Whetu Cormick
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