| LATEST NEWS |  |
|
QPEC Public Forum and AGM - all welcome Saturday April 10th, St Columba Centre, 30 Vermont Street, Ponsonby, Auckland from 10am 10am Public Forum - "2010 - a year of challenge for education" Speakers: Dellis Hunt - Spokesperson for PAL (Parents Against Labelling) Frances Nelson - President NZEI (New Zealand Education Institute) Bronwyn Cross - Deputy General Secretary PPTA (Post Primary Teachers Association) Tom Ryan - President TEU (Tertiary Education Union) David Do and Pene Delaney - Co-Presidents NZUSA (NZ Union of Students Associations) 12noon Scone/muffin Break 12.15pm Forum continutes with speakers Martin Thrupp, Professor of Education from Waikato University Ivan Snook, Emeritus professor of Education Massey University Ruth Mansell, QPEC National Vice Chair John Minto, QPEC National Vice Chair 2.30pm - Lunch 3pm QPEC AGM 4.30pm Finish Attacks on public education are coming thick and fast from the National ACT government. Everyone welcome for a lively discussion with planning to enhance education quality and opportunity for all New Zealanders. All welcome.
Government voucher proposal has five major flaws Media release: 17 February 2010 The very worst of policy making “The Step Change proposal released yesterday proposes to allow non-qualified educators in community settings to educate the hardest-to-teach students in New Zealand, receiving only two-thirds of the funds that schools get (with the final third paid once success is achieved), with no capital development money and no system of educational review”, said Liz Gordon today. Dr Gordon said there are five major flaws in the report: Click here to read the release. Read also this excellent blog from Russell Brown which gives the lie to Heather Roy's proposals.
Latest QPEC Newsletter - February 2010 Read the latest news and views on critical education issues. This newsletter includes coverage of the government slashing of night class funding and the heated debate about national standards. We have views from educational experts, teachers and parents and we expose the government's deceitful use of an official report to promote bad policy. Once you've read the newsletter please consider joining QPEC to help us become a more effective voice for high quality public education. Get the newsletter by clicking here: February 2010 QPEC Newsletter.
Special Education Review The government has announced a review of special education. We encourage parents and teachers to have their voices heard. QPEC has a long-standing interest and involvement in special edcuation and we will be making a submission to address what we see as systemic problems with funding and too many children falling through the cracks. The deadline for submissions is 19 March 2010 and more information is available through this link. National Standards debate The debate about the government National standards is heating up. The government seems determined to ram through changes which are alarming schools, principals, teacher organisations and educational academics. Here is a selection of material which gives the lie to government's claims:
QPEC National Chair Liz Gordon released this statement on Wednesday February 3rd in response to the government spending $200,000 to promote national standards: Taxpayer’s money will spread disinformation to... taxpayers
The National Chairperson of QPEC, Dr Liz Gordon, said that John Key has been misled by his Minister and officials into spending taxpayers’ money to spread incorrect information about the findings of an Education Review Office (ERO) report. “I am not excited about having a Prime Minister that repeats the untrue statements of others. A few moments checking the report would reveal the truth, and he should have checked”. Liz Gordon says that John Key is trying to convince parents that National Standards are worth the time and effort being put into them. But, she says “he has had to resort to disinformation to make the case”. QPEC Vice President, Emeritus Professor Ivan Snook, undertook a detailed analysis of the ERO report on ‘reading and writing in Years 1 and 2’ at the end of 2009. Snook’s work covered all the claims made at the time by the Minister, and now repeated by the Prime Minister. Key stated that “two thirds of principals and senior managers were not properly managing assessment”. If true, this would be a damning claim. But the ERO report is about the first two years only, and schools have always seen these as essentially classroom focused years, where the teacher, often with smaller classes, has the opportunity to get to know and manage children’s learning intimately, giving immediate feedback and invoking remedial techniques at will. In short, top down management of assessment in beginning classrooms is often not judged appropriate in schools. Snook quotes the ERO report which stated principals “trusted their junior school teachers or leaders who knew the students well.” Hardly an indictment on schools! Key goes on to state that “30 percent of teachers were not doing a good job of teaching reading and writing”. ERO rated teachers (subjectively – no explicit tests were used) as High (26%), Good (43%), Adequate (21%) or Limited (10%) on the quality of their teaching of reading. The 30% covers both ‘adequate’ and ‘limited’ categories. In his analysis, Ivan Snook notes: But surely, if the teaching is “adequate” it is “adequate” (not excellent or outstanding but adequate) and a more honest reporting would place the unsatisfactory teachers at 10% rather than 31%. The third claim that Key makes is that “many principals aren’t adequately sharing their school’s achievement information with their communities”. Snook comments: What the ERO review found was “In some schools that were working with a cluster of other schools, a professional development facilitator had collected, or assisted with data analysis. However, some teachers and leaders ignored this information or did not share it with their school community.” (p 38). Liz Gordon said that “Key was reported as saying that national standards would identify poor performers and demand more from them. The Minister of Education has consistently refused to explain how this will happen. In a press release just yesterday, she said ‘Children who are slipping behind will be identified so teachers and parents can help them improve before it’s too late.’ What’s new in that? “QPEC thinks the $200,000 disinformation money should be spent on a high quality, detailed study of what needs to be done to improve the literacy of the bottom 20 percent of learners. All educators would support such a study.
Assessment expert and Co-director of the Educational Assessment Research Unit at the University of Otago, Lester Flockton, has examined the government's claims and measured them against the reality of national standards. Read the government spin here.
Lester has produced this letter to parents: Dear Parents, Students and Teachers National Standards: there’s more to this than meets the eye! I fully support the positions of respected educational organisations, experts and leaders throughout our country who endorse quality teaching, high expectations, and standards of achievement appropriate to the individual student. I also share with those organisations and experts my deep concern and strong opposition to the National Standards regime that the Minister of Education wants to impose year by year on every primary and intermediate child - from five year-olds onwards. Claims that National Standards will benefit all children, parents and teachers sound good, but are far from true and quite misleading. There is huge and compelling evidence from around the world that warns of the harm that National Standards can do to the quality of children’s schooling. Considerable international experience (e.g. USA, England) provestheir outright failure to “fix” underachievement or improve learning. Parents want to be confident that their school is doing its best for their children, and that it is a good school. Most parents want to know how well their children are doing at school – where they are succeeding, where they need to improve, and what they can do to help their children’s learning. I agree with and work to these expectations. However, National Standards and reporting as designed by the Ministry of Education, can only give very narrow and even misleading answers. Because of the potential flaws and harm that can be done by the systems the Minister of Education is pushing onto our schools and children, consideration is being given to conditions that will have to be met before agreeing to try National Standards. It is fair to expect a fully independent, Government funded evaluation into whether National Standards do what is claimed. We need to be convinced that National Standards do not undermine a well-rounded and modern education for our children. We also need to be convinced that the reporting of National Standards will not label or harm our children, our schools and our communities. Any full implementation of national standards would depend on positive evidence from a thorough investigation. The public has a right to know the truth of the matter. Education leaders are disturbed that the Minister of Education fails to take notice of sound and expert advice about flaws in this Government policy despite numerous attempts to get her to understand the implications of her policy. Many are also specially worried about the lasting damage National Standards could do to a well-rounded education for our young people, and the quality of teaching and schooling in New Zealand. These are held in very high regard around the world. Thank you for taking the time to think about what National Standards could do to our children and schools. Any change needs to be proven to be good change – for our children. There is absolutely no proof that National Standards will work. There is a lot of well-justified doubt, and continuing misleading statements from the Minister of Education who takes comfort from the general public’s lack of sufficient insights into what National Standards mean and could do. It is costing the tax payer millions of dollars at the expense of other important provisions. The fact sheet with this letter summarises the truth of the matter. Your support is appreciated. The teachers union NZEI is conducting a national bus tour to raise awareness with parents. See what is happening at this link: http://www.handsupforlearning.org.nz/
QPEC National Vice Chair John Minto has blogged about it: http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/blogs/frontline/3284466/Preparing-for-baked-bean-education Associate Education Minister and Maori Party Co-leader Pita Sharples has grave concerns: http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/politics/3282549/Sharples-Grave-fears-about-national-standards
QPEC 2010 AGM - Advance Warning QPEC's 2010 AGM will be held in Auckland on Saturday April 10th at the St Columba Centre, Vermont Street, Ponsonby. More details will follow. Put the date in your diary now. All welcome.
QPEC's Liz Gordon challenges Destiny Church Campbell Live, Friday 30th October 2009 http://www.3news.co.nz/Schools-of-the-Destiny-Church/tabid/367/articleID/127594/cat/221/Default.aspx
Literate but ignorant? Our children’s future, part II. Press release 23 October 2009 – UPDATED FROM YESTERDAY’S RELEASE
Yesterday, QPEC chair Liz Gordon put out a release on behalf of QPEC discussing the government’s decision to focus on literacy and numeracy standards, at the same time withdrawing teacher support for science, languages, the arts, health and technology. In that release, Dr Gordon mentioned the comprehensive Cambridge University review of the British curriculum. Schools in Britain went down the standards/ literacy and numeracy path over a decade ago, and this is the first comprehensive evaluation of that system.
‘QPEC members have now done some further study of that review. Essentially, what it means is that the Government is to about to embrace, in total, the failed policy direction of another country. Not only is the proposed direction narrow, it is clear from the Cambridge study that it will not lift literacy and numeracy levels here’, said Liz Gordon.
‘The main finding of that review is that: “the evidence could not be clearer: if breadth is obtained, so are standards. If breadth is sacrificed, so are standards." The review argues that literacy and numeracy are best developed, not in isolation, but through study of other areas of the curriculum. ‘The British Conservative Party spokesperson on Education said that it is clear that “a broad and demanding curriculum—far from undermining reading, writing and arithmetic - reinforces attainment in these core skills." ‘The Cambridge reviewers also found that the standards-based curriculum was "excessively prescriptive and needlessly detailed," "had undermined teacher professionalism" and had "failed to improve the quality of teaching and learning."
‘The curriculum in England, they say, places a premium on the memorising of facts and neglects the understanding of concepts and principles’ said Dr Gordon.
‘Today the Prime Minister will announce the introduction of National Standards, while the Minister of Education signals that it will be accompanied by a downgrading of the other learning areas. We know from the Cambridge study what this is likely to mean. If this policy is meant to improve achievement it would seem, on the British experience, that it is doomed to failure and the losers will be a generation of our nation’s children’.
Ends Liz Gordon 027 4545 008
Literate but ignorant? Our children’s future. Press release 22 October 2009
The Minister of Education’s decision to cut professional advice and support for the teaching of Art, PE and Science is crude and short-sighted, according to QPEC chair, Liz Gordon.
Anne Tolley today said that the move is required to transfer resources to the government’s proposed new national standards in primary schools.
“What this means is that more resources will be put into basic literacy and numeracy and less into substantive subjects. Children will enter secondary schools possibly more literate and definitely more ignorant”.
Dr Gordon said that after a decade of a literacy and numeracy focus in English primary schools, a recent Cambridge University report revealed that children’s learning was ‘impoverished’ because the Arts and Sciences have been squeezed out.
“ This appears to be the path that Anne Tolley wants to follow. The notion that national standards are incompatible with a broad curriculum has taken hold here, and is a dangerous one”.
Liz Gordon says that this decision will impact particularly on the “200,000 students living below the poverty line”, who rank “29th out of 30 OECD countries in child welfare”, and who have few books, travel experiences and role models from which to gain a broader view of life.
“Locked into a literacy and numeracy race that they have no hope of winning, are these students now also to be stripped of substantive knowledge?”
Liz Gordon said thatAnne Tolley’s comment on National Radio this morning that the government may change the focus from year to year between Science, Art and PE is an “astonishingly crude and educationally unsound approach”.
“Every educator in the country will sit up and say – is she serious?!!” Liz Gordon National Chairperson 039805420 or 0274545008
When you are the least powerful school in your community... 30 September 2009 Media Release: The Minister of Education has announced that Aorangi School in Christchurch will close. Neither the high level of community support, nor the need to save the bilingual unit, the only one of its kind in the North West of Christchurch, has saved the school. QPEC chair Liz Gordon notes that October 1st marks twenty years since Tomorrow’s School was set up, which instituted open slather competition between schools for students. Schools like Aoraki, serving lower income and ethnically diverse communities beside much higher decile and wealthier communities, have been under threat from day one of the new system. Many have closed. Schools like Surrey Park in Invercargill, a large school and highly successful, was a victim a decade ago to the tendency for wealthier schools to absorb the poorer. There are many others. This would not matter, except that the education of low income, Māori, Pacific and immigrant communities has not improved. There are much bigger educational gaps then there were a decade ago. The education of the powerless has suffered. “Aoraki School has demonstrated time and again that it serves its community effectively”, said Liz Gordon. “I understand that at yesterday’s meeting with the Minister, she raised ‘educational concerns’ as yet another reason to close the school, when that had never been stated as a reason through the consultation process. She makes it up as she goes along”. “Let us be clear. Aoraki School offers a wonderful bi-lingual education to Māori families living in the North West, in the state housing area that John Key once called home. Aoraki School has bent over backwards to support the new migrant community in the same area, and has won the loyalty and support of that community. “It is absolutely clear that the school has now lost its struggle to remain open, subject to final appeals, because its catchment is not rich enough, nor white enough, nor able to speak out enough, to be saved. Dr. Gordon said that the families and children who passionately support the school have learned that their hopes and prayers count for nothing. “How can we expect them to grow up as good citizens, when they have learned that they are worth less?” Liz Gordon National Chairperson 039805420 or 0274545008
Three reasons why league tables do not improve schoolingMedia Release—7 April 2009 QPEC is dismayed at reports that the Government intends to introduce league tables in schools. “There are three main reasons why league tables are bad policy”, says Chairperson Dr Liz Gordon. “First, only some things can be measured, and these are not always what is valuable about education. You can only measure achievement, not interest, engagement, passion, social skills and all the other things that go on in schools. “Second, league table tests only tell us what we already know, that kids in wealthy areas do much better in school than kids in poor areas. A league table based on pure socio economic factors will be virtually identical to one based on educational achievement. “Finally, in countries which have league tables, there is strong evidence that teachers are forced to `teach to the test'. This may increase performance on individual indicators, but there is no evidence that populations are better educated as a result. There is evidence that schooling becomes a lot narrower and less engaging for hard-to-teach children”. Dr Gordon says that we already know that there is a hierarchy of school performance based on student background. “The PIRLS studies over the past 20 years have seen NZ drop from first, to 6th, to 13th and now to 24th in the world rankings for literacy. The sole reason is that economic and social inequalities have impacted heavily on the bottom quarter of the population, putting up huge barriers to learning and causing falling levels of literacy. The solutions do not lie in naming and shaming poor schools, nor in celebrating high achievement in Remuera or Fendalton. Policy should not be based on such crude indicators. We need to address causes, not symptoms. “QPEC wants to see effective policies to close the gap, not ones that further alienate those many teachers working in our poorest schools, often against enormous odds”. |
|
