Are you on board the ‘change Principal perceptions of Inves Educational Success Dianne Smardon and Jennifer Charteris University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia
Are you change-invigorated, change-weary or just pedalling to keep up with recent Ministry of Education (MoE) moves? However you are travelling, it must be apparent that Aotearoa/New Zealand school administration is undergoing significant change through the current schooling reform process termed Investing in Educational Success (IES). But what is it all about? Two years ago, in January 2014, the NZ government launched IES. Under the umbrella of IES, the MoE framed a school administration structure and funding model that aims to provide targeted tools and resources to build teaching capability and improve learning through the establishment of three initiatives: Communities of Schools (CoS), a Teacher-led Innovation Fund and a Principal Recruitment Allowance. (The third arm of this strategy is described by Professor Ivan Snook (2014) as performance pay for senior leaders.) As ‘the engine room’ of IES (MoE, 2014), CoS is framed in social justice terms as an approach to target the most disadvantaged young people in NZ. Communities of Schools are groups of kura/schools that come together, along with their communities, to raise achievement for all tamariki and young people by sharing expertise in teaching and learning (ako), and supporting each other. (MoE, 2015, p.3) The MoE acknowledge that in many regions there are highly successful clusters. Your kura/school may already be part of a network or cluster. These professional groups do great work and it is likely that such a grouping will translate well into a Community of Schools. This will depend on how well it already reflects the educational pathway from primary through to secondary level. (MoE, 2015, p.6) Although it is not acknowledged in this CoS literature, there is a significant difference between the nature of networks and clusters. Networks are needs-based collaborations that are generated on a voluntary basis through interactions of likeminded people who have a shared aspiration. On the other hand, clusters tend to be a geographical connection by location. This does not preclude the development of shared goals, yet the collaborative focus is not the driver for their constitution. The CoS initiative fits the latter notion and, with their funding contingencies, there is a mandated aspect to them. In a 2014 cabinet paper, the Minister of Education, Hon Hekia Parata, provided a rationale for the initiative through highlighting that ‘capability is inconsistent’ in school leaders and
teachers throughout NZ and IES would universalise practice. It marks a significant swing from the local, contextualised curricula of the Tomorrow’s Schools ethos toward a ‘tight-loose-tight[er] system of school governance’ (Fiske & Ladd, 2001, p.540). Evidence demonstrates that investing in the profession to raise the quality of teaching and leadership provides the best opportunity to deliver the improved educational outcomes we seek. There is sufficient capacity in the system and we have some of the best teachers and leaders in the world. Capability is inconsistent however, and there are barriers to ensuring best practice is universal practice. (Cabinet Paper: IES design and implementation, 2014, p.3) Curious to know how primary and secondary principals in Aotearoa interpret the IES initiative, we conducted 31 interviews. The school leaders articulated a range of perspectives, alluding to the rich potential of cross-school collaborations, the desirability of a progressive career trajectory but also concern that the proposed changes may be detrimental to school communities. Representative comments from principals (pseudonyms provided) are included here. The range of issues identified by the principals include: fiscal motives; accountability and control; loss of responsiveness and lack of local knowledge; hierarchical considerations; and uncertainty in the face of change. Fiscal motives The policy is viewed as an economic strategy for reducing Education expenditure. I think that they just brought something over and plonked it on top of us and that’s been a result of wanting to save money. (Trina) Concern is expressed that money may not be available to schools that are not fast to access incentivised funding when it is offered. Kate alludes to the coerciveness of needing to apply for PLD funding as a CoS or risk missing out. She alludes to the potential for the initiative to change the nature of an existing cross-school collaboration. And the government has made it so that if you don’t [join], you don’t get professional development (PD) funding and PD is fundamental to our survival. If you don’t join you’re just going to get starved. We have to believe in ourselves enough, in our relationships to believe that we can actually survive the structure and make it work for us. We have to. (Kate) However, Noah, a principal from a disadvantaged area of
train’? sting in Jennifer Charteris
Aotearoa, notes that the potential for pooling of funds is a positive way to collaboratively access MoE funding. [It] is about pooling your resources as a grid of schools and buying professional development or [having] buying power for an innovation that you want to do in your little school district. (Noah) Accountability and control Principals described an increased pressure for centralised power over school administration and management. They suggest that this intensified control may be filtered through the executive principal to provide an additional layer of administration to the existing system. The model is like Sydney schools where you have much less autonomy in the school and you have a district supervisor. [The minister] talks about career pathways and creating these super principals who will have oversight of a number of schools. And that’s sort of adding another layer of management that’s really unnecessary. She’s calling it a career structure, but then she is laying another layer of control over the schools. (Dana) They want somebody to be accountable –somebody to beat over the head. They want somebody to say ‘here’s your target, you’re going to improve.’ They need a direct line of authority. (Kate) The potential for intensified accountability through increased scrutiny of student achievement data was noted. Through this monitoring, it is perceived that schools that are not thriving will need to be brought into line with the rest. Some leaders suggest that this targeting of underperforming schools, and by extension practitioners, through the CoS project is an unwarranted, draconian measure imposed on all schools. They are forcing it on us. They have titles like ‘lead principal’ and ‘change principal’. I think that the Ministry is trying to get more control because they’re all independent schools. By encasing us in a community, it might be easier to manage the random [schools] that are out there . . . If you’re a s*** school and you are fighting your data or hiding your data, you’re going to be ‘got’ in the CoS. (Magnus) I know that some schools are not functioning very well. Now if they aren’t, then the Ministry needs to be able to deal with it. However, when schools are functioning extremely well, they shouldn’t have to put on the control. (Dana) The principals we spoke with aligned the intensification of the audit culture with league tables where data is gathered and
Dianne Smardon
published. A link is also drawn between a model of governance of a cross-school Board of Trustees and moves to implement performance pay. I think it’s just totally achievement driven not learning driven and we are going to get hyped up about results, which actually is league data . . . I think that’s how we’ll be judged and I think it’s quite an ideological focus from this government and this particular Minister and I don’t think it’s a good idea. (Trina) The agenda may become five schools to be run by one principal with one board of trustees taking over all of those schools . . . I have an issue with teachers being paid on the results. (Nigel) Loss of cultural responsiveness and lack of local knowledge A general governing body responsible for a number of schools was considered an issue for the social and cultural uniqueness of a school community. Dana expressed concern that responsiveness to each school’s context and community would be lost in the push for universalism. When you’ve got somebody who doesn’t fit in the community, making decisions for the school, they’re not necessarily going to have the knowledge of those norms that make or break a place, you know, those cultural understandings and beliefs. (Dana) Suzanne points out that less affluent schools may not have a presence amongst their more wealthy counterparts and therefore may be underrepresented in the CoS. I think they’re going to have us all under an umbrella and I don’t necessarily think that it will be in the best interest of everybody . . . In affluent schools, the parents are much more engaged and they have those skills that you would hope to have on your board, you know, lawyers, accountants, people who are senior business people. I think that a school like mine could easily get lost and therefore the kind of interests or the direction we’re working towards will get consumed by those other schools. (Suzanne) Aligning collaboration with a business model is an issue for Trina, a secondary principal. She sees that both resourcing and the logistics of coordinating with a large group of schools may be a distraction from the ‘core business’ of leadership in her own school. Well, I love the idea first of all that schools collaborate,
but I just don’t think it’s being resourced properly and in a way that’s going to allow [collaboration] to happen. It’s a communal collaborative process with the business model put on top of it. I think the reality of actually getting together with several other schools to come up with some common goals would actually distract me from my core business, which is leading the school that I am in. (Trina) Hierarchical considerations There is concern over the hierarchical nature of the CoS structure where there is a well remunerated executive principal who has authority over other principals. Kate considers a hierarchical model would jeopardise the existing collaboration. It has the capacity to kill the sort of collaboration where everyone has a responsibility for the initiative and people all have different roles. [However], when you look at that executive principal, you’re saying: ‘Well, you’re getting 25 grand, you do it. You’re getting the money!’ . . . I don’t think we need that in our cluster –somebody having 25 grand and the authority to come around, you know, beating their chest and saying I need this. (Kate) Uncertainty in the face of change Uncertainty in the face of profound and far-reaching change is an issue that concerns school leaders. Jackie uses a maze metaphor for the introduction of IES. It just seems like [the Ministry] are wanting to do something but we just don’t quite know what it is that they’re wanting to do. It kind of makes you feel like they know the way out of the maze but we are stuck in the middle of it . . . And we are meant to be leading and innovating and collaborating but nobody is to get a newer map to get out. (Jackie) Eliza also comments that, although she likes the collaborative focus on shared goals for student learning, there is a lack of clarity about the wider agenda for the educational changes taking place. I have got no issue with principals working as a cluster collectively to plan professional learning and development, focusing on our shared achievement challenge. [However], the level of transparency and the level of clarity around the [CoS] vision is not there. The issue is that we’ve got this snippet of it but we haven’t got the big picture of what the Ministry intends around the CoS. So we don’t actually have a concrete understanding of what we’re signing up for. We see the benefit of working for our kids and working collegially with a learning focus. But, what we don’t know is how much bigger this is going to get. (Eliza) Our initial research findings suggest that NZ principals are critical interpreters of policy and are cautious of the implications for accountability and control mechanisms associated with IES. It is apparent that we are witnessing a swing away from the decentralization marked by Tomorrow’s Schools yet this also differs from the centralised accountability of the Departments of Education of the 1980s. The IES move can be seen as the intensification of an audit culture through the additional layer of administration. There is clearly a need for greater clarity in sharing the big picture vision for schooling change and a need for further consultation with school leaders and communities.
As illustrated by the comments of Eliza and others above, NZ educators are interested in undertaking influential and positive collaborations. Over the last few decades, we have seen generative and generous collaborations throughout NZ with initiatives like Extending High Standards Across Schools (EHSAS), Resource Teachers: Learning and Behaviour (RTLBs), and Digital Opportunities. Recognising the significance of the proposed change, it is appropriate for a principal to have the last word in this article. Kate highlights the pressure for leaders to ‘get on board’ with recent changes to schooling administration, the weight of influence inherent in powerful professional collaborations and the perils of ‘stepping off ’ or being ‘left behind’. I liken it to a freight train. You get on that and all those carriages are bearing down. All those schools are a carriage each. And the momentum for change toward a goal is huge. You dare not step off the train because you will be run over. You will be off it and it’ll carry on and you will be left behind. So, there is a lot of pressure, peer pressure or professional pressure, to keep on the change train and working together to mould change together and make it work. (Kate) Acknowledgement The authors wish to thank the principals across New Zealand who generously contributed to this research. References Fiske E., & Ladd, H. (2001). Self-governing schools and accountability in New Zealand. School Autonomy And Evaluation Prospects, 31(4), 537-552. Investing in Education Success: Design and implementation. (2014). Cabinet Paper 28th May 2014. Retrieved from http://www. education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Ministry/Investing-inEducational-Success/ies-cabinet-paper-28-may-2014.pdf. Ministry of Education. (2014). Investing in Educational Success: Communities of schools – Expressions of interest. Retrieved from http://www.education.govt.nz/ministry-of-education/ specific-initiatives/investing-in-educational-success/ communities-of-schools-eoi/ Ministry of Education. (2015). Community of schools. Guide for schools and kura. Retrieved from ttp://www.education.govt.nz/ assets/Documents/Ministry/Investing-in-Educational-Success/ Communities-of-Schools/IESCommunitiesOfSchoolsGuideForS choolsAndKura-web-enabledV2.pdf. Snook, I. (2015). Ivan Snook – Academic perspective. IES JOINT FORUM NZPF & NZEI. Retrieved from http://www.nzpf.ac.nz/ sites/default/files/IES_Forum-Ivan_Snook_10_June_2014_1.pdf
A PD package for educational centres A critical guide to Māori and Pākehā histories of Aotearoa
MAGAZINE
You can now access the current and past issues of NZ Principal magazine online This curriculum programme resource (CPR) is now available for all educators. Is your school still struggling to effectively meet the wider goals of the Ministry and other policies, to provide responsive education for Māori as Māori with Te Tiriti o Waitangi as part of the context? Or to teach NZ histories to all ethnicities effectively? The CPR can practically support implementing these policies and NZ histories curriculum more effectively. Mainstream and Māori pathways can successfully use the CPR. Schools can choose from a range of timeframes for reading & delivery. The CPR covers these topics in 6 Unit Booklets for staff to read and create their own unit plans, lesson plans, and assessments to deliver.
You can search by magazine issue, article name or author
For PD information, rave testimonials and costings view www.criticalhistories.nz or contact tamsinhanly@xtra.co.nz at 09 630 2188
visit www.nzprincipal.co.nz
The CPR is a single programme to help schools plan and teach their approach to New Zealand’s Māori and Pākehā cultures and histories in a cohesive way.
KNOW WHO’S ON SITE?
You do with
VisTab! Get Started with VisTab Today CONTACT US sales@vistab.co.nz 0800 VISTAB (0800 847 822) www.vistab.co.nz
Replace this
With this
Cloud Backup Your data is stored and replicated off-site, out of harm's way.
Secure
Zero Maintenance Sit back and let VisTab handle your visitor management.
All data is password protected and transferred over a secure connection.
VisTab
Customisable
Easy Access
If you require ten different questions at sign-in, or want contact details for a prize draw, VisTab handles it all.
Retrieve your records at any time from anywhere using only a web browser.
Brandable Display your logos, upcoming events, and health and safety messages where everyone can see them.
SO DO WE. Could your school and students qualify for our FREE Vectorworks offer? How could your Drama students benefit from using Vectorworks in your school?
Lighting design by Diana Kesselschmidt. Photography by Lukasz Drapala.
YOU SEE THE WORLD DIFFERENTLY.
· In an emergency know exactly who should be at school and who has checked out · Supports repeat visitors, staff and contractors with an innovative ID system · The system can be customised to any school with a wide range of forms from daily reliever logs to monthly contract hours · Instant access to do roll calls by remote and on other mobile devices · Know when relieving teachers have come and gone
· Permanent access to information stored in the cloud · Access to statistics and respective details if required · Frees up office staff · Supports managing your late students and able to generate truancy records to assist in attendance · All data can be exported in customisable Excel/CSV files
Financial Reporting Education Services provides a Financial Reporting Service to over 660 New Zealand schools – we are the largest provider of accounting services to school’s in New Zealand – and would love the opportunity to help you. Take all the worry out of Financial Management (Including completing your Annual Financial Statements in the new reporting format with ease) and have everything done on time, every time and done right! We have an office and personnel near you: Whangarei, Auckland, Hamilton, Rotorua, New Plymouth, Whanganui and Wellington. If you would like a no obligation quote to compare the cost of our service to what you are currently receiving, or would like to enquire exactly what our service involves, please phone:
AUTHORIZED DISTRIBUTOR
For more information, go to: megabits.co.nz/Ed-offer E: EdOffer@megabits.co.nz Ph: 09 445 8480
Pete on 06 757 5489 or email: pete@educationservices.co.nz www.educationservices.co.nz