Revolution in the classroom
An independent taskforce has made its recommendations for reforming the school system. Adele Redmond examines the key points.
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 ministerappointed 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 says.
‘‘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.
CREATING MIDDLE SCHOOLS
The review places a big question mark over the future of New Zealand’s 115 intermediate schools.
Three options for reorganising public schooling have been proposed: Having solely year 1-to-13 composite schools; a system of year 1-to-8 primaries and year 9-to-13 high schools; or establishing year 7-to-10 middle schools, with senior secondary schools from year 11 – the taskforce’s preferred model.
Intermediate school students undergo ‘‘an additional significant transition’’, changing half their peers from one year to the next during a key period of early adolescence, the report says.
Principals say intermediate schools have their advantages. A good-sized intermediate can offer a broad curriculum and make children ‘‘feel more adult’’ before starting high school, according to Richard Edmundson, principal of year 7-to-13 Linwood College in Christchurch.
Justin Fields, principal of Chisnallwood Intermediate School, also in Christchurch, says it already has the arts, science and technology resources – and the desire – to become a middle school.
‘‘The advantage of a year 7-to10 school is the focus can be on learning, rather than NCEA.’’
Auckland Primary Principals’ Association president and Target Road Primary School principal Helen Varney says the introduction of middle schools could benefit the whole school network – not just intermediate school students and teachers.
‘‘Those middle schools will grow, rather than having these massive secondary schools with 2000 students.
‘‘How amazing would it be if we can actually work within that framework for a little longer, build [students’] confidence and then have them go on to secondary school and be really successful?’’
FIVE-YEAR PRINCIPALS
The taskforce has proposed principals spend only five years at a school before they move on elsewhere.
The proposal came as a surprise to New Zealand Principals’ Federation president Whetu Cormick, principal of Bathgate Park School in Dunedin.
‘‘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 says.
‘‘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 have welcomed these ideas as a way to keep them accountable – even if they lose some job stability.
But it could take five years just to become established in a school community and ‘‘white knights’’ riding to the rescue of schools are rarely well received.
Tomorrow’s Schools taskforce chairman Bali Haque says the proposal is about making sure ‘‘the conversation takes place every five years’’. ‘‘Maybe people will stay on for another five years. I think that could be quite exciting for principals.’’
Teachers would also be hub employees, but would continue to be hired by school boards and managed by principals. A leadership centre for identifying and nurturing school leaders would also be established.
FUNDING FOR EQUITY
Decile-based funding may be out – again.
The taskforce has recommended that an equity index, developed by the Ministry of Education after work on a ‘‘risk index’’ funding system was discontinued in May, be implemented ‘‘as soon as possible and prioritised for the most disadvantaged schools’’.
The risk index would have managed just 3 per cent of school funding, but the new equity index would be applied to a range of funding streams, including staffing, wellbeing services, and other resources.
Factors such as parents’ employment status, household income, and interaction with agencies such as Oranga Tamariki would be aggregated to create unique funding rates for each child from preschool to secondary school.
‘‘When we were briefed on this, we were impressed by what was being done and we were convinced that it painted a better picture of disadvantage,’’ Haque says. ‘‘Some [schools] are getting more funding than they should; some are getting less than they should.’’
Most principals spoken to say targeting funding to students based on disadvantage is a step forward from the ‘‘blunt instrument’’ of decilebased funding, which focuses on the affluence of a school’s neighbourhood.
Malcolm Milner, principal of Balmoral School in Auckland, is less keen: ‘‘Sometimes blunt instruments like the decile funding can be really effective.’’
Milner says low-decile schools struggle with disadvantage, while high-decile ones need to fundraise more to provide services for which they don’t receive government funding.
‘‘If schools can’t raise enough additional funding, the pressure will go back on the hubs to provide those services.’’
The taskforce has also mooted limiting how much schools can ask for in donations, so as to provide families with more equity in school choice.
EVALUATING EDUCATION
The taskforce has recommended scrapping the Education Review Office (ERO) and the New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA).
The Ministry of Education would take over NZQA’s examsetting and assessment roles, and a new Education Evaluation Office sitting under the hubs would take on its quality assurance functions and ERO’s auditing.
Neither ERO nor NZQA would comment on the proposal, which the taskforce believes will eliminate an overlap in their responsibilities and address ‘‘variability in the quality and expertise’’ of ERO reviewers.
Principals say the current regime of giving schools either a ‘‘gold star’’ or ‘‘a slap on the hand’’ every few years does nothing to support schools through any difficulties they may be facing.
Cormick says ERO ‘‘needs to go’’, while Holstein says it seems odd to have two compliance and monitoring agencies working separately. ‘‘To have it [done] in a more cohesive way, that’s something I would love to see.’’
Varney says having the hubs review schools would mean more regular contact, ‘‘not every five years, not every four years, and not every year’’. ‘‘It will be consistent . . . and that probably needed to happen.’’
In a submission to the taskforce made public on Monday, the Office of the Auditor-General warned changes to the Tomorrow’s Schools model will have implications for schools’ accountability. ‘‘There should be opportunities for making reporting more understandable, valued and more accessible. This could include reporting on educational outcomes, as well as financial performance.’’
The ministry would also come under more scrutiny, with the education hubs reporting to Parliament on its performance, it 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.’’
Principals’ Federation president Whetu Cormick