School of Educational Studies, Massey University, Palmerston North – j.a.clark@massey.ac.nz
For fifty years, from 1939 until 1989, education policy in New Zealand was governed by a fundamental principle against which all proposals could be judged. In 1990 it was abandoned and for the next twenty five years until now, our education policy has been held hostage to the fortunes of unprincipled pragmatism. The time has come for the reasserting of a principle which captures the imagination of politicians, policy makers, practitioners and parents alike, such that it sets in train an education for our people which meets not only their individual needs but also the common interest of our community as a whole. An Education Principle The First Labour Government (1935–1949), following years of social inequality capped by the Great Depression, enacted a raft of reforms across the broad spectrum of the economy, welfare, health and education, bringing social justice for all in a society which hitherto had advantaged the few while disadvantaging the many. Early on in his political career, Peter Fraser, who later became Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education, articulated his policy clearly: “Every child, whatever his social and economic position and whatever his level of academic ability has a right as a citizen to a free education of the kind and length to which his powers best fit him”. The Labour Party’s Education Policy for the 1935 election made clear its commitment that “every child should receive a full, generous education together with the opportunity to develop his or her talents to the utmost”. In 1939, not accepting the Department of Education annual
report which he was required to submit under his name to Parliament, Fraser requested it be rewritten to say something useful. Overnight, Beeby, then Deputy Director of Education, wrote the words which captured Fraser’s policy: The Government’s objective, broadly speaking, is that every person, whatever his level of academic ability, whether he be rich or poor, whether he live in town or country, has a right as a citizen, to a free education of the kind for which he is best fitted, and to the fullest extent of his powers. So far is this from being a mere pious platitude that the full acceptance of the principle will involve the reorientation of the education system. In spelling out the consequences of the principle, the annual report went on to say: The structure of the New Zealand school system as originally laid down . . . was based on the principle of selection. An elementary education in the 3 R’s was given to all of the population, but, beyond that, schooling had to be bought by the well-to-do, or won, through scholarships, by the specially brilliant . . . A definite penalty was placed on the children of the poor, especially those who lived outside the main centres of population. The present Government was the first to recognise explicitly that continued education is no longer a special privilege for the well-to-do or the academically able, but a right to be claimed by all who want it to the fullest extent that the state can provide. Important consequences follow from this principle . . . Schools that are to cater for the whole population must offer courses that are as rich and as varied as are the needs and abilities of the children who enter them and that means generous
Equipping the Performing Arts in Schools Nationwide
Lighting
Makeup
Scenic Products
Drapes
Specialist Supplier to the Education Sector Huge Catalogue Online: www.adena.co.nz
TV/Video
Sound
Adena Limited PO Box 756, Hamilton Email: sales@adena.co.nz Free Phone: 0800 782-438
equipment, more and better trained teachers, and some system of guidance to help pupils select the schools that will best cater for their abilities. It also means if there is to be true equality of opportunity, that by one method or another, the country child must be given access to the facilities from which he has always tended to be barred by the mere accident of location. Most important of all, perhaps, it means that the system of administrative control must be such that the whole school system is a unit within which there is free movement. It is only against this historic background that the Government’s policy in education can be fully understood. It was necessary to convert a school system, constructed originally on the basis of selection and privilege, to a truly democratic form where it can cater for the needs of the whole population over as long a period of their lives as is found possible and desirable. For half a century this principle served as an education settlement for governments of all persuasions, serving as the criterion against which subsequent policy proposals were to be judged.
and accepted by coalition parties alike if the reform of education is to return to its roots of equality for all. What might the principle look like? We can do no better than to begin with the opening expression: The Government’s objective, broadly speaking, is that . . . What comes next must be short yet convey the essence of the principle in words which capture the imagination of those who are to administer policy and those whose support is required to successfully implement policy. It must recognise that in many ways the social, economic and educational circumstances now are not those of then; it must also recognise that in other ways things have not changed at all. To remind ourselves of the 1939 statement. National Standards have had the effect of returning to an emphasis on the 3 Rs, wealth allows some to gain entry into preferred schools while the poor continue to be penalised. Above all, education is to be free for all with the fair allocation of the resources required to provide an education for all which has, as its end, social equality. Equality for all, as a social ideal, is not equality of opportunity as Beeby conceived it, nor is it the Unprincipled Pragmatism equality of results as Renwick, a The principle places The Fourth Labour Government (1984– successor to Beeby, later thought of 1990), under the direction of David great responsibility it. Society now is much different from Lange, Prime Minister and Minister of that of seventy years ago. We must Education, rejected the principle, putting on politicians to act in rethink what it is to be a good person in its place the unbridled power of accordance with it and only who, as a good citizen, participates choice in the market which only widens in and contributes to the making of a inequality. Since then, under successive approve policies which good society. We must reconcile the National and Labour Governments, we conflicting interests of the freedom have witnessed the growth of economic adhere to it. of the individual to pursue their inequality as the rich get richer and the own legitimate interests, with the poor become poorer, matched by a corresponding increase in responsibility of the community through the state to seek the the inequality of school achievement along the lines of wealth common good of all by providing for their general welfare as and poverty. Education policy is now made on the basis of user citizens of a caring society. pays; how else to explain, for example, the acceptance of a policy This, therefore, places education as the end to which all else which requires parents to pay for a psychologist’s report for their serves as a means. Nothing can be of greater value than educating child to obtain NCEA support which leads to wealthy children in our children to become good people who, as good citizens live decile 10 schools being granted aid while equally deserving but in a good society. All other social policies – economic, health, poor children in decile 1 schools are denied it. The 1939 principle welfare, security and the like – serve as the means of achieving would have ruled out the policy as completely unacceptable to this ultimate end. politicians and policy makers alike; the 1990 dogma, on the other Even when a principle is formulated which is agreeable to hand, made it quite permissible for both. All the more reason, all, the hard work has yet to begin. How to implement the then, for education to become principled once again so that the principle remains, administratively, the hardest thing of all. policies advanced by policy makers and approved by politicians When faced with problems requiring solutions, proposed policies pass the test of fairness, social justice and equality for all. Against must confront the tribunal of competing social forces from this, the policy of national standards is to be judged. rival sectors and interest groups. If the politicians formulate the principle, it is the policy makers who take administrative Principle Regained decisions about policies and their implementation and carry The current education policy of the Labour Party in an election out the will of the politicians. Beyond this are practitioners, the year where they face the reasonable prospect of forming the teachers, who must be convinced that the policy initiative is in the sixth Labour Government in a coalition with other like-minded best interests of students and their teachers. Further removed, but parties, has the makings of a principle which once more captures no less important are interested parties; parents with the welfare the vision of the First Labour Government: Education “is a of their own children at stake and employers concerned more priority for us because a good education provides our children with generally with preparing children for the workforce. a lifetime of opportunities. Our belief is and always has been that The principle places great responsibility on politicians to act in no matter who you are, no matter where you’re from, you have accordance with it and only approve policies which adhere to it. the right to a free, high-quality education”. If Labour and its coalition partners hold firmly, for example, to This is a start, but far more is required if the country is to the right to a free education then there is no expecting parents regain what it lost; a principle governing education policy which to pay for it, at least in state schools. There can be no place for benefits all rather than the few. While the formulation of the school donations to help make up the difference between what it policy and its expression in words lies with politicians, especially costs to run a school and what the government funds the school. the Labour spokesperson for Education, it must be acceptable to There can be no place for fees and expenses which fall within the
ambit of free education, such as entry to school examinations. If a Labour Government and its allies pay lip service to the principle and renege on their promise of free education then they will, collectively, pay a high price at the hands of a dis-illusioned electorate and the next government may share the fate of the second and third Labour Governments rather than share the honours with the first and the fifth for longevity. National Standards One of the biggest problems in New Zealand education today, for which a successful policy solution is urgently required, is the growing inequality of school achievement. National Standards have been introduced and promoted by the current National-led coalition government as the way forward to significantly reduce what has been called ‘the long tail of school underachievement’. The indicators used to measure the widening gap between highest and lowest school achievers are international measures such as PIRLS and PISA. On average, in reading for example, New Zealand scores well although our scores are in decline. Compared with other countries with similar overall scores, New Zealand has one of the widest ranges of scores between highest and lowest student achievers. The question is, can National Standards arrest the decline in reading (and mathematics and science as well in TIMMS and PISA) and close the gap of inequality of school achievement? The strongest argument against National Standards achieving the goal for which they were introduced, to raise achievement and close the achievement gap, lies in the theoretical framework within which they were conceptualised and implemented. Bound
by the within school and beyond school dualism, National Standards place great faith on within school factors as the causes of the inequality of school achievement and hence where workable solutions are to be found. Unfortunately, the causes are not as self-contained within the school as supposed. Beyond school factors, such as poverty, poor health, inadequate family resources, dysfunctional families, social ills (alcohol, drugs, teenage pregnancy) and the inability of parents, for whatever reason, to support their children in successful learning, are all too often held in place by government policies which have cemented in structural inequalities surrounding the distribution of social goods. In short, if schools are not the cause of the problem then neither are they the solution to it. The way out is to rethink the matter: if the causes of the inequality of school achievement are, instead, located along a continuum from proximal (close in) to distal (far out), where causes whatever their nature are taken together as a systematic whole for which a wide variety of school and non-school, education and non-education policies are required, then, perhaps, we will begin to unwind the inequality which flows through all of our social fabric with such devastating effects on individuals and at such a huge cost to the community at large. The empirical evidence is not encouraging either. National Standards in reading, writing and numeracy were introduced in 2010. Consider reading: PIRLS reported the results of reading achievement in 2006 and 2011, too early to reach any reliable judgement about the success of National Standards in reversing the trends in reading achievement. The next round of PIRLS is scheduled for 2016, by which time the 2010 year 1 students will
Auckland / Northland 09 636 1377 Hamilton 07 856 1194 Bay of Plenty 07 544 3544 Gisborne 06 867 3350 Central Plateau 06 388 1109
Taranaki 06 757 2699
JUST $85.00 PER STUDENT alternative hours may BE NEGOTIATED INDIVIDUALLY with EACH instructor NZQA UNiTS 26551 and 26552
WORKPLACE FIRST AID contact YOUR LOCAL INSTRUCTOR NOW
Manawatu / Wellington 06 368 4873 Nelson 03 545 7267 Canterbury 0508 428 428 Otago / Central Otago 03 488 5919
Head Office | MediTrain Limited | PO Box 13 535, Onehunga, Auckland | Phone: 0800 084 543 | Email: enquiry@meditrain.co.nz
www.meditrain.co.nz
fall within the scope of PIRLS. A comparison of 2011 and 2016 results will provide a strong indication of whether National Standards are all that its proponents claim. PISA results for 2009, the year before the introduction of National Standards, will provide a good yardstick to assess the results for 2012 and especially 2015 where an improvement could be expected if National Standards are up to the mark. On this, only time will tell, but current trends suggest that we should be cautious about expecting improvement any time soon.
If the Minister of Education in the sixth Labour-led Government is to receive the independent advice required to tackle head on the most pressing educational problem of our time, then s/he will need to look beyond both the Ministry of Education and the leaders of the education sectors. Their unified approach focusses on within school factors which closes them off from looking beyond the school where the real causes of the inequality lie. Their sectional allegiances blind them to the need to commit to a principle which expresses the vision of a nation. In short, the Minister must look outward, to be advised by those within An Alternative Policy to National Standards and without education, for the problem and its solution span If a Labour-led coalition government is to generate a long-term widely across the economic, health and welfare spheres which solution to the problem of the inequality of school achievement, are interlocked in complex and mutually-interactive ways. the effects of which play out heavily on the lives of affected Furthermore, those providing advice must not only be competent individuals as well as undermining social cohesion, then in their areas of expertise but also have a shared commitment to something other than National Standards is required. Some way the education principle within the wider context of the overall of providing the government with sound advice, of a kind which goal of the Government to halt and reverse the huge social not only addresses the empirical reality of the circumstances inequality which has this country in its grip. Then, and only then, but is also attuned to the politics of the will the Minister of Education and principle, must be forthcoming. The way The Forum gathered on the Government be fully appraised forward must have the confidence of the of the severity of the problem and the Minister and the Government: The First a number of occasions enormity of the solution. The task of Labour Government had a reforming taking policy makers, practitioners Minister of Education driven by a deep and made public its and parents, as well as the business commitment to change and a Director deliberations, which community, with the Government of Education equally passionate about will be a measure of the ability of the the principle. Whether the same can be appear to have sunk Government to convey its principle said today remains to be demonstrated. and policies in ways which are of In 2012 the Minister of Education in without trace. benefit to one and to all. the National-led coalition Government established the Ministerial Cross-Sector Forum on Raising Final Note Achievement. A good idea poorly executed. The first terms of How we think about the resources of our nation will determine reference read: “The purpose of the Ministerial Cross-sector what it is to be a good person who as a good citizen, lives in and Forum is to contribute to the Government’s overall goal of contributes to, the making of a good society. Where it is held that improving quality in teaching, learning and leading, to raise the wealth of the nation belongs solely to individuals who have student achievement across the education system, using the the freedom to acquire and utilise their resources as they see fit evidence of what works, so that every young person leaves school in a self-regarding way, then we can expect social and educational with the knowledge and skills they need. The aim is system-wide inequality to continue to grow unabated. On the other hand, if success for all”. The worthy goal of raising the school achievement we are of the view that the nation’s wealth is just that, the wealth of all children was undone by two things: a focus on within school of the nation for which each one of us is a custodian acting in factors alone and a membership consisting almost entirely of the best interests of all, then our other-regarding interests will people from within education. The Forum gathered on a number lead us to adopting principles and approving policies which work of occasions and made public its deliberations, which appear to not only for the individual but also, more importantly, for the have sunk without trace. In other words, a noble aim has met common good of all. an ignoble end.
‘Tools for thinking and interaction, resulting in substantial improvement, building confidence for all’
Full classroom programme, including special needs and gifted.
www.numicon.co.nz 0800 678 581