As I feared, we stuffed up responding to Parata

As I feared, we stuffed up responding to Parata

Guest Blog by Kelvin Smythe

The propaganda, the culture of lying, and the control of institutions mean that education policies under National are almost impenetrable to wisdom and historical experience.

Response beyond the normal is required. All the old conventions should be null and void.

In recent posting, ‘A pivotal moment in primary education history: are we awake?' I wrote:

‘The overall matter is truly serious.’

‘I know it is hard for Wellington-based people to fully appreciate, but all the meetings, the insider information, the gossip, the rubbing shoulders, the purpose-based groupings, the sense of inclusiveness, the hi-mum moments – don’t matter a damn in these changed times.’

 

‘Huge damage is about to be wrought on the primary education system, the primary system as a whole. This is not the time for Wellington matters and ritualised saucer-licking, but time for system’s matters and really saying it as it is.’

‘Both teacher organisation leaders have the capacity to be much bigger than they are.’

‘This is the time to make a strong stand; this is the time to develop a comprehensive policy of change; this is the time for bold moves; this is the time to say things that are irresistible to the media; and of course, this is the time to leave that dreadful Forum.’

In the situation the most relevant words in my posting were: ‘this is the time for bold moves; this is the time to say things that are irresistible to the media …’

NZEI’s response was infinitesimal relative to the provocation and the opportunity provided by Hekia Parata’s pre-announcement of league tables. Its response was puny and routine (this morning’s response sweet, sincere, but too rational); NZPF’s I didn’t catch, but it raised no media waves. (I have read NZPF’s response this morning: sensible, well-expressed, but given the context, unmemorable.)

 

Parata’s announcement provided a platform to correct the lies and distortions; also the myths so firmly fixed in the public and media mind, for instance, that national standards were needed to identify children, and that national standards came without a cost to children’s learning.

I’m sorry to say, that teacher organisations don’t seem to have caught the direness of the situation; I sense they are holding back in interests of what they consider the wider interests of their members.

The teacher organisations needed to grab the initiative to say what needed to be said, needed to say something bold and to the point.

They didn’t.

The bombed.

We were asleep.

Why?

[The headline grabber I would have gone for is to announce that a campaign was to be begun to agitate for funding compensation for the harm caused by national standards. The particular focus being extra ancillary aides as a means to give special individual attention to children to compensate for national standards’ ill-learning effects.]

Parata’s tissue of lies, distortions, omissions, and misleading statements

Lie: ‘Until now we’ve had to rely only on NCEA data – at the end of compulsory schooling – to provide us with a picture of our education system.’

This is a whopper!

For 15 years we had the world-renowned and truly independent National Education Monitoring Project based in Dunedin which provided a terrific picture of the education system and encompassed all parts of the curriculum. National closed this down so it could muddy, it seems, the data waters and control education statistics. For a ‘picture of our education system’ we now have the narrowly focused, massively intrusive, dizzyingly complex, high stakes’ national standards, and NCEA. And NCEA is being systematically, but quite understandably in my view, manipulated in schools to push lower ability children through.

Lie: ‘NS data reported for the first time has set a baseline of years’ 1-8 learner achievement.’

This is a whopper!

For 15 years we had the world-renowned and truly independent National Education Monitoring Project based in Dunedin which provided a terrific picture of the education system and encompassed all parts of the curriculum. National closed this down so it could muddy, it seems, the data waters and control education statistics. For a ‘picture of our education system’ we now just have the narrowly focused, massively intrusive, dizzyingly complex, high stakes’ national standards, and NCEA. And NCEA is being systematically, but quite understandably in my view, manipulated in school to push lower ability children through.

Lie: ‘In maths, 72 per cent were at or above, and writing the figure was 68 per cent.’

Parata knows the figures are no-where near accurate. [By the way, the maths figure being so high is a give-away and an absurdity. We sure went to town on that one.]

Lie: ‘Parata said the first set of data was “powerful for identifying and providing support for all learners” ’

National standards do not serve that purpose; identifying and providing support for learners comes from where it always has come from: teachers working with children and non-high stakes’ testing.

Distortion, omission: ‘A concerning number of Maori and Pasifika children not meeting the standards.’

National standards were not needed to establish this.

What programmes has National funded over its four years to help lift the learning of Maori and Pasifika children?

What is the degree of damage done to the learning Maori and Pasifika children by national standards?

Distortion, omission: ‘Boys were also over-represented in not meeting the standard in reading and writing.’

National standards were not needed to establish this.

What programmes has National funded over its four years to help lift the learning of boys?

What is the degree of damage done by national standards to the learning of boys?

Lie, omission, distortion, misleading statement: ‘National standards data will now allow us to support all learners and target those who are behind much earlier and give them the help they need.

Utterly insulting, massively incorrect, and straight out nasty from this incompetent minister – what a show pony she is, taking away the mana from teachers in the way she does – to say national standards will mean teachers will identify early children falling behind is risible. Good heavens! Teachers are beside children everyday and regularly dispense a range of standardised tests, especially old reliable, PAT.

Oily rag is it?

What cant.

Distortion, misleading statement: ‘We also have a range of support in place to help learners, e.g. reading recovery.’

All the tools for a range of support were in place before national standards, for instance, reading recovery and ALiM.

As well, no extra money has been allocated to schools to make these fairly expensive processes available. This despite the greater need for their services arising from the increased poverty, and National’s song and dance about achievement and caring about the education of Maori and Pasifika children.

Lie, Distortion: Good quality data is absolutely essential … to achieve a system wide lift … to ensure all our learners leave school with the skills they need in modern society.’

Parata knows the data is rubbish, and almost certainly has some inkling that national standards’ data always will be.

As well, she would have read that 177 research academics said that national standards and league tables would be harmful to children’s learning – all children’s learning of all abilities

All this nonsense in a brief media release. It is rather an avalanche of dishonesty than a culture of it.

The teacher organisations should declare they have lost confidence in the minister’s ability to present education information in a fair and balanced way.

We must learn to speak our minds and let the consequences fall where the may.

National is making a wasteland and calling it education.

It restricts and impedes and calls it education for the 21^st century.

And the minister assumes a deadly freedom to lie, omit, and distort as if nobody will take the trouble to challenge her, or have the courage to make it stick.

Who is going to do it within the teacher organisations, or will it have to come from without?