The mockery of the Christchurch school closures and the Ombudsman

Dame Beverly Wakem of the Ombudsman's
office making the announcement.

In March it was announced that the Ombudsman would be taking a fresh look into the process of the proposed closures and mergers of Christchurch schools as part of the review of education in Christchurch post earthquakes.

Here is the link to the video on TV1 News:  http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/christchurch-school-closures-come-under-fresh-scrutiny-5382830/video

The Ombudsman said they would investigate the process of consultation process used last year.

This investigation will focus on how information was not released or was not released in a timely manner to allow schools to use and respond to it when presenting their submissions against the closure.  The results of this investigation will not be known until the second half of 2013.

After the announcement was made, Hekia Parata, the Minister of Education, said that it would not delay her decision making.  Hekia Parata said the government and the Ministry of Education had acted properly in their consultation.  She is expected to announce her final decisions to be actioned before the 2014 school year begins later this month.

What is truly galling about this investigation however is that the decisions and actions of the Minister will not be investigated.  Only the actions of the Ministry of Education will be investigated.

I truly believe this makes a mockery of the Ombudsman's office when they can not properly assess the whole process.  The MOE acts on the directives of the Minister, so surely the Minister's actions should be taken into account.

And if the Ombudsman does find discrepancies in how the consultation process was managed, it will be far too late, because the Minister will have already made her decisions and the process of the changes being made will be in action.

I believe that the process should be delayed until the outcome of the Ombudsman's investigation is complete and reported on.  I believe that the actions and the decisions of the Minister should also be included in the review for the sake of fairness and transparency.

After all, once the changes are made, it will be too late for some schools when they find they have been acted against unfairly.

The law surrounding the powers of the Ombudsman are well below the standard on this occasion.

NZEI's Day of Action & the Education Amendments

Today, Saturday 13th April, NZEI members up and down the country will be making a stand in the

NZEI Day of Action.  I will be attending two events.  My branch has organised a mini-march in our town at 9:30am, and then I will head into a bigger march in Hamilton starting at 11:00am where I will be a marshal manning a red light at an intersection!!  Oh, the power!

So why are NZEI members doing this?  For the following reasons:

• the Ministry of Education is not acting constructively in the negotiations over the Primary Teachers' Collective Agreement (PTCA).
• there are a number of claw backs in the MOE's offer, and most disturbingly is their assertion that the Secretary of Education be granted new powers, which could affect our Collective Agreement without any negotiations.
• The direction of education policies by this government that are directly linked to GERM (Global Education Reform Movement) such as: National Standards, standardised national testing, the messing around with assessment tools we previously trusted, the development of PaCT (Progress and Consistency Tool), league tables, Charter Schools/Partnership Schools/Kura Hourua, unregistered/untrained teachers, performance pay......
• Changes to the Education Act that are contrary to good practise and are being implemented despite thousands of submissions which oppose a number of amendments.
• The ramming through of school closures and mergers in Christchurch despite the Ombudsman investigating the process of consultation and decision making.
• Teachers know this government has no respect for them.

While all of these impact teachers in some way, they also impact on the students we teach. 

National Standards were not researched and trialled.... and yet they have been forced upon our students, with no opt out options.  Even schools with severely disabled students are forced to assess their learning against the National Standards.  These are labelling students in a way each student is very aware of.

We are worried about the possibility of standardised national testing - which has not improved outcomes for learners in countries like the UK, USA or Australia.  The development of PaCT that has the power to over rule a teachers' OTJ (overall teacher judgement) is most concerning.  Since when does a computer know better than a teacher how a child is achieving?  Who will have access to that data and how will it be used?  And towards the end of last year, Kelvin Smythe revealed how our trusted tools like STAR and AsTTle have been tutu-ed with causing some alarming so called improvements to student's achievements that experienced teachers and principals were very concerned about. 

If teachers' are over ruled in how they assess their students by a computer and we can not trust our assessment tools, plus a standardised national test makes a mockery of our well researched and trialled curriculum and teaching to the individual needs of each child..... well, can you see how that impacts on each and every student?

Finland has no national testing regime until the last year at secondary school - and they are top of the world rankings for education.  That is not to say their teachers do not test their students - they do.  But the testing is used to the benefit of the individual learner's learning journey - not to big note dodgy politicians.

PaCT also brings in the concerning issues of performance pay for teachers and another angle on league tables, which were brought into our education sphere last year despite the data from National Standards being, in PM John Key's words, "ropey".  PaCT data could be used by the MOE to identify "top performing" and "failing" teachers, and apply performance pay or other sanctions that fall outside the PTCA.  This method would not take into account the cohort each teacher has, the personal learning journeys of each individual student, or outside impacts (i.e. an earthquake....).

In Finland there is no performance pay.  Teachers are treated with the utmost respect and teaching is a difficult profession to get into as only the best are accepted into teacher training (I do think NZ could do with some tightening up on who gets into teacher training).  Performance pay comes with so many fish hooks, for example, teaching to the test, personality conflicts with the person who makes the decision, "cooking the books" when it comes to student outcomes, fewer teachers will want to work in 'under performing' schools.....

And then there is the Charter School, or whatever they are calling them this month, issue.  Charter Schools are classic GERM.  This involves tax payer dollars going to private enterprises to start their own schools.  The government would prefer these schools started in underprivileged South Auckland and earthquake devastated Christchurch first.  The government are helping clear the way in Christchurch by closing down a number of schools.  These schools will not have to follow the NZ Curriculum or assess and report according to National Standards (unlike your normal state school), will not have to have community representation, will not have to respond to the Official Information Act, will not have to employ registered teachers - or even trained teachers!

Again the fish hooks are huge!!  There will be no oversight as to what these schools will teach due to them not having to use the NZC.  For all we know, these schools could be teaching children that mushrooms grow on the moon!!  And if they are not assessing against the National Standards (as much as I detest them), how can you compare achievement in a Charter School against achievement in the nearby state or integrated school?  And as for allowing unregistered and untrained teachers to be employed by these schools, well that down grades the professionalism of teaching and all the theory of how to teach.  It puts children at risk in more ways than I care to consider.

The US, UK and Sweden have gone the way of GERM infected Charter Schools.  Finland does not have Charter Schools, and very few private schools.  Under our Tomorrow's Schools model (being rapidly eroded by GERM) there is ample opportunity to have a school with a special character, although I note in last weekend's Marae Investigates that road blocks have been put up for this in an effort to pave the way for Charter Schools, forcing schools that want to integrate into the state system to go through the Charter School process.

Yesterday the Education Amendment Bill for the second reading in parliament was released after submission were made to the education and science select committee were held in February.  Well not a lot has changed as a result of thousands of submissions opposing Charter Schools.  The one obvious change is that the Ombudsman will be able to have some oversight into Charter Schools - in regards to suspension/expulsion/disciplinary issues - but not achievement, not how they are using tax payers' dollars (check out this example of abuse of Charter School funds in the US).

People who have participated in the submission process on this Bill are furious that all the evidence and submissions that were presented have been ignored.  It makes a mockery of consultation in the New Zealand democracy.  It's that old attitude of "let's give it a go" despite evidence to show how detrimental it will be to childrens' learning.

So when teachers and the academics who study education are so blatantly ignored, is it any wonder that they feel the need to take to the streets and show how they feel, to share with the public what is happening?

Despite the fact that the consultation and decision making process of closing and merging Christchurch schools in the post-earthquake shake up is being investigated by the Ombudsman, the Minister of Education, Hekia Parata, is pushing ahead with the unrealistic timeframe.  Warnings have come out of Christchurch that the reorganisation forced on them by the minister is a blueprint for what will happen to other communities, despite denials by Parata.  The thing is, it smacks of what happened in Dunedin during Anne Tolley's tenure as the Minister of Education, and the discussions now happening in Auckland to accommodate the current bulging rolls in certain areas that are set to increase with infill housing under the proposed Auckland housing plan.  The common denominator is all these reorganisations is the lack of listening skills by the minister (past and present) and her officials when it comes to consultation.

All of the above consolidates into a definite lack of respect for teachers and the education community.  We are branded with the "self-interested" slogan.  That we are "blindly following the union's propaganda".  According to our old friend Cameron Slater of Whale Oil fame, we are bullying people to participate today and are having to "rent a crowd" (has he not heard of humour?).  Even Michael Laws has slammed teachers for standing up for their beliefs and informing their school community (this begs the question if we should include information about healthy eating and exercise in our newsletters for fear of politicising the issue).  It was obvious that Laws didn't read the pamphlet because his opinion piece was full of holes.

I really do have to wonder why they think anyone teaches.  I could possibly get paid more.  I could possibly get a job where I don't fork out so much of my own money so I can do my job.  I could get a job with way less stress and work that impinges on my time when I am not at school.  I could get a job that would involve not being exposed to so many germs, and, on the odd occasion, the odd violent parent or student.  I could get a job where I had more respect.

But I don't.

I don't because I love children, I love learning, and I love the fact that every day is different with the potential to for not only my students to learn, but I learn too!!

Again I will have to assess against the standard.  I find this government has failed the standard for consultation.  I find this government has failed the standard for listening to and comprehending sound research and facts.  I find this government has failed the standard to uphold and resource a quality public education system.  I find this government has failed the standard for doing what is best for our learners - the people who are our future.

Christchurch - some reflections of the February announcements for the 'rejuvenation' of education in Christchurch

On the 18th of February Christchurch schools were told their 'interim' fates.  Some schools were spared from closure/merger and will either remain on site (being repaired or rebuilt on that site) and some will be rebuilt on another site.  Some schools on the other hand will be closed or merged with another school, meaning that some communities will lose their identity, lose the place that has truly held many together since the total devastation that wrought Christchurch and its surrounds on the 22nd of February 2011.  Some schools, particularly around Aranui, still have decisions to be made.

But one thing I found most incredulous was the timeframe.

All these closures and mergers are to be completed for the beginning of the 2014 year.

This timeline is completely at odds with the conversations many of these schools have had with the Ministry of Education and the Minister of Education herself.  Many schools had been told as part of the consultation last year that there was a timeframe up to 2016 for these changes to be implemented.

In particular, several intermediate schools checked with the Ministry that any students entering Year 7 in 2013 would be able to complete their Year 8 at the same school in 2014.  They were given these assurances, with at least one of the school's having evidence of Hekia Parata saying so herself - but when challenged in parliament by Chris Hipkins she did what she (and every other National minister according to the Hobbit document) does best:  LIED THROUGH HER TEETH!!

Of course students, parents and communities are devasted.  The central hub of thse communities is being ripped away from them, from many people who still live in damaged houses, drive damaged streets and can not go far without a constant reminder of how their lives have changed on that day two years ago.

Principals and teachers and support staff are devastated, and not only because there will be inevitable job losses with the closure and merger of schools.  They are devastated because the school is their community too.  They have attachments to the people of that community be they colleagues, students or parents.  Their schools have a culture, their own specialness, that will be gone once their school closes or merges.  The principals, teachers and support staff will mourn the spirit of their school.

The general consensus is that National wants to push through these closures and mergers by the end of 2013 before the school year starts in 2014 because 2014 is an election year.  National seems to think that if they have swept the situation out of the way before an election year starts that people will forget.

I actually think that is rather short-sighted.  The people of Christchurch have suffered trauma after trauma over the last two and a half year.  Those who have been affected most by school closures, lack of progress in dealing with insurance companies, lack of safe and healthy accommodation, the slow rebuild, etc. will remember.  They will know who shut their child's school and forced them to travel to another school.  They will know who has not gotten things moving in the rebuild.  They will know who let accommodation in Christchurch get to the state it is in.  Those people are voters.

Another reason why I think this is a stupid idea is the time table is impossible.  To close a school can be done.  But to merge a school in such a short time, to ensure that at the preferred sites there will be enough classrooms, toilets, plumbing, wiring, data connections, play areas, hard lanscaping, staffing, a school culture, etc. in a mere ten months is laughable.  There are not enough trades people in Christchurch now to do the rebuild, so schools will be hard pressed to get someone to do all this work.  So when these schools are not ready to roll at the end of January 2014, people will remember.

It is also indicative of this government.  Since National came in they have come up with many bizzare ideas and policies.  With little thought to how these impact people, jobs, communities, infrastructure, etc. they do little if any research, change a perfectly good law and ram something through that is full of holes and costs the country socially and economically for years!!  And the only people who do benefit are those on the rich list - again.

So here I make a prediction for some schools.

Hekia will want to look better in the public eye.  She has to.  After stuff up after stuff up last year, and the recent poll result in Canterbury that said 71% of people thought John Key shouldn't have returned her to the post of Minister of Education, Hekia has to save some face.  And this is how I predict she will do it:

• She will extend the date of closure/merger for some schools - in particular, the intermediates (she has to, she's been caught out in a bare faced lie again).
• She will tell you that these schools put up strong and convincing arguments in the consultation that will occur until the end of March.
• She will tell you that she listened with an open mind and heart (debatable!).
• She may tell you that MOE forecasting had shown that school infrastructure was going to be difficult to be made ready for the beginning of the 2014 year to accommodate more students on a merged site.
• She may tell you that this is to ensure that some merged schools can work more closely together to define their culture.

Now this prediction is only for some schools.  Hekia still has to close some schools.  How else will she make room for that riddiculous idea of Partnership/Charter Schools?  And yes, I make these predictions from another island, I haven't stood in Christchurch since the earthquake.  But I watch, I listen, and I've observed how Hekia works closely.  So let's see how these predictions play out.

I think everyone agrees that resources and infrastructure and all that has to be looked at in Christchurch, including schools.  Everyone agrees that there needs to be certainty.  But everyone should also agree that the information is correct, consultation is transparent and moves in both directions, that the decisions are fair and straight forward, and that the time table is achievable and allows a good job to be done.  Will that happen for Christchurch schools though?