Been thinking about the National Standards and why the teaching profession is so resistant to them. Seems to me that there are fundamental differences between the world views of the teaching profession and the MoE with respect to a number of very important things.
It is these differences that seem to be causing the conflicts in opinions over the Standards?
These are of course gross generalizations and not necessarily reflective of individuals in either sector, just generalizations I see and how each sector seems to view the other:
|
Ministry |
Teaching |
|
Driven by political imperatives |
Driven by learning and teaching imperatives |
|
Incompetent (schools) competent (MoE) |
Competent (schools) incompetent and obstructive (MoE) |
|
“We know best” |
The MoE don’t understand “the realities of schools and the |
|
Teachers don’t ‘get it’ unless we tell them what to think |
We have a good understanding of learning and teaching and |
|
End point achievement is a valid assessment of school |
Where kids get to summatively is only the beginning. Trajectory of learning is important too, as is formative assessment. |
|
Accountability is a driver of quality |
Personal professional integrity is a driver of quality |
|
Outputs |
Outcomes |
|
Mistrust – we need to check schools are doing it |
Trust – we know what we are doing, let us get on |
|
Need managing |
Self managing |
| Profoundly risk averse | Constantly and consistently taking risks |
| What counts is the quantifiable | Much of what is important is intangible |
| Fiscal responsibility as bottom line. Need to manage costs. | Children’s learning as bottom line, irrespective of what it costs |
There are some highly skilled, cognitive and competent people in the MoE who have the best interests of schools and childrens learning at the very centre of what they do. The complete inverse is also true.
What would you add to the list? Is this accurate or am I being way to cynical?
Entries (RSS)
I’m sorry to use a cliche here, but I think you’ve hit the nail on the head here, Greg. The one entry that really stands out for me is Mistrust. The impression that I get is that the Ministry don’t believe we are doing our job, generally speaking, so they need to establish this system of quality control. I’m still struggling to see how these standards can improve student learning. If anything, surely it will have the opposite effect because we will be spending more time on assessing, both in and out of class time. This means an increased work load for teachers, and less precipitous teaching in an climate that is already suffering drought conditions.
That’s a great list Greg – you’ve hit the nail on the head as usual. It’s a distillation of the conversation our principals group had last night. Good to know that it is not just us, but that others are feeling the same way.
Off-topic a bit, but another part of our discussion was around the “new” experienced principals programme being introduced. That also aligns with many of the points in your list – yet another example of MOE deciding what principals “need” (call me cynical, but with a shot of “this’ll fix ‘em”) rather than allowing research, discussion or practitioner based input to inform decisions around what might be best for school leaders.
We seem to be operating in a very low-trust environment at the moment – what can we do as school leaders to turn that around? Or is it a futile battle?
Hi Danny
My discussions around the experienced principals programme are actually quite interesting and exciting. CORE are running the programme in Otago and it looks like a prime aim is to engender the sorts of debates, discussions and engagement with ideas that we all have in our learning networks and through our respective blogs. I suppose there will be different models around the country and some providers will be more focused on a ‘do and think what I say and you will be right’ mentality. We need to provide this feedback, in no uncertain terms, on the models so we get a useful programme in the longer term.
I think we just assume trust and carry on as if it is there. It unnerves the MoE people if you take control and simply act as if you are competent. Just assume the answer will be yes and carry on. Don’t buy in to asking permission! Frustrating to have to battle for entitlements but go for the jugular of people who get in the way and are deliberately obstructive. The MoE SHOULD be there to support learning and teaching not inhibit it …. keep reminding them that.
A for insrtance is that I never send in our planning and reporting documentation until I am asked and reminded a couple of times. Just like to make the point …. I’m fine, got it sussed, don’t need your tick and don’t have much interest in it anyway.
We need to continue to keep our crap detectors (and volume) turned up high!!
btw Danny, good to see someone else clears their mail and rss so early. Not just me being a geek
cheers
Greg
Mark – I like the quote from a Nelson principal recently along the lines of measuring a kids height doesn’t make them grow any faster …. so …..
Greg
That is reassuring Greg – hopefully you will post more on your work with the programme in the future? Assuming Yes is the answer is a good tip. Thanks for that, have filed it away. Talk again early tomorrow morning