Showing posts with label national standards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label national standards. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

Coming soon to New Zealand!!!

















A scene from Coronation Street.Teachers attending a 'Standardisation Day'!!



A combination of a Market Forces ideology and the powerful role of educational technocrats are pushing ahead worldwide with their agenda to provide parents with data ( 'League Tables') to give parents choice  with no understanding of the consequences of destroying diversity, creativity and innovation that such a narrowing of the curriculum involves. Education in the 21stC  is reduced to a reactionary 'Victorian '  emphasis on literacy and numeracy.

This is ironic as the future success of an innovative country requires the school system to develop the divers talents and gifts of all students.

This American article points to the fulfillment of the technocratic dream.


' A new Federal Grant  will expand North Carolina's  digital recording of student academic histories beginning in infancy for some children.

About 49 million of the $70 million 'Race to the Top' grant the Education Department awarded North Carolina will be used to expand to track the progress of younger children.Tracking already is done in a 2-year old database covering more than 1.5 children between kindergarten and 12th grade.

Teachers are also recorded with unique identification number so their performance can be tracked.

Four year olds enrolled in a state kindergarten programme were tracked previously.

State education officials have applied for a $4 million grant that would increase the ability to track students performance into their university or community college careers an even fellow students when they enter the workforce after leaving school.

Tracking  student learning from early years to graduation and beyond is a part of a national trend towards shaping efficient and effective schools based on "good data' instead of anecdotes and feelings and political decisions" said Adam Levitson the State Education official in charge of 'Race to the Top' grant programmes.

North Carolina is one of the half dozen states that share teacher information performance data based on student achievement, with the institutions from which they graduated.

Online trackers also allow parents to see how their children are doing. A system called NC WISE allows parents with an online password to track children's homework, standardized test results and days absent.'

I would suggest the 'officials' make study of Mc Donald's for models of the standardisation agenda or the work of Joseph Stalin's officials in the Soviet Union of the 1930s. Or Adolf Hitler!! No point in reinventing wheels.

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Extreme views on Education -I think not!



















In a comment to my  Christmas blog Mr and Mrs Symonds , formally of Auckland and now living in Sydney, wrote that it was 'because of people like you we have taken our children to be educated in Australia'.  'Your views on education', they wrote, 'are extreme' and 'out of touch with what parents want of a modern education system'.

They began their comment by saying they were 'glad I was going from New Zealand education' and concluded with the phrase 'weird and creepy' - I presume they were referring to themselves? And I have no idea who they  include in the 'people like you' comment nor what they define as a 'modern education system' that parents like them want.

Below is a comment from a New Zealand teacher now working  in Australia. Is this the  'modern system' that parents like the Symonds want? It certainly reflects the agenda of the current government in New Zealand.

'We are right into national testing over here. There is now national testing of all year 3, 5, 7, and 9 students. It just used to be in the other states. Victoria used to be told that we were lagging behind the other states but now, low and behold, after national teaching we are one of the top states. We also have online testing in Numeracy and Maths with the results going to the Department. This is done 3x a year. Our reports are also put directly into the Department. Accountability is everything, don't worry about the teaching. We are told that it does not matter where the students start our job is to get them up to national average and they are trying to bring in performance based pay as well. Also pay incentives for expert teachers and principals to work in disadvantaged areas.’

Sounds very Eastern European to me - something Joseph Stalin would have been proud of or right-wing political American thinkers today. Hardly modern.

Here is what one American educationalist has written ( Glickman 2006)

Today, measuring the accomplishments of students, teachers, and schools by standardised test scores and handing out rewards and punishments for reaching or failing to reach state and federal standards has become commonplace.

In such a climate, we typically err too much on the side of avoiding failure by relying on externally approved " research based" programmes, teaching methods, and assessments that are officially prompted by state and federal governments ( through their agencies).

What we lose in the process is imagination.Failure cannot go unchallenged, but what we have today is our own failure to imagine new possibilities and the worth of what has already worked well*. There is no tragedy in reaching for the stars and falling short; the greatest tragedy in never reaching at all.'

*added

Anyway the below are the 'extreme views' on learning I have been sharing (and will continue to do so) over the years.  I will leave it over to anyone who reads the blog to decide if they are  'weird and creepy' or 'not what parents want for a modern education'.

It is important to appreciate that students are  entering a new age of creativity ; an  era of knowledge creation - where the ability to continue learning, to  develop new ideas, even when confused, will be an important attribute.

I believe that a modern education system ought to focus on developing the talents and gifts of all students and not to judge their success on their test scores only in literacy and numeracy.

I believe that students future success depends on the power of their personal motivation realised :through making choices; achieving mastery; and in the process developing a powerful sense of personal autonomy. As part of gaining success students need to value personal effort and focused practice. These ideas are ignored by standardised testing. Effort and practice sound old fashioned but if neglected little learning will stick.

I believe that learning ought to based on helping students answer questions that engage them in realistic studies; studies that  call on whatever learning areas are necessary to solve the problem. And students also need to appreciate the power of collaborating with others by working in teams.

I believe that the role of the teachers is that of a creative learning coach who follow the advice of educationalist Jerome Bruner who said. 'teaching is the  canny art of intellectual temptation'. Teachers should help students construct their own learning  - and learning should be personalised to suit each learner.

I believe that teachers should ensure all  the various strategies and skills are in place ( including literacy and numeracy)  so students have every chance of success. This includes integrating modern information technology.

To achieve quality learning it is important for students to dig deeply into any learning challenge - to do fewer things well so as to develop the importance of personal excellence.

Can't see what is not 'modern' or is 'weird' in the above.

Thursday, December 22, 2011

A message from Australia














I think it is worth sharing the below posting by Australian educator Phil Cullen ( Phil used to be Director Primary Education Queensland ) .Thankfully he hasn't lost his belief in creative education. Australia has moved further along the downhill  accountability track than New Zealand but we are rushing to catch up - a race to the bottom!

To access Phil's site click here.
IS 2012 THE YEAR FOR AN EDUCATIONAL R/EVOLUTION?

On Wednesday, 21 December, the ASIDE blog commented upon the TIME magazine choice of The Protestor as the person of the year. ‘Frustrations felt by millions nationally and internationally reached breaking point ... in 2011...by teachers as well.’

http://theasideblog.blogspot.com/2011/12/is-2012-year-for-educational-reform.htm

“To top it off, we have a growing number of disgruntled youth, who drop out of an education system that sees them as a number and fails to see the ensuing impact on society as a whole...Conformity and measurement are being used to define students, yet we constantly talk about differentiation, multiple learning styles, and the whole child....This leads us to ask the question, how many teachers will ‘dropout’ from conformity and measurement?”

“Just think how much more we could engage students if we were not so close to the edge of the cliff.”

There were protests everywhere in 2011 about the branding of schools with numbers. This week, also [Monday, 19 December] 1046 New York principals signed a petition opposing the linking of their own evaluation [ A score out of 100] with the results of their students’ testing scores. Such number branding is coming down here.

On July 30, you will remember how the many thousands of teachers marched on the White House chanting “No Testing. No Testing. 1-2-3”. They were supported by famous people – film stars, professors, legislators. Major cities around the country conducted their own protests at the time. No change yet, however. The school-bashing ideology is very strong. Teachers are very compliant.

Protests, however, are growing in size and number. Protestors now Occupy. It’s all coming to a town near you in Australia, for sure, if political parties don’t start caring for kids. There is a limit to the patience of parents and teachers down-under and up-over.

On January 7, 2012 the United Opt-out National in the U.S. is encouraging everybody to send a card or letter to their educational superordinates and legislators [our Minister for Education and Federal Minister for Education in our case] telling them ‘to end standardized testing.’ Check this out on http://unitedoptout.com With determined organisation and parent support, this movement could become world wide. Although schools in the southern hemisphere are closed, we parents and grand-parents can still have our say. Post offices aren’t closed.

Why be an Australia ( or a Kiwi) who has trouble grasping the significance of these movements?

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Thursday, December 8, 2011

Something all principals ought to have written to their students' parents












A principal and his website posting to parents

Where are we heading, and what have we lost to get there?

Danny Nicholls is principal of St Patrick’s Catholic School, Taupo. He runs a website intended for the school community and other interested readers. The beliefs and opinion expressed are his personal ones. Danny's blog is a well balanced description of the current environment schools find themselves in - if only more school principals ( or better still groups of principals) had written, or even shared similar newsletters.


One of the big building blocks of any school is curriculum delivery. Here in New Zealand we have a fantastic national curriculum which gives sufficient breadth for schools to develop and deliver really exciting and innovative programmes that meet local needs.

The New Zealand Curriculum has been bedded in over a few years now and replaced the more ‘tick the box’ style approach of the previous document.

In particular, the promotion of Key Competencies was a really exciting move towards developing what we want and most value for our students. This curriculum went through extensive consultation and trial/error periods before being accepted and used. I can recall many hours spent getting to understand the intent of this new curriculum and being very excited about its potential.

Sadly, it looks like we are not going to get the most out of this new curriculum, which has been hailed as a world leader by educational experts. The mood at the moment in New Zealand is one of accountability and narrow test scores which inevitably will mean schools not spending so much time on developing the Arts/Health and PE/Languages, as any gains made in those areas will not be directly reflected in national standards data. That to me is one of the most disappointing aspects of the forced imposition of the standards – not the accountability, because that's important to have, and what ERO do already – but what we have lost along the way.

I think back five years to the support my school received. We were a well performing school who were accepted on to a Health and PE contract. This enabled us to have a specialist teacher/consultant working in the school at regular intervals during the year developing teacher capability and confidence in teaching Health and PE. We also hosted a cluster Arts contract, which meant that the regional Arts adviser would run after school workshops once a term at our place, and teachers from around the region would come for a staff meeting in which they developed new skills in teaching an aspect of the Arts curriculum. I also had access to a Leadership adviser who visited once a term to meet with us to give advice or direction we may have needed and to keep us in the loop of the latest developments out of Massey University which was where we drew most of our PD from.

The landscape has changed dramatically and we work in a tighter economic environment, so there are no more Arts, Health, and PE or Leadership advisory positions available to schools. Any professional development or support offered by the Ministry of Education is solely focused on supporting the goals of national standards and is only accessible to those who can prove that they are failing their students. The message is that if you are doing a good job then you are on your own. At another level the message is also that the national focus is on the tail of achievement not extending the brighter children – there is literally nothing available to assist schools to challenge and extend brighter students.

The model being offered now is ‘contestable’ or ‘targeted’ meaning that schools, as of right, do not have access to advisory support but must either pay for it or prove that they are failing their communities and require external support. I find it sad to receive pamphlets from Waikato and Massey (geographically we are in the middle so get both institution’s mailings) touting for business at ‘competitive’ or ‘tailored’ rates – for services that schools used to receive as of right. Money that should be going on school based resources now needs to be spent on providing teachers with the ongoing professional development they require. I imagine both universities are working in difficult times and am saddened to see what we now have to work with. It is well known that the investment by government in education is significantly less than in other comparable nations – our system does have that ‘run on the smell of an oily rag’ ethos, and always has done – yet internationally our results are well above what could be reasonably expected. Not that you would know it if your only source of information on school performance came from those who really should know better.

We continue to hear about the ‘1 in 5’ are failing school’ from the government – as if this is solely a school failing and there are no other social issues in the mix. What about ‘1 in 5 came to school without breakfast today’, or ‘1 in 5 spend their schooling life bouncing from school to school with no stability or opportunity to cement learning patterns’, or even ‘1 in 5 who take 1 in 5 days off school regularly’ – not so catchy or vote grabbing. Anyone who understands a bell curve knows that there will always be those who do not achieve as well as others in particular areas. That is reality. I am not suggesting for a minute that we should not be concerned about raising achievement for the most vulnerable – we always should be, and I know in my school a disproportionate amount of time, money, energy and resources goes into just that – but where is the conversation about high achievers? Or even the ‘average joe or jill’ – do they get a look in?

Remember that summit/think tank held just after National were elected three years ago, investigating how to promote our nation and make it even better? There was a real focus on innovation and doing things differently. Nurturing the tall poppies to make them really blossom was a sound-bite I can recall. Sadly it seems that optimistic start to National's tenure has all but gone. They’ve governed through a tough patch with global financial problems and two national tragedies, so I don't begrudge them the decisions they've had to make in that sense – I just wish it wasn’t at the expense of our high achieving children.

My concern is that post election this narrowing will only get worse. Shonky, unreliable tables comparing schools to one another will begin appearing in newspapers. Schools will begin to be tagged as ‘excellent, ‘failing’ or anywhere in between based on manipulation of data and/or differing assessment practices. Teachers will continue to get bashed in the media despite 95% of them being dedicated, caring and effective professionals. There are a few bad eggs like in any profession yet from what you read in the media (and it will only get worse) it seems all teachers are ineffective. There is already a mini-exodus of school principals as the reality of what we are being charged with overseeing and implementing in our schools begins to take effect. This will only get worse over the next few years. The whispers about how our roles and employment conditions will change post-election will have dire consequences if realized.

National standards on their own will not make a difference to any child’s achievement. Parents who are engaged and work positively with schools already know or can easily find out how their child is doing. The ethos of partnership is eroding and being replaced by one of reporting and suspicion. So much money being invested in a scheme which has little if any benefit to children. And in the meantime a world leading curriculum is abandoned ...

I hope that whether through school/parent pressure, or just common sense, we will see the re-promotion of the NZ Curriculum as our guiding document. This should be the cornerstone of student improvement for our children not a narrow Literacy and Numeracy focus. Those areas are foundational and absolutely at the core of what a school does but we can be so much more than that.

Last night at our teacher meeting we did some preliminary work on our inquiry learning approaches for 2012. That was intended as the posting for today, but clearly I got sidetracked. My biggest concern is that such staff meetings in the current climate may become a luxury as we will need to spend the majority of our time on national standards compliance matters. This isn’t what I want for my children and I know parents in our community don’t want that either.

Unfortunately the debate and decision making on educational direction and policy shifted out of the hands of those actually doing the work some time ago. It is up to us instead to determine what is best at a local level as the national direction is already fixed.

Danny Nicholls

Principal


St Patrick's Catholic School, Taupo



Tuesday, December 6, 2011

Whose agenda ought we be following in education?



While  schools are increasingly being constrained by the imposition of National Standards right wing politicians introduce another failing idea from the USA (and the UK) -  Charter Schools' -  which are to be given considerable freedom.

I made use of 'The Most Important Speech' posting - based on Diane Ravitch's for my blog below. The linked blog is well worth a read by all principals and BOTs - as is the PDF file it refers to.


When politicians interfere with educational provision without democratic consultation we are in trouble. All too often such ideas have popular appeal until they are given more thought. Without time to consider implications the ideas develop a life of their own.

These politicians are undermining education for their own political ends. The idea that our schools are failing is a cynically crafted myth by those who want to privatise 'our' schools.

American educational philosopher Horace Mann wisely said, many years ago,  that when partisan politicians introduce their ideas the result is that public education is demeaned as is respect for professional judgement.  Educational consultant Michael Fullan  has written more recently that politicians always get it wrong; he should know because he has wrongly advised politicians in the UK and Canada!

Educational critics start off by stating that schools have let too many children fail -in New Zealand Ruth Richardson, Bill English, John Key, and now, New Zealand's answer to the American Tea party, - John Banks.

Three things are ignored in the lack of debate.

Firstly the troublesome home circumstances created by poverty is ignored. This poverty has been escalated by failing market forces policies which had at their premise the belief that wealth would 'trickle down'. New Zealand is now one of the countries with the widest 'rich/ poor gap' in the Western World. Conservative politicians fail to acknowledge that the so called 'achievement tail' correlates to the 'one in five students' living in poverty and prefer to spread the more simplistic 'schools are failing 'one in five students.' What is ignored is that even before the first day at school there is an achievement gap.

There is a story of two doctors waiting by a river who see a somebody drowning and the rescue the person.Then another drowning body appears and they pull him out, then another , and another. finally one of the doctors runs up stream and the other calls out, 'where are you going?' The running doctor calls back, 'I am going to see why they are falling in!'

Are we looking upstream to see the causes of school failure?

Politicians like John Key and John Banks say that teachers are using poverty as an excuse yet lack of equality and opportunity can't be that simply ignored.

Secondly while choice is trumpeted as the reason for charter schools the public school system is increasingly being constrained by the politicians imposition of standards- another simplistic political idea with appeal until the consequences are thought through. The ideas of standards come to us from the USA and UK where they result in narrowing of the curriculum, league tables and teaching to the tests. Ironically the most successful American Charter schools are those that have the tightest accountability requirements - so much for choice and diversity.

Thirdly New Zealand schools score highly ( in the first four or so) in the International Tests in Literacy , Numeracy  and other curriculum areas. Both the UK and the USA are seen as failing systems in this respect yet they are the countries our politicians want to follow! Politicians are blind to the more liberal approaches of such countries as Finland. Top achieving countries, like Finland, do not test every child every year. And those that do ignore creativity, innovation and imagination.

Both National Standards and Charter Schools, no matter their superficial appeal, are not silver bullets - raising children achievement is not as simple as their proponents think. Such ideas contribute to a poisonous narrative that colours the minds of the public and destabilizes  the reputation of public education and will add to the gap between so called 'winners and loser' schools.

The sad thing in all this is that the enlightened New Zealand Curriculum, the vital role schools play in creating a democracy, and innovative ideas that creative schools are implementing will be ignored .

Already most primary schools have , for their survival and reputation, have already distorted their programmes to focus on literacy and numeracy - and an obsession with testing -  resulting in students with talents and passion  in other areas  being ignored.

National Standards and Charter Schools ( if they are to be  tied to tight accountability requirements) are no answer. If Charter Schools are to be given given greater flexibility and choice then this also ought to be given to all schools.

There is no argument about the importance of literacy and numeracy but if New Zealand is to become a creative and innovative country then developing every students gifts and talents ought to be the driver for all school change. What is missing by current reformers is the neglect of imagination, creativity and imagination.

For this we need to re-imagine schools completely. We need to move out of  a standardised  'one size fits all'  schooling and move towards personalising education.

Educators understand that children develop in different ways and at different paces and respond differently to different experiences - they cannot be seen as a easily defined product or measured outcome.

What we need is a new narrative for a 21stC education system  one that promotes critical thinking and innovative ideas required for the future.

Creative teachers have always known this.

This ought to be the focus for anyone involved in education.  History will not look kindly on politicians ( and schools) that support such retrogressive ideas. Until this happens how many students will learn to see themselves as failures. How many good teachers will lose hope and leave? Who will want to be a principal in such a managerial, uncreative and technocratic environment?

We have to fight for a different narrative - one that makes sense to parents and the wider community once they have been give the time to consider the faults of the current bunch of self serving conservative politicians.





Thursday, December 1, 2011

Let's not lose the point of school now we have 'the standards'!

















Just as we need creativity the government imposes standardisation. Not that schools haven't been there before.

I have just discovered, in my tidy up, a copy of Guy Claxton's ' Whats the Point of School - Rediscovering the Heart of Education'. Claxton's book provides inspiration for a real 'step change' in education to cope with the demands of a dynamic new century that is already a decade old.

Our current system fails too many children but the answer is not to go back to the failed standardisation of the past.

The trouble with the standards is that the cure may be worse than the problem as school are pressurised to focus more on more on ensuring students succeed they will neglect more important things such as attitudes and individual students' talents and gifts. It is these qualities that are the heart of a future orientated education. I am reminded of the old saying:  ' when you are up to your backside in alligators it is hard to remember you came to drain the swamp'! It is not that I am against literacy and numeracy it is just that these need to be seen as very important 'foundation skills'  - skills best learnt when students see the point of them.

There is no doubt that Claxton is one of the most important writers of our time. Claxton is one of the UK's foremost thinkers on creativity, learning, and the brain.  All schools should have a copy and make efforts to implement his ideas - somehow, in the present environment in New Zealand, I can't see this happening - quite the opposite.

Claxton begins his book by writing: 'The purpose of education is to prepare young people for the future. Schools should be helping young people develop the capacities they will need to thrive. What they need, and want, is the confidence to talk to strangers, to try things out, to handle tricky situations, to stand up for themselves, to ask for help, to think new thoughts.'

'But, he says, 'they are not getting it'.

'Education' he continues, 'has lost the plot and it urgently needs to recover its core purpose'. Politicians claim to put education at the heart of their concerns but they are wrong if they think imposing regressive standards will do it they are mistaken - they will only act as  intellectual straight jackets. Politicians need, Claxton says, 'the courage to go deeper'.

Albert Einstein wrote that 'education is what remains after one has forgotten everything one has learnt at school' - and Claxton reminds us that Einstein was referring to those lifelong skills and attitudes that mark out a true learner.

The key to develop such qualities are gained by students working in groups researching engaging projects involving skills of collaboration, discussion and attitudes of self organisation. This of course involves in depth content and quality outcomes but it is , Claxton says, 'not the immediate performance so much as the cumulative development that is going on behind the specific tasks' that is more important. It is these attitudes and skills that matter in the long run.They are the core confidences young people need,Claxton calls them 'learning muscles.These are curiosity, courage, investigation, imagination, reasoning, sociability and reflection' .'These , Claxton calls ' qualities of mind'. And all these are are 'perfectly capable of being strengthened and cultivated by education' - but the 'pressure to push up literacy rates' subverts their development. The quest for results undermines student's confidence and contributes to their 'losing their capacity for wonder and critical thinking'.

Claxton quotes John Dewey who wrote: 'How many students for example, were rendered callous to ideas and how many have lost the impetus to learn by the way in which learning was experienced by them?' The new standards come to mind!

In this desire to focus on literacy and numeracy, Claxton writes, 'we  have forgotten the deeper purpose of education.'

'To effect a thorough change' he says, 'we have to start by seeing how bad things are.We have to understand what it is young people really need, what schools are actually providing, and acknowledging the gulf between the two. And then we have to establish, beyond all possible doubt, that the kind of educational reform for more than a hundred years is not going to work'.

Only when this is understood that a different kind of change is both necessary and possible. 'With a little bit of imagination, and a modicum of courage, education can rediscover its heart and soul.'

Claxton wants to inspire teachers to see  students as 'brave and confident explorers, tough enough in spirit,and flexible enough in mind, to pursue their dreams and ambitions.'

So did the New Zealand Curriculum until the government sidetracked it!

'We need a new narrative for education that can engage and inspire chidren'. Lets fire kids up with the deep satisfaction of discovery and exploration. They are born with learning zeal; lets recognise, celebrate and protect it, but also stretch, strengthen and diversify it.'

Schools have , as Claxton says,   'lost the plot'!

Monday, November 28, 2011

Where has that Aussie confidence gone from their teachers -and a look at where New Zealand is about to go!






A little bit of Ned Kelly spirit is required to combat the technocrats in charge in Aussie (and now in New Zealand).

Guest blog by Phil Cullen
Ex Director Primary Education Queensland.

Check out Phil's website.



ORWELL IS HERE!

The year of Orwell and  the introduction of Orwellism has been delayed.

 In the 1950s when we first read about a future manipulated, dysfunctional society, 1984 seemed to be so far away. ‘1984’ didn’t happen when it should have. Society was fairly comfortable in 1984, except for Queensland. The leader there had been appointed by divine authority, he had suggested; and made some curious judgements about schooling on moral grounds.
None could even imagine, then, a future where the country was run by a focussed control-pedant , who preferred to rule by fear-based, heavy-handed distrust and make decisions about  schooling just to illustrate his/her authoritative control. 
By the 1960s, the western world was on the cusp of creating a school culture of learning that would have had no equal in history. These years produced the greatest thinkers and writers of the 20th century; and teachers of the time, straining to shatter the shackles of colonial styles of teaching-learning were about to break loose. They read and they observed and they talked and they listened and they shared. The mood of the late sixties and seventies with its Deweys, Goodlads, Bassetts, Parrys, Postmann & Weingartners, Holts, Plowdens, Cleggs...such a long list of child-oriented scholars and writers...was one of hope. 
Every state Australian state bureaucracy appointed visionaries to important positions [e.g. Guymer in Q’ld, Swan in NSW, Jones in S.A., Shears in Vic., Beare in ACT] irrespective of the local political power base. Schooling was on the up and up - despite one or two attacks [e.g Back to Basics, M:ACOS] that the press enjoyed featuring.
The dystopic political arrangements for an Orwell-1984-style-Australia were put on hold for a quarter-of-a-century. It was destined to happen as soon as despotic managerialists and measurers introduced euphemisms as articles of faith [e.g. ‘outsource’ = don’t trust your own; ‘down-size’= sack those you fear] circa 1990. The public learned to tolerate this inconsistent square-peg  ruddism [in Q‘ld. in particular] without dissent; and ‘orewellism’ entered the language as a suitable descriptor for what eventually happened in 2009. Big Brother showed himself.
Turn back to the real 1984.
 The year itself, might have been considered a fizzer for those who had trusted  George Orwell’s predictions, but child-oriented schooling itself was well under way and schools were happily optimistic at that time. Big Brothers were not necessary. Teachers believed in themselves. They felt proud of what they were doing.
I could open a Principals Conference in 1984 by saying “There is no task so demanding, no occupation [apart from that of religious minister or priest] so ethically professional than that of a primary or secondary teacher. Its impact on the welfare of the world, the care for people as people, the influence that it has on the achievements of each person and subsequently of each nation places the profession as something apart from all other occupations. It is concerned about a nation’s most precious commodity and its richest resource – children. It is a self-monitoring, self-improving profession ...and it is in this context that we have foregathered. We hope to make a determined and realistic commitment to enlivening classroom practices because they are the base-line of what we are all on about.”
The conference was about ‘Excellence in Teaching’. Attenders talked about teaching and learning and on how to improve both.  They could say that and do that in 1984 and believe in solid, immovable professional ethics. No jumped-up politician, lawyer or sciolist would dare to tell teachers what to do and how to do it. The force felt solidly professional from top to bottom and remained so until 1990 or thereabouts.
We can’t make those sort of statements that I made, anymore. The political Darleks, ‘utterly without pity, compassion or remorse with every emotion removed except hate’ have moved in. Professional schooling principles have backed off.
A 2011 national conference for principals [that I ‘attended’ on-line] was about improving scores on national blanket tests. Schooling by numbers. Pupil welfare and progress did not get much of a mention. Ethics had travelled a long way .
It was another sign that Orwellism was well entrenched. It had twenty-five years to arrive and it had infected all parts quickly.
What is orwellism? 
 Described as oligarchical dictatorship,  based on a nonsensical, peculiar thought process that manipulates social structures on behalf of the most powerful,  participants can indulge in double-thinking by holding two contradictory beliefs and believing in both. Teachers can believe in freedom to learn and use fear-driven practice techniques to prepare for Big Brother’s NAPLAN tests.
Thus, by embracing inconsistent concepts, school principals can acquiesce to the decadent political view that low test scores indicate poor teaching and shabbily-run schools; and their professional conscience won't worry them. Professionally neutered, they are unable to dissent from or offer ethical advice to political masters. The work-force generally is on the same wave-length. The school-tardy, both pupils and teachers,  must be punished; and all adults generally subscribe to this notion.
With ethical principles in suspension through political mandate, this further entrenches the style of Orwellian oligarchical dictatorship that decries individuality and teaching ethics.
Teachers are told what to do and what to think. School leaders acquiesce as it is easier to do do so. Double-think prevails. True-blue professional codes are trashed with organizational approval. The sycophants feel even more secure and comfortable; and the ultimate victims are not taken into account at any stage. .
Whereas politicians kept out of –perhaps avoided -  serious curriculum considerations in the real 1984, there has been a change of social climate since then. As George O himself said in the other ‘1984’, “ In our age, there is no such thing as ‘keeping out of politics’ ; and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasion, folly, hatred and schizophrenia.”  So its welcome to that sort of world for all 2011 school personnel and clients. 
Teachers probably sense the outrageously camouflaged intentions of our fat controllers, but cannot do anything about it. If the playing field was level, their organizations would be able to say to Her Overbearance, “We won't give your tests to our pupils.  We love them and want them to learn. It is unworthy of you to ask us to do so and a serious breach of schooling ethics.”
The field is very steep. The ball gets away from you if you don’t try to stop it. Orwellism is in full swing in dystopic Australia

Friday, November 25, 2011

National's 'brighter future' doesn't include the students or their teachers!


















The current National Government has ignored educators worldwide and opted for an accountants view of education turning students into products and schools into factories so as to give consumers a choice - but what a choice!

What many feared has come to pass.

Populist political simplicity has won the day!If you repeat a half truth ( one in 5 students are failing) without also factoring in the effects of poverty and poor health of  unknown in other civilised countries. One fifth of our students live in distressing poverty ( that is , of course, 1 in 5)

The Government seems to admire a McDonald's approach to education and , if they knew their history, one promulgated by Joseph Stalin in the 1930s. Joseph also believed in the pseudo science of measurement as do technocrats around the world.

Read what a young teacher wisely has written - shame many principals don't have the same insight.

‘Learn from what not to do from reform in the US’.....
 
said Joe Bower from Alberta, Canada quoting from “Testing, Testing’ by Larry Bool and J.C.Couture.  They maintain that the absurd elements of the absurd US reform are largely ideological....
 
 
*market-based business methods for the running of schools;
*emphasis on standardisation and narrowing of curriculum;
*fostering choice and competition among schools;
*making judgements based on test data;
*merit pay and other incentives;
*faith that technologically mediated instruction will reduce costs;
*overwhelming top-down approach which tells everyone what to do;
*holds everyone-else accountable.
 
For New Zealand and Australia [as well as Canada] to copy such reform elements is beyond belief - where was the professional leadership - setting tests no doubt!

And read what a  wise old Director General of Queensland Primary education has to say.

And check out this warning from a great Canadian blogger!

True science , according to Brian Cox Science Adviser to the previous Ministry of Education and Science in the UK is 'being happy with the unknown' - a search to reach for the stars.

A quote from American educationalist Glickman 2006  clearly states the scenario we are moving into in New Zealand.

' Today, measuring the accomplishments of students, teachers, and schools by standardised test scores and handing out rewards and punishments for reaching or failing to reach state and federal standards has become commonplace.

In such a climate, we typically err too much on the side of avoiding failure by relying on externally approved " research based" programmes, teaching methods, and assessments that are officially prompted by state and federal governments ( through their agencies).

What we lose in the process is imagination.Failure cannot go unchallenged, but what we have today is our own failure to imagine new possibilities and the worth of what has already worked well*. There is no tragedy in reaching for the stars and falling short; the greatest tragedy in never reaching at all.'

*added.

And from the  UK  another warning ( source NZ Herald).

'Survey slams schools.

Many British adults say they did not realise their true potential until years after they had left school. A survey of 2000  people found, on average,   they cited 22 as the age they found their niche in life.  Nearly half of those surveyed felt they  were regarded as average or poor students while they were at school. Of those, 15% said they never got the chance to discover their talent in the classroom because their teachers had written them off as failures'.

It seems to me that the challenge of 21stC schools is to ensure all the talents and skills of every individual students are realised - and, according to business philosopher Peter Drucker, the first country to develop such an education system will win the future.

Some countries like Singapore are doing just this.

 It is a shame that our government looks back to failed approaches , used by failing countries, for inspiration. And it is a shame that not many schools are developing true personalised talent based programmes.

 Most schools lost the plot years ago and now the 2007 NZ Curriculum - an antidote to previous curriculum approaches, has all but  been sidelined.

For more read Larry Cuban's blog

Thursday, November 24, 2011

John Key and Mrs Tolley turn education into a McDonalds - principals will now become managers complying to franchise regulations.


Early this week National finally showed its hand about National Standards testing and 'league tables.

After months of weasel words Nationals agenda becomes painfully clear.

And on TV John Key happily blamed failing children on poor teaching - he evidently didn't see the programme shown the same week about the effects of poverty, poorly heated housing was creating for 1 in 5 children in such areas. And in housing managed by the government . Funny how the 1in 5 failing children fits the same data as Mrs Tolley's - this time the data is correct; not  simplistic political dogma spread by both Tolley and Key. I think we could correctly call it propaganda. The figures for failing children in these areas are greater than 1 in 5  due to poor housing resulting in health problems that civilised countries like Sweden have long since solved through integrated humanitarian policies. In New Zealand we still rely on the 'trickle down' theory that has failed wherever it has been tried - but the theory does save the self satisfied National voters facing up to reality. After all it is the poors own fault. All they need to get is job and all will be well - ignoring that there are no jobs to get!

Time will show John Key and Mrs Tolley to be the simplistic wreckers they are. In the meantime creative teachers will have to cope by going underground  and if the remainder can't see the problem then they will be seen as complying with the destruction of an education system once held in high esteem  by educators ( if not politicians and technocrats) around the world.

Principals who meekly went along with National Standards  will be seen as Judas Sheep or the Vichy ( who worked with the Germans) in France. Too few principals had the courage to stand up to such destructive polices and too few got together to make  a  group stand - I can only think of one group who did so led by Perry Rush. NZEI and NZPPF opposition was in itself not enough to make it clear to teachers and principals the need for action. 

To get an idea of what is about to rain on their heads teachers and principals need to read the Joe Stalin's approach to education and also click the  to Kelvin Smythe uncovering of the future agenda before it was announced.

Probably the best metaphor for the future direction of education is a comparison with McDonalds- and Ronald their clone like icon.

McDonalds is all about efficiency and standards - and each franchise can easily be reported on and help from the central office sent if necessary or the franchise removed.

Now I don't mind the odd McDonalds meal when in a hurry but as a diet it results in poor health. The biggest difference between a school and MacDonalds  will be that McDonald only takes in standardised potatoes and meat. Schools will have to take whichever students turn up -although students attending high decile schools, of course, will have the advantage of their parents 'social capital'. And the rich will simply avoid going to McDonalds school as they do now.

The McDonald story is quite interesting. By the 1950s one company was responsible for the the change in the American diet as fast food became the craze. One little restaurant in California sold more than any other in America. This was run by two brothers  - the McDonalds. The brothers were a success and opened others unfortunately for them they didn't like flying and Ray Croc bought the business and sold franchise  throughout America -  and the world. Standardised food had arrived.

The McDonald brothers originally started with a vision. They got rid of all the china, silverware and waitresses and reopened with customers coming to collect their own food - and they cut their menu to seven items. Customers only could specify the meal they wanted -  McDonald's became a success.

Every thing was standardised. The process was made into an assembly line. Kroc was obsessive that everything should be followed exactly -even down to the bun having 178 sesame seeds!

This all led a culture that was successful but dazzlingly unsympathetic to innovation; the formula worked.  A fifth of all meals eaten in the USA eaten in a McDonalds. This might account for obesity problems!

And if you think of it this can all be applied to schools.

The Ministry will determine the educational standards and 'best practice' processes to be followed.

Schools will report to the Ministry and the Ministry will ( Kroc like ) ensure any diversions from the standards are sorted out, or schools will be 'helped' by Ministry 'officials' - 'we are here to help you'.

Schools  will have to comply and to achieve fidelity to Ministry goals they will inevitably  cut back on areas of the curriculum not tested. As much as Mrs Tolley says this will not happen it has already has happened in the UK and the US.

Ministry 'helpers' will be  contracted to assist in the designated targeted standardised areas. ERO will complement the surveillance culture.

It will be  all about accountability, measurement, targets, efficiency and recorded progress -and sticks and carrots.

Innovation, diversity and creativity  -once the hallmark of our highly regarded system will go out the window.

Tough times for the creative.

No need for leadership ( what little there was) the future will be all about management.

I am pleased  I am out of it!

Only Ronald McDonalds (teachers, principals and students) will thrive -  the  different, the creative, and  those from different cultures will all be forced into a Procrustean curriculum bed  with only three slats - reading, writing and arithmetic.

We will have returned to Victorian days just as we need to encourage all the creativity and talent we can.

At least our future failure will be documented!







 

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Free market Stalinism in New Zealand Education.














Why are we following Joseph Stalin?

John Key follows Joe's Communist policy

National goes for a 'big brother' approach - we always knew they would!!!!


The critics of the previous Labour Government used to call its leadership 'Helengrad'.

Ironically, in education, the current government is moving towards what looks very much like the philosophy of Soviet Russia under Joseph Stalin.We seem to be moving away from a benign 'nanny state' to a destructive and regressive Big Brother environment in education.

If schools have not read the recent posting of Kelvin Smythe they ought to do so because once the election is over they will have to face up to surveillance culture that will have long term effects on education. The innovation, freedom and creativity of the 2007 New Zealand Curriculum will be at risk. Mind you this innovative curriculum was introduced under the previous Labour Government. The current government's approach is hard to align with  their so called core values  of  innovation, individual freedom and enterprise.

If it all comes to pass teacher professionalism will be replaced by technocratic control - compliance, not creativity, will be the new tune  to dance to.

Kelvin Smythe writes:

'.....we are going to have a more feral and destructive kind, New Zealand national testing. Unless you go to a private school, or a te reo school, children will be given a number, and test results will be sent monthly from classrooms for a profile to be established. There won’t be any privacy issues we’ll be assured, and in some respects they’ll be right, they’ll be ethical and moral ones. Children will know the information is being sent to the central bureaucracies and attached to a number representing them, and that the information will be stored. Is this the kind of knowledge, expectation, and experience we want our children to have? They will become well aware that the results from those monthly tense, high stakes’ tests will be sent to Wellington for that purpose.

Do you want this to be the experience for our children?'

The similaritiesies between what is being proposed in countries pursuing  a national standards agenda and 1930 Russia has been noted by American critics of national testing - and Mrs Tolley's proposal are in line with what is happenings in the US. Why we follow failing procedures from failing countries is beyond comprehension.

In the 1930s the Soviet Union was mired in a recession with poverty and unemployment rampant. The Soviet Union, under Joseph Stalin , instigated a series of educational reforms designed to obliterate the the established progressive system and to create a new centralised structure that would increase literacy and numeracy.

The similarities to what is happening in America today ( and Australia and  UK and soon NZ) are as discomforting as they are striking.

In America , despite uncertainty about what National Standards should look like and ignoring professional opinions, 48 state government have already accepted the new  standards - improved from the destructive standards previously imposed by the No Child Left Behind ( NCLB) of the Bush Administration.  States gain financial reward if they agree to take part!

Under President Obama'a Secretary of Education  Arne Duncan  the goal of the current administration is 'to establish national standards and national testing so that states, regions, schools, teachers, and students can be compared and ranked'.

This was Joseph Stalin's plan and now is Mrs Tolleys!

Before Stalin's educational reforms teaching was characterised by local control and educational polices influenced by 'pedologists' ( such as the currently highly respected in the West Lev Vygotsky) who were oriented towards a 'child centred' eduction. This approach , in contrast to imposed standardisation, is pursued by innovative countries as 'personalised learning'. It is this approach that underpins the increasingly sidelined NZ 2007 National Curriculum. The Communist party rejected 'child centred' learning in favour a standardised curriculum that featured frequent examinations, competitive  testing and  grading and a focus on the basics Sound familiar?

In America ,as a result of standardised testing/teaching and grading,  areas of the curriculum, such as the arts, physical education and areas of personal interest are being neglected. A 'procrustian' 'one size fit all' approach that ignores individual variation between students and will result in a loss of creativity. Schools are now teaching to the tests for their own survival.

Soviet teachers in the 1930s had little leeway to to veer from government edicts, and this is happening in the USA and will happen  in New Zealand. Government contracted 'advisers' will make certain of this. Few principals will have the courage to stand against such a technocratic approach. Advisers will determine 'best practices' for schools to comply with and ERO will reinforce this.

The most debilitating result of such a test regime will be  to use the narrow test results to assess the quality of learning - the national standards in literacy and numeracy will become the default curriculum.This is already being seen in the USA, the UK, Australia  and already in many New Zealand schools. Teachers in such an oppressive environment will not want to introduce students to areas of learning that will not be tested - their schools success will depend on them complying.

The whole idea of 'ivory tower educational tecnocrats' determining what standards students should know would impress Joseph Stalin! Joseph also banned fairy stories as being unscientific - imagination is not a strong point of technocrats in Russia, the USA and in the Ministry of education in New Zealand!

Why the public is blindly accepting the idea that their children's final outcomes can be standardised and preconceived  by technocrats is beyond comprehension. Mind you there are now many teachers, using teaching intentions and WALTS, who have come to believe in such an uncreative 'clone like' teaching approach. It is anti democratic and anti individualistic more suited to the goals of communism - all about discouraging creativity and individual personality personality and more towards averaging and levelling  of achievement - 'closing the gap' at all costs!

Already in America politicians are talking about firing the staff of unsuccessful schools as shown by testing under the catch call of accountability. Joseph would not hesitate! How can tests scores be compared between high and low decile schools - and do tests tell the whole story?

What is required is for educational leadership to 'fight for what is worth fighting for' to quote Fullan and Hargreaves. Remember it was Fullan who said, 'politicians always get it wrong'.

But leadership is one thing that is missing.

I wouldn't blame Russian principals for keeping their heads down but New Zealand is not yet so oppressive so there is still time.

Creative teacher ought to be valued for their enthusiasm , passion and relationships,  not just unscientific and narrow test scores. Teachers are important influences in a childs' life and  teachers know, through,experience, that many students who might struggle at school do well in life -and vice versa! And teachers know the debilitating effects of poverty on their students education success -something politicians are loath to admit.

In the 1930s Russian leaders rejected any notion of  heredity and environment in education  and that all students  ( the one in five who currently fail according to Mrs Tolley) can succeed if teachers conformed to government expectations.

While the Russian leaders extolled the  vital role of the teacher (as does Mrs Tolley) more emphasis was placed on conforming teachers to government expectation than improving the capacity of teachers to engage all students to help all students realize their full potential. In Russia teachers learnt to fear failure and to keep their heads down and toe the party line;  a lesson now being learnt in New Zealand schools!

It is not too late for real leadership in our schools!

If leadership does not emerge school principals will have to accept their role in transforming teachers into technicians. What will be seen as a  good teacher in the future will be a long way from the creativity that New Zealand teachers were once recognised worldwide for.

Education is fast becoming more about making teachers comply to government directives that helping all students realize their innate potential. Mrs Tolley and her National Party with their standards, and through  their future agenda uncovered by Kelvin Smythe, is destroying the creative fabric of education.

The Stalinisation of Soviet schools had a persuasive effect on Soviet life and  as a result Soviet schools remained largely unchanged for fifty years.

Education reforms in USA , the UK (and coming soon to New Zealand)  are leading schools to an era of measurable prescribed outcomes and deadening accountability rather than dynamic creativity - the cost is just too great.

A country in the twenty first century, an age of unpredictability, cannot afford to  lose the spirit of creativity in their students  - such dymanic creativity is the  only thing that will ensure success in the interesting and challenging years that lie ahead.

Tuesday, November 8, 2011

NZ educator's voice heard in America! Well done Allan

















Guest blogger Allan Alach has been under attack from a right wing blogger and the Minister of Education  for expressing his democratic right to share his views on the government's pushing it's National Standards on schools against the majority of school principals and well respected NZ educators advice.

This blog is a posting by Morna McGregor of the Baltimore Reform Examiner 8th November and shows how idea spread around the world. Standards are about  right wing corporate politics not education. And it is pleasing to see that old warrior Phil Cullen ( ex Director Primary Education) Queensland coming to his support.

I only wish more principals had the moral courage to express their views but then those involved in education are all too often under great pressure to comply.

The posting is as follows:

So I begin with a question:
When did it become acceptable to publicly attack educators dedicated to fighting for the welfare of children? Isn’t this supposed to be our charge?
Yet, with the onslaught of corporate driven education policies, educators are now coerced into tossing the welfare of children aside in order to advocate for the well being of multi billion dollars companies and the legislators who front them.  Alan Alach is a long standing educator in New Zealand who has also been an active contributing member to the United Opt Out movement . He advocated for our international outreach segment of the website. Why? Because he sees the writing on the wall . He sees the destructive nature of the educational policies being forced on educators in his own country.

 He, and New Zealand are not alone. Back here in the good ‘ol USA, his story should resonate soundly with us. Alan was “reprimanded” by the Education Ministry of New Zealand for his outspoken opposition to the standards being imposed upon students. Part of this attack was the accusation that he was using the school where he works as a "political soapbox." He is accused of spending time blogging when he should be attending to so-called day-to-day activities.
 We, the educators who advocate for opting out of high stakes testing understand that one of the key elements to bringing the public back into public education is changing the narrative that the corporate-led policy makers have so deftly co-opted. It would be negligible of Alan to act like so many others and simply stick his head in the sand. He is not writing about shoe shopping folks. He is researching and writing about education policy in an effort to advocate for his teachers and students.
 Such accusations ignore the reality that all educational work is political-to ignore the fact that the standards and common core themselves are a huge political and economic football is either naïve, or worse, deliberate-why is when the left speak out its political but when the right wing free- marketeers push their agenda it’s just “business as usual?” Because that’s the nature of hegemony and dominant discourse-to makes one’s agenda “invisible.” Alan’s work exposes the education reform for what it is: Politics for the rich and powerful, as usual.
We all need to follow Alan’s courageous lead and to announce loudly that the Emperor has no clothes. The high stakes testing agenda and National Common Core being rolled out across America is grounded directly in the pockets of the corporate reformers who have much to gainpolitically and financially from the implementation of these policies . Secretly behind closed doors, I hear teachers and teacher-educators alike expressing their opposition to new teacher evaluations, to new standards, to new testing policies; everything the latest reform measures have forced upon them. That’s because they see every day, on the frontlines, the negative effects these measures are having on their profession and the children they serve. But if you ask them publicly how they feel … you hear crickets. Educators are understandably afraid. Why? Look what happened to Alan. But rather than reinforcing our collective silence, we should be uniting.
 Don’t let Alan’s courage be in vain. Phil Cullen of Australia (a Member of the Order of Australia- a sort of Aussie knighthood-for services to education) writes this letter to the editor in response to the article that led the attack on Alan’s work (shown in its entirety here):
The article by Jessica Button on 4 November suggested that the education minister was displeased with the principal of Hokowhitu School for alleged injudicious remarks on a blog site.  Mr Alach is an ebullient critic of national standards. He seems to think that they constitute a confining process that constricts and lowers overall curriculum standards; and which does nothing to promote purposeful achievements in reading, writing and mathematics. As a practising school person, he is worried overall about the effects that politicking for corporate benediction has on children’s focus on learning.
Mind control of schooling and the use of officers to bring schools into line is pandemic. Mr Alach’s blog vocabulary indicates that he does not like it being used in New Zealand. Australia certainly uses forms of gestapo-ism; but I will not be called to account for saying that.  When Joh was king in Queensland and I was a state director of education, in charge of about 1200 primary schools, I was  sometimes called to account by school principals and nasty names were used. I felt aggrieved, of course. However, when at times I checked the accuser, it was often a principal who knew a thing or two. As far as school leadership was concerned, we did not have many Alachs. There were some, and although they doubted my parentage at times, I learned to give way, especially to the Alachs. On reflection I do wish that there were more Allan Alachs in our work-force, brave state-employed, good school operators unafraid to be critical;  reminding superordinates that they don’t know everything.
Some advice for Ms Tolley: “Young lady, part of your job requirements is to eat crow. Do it and just spit out the feathers; not seek revenge.”
Phil Cullen A.M.
Former Q’ld State Director
I concur with Dr. Cullen. We need more Alachs. If we did, maybe we could fight the take over of public education by corporate interests and get back to the work of provided quality and equitable education for all students. Please join and the rest of us at www.unitedoptout.com and be there for the Occupy the Department of Education in Washington DC  March 30th-April 1st. It’s our time to stand up and speak out.

 
Design by Free Wordpress Themes | Bloggerized by Lasantha - Premium Blogger Templates