Anne Tolley only has herself to blame for the National Standards shambles and the Auckland Primary Principal’s Association (APPA) response.
Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with National Standards the last way to implement any sort of change with forty thousand teachers is to have a Minister of Education, with no knowledge of either education or how to make kids learn say, “I know best, do what I say or I’ll sack your Board of Trustees.”
Change management is not Anne Tolley’s greatest strength. She’s bungled the implementation of National Standards from the start and is suffering the result of her own incompetence. The education sector has no confidence in her and while she continues to bluff and bully her way through this mess, she’ll continue to meet resistance.
I offer this advice to the Minister – stop, take a deep breath, swallow some pride, admit that her approach has been unnecessarily confrontational and that she’d like to sit down with members of the education sector to decide a path that Principals and teachers have confidence in.
I am pretty sure if Anne Tolley got off her high horse she’d find a degree of willingness to make the National Standards work. I doubt if there are any Principals or teachers who don’t believe in high standards or giving parents the information they want about their children – therefore there is common ground to build on, but from the very start of the National Standards debate Anne Tolley has bashed teachers and laid all the blame for under-achievement at their feet and done her best to turn parents and the public against the education fraternity without giving teachers the actual support they need to raise achievement.
If Anne Tolley really thought things through, the reaction from teachers and principals is a fairly natural and understandable response to being dumped on from a great height by someone with no credibility, without any opportunity to have input into something that has a significant impact on their work.
Teachers aren’t concerned about further transparency and accountability, rather, they want to correct the flaws in the National Standards so as to make them workable.
Every child, in every class in every school across New Zealand has the right to an excellent teacher. It is the responsibility of the government to provide the conditions where excellent teachers can weave their magic. If Anne Tolley believes that one of the conditions required by teachers to raise educational achievement is criticism and condemnation by someone like herself who knows next to nothing about teaching and making kids learn, then she will continue to find resistance to her bullying antics.
Which is a shame because the whole educational system, from the Minister to her Ministry of Education officials, through to Principals, teachers and parents need to be working together for the benefit of all New Zealand students.
LOL
I know it’s not funny because she’s ruining education, but … 
I recently read this comment by one George.com on “The Standard” and it seems to me to sum up the problem in a nutshell.
“Schools are being required to implement and explain to parents the governments policy of National Standards, without adequate training and knowledge. The PD trainers are unable to clearly explain the National Standards to teachers because the Ministry is unable to clearly explain the National Standards to the trainers. The Ministry is unable to clearly explain the National Standards to the trainers because the Minister is unable to clearly explain the National Standards to her Ministry. Ultimately, the responsibility goes back to the Minister for embarking on a hasty development and a hasty implementation of the package. If the Minister is not clear, don’t expect anyone else to be.”
Anne is back
The National Standards debacle is not an Education but a political move.
Assessment is carried out in all schools as well as an annual assessment in specific areas using national norms for individual ranking percentiles and levels of performance.
All than has happened for many years and is completely independent to the latest political push by NACT to appease those who know little about educating children but respond to a call that something needs to be done.
The ignorance of those backing National Standards as a means of improving education is appalling.
The odd School Principal eager to please ignorant parents and adopting the standards may not have had a sound understandingly of current assessment and child based education. There are a mixture of abilities and performance among Principals as they are appointed by lay people including parents. Local politics can and does affect appointments.
The mindset of pushing National standards and possibly linking some public listing and ranking of schools, is nothing to do with education of children but everything to do with creating and elitist regime.
That appeals to some and confusion about assessment is rationalised into political argument.
Spend the money on education, not an inferior approach to assessment to gain political sway with a small, somewhat ignorant sector of the public.
The Minister is patently incompetent with education and understanding the where any weakness lies.
No doubt plenty have been galvanised to work against the Minister from the inside. She’s not going to even vaguely understand why so many things start going wrong at once.
Can we just smarten up and shameless copy Singapore, who spend 29th least in the OECD on education, yet comes first equal with Finland for results…
IIRC a lot of people pay for evening classes for their kids in Singapore…’private after school tuition’ as it were.
Just googled it…looks like we spend 21st least in the OECD…or rather we are 21st in terms of most spent on ed. I think Tolley spent some time recently defending why we were so low on the list. Have a feeling she said it was because we were poorer than other countries.
Talking today to a teacher in the senior school – decile 10. The teachers have reported to parents using the new reporting system.
1. The kids who are above average are openly saying that because they are above average, they don’t need to work hard.
2. The parents of the little kids in Infant classes are horrified that their little kids are already labelled as below average or that they are on course to reach average by the end of the year. Great way to begin school life. (Hey kid. You’re failing.)
3. Their previous reports had shown an indication of strengths/weakness and a few comments to support. Now just a bare set of data.
A parent described the new reports from a local decile 10 school as narrow and shallow. I think at best we get a compliance mentality and the magic Kelvin promotes will be lost.
The education of my children is my responsibility, and not that of the school or the government. My kids go to the school chosen by ‘catchment’, because they are required by law to do so. I am forced to pay for it from my taxes. I wish for neither.
Ongoing shenanigans like this and continued poor results serve only to strengthen my resolve.
Why should we wait until kids go to school to label them as failures? We should set a standard that says all children should be able to walk and talk by their first birthday. Plunket nurses can give parents reports that tell parents their child is either well below, below, at, above or well above the standard. They can then give the children who are below and well below the standard remedial activities and parents can do extra activities to help them meet the standard. All parents should have their children’s results printed in the Herald and Dom Post because the public has the right to know who the poor parents are and whose children are going to be a drain on society. Other parents can then choose the excellent parents to associate with and whose children their own kids can play with.
I’m being facetious, so don’t take the above comments seriously.
In all seriousness education is far too importent for political parties to use it as a football
Maybe Labour should talk to thier comrades in the education union and tell them to give it (the standards) a fair go and then see if the sky will fall in (I bet it doesn’t)
This should be a win-win situation for Labour:
They could say they were healing wounds between the union and the govt (for the sake of childrens education) and if it fails (unlikely) everyone knows its Nationals policy anyway
I really should start charging for this advice
T
LLY is trying to impose a lemon on the country. I say kick away 
@Chris – I’m sure you’re getting paid plenty by the National Party
Healing wounds, nice try 
You mean
[1] Your children passing NCEA is totally your responsibility and the school/the Govt has no responsibility to help your kids pass NCEA?
[2] Did you mean your kids are forced to go into schooling full stop, not just the one in your catchment area?
[3] So even if your children didn’t have to go to your catchment school and could go to any another school in town, wouldn’t your taxes still be paying for both the schools?
[4] You mean you don’t want your kids to go to the catchment school and you don’t want your taxes to go to any school?
[5] Strengthen your resolve to do what? Not pay your taxes or not send your kids to the catchment school or to stop the ongoing shenanigans with National Standards?
? I’m confused as to what your post means
Kelvin: How about a National Standard for driving. Your ability as determined by some shady folk in the Ministry of Transport will test all drivers every three months. If your driving is below standard your car and your licence will be labelled as Below Standard. You will have to undergo remedial re-education at your own expense in your own time. The data for your town will be published every 3 months, and sorted into male/female, race, age group, political party.
This will cost millions of dollars and will start next month. Everyone wants our roads to be safe and the current Government has a mandate and a womandate to carry National Standards through.
“Teachers aren’t concerned about further transparency and accountability, rather, they want to correct the flaws in the National Standards so as to make them workable”
Kelvin, as a primary teacher I’m not the slightest bit interested in having the flaws corrected in a tory designed regime that is flawed from the outset. I don’t know why the NZEI and Labour Party sometimes run the line that if Tolley just sat down with teachers and principals and discussed the issues, then all could be fixed. Sigh, I really despair when I hear that.
These standards will not motivate or encourage the very children who Tolley seems so concerned about. Teachers already know the children who need further intervention. Standards won’t be in the slightest bit helpful.
Last week I had three-way conferences with 18 children and their families. I’ve been to no National Standards training sessions and our school’s accompanying mid year report made no mention of Tolley’s standards – thankfully. The children I teach know their stars (where they’re doing well) and wishes (further goals) without being told they’re failures. They’re motivated and enthusiastic learners who are focused on achieving their various goals.
I already have the Ministry of Education’s New Zealand Curriculum (brilliant!), literacy progressions, Numeracy Project (full of learning intentions for each stage), ASSTLE, Ready to Read material, curriculum exemplars, numerous other documents, and my own brain to identify learning progression and the direction each child’s learning should be heading.
I really worry that the NZ Ministry of Education has produced a mountain of documents in the last 10-15 years, and now with these standards they’re throwing yet another couple of glossy documents at us. The mathematics and literacy national standards documents are hastily written, filled to the brim with jargon (not ‘plain english’), and are awfully laid out. Most unhelpful and an utter waste of money.
I do sometimes wonder when the Labour party is going to set out positions wholely, completely and radically different to what is being offered by the Tories, not just +/- 10% what the Tories are offering.
In the eyes of the public I think that the two parties is considered way more similar than they actually are.
Schools function for larger societies to spread the accepted behaviors and values common to society.
For sake of children’s development at many levels, a good teacher is a bonus and formative experience for any child. Not all teacher fit all children all of the time and that is a part of learning about life.
Many teachers do a wonderful job most of the time.
Support and ongoing training of teachers is a number one method of improving education.
Tolley knows little of this secret.
Many of our greatest contributors to advancement did not do well at school but learned the important lessons to be found there.
Einstein would have done very poorly on the National standards. He should be stripped of all recognition.
What bemused me the most about Tolley’s response to the APPA announcement was her statement that she wished teachers and principals had raised their concerns with her first, before taking such a stand.
It’s as if the last eighteen months of teachers and principals doing just that never happened. Did she miss the bus tour they did last term? Or perhaps the pledges that were presented to Parliament at the end of March? Or the petition presented to Parliament last week? (And these actions only happened because teachers and principals spent the whole of last year trying to raise concerns with the Minister only to have them brushed aside). Argh!
So what if a kid can’t read or write by age whatever…
Y’all know the story of John Britten eh ?
The story of John Britten is now legend in New Zealand. A New Zealand mechanical engineer who designed a world-record-setting motorcycle with innovative features which are still ahead of contemporary design.
He started out as the boy with learning difficulties caused by dyslexia, who battled within a school system not designed to recognise and nurture his creative gifts, John’s school reports suggested he was destined for anything but greatness.
Years later he was the eighth person to be elected an Honorary Fellow of the Institute of Professional Engineers of New Zealand in recognition of his outstanding contribution to the advancement of the science and profession of engineering.
Rich recognition for a person for whom a reading disability caused learning difficulties in his early education. He needed to have exam questions read to him at school and during his tertiary education, and his answers recorded by a writer.
Then, he only got his engineering qualifications through four years of night school.
Not bad for a guy who as kid by today’s standards would be labelled an abject failure…R.I.P
Kelvin, great post as usual, trouble is it never was about making education better – that would cost money – but about picking a fight to make the govt look tough
Anne Tolley gone by Christmas? I think so.
You mean
[1] Your children passing NCEA is totally your responsibility and the school/the Govt has no responsibility to help your kids pass NCEA?
NCEA is irrelevant. I have no choice. School does not in and of itself = education.
[2] Did you mean your kids are forced to go into schooling full stop, not just the one in your catchment area?
Both.
[3] So even if your children didn’t have to go to your catchment school and could go to any another school in town, wouldn’t your taxes still be paying for both the schools?
Irrelevant. I have no choice.
[4] You mean you don’t want your kids to go to the catchment school and you don’t want your taxes to go to any school?
Indeed.
[5] Strengthen your resolve to do what? Not pay your taxes or not send your kids to the catchment school or to stop the ongoing shenanigans with National Standards?
I am forced to do the first two. As such, I expect nothing but the latter.
? I’m confused as to what your post means
The use of force is uncivilised. Just because it is done by the government does not make it right.
@ John Dubya
“Schools function for larger societies to spread the accepted behaviors and values common to society.”
You are joking, right?
Some good comments. Totally agree with John W. However we are in my opinion getting a little side tracked. The Minister and her sycophants’ keep telling us
(1)We need to have National Standards so that we can identify the children who are failing as that will improve their education.
(2)That NZ Education is failing because we have the biggest tail of under achievement in comparison to OECD countries
(3)She is only interested in children succeeding in education
(4)That the opposition to Standards is only Union driven.
In response.
We have been able to identify who is failing in our schools accurately for many years. What we have lacked is the resources to address the needs of those who are failing in an adequate fashion, rather than just sticking Band-Aids on as a stop gap measure. These resources are not only in relation to education but as well, the social and economic needs of many of our families. The money she has whipped out of the system to help fund Standards means there is less even to effectively help. As well identifying failure is no use at all, unless we can also resource how we help. To do that as she says, by calling schools with large numbers of children behind as failures, in order to get any extra help, is so negative. To label children as failures at any point in time, when we know children don’t the same or at same rate is also misleading and dangerous, especially when we can clearly show the Standards themselves are inaccurate and don’t fit accurately with existing assessment tools.
(2)Calling us failures because in comparison to other countries we have the biggest tail, is also incorrect. Yes we have a big tail, and yes we need to do something about it. However we cannot use the results to say it is the biggest tail in the OECD because unlike NZ, other countries don’t include all their children. E.G. Australia doesn’t include all its aboriginal children. Africa does not include all its children; Ireland doesn’t include all its Romney children etc. Using the comparison is political teacher bashing and is quite incorrect.
(3)How can the Minister state she is only interested in children succeeding when she chops the access to the 20 hours Early Child hood help, and tells Early Childhood Centres they can cover the shortfall by laying of qualifies teachers and hiring un trained people????? The children who are failing are desperately in need of as much access to Early Childhood help – to succeed they need it.
(4)That the opposition is just Union driven. Actually I don’t care who leads opposition to something that is academically and morally as wrong as National Standards. However this flies in the face of the most recent opposition to Standards from Auckland primary principals. This group is not Union driven, in fact there are (hopefully now were!) many National Party supporters contained within APPA. Their opposition covers from Low Decile to High Decile. They are no affiliated to the UNION, and in fact there are a number of those principals who are not union members!!
The Tai Tokerau Principals Association has been one of the loudest for the longest, in their opposition to Standards. I can assure you this is not lead by the Union.
So finally TOLLEY, tell us how, besides supposedly identifying children who are failing, exactly how National Standards will help improve one child’s learning….
Your points are entirely valid, Mr Newman. For the full OECD picture,”google” (how the h&ll did that become a verb??) the 2009 OECD report “Doing Better for Children”. You will note that NZ actually gets a bouquet for it’s underfunded education system. The bric-bats are for our poor performance in regard to child welfare and poverty. I wonder why Mrs Tolley never quotes those particular truths: inconvenient to her argument perhaps? Politically easier to give education a good kicking and then highlight the fact that it’s limping!
Diane Ravitch’s The Death and Life of the Great American School System” is a useful pointer. Especially given she’s been down the teacher-bashing anti-PC path, only to turn over a new leaf in more recent years.
Imagine a situation where teachers could be paid what they are truly worth? There are surely few professions more worthy of substantial reward for excellence.
Kelvin @ 10.07pm – I get your point but it is hardly the same thing.
Every teacher and parent that I know and have spoken to about this is really keen to some kind of yardstick brought it.
They have also said that as the NS are incorporating elements of assessment already used in schools, for many there won’t be/isn’t a major change.
It is not what is being brought in that seems to be the issue per se for these people, it is how the Minister has gone about it.
Everyone seems to be unanimous in their desire to have a trial period and think the whole thing has been rushed through the backdoor.
I also wonder whether Labour is in fact flogging a dead horse with respect to this issue – it’s just not gaining enough traction…..
I also find it very interesting how Labour seems to be anti these standards and the prospect that some children will, God forbid, fail yet you place such huge emphasis on ECE and the need for children to meet certain literacy & numeracy standards by the time they start school. Something that many children naturally fail as well, quite frankly, the expectations are far too high & unnecessary.
Interesting….
Rebecca the only politician I have seen calling for possible school entry standards is Anne Tolley.
Julie sorry, I think you have missed my point – while Labour have not expressed their desire to formalise entry standards to primary school, their emphasis on ECE and the underlying expectations that go with this imply that is what they believe in.
I’m still worried it is going to narrow the curriculum.
Intersting what you Ianmac, that the kids getting above average are saying they don’t have to work hard when they saw where they were sitting.
@Pat Newman: Well said in every respect. It helps to put some facts on the table though those who should be listening are not. And Anne Tolley has not listened or communicated about concerns. If not why not.
@Rebecca. The entry standards which help a great deal is the ability to listen and communicate effectively with other kids and adults. Being able to follow instructions. Being able to toilet and to blow the nose. To enjoy books.If ECE does the above things well I say that they need all the support that can get.
I think Anne Tolley did suggested that kids learn formally to read and use number before school entry under a pre-school National Standard.
A Mother: The kids in a decile 10 school Years7-8 were in interviews with parent and teacher for reporting process. These kids were above average but hard to motivate, and one of the by-products of continual assessment is that kids are lead to believe that I have made it. Very sad. (NCEA does this too.)
Instead kids should be helped to self evaluate and decide on ways to extend their skills and do even better next time. (Once I pass my drivers licence why bother to improve my driving?)
Ianmac re “I think Anne Tolley did suggested that kids learn formally to read and use number before school entry under a pre-school National Standard.”
Seriously? Where did she say that? I certainly hope not!
In terms of the entry standards the expectation that most primary schools have is that your child:
Know their name
Be well on their way to learning the alphabet
Know basic colour names
Know basic item names (words) such as chair, table or toilet
Use basic manners, sharing/taking turns/socialisation
Be toilet trained
Self-care – know how to dress/undress, put school bag away, eat out of lunch box etc.
It is bizarre that Anne Tolley is allowed to continue on drifting along in her little cloud where reality has no place – I can’t seriously believe she would be that stupid to try and tell parents & ECE teachers their child must know how to read before they start school. Ridiculous.
@A Mother – that’s a worry
@Ianmac agreed
I think she wanted to review Te Whariki and have a look at and possibly revise the literacy and numeracy standards in it. What ever that means.
Insert Maori expletive here!
Some older blogs that are interesting to look back on.
Here is an example of a Natioal Standard
http://blog.labour.org.nz/index.php/2010/04/03/an-example-chopper-tolleys-standard-for-year-4-reading/
Here is where the ECE standards were mentioned
http://blog.labour.org.nz/index.php/2010/04/01/save-our-kids-from-anne-tolley/
Here is what was cancelled that was pulling children up and helping them that was proven to work and canned by Anne to put National Standards in place instead.
http://blog.labour.org.nz/index.php/2010/03/17/tolley-has-another-shocker/
Okay my post is in moderation. Was the link to the post about the ECE standards
An example of a national standard in year 4
What was working that had been proven to be working to help children that were behind with literacy that Anne Tolley pulled to make room for National Standards.
Think it was due to being more than 2 links.
A Mother – I have no issue with Te Whaariki being revised, to me the ECE curriculum has far too much importance placed on it…and no I don’t believe home schooling…just in case you thought I might be that anti standard education!
Re “possibly revise the literacy and numeracy standards in it. What ever that means”….yes, I wonder what that means too.
Oh well, by the time any changes take effect our children will be long gone so my focus is more on primary school.
yes I just hope she doesn’t try for standards for preschool aged children. I hope she isn’t that stupid.
“I hope she isn’t that stupid.” I wouldn’t hold out too much hope there
Spud – have to agree with you….