child gets E in one mathematics discipline, A in another and M in another. This is all in mathematics mind you. So how she doing in mathematics? I have no idea — I think quite well — but it is a feeling, rather than through any objective feedback from the reports.
My son brought home a report on DVD from his primary school the other day. It was well produced, told me how well he thinks he is doing, but I have no idea what the teacher thinks or what the school thinks. So I think he is doing well — but the report gave me no clue.
What I am getting at is that if the education Minister could cut the technical jargon and enable parents to know how their children are doing in simple terms, I for one would be very pleased. Education appears to have been taken over by technocrats from Mars who have no idea about communicating with parents.
Here’s a constructive idea — give a child a C if they pass, D if they fail, E if they fail badly, B if they are above average and A if they are doing excellently. Tell me about their effort. That’s all I want to know. Then comment at the end about how they are doing generally at school and their attitude and then we have done.
If national standards cuts through the clutter and bring some sanity and simplicity to education then I am all for it.
December 16th, 2009 at 9:50 am
The problem with Anne Tolley is that she cherry-picks the advice that suits her agenda. This isn’t a trait that’s exclusive to her of course, but its problematic for her because she doesn’t have much of a grasp of the education portfolio and she should be listening to as much advice as she can get.
Remember when John Hattie said things like class size has minimal effect on learning, it’s the quality of teaching that counts. Tolley saw dollar signs and an opportunity to sock it to the teachers, so Hattie was hailed as the new educational messiah. (Hattie also said homework has minimal effect too but that part was ignored). Now Hattie has come out saying the National standards could have a dangerous impact on student achievement and suddenly he is an ignorant fool in the eyes of Tolley.
She really needs to listen more.
December 16th, 2009 at 10:36 am
You know Scott you could always go and have a chat with your child’s teacher, that’s a great way to cut through the ‘clutter’.
December 16th, 2009 at 10:37 am
I welcome the introduction of National Standards also – even more so now I have read last weeks primary school newsletter. One page of the four page newsletter was devoted to influencing parents that National Standards were a bad thing. Some excerpts:
“the standards system assumes the children are failing if they do not meet the standard for their age, rather than reflecting the progress each child is making. This will lead to repeated labelling of many young children as failures, resulting in them turning off learning and achieving”
“the opportunity to engage children in learning that is meaningful to them and relevant to their local situation may be lost with a national “one size fits all” approach”
What a load of codswallop. All this philosophy leads to is a lowering of standards overall – exactly the problem we have at the moment with 20% illiteracy. Exactly the problem National Standards is aimed at fixing.
Coming on the back of a school sports day where there were no winners or losers at any event, and where trying hard was optional, I am relieved my child is attending a new school next year.
December 16th, 2009 at 10:52 am
stayathomemum – perhaps you could explain how labeling children as ‘well below the standard’ will magically fix the 20% illiteracy problem.
December 16th, 2009 at 10:55 am
And what will the teacher say?
Little Johnny is grade A at reading, grade B at writing, and C at arithmetic. Why not just put it on a piece of paper for posterity? Then the kid can show gramps and granny rather than send them down to talk to the teacher also.
December 16th, 2009 at 10:57 am
It works at work. They get 3 ‘well below standards’ then a ‘don’t come monday’, most people get ‘above the standard’ after 1 or 2 ‘well belows’, there is something about consequences that seems to motivate them.
December 16th, 2009 at 11:06 am
OK Sonny so your approach is to kick kids out of school if they don’t improve? I can’t see how that improves the 20% illiteracy problem.
December 16th, 2009 at 11:15 am
YesWeDid – I have not said it will “magically fix” the problem. I understand the National Standards will be a measure of our children’s learning on a nationwide level. There appears to be no consistent measure currently taken, with schools varying widely in their methods.
Just like if you want 1/2 a cup of flour in your baking, you measure it accurately for best results. You could always go by eye of course – and have a varying success rate.
Once the state of our nations education is assessed, and those children labelled “well below the standard” are identified, action can be taken to improve their learning. Things like remedial reading, etc. Currently these children are unidentified at a national level – and probably lie in that 20%.
If my child was labelled “well below the standard”, I would like to know, so I could take remedial action.
If I was a teacher and my pupil was labelled “well below the standard” I would like to know, so I could take remedial action.
If I was Minister of Education and kiwi kids were labelled “well below the standard” I would like to know, so I could take remedial action.
December 16th, 2009 at 11:25 am
stayathomemum – you are assuming that things like remedial reading are not happening now and teachers don’t currently identify the below standard children, that is simply not the case. If you had concerns about the school your children are attending you could contact them and I am sure they would be happy to discuss their current assessment and remedial reading programs.
National standards might have a positive outcome if the government also increased the resources available to assist the bottom 20%, I am not aware they have done this. All national standards is going to do is increase the paper work a teacher/school has to do and that leaves less time and resources available to actually teach the children.
December 16th, 2009 at 11:26 am
I think you could just go and ask and most teachers could tell you straight away which pupils are “below the standard” and would benefit from remedial action – if there were sufficient resources that weren’t going in to testing standards.
National standards may reassure parents that give a damn but will they just continue to damn those who don’t?
December 16th, 2009 at 11:43 am
I am not assuming remedial activity is not currently undertaken (perhaps you should stop the assuming!). Don’t you think by measuring where the bottom 20% lie at a national level, then resources can be allocated better? For instance, the bottom 20% of a poor school may include only a fraction of those children requiring attention, and the bottom 20% of a top school may all be achieving adequately. I believe Standards will enable better targeting of remedial action.
December 16th, 2009 at 11:56 am
“You know Scott you could always go and have a chat with your child’s teacher, that’s a great way to cut through the ‘clutter’.”
Well yes I could. But then what the heck is the point of having a report? Is it too much to ask to have a simple report, with simple standards, that tell me as a parent whether my child is doing well or poorly?
December 16th, 2009 at 11:56 am
You might be right, however I think the whole purpose of national standards is to add another layer of bureaucracy which the government can then use as a big stick to target certain schools.
All so they can say ‘if xyz school is doing so well why can’t you’?
Until extra funding and resources are provided I can’t see how national standards can improve things.
By ‘targeting’ what you are suggesting is taking resources from schools that are doing well and allocating them to schools that aren’t, hard to see from a National government that thinks it’s OK to give private schools (who already achieve highly) an extra $25 million a year and then shuts Aorangi Primary here in Christchurch (John Key’s former primary school).
December 16th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
Scott (and others)
go and ask the teachers.
You don’t have to wait until parent interviews either. Whenever I go to my girls schools to talk to their teachers it has never been a problem. You can also get the teachers email address if you find it difficult to get to school. This also works well with high schools (where students will have many teachers).
You need to actively engage yourself in your children’s education – it is your duty as a parent.
Also A = Achieved, M = Merit and E = Excellence – go here
http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/ncea/for-parents/index.html
to learn more.
December 16th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
“All so they can say ‘if xyz school is doing so well why can’t you’? Until extra funding and resources are provided I can’t see how national standards can improve things.”
Pardon? If some schools are doing better with exactly the same funding how come picking up their ideas, methods and standards won’t improve matters without spending any more money?
December 16th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
If some schools are doing better with exactly the same funding how come picking up their ideas, methods and standards won’t improve matters without spending any more money?
It might, there is alway room for improvement, but I doubt there are two schools in New Zealand that are identical, each has there own problems and special issues.
I would hope that any comparison between schools is used by the government to help and support the ‘underperforming’ schools and not just as a big stick. Unfortunately with Tolley as minister I don’t have much confidence.
December 16th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Why thank you Max Call for pointing out my “duty as a parent to get actively involved in my children’s education”.
I would suggest it is the duty of the school to give simple reports that we can understand so we know whether a child is failing or doing well. Is that too much to ask?
Unlike some here I do not want or expect to have to master the intricacies of many assessment systems in different schools in different subjects. I honestly do not care that much about the education system for the systems sake.
So let’s just keep it simple. Give them A-E or 1-5 for each subject. Not multiple grades for one subject. Take out all the jargon.
And yes I am happy to visit the school to actively engage in my children’s education. I just wish the report would give me a clue whether I need to visit the teacher or not.
December 16th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
‘I just wish the report would give me a clue whether I need to visit the teacher or not.’
So, you are happy to spend time moaning on a blog site about your child’s reports not being clear but will only take the 1/2 hour or so that it takes to visit the teacher if you ‘need’ to.
My guess is you ‘need’ to, there is no way an A-E or 1-5 on a report could ever give you a complete picture of your child’s progress (or lack of) at his or her school.
December 16th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
The teachers job is to teach children, not to waste their (precious) time teaching parents how to interpret the way……………
December 16th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
if reports confuse you or if you don’t wish to talk to teachers – ask your child.
if they say they don’t know they are fibbing or are ‘limited’
children know if they are in the ‘top’ group or ‘third’ group or whatever (no matter what their teachers call the groups).