School Lines The Rise and Rise of CoLs (Common old Lollipop $yndrome) The Decline and Demise of a Common Sense Lester Flockton
lester.flockton@otago.ac.nz
Some important Definitions Passion:
a forceful driver fuelled by what is believed.
Belief:
an opinion or conviction that is not necessarily supported by what holds to be true.
Polarisation:
Division into two contrasting groups or sets of opinions or beliefs.
Alternative Facts:
statements intended to contradict other more verifiable, but less palatable, truths.
Achievement:
successful accomplishment of something that is dependent on multiple factors, of which the teacher may be one, but never the only one.
During an informal discussion with a senior Governmentaligned politician, I asked whether he believed that CoLs would lead to significant gains in student achievement. ‘Of course they won’t. It’s about politics. It’s about capture into an ideologically driven big-sell policy package through the lure of money and privileges,’ he replied. During a perchance meeting with a well-known principal, he surprised me by declaring that he happens to be a CoL leader. I asked what led him to this. Straight up he replied, ‘The money. Might as well take what’s going. But I never realized that I would now need so many Ministry people hovering around to “help” me do my job!’ During a reflective discussion with a senior principal of a large school with a high percentage of Māori students, he opined, ‘I regret having agreed to join the CoL. I’m convinced it’s not going to do much for our students or our teachers, but if we pull out now, three of our good teachers will lose a lot of money. It’s become very awkward.’ Then I read with considerable disquiet that a ‘showcase’ CoL of high decile schools, with mainly ‘achieving’ students, somehow managed to become first in line for a considerable share of CoL funding. The money allocated to teachers through the Communities of Learning scheme has largely gone to those at the wealthiest schools (located in Auckland) . . . That’s despite the programme being aimed at closing the gap between top-performing students and those at the bottom. (NZ Herald, 8.6.16) But at the time, the then Minister and her Ministry were desperate to get their Investing in Education Success (IES) ignited, and they needed a Little Miss Lucifer, a ‘morning star’, to lead a trail blaze, no matter how needy the group of schools. Data reveals that this front-runner cluster of eleven schools is now garnering over a million dollars in extra salaries, and spending thousands upon thousands of dollars on travel each year.
So is this CoL thing really serious about claims that it will significantly accelerate student achievement (claims that are not supported or substantiated by convincingly robust evidence), and is it true to the Government’s espoused priority of supporting those most at risk of not achieving, and improving equity of educational outcomes? Or is it really about grandstanding a policy of well-intentioned virtue wrapped in sugar coated platitudes? Consider these questions in relation to statements made by the former Minister of Education: Having broad support (for IES) as we look to raise student achievement is great for kids, parents, schools and our country as a whole. This investment is part of a comprehensive range of practical measures we’re delivering . . . to help families and children and I look forward to seeing the first communities of schools from the first term of 2015. The initiative is expected to make a significant contribution to raising student achievement (by raising the quality of teaching). New Zealand has an achievement challenge. Our top students are doing as well as students anywhere in the world but there is a big gap between our top performing students and those who aren’t doing so well. Too many Māori and Pasifika students, students from low socio-economic families and those with special education needs, continue to be under-served by the system. Investing in Educational Success will respond to this achievement challenge. The Government expects it to accelerate achievement and to improve equity of educational outcomes. (Hekia Parata, 3.6.14, beehive.govt.nz) But, as has been repeatedly noted in previous School Lines articles, the quality of teaching in New Zealand is high by international standards, and the teacher is by no means the only determiner of student achievement, as made very clear by OECD: In a study of 25 school systems, it was found that ‘the first and most solidly based finding is that the largest source of variation in student learning is attributable to differences in what students bring to school – their abilities and attitudes, and family and community background’ (OECD, 2005). It is a curious matter, therefore, as to why so much play has been made around teacher capability by the CoL regime rather than the core concern of the ‘gap’ in learning opportunity between students in high and low decile communities. Is this a case, therefore, of policy distortion through ‘alternative facts’, because it is not a proven fact or truth that this scheme in its present