It seems that leading countries are moving towards what is being described as the “new basics” based on the need for 21st century skills.
The new basics involves developing rich, highly challenging, tasks for students. Often involving the new technologies.
And as this happens poor old NZ is being forced into a narrow 19th century approach.
Yep, they’re wiping the slate clean with their educational approach. Reducing Relevant Reasoning.
But hey let’s put it this way, at least we’ll make good tourism for students who would like to study the new amish!
I suggest you read this article:
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/7717/
“In policy deliberations about education, the acquisition of subject-based knowledge is often dismissed as old-fashioned. Typically, an emphasis on the intellectual content of classroom subjects is labelled an outdated form of scholasticism that has little significance in our era.”
It may help you to understand the true nature of your educational perspectives.
A lot of the ‘New Basics’ work is based on the UNESCOs 3 pillars of learning – the three pillars necessary if we are to develop a world community able to ‘Learn to live together’.
They are:
‘Learning to know’ – combining a broad education with in depth studies.
‘Learning to do’- for students to develop their abilities so as to handle unforeseen situations and to be able to work in teams.
‘Learning to be’- the importance of personal judgement and responsibility – values
Funny enough – Literacy and Numeracy are a given within this. But no, our govt – in particular – our Minister of Ed – thinks she knows better about what kids need. No point looking at what the forward thinking parts of the world are doing or what research says, because obviously she is far more knowledgeable. (not)
So Trevor, you are correct – the new direction she is taking our system does not gell well with the way the new NZ curriculum has been set up (as a more ‘new basics’ curriculum)- instead, it is at odds with it, and the Nat Stds are setting us on a track to failure and we may as well be back in the industrial age again – because that is all her curriculum focus is good for. It will not serve our 21st century kids well.
Sounds like fads, in 5 years it will be something new. And the wreckage of poorly thought out ideas will be someone else’s problem.
And anyway why does going to London suddenly make small ideas into grand ones.
Whats wrong with looking at experts in NZ think , or are we still into the cultural cringe in 2009 , especially in education
I believe that the NZ experts agree with the UK experts.
What’s the comparative research like? Is our own research up with the UKs, better than the UKs or is it falling behind due to lack of funding? The latter seems endemic to NZ so I suspect that is the answer.
Actually, the ‘new basics’ is not really a ‘fad’ – its been around for sometime in a variety of shapes and sizes.
The issue is that Nat Stds and 21st Century curric do not marry together well – they are poles apart.
“Ghostwhowalksnz says
Sounds like fads, in 5 years it will be something new. And the wreckage of poorly thought out ideas will be someone else’s problem.”
If only that were true
I recently saw the documentary “A fair society”. It detailed the history of Labor/Nats “Tomorrows schools” and privatization via bulk funding. (It also touches on the ECA).
I think for anyone wanting to comment on right wing education policy this is a MUST view doco.
If only your quote was true. Through the 1970s and 80s Lockwood Smith (who can forget that grin) was banging the barrel with “Reading Riting Rithmatic”. Even Muldoon and Fraser (Seddon probably said the same) had the same message.
The other part of the doco that is pointed is just how fast politicians from Labor(Act)/Nat can dismiss the views of teachers/bureaucrats (professionals) as advice that “feathers their own nest”.
The premise of tomorrows schools (secondary/tertiary)sound great “Real skills for real jobs” but it was a narrow focus to provide workers for industry. It had no place for Social studies ,Art, Sport, Critical thinking, analysis. No room for innovative thought (Much the same with the health rationalization “we want everything done the one best way”).
The last important part shows how change can be fought (and stopped) as the teachers quit on mass rather than teach under harmful conditions. The Universities did not fight and so have had years of under investment via Govt while the responsibility for the results falls on the council, not the Govt that causes the mess.
@jeremy – that sounds like a good doco – where did you see it?
As for teachers etc standing up – I feel its coming – the way the Nats have rail roaded the roll out of nat stds is going to have a backlash of some kind – it is unwanted and unlikely to make any difference at all. It is foolish to ignore those who know better. It would be like seeking advice from a specialist doc on cancer if you were sick, only to disregard it and take the advice of a real estate agent instead, because they think they know best. (any links to the current ministers background is purely accidental…sort of…)
@Daniel Silva – excellent article.
Paul,
It was on the Documentary channel. I believe it was released in conjunction with the old Alliance party. Try E-Mail Jim Andertons office as I believe he (or the unions) were supporting it.
Dtb – ideas not nec London ideas, and I spend an enormous amount of time with NZ researchers and people with academic and practical expertise – but sometimes it is good to get a bit of distance and use different lenses.