Children – and teachers – must be allowed to fail
BY RICHARD LONG
Relevant offers
Comment
OPINION: There is nothing quite like the world of political correctness to provide farcical entertainment.
Each variant adds to life's rich tapestry. My favourite last week was the job centre in Britain, which initially declined an advertisement for a ''reliable'' worker on the grounds that unreliable workers could sue for discrimination.
That even left the BBC in the shade, with their continual squirming to avoid the use of ''terrorist''. Since the time of the Irish ''troubles'' the BBC, with its global reach, has taken the view that one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.
Rather than upset all the Irish in America, they came up with various euphemisms to avoid describing IRA bombers as terrorists. Then terrorists in Iraq were described as ''insurgents''. Even during the train and bus bombings in London, the perpetrators (of Middle Eastern rather than Celtic origin) were, in BBC language, ''misguided criminals''.
That reminded me of the wonderful educational euphemism for failure - ''deferred success'' - which Britain's Professional Association of Teachers tried to introduce a few years ago.
Unfortunately, this took the thought processes to New Zealand teachers and their bloody-minded opposition to national standards in primary and intermediate schools. And that produced a headache.
I can't help but feel sorry for Education Minister Anne Tolley as she valiantly battles away on this one. It would, after all, be easier to abandon the field to the teachers' union, as previous governments have done, continuing to leave pupils and their parents in the dark over performance and standards.
I don't know if the NZEI has taken over from the Labour Party in singing The Red Flag at conferences but, judging by their campaign, it would seem to be warranted.
Mrs Tolley, it seems to me, should have more support from her colleagues. After all, this is Government policy, not her private predilection. It was widely flagged as National Party policy pre-election. Why should teachers be able to subvert the declared policy of a democratically elected government?
Why should the wishes of so many parents be ignored?
Central to this clash is the fundamental need for parents and pupils to be aware of performance, and failings, so correction can be taken.
There is a complete lack of clarity at present.
Faced with the facts, some parents may even wish to use the additional support of outside tuition in extreme cases. We cannot go on for ever with the ''deferred success'' approach, pretending there is no such thing as failure.
This is delivering to employers a batch of school-leavers unable to read or write adequately, or to undertake basic maths. Some employers have had to institute basic in-house education systems.
Prime Minister John Key is on record as suggesting one in five pupils are being left behind. Teachers present heart-tugging examples of pupils considering themselves failures when faced with the sometimes unpalatable results from national standards systems.
But that can be addressed in work programme discussions with parents and pupils to try to regain lost ground. It should be seen as a warning alert, rather than a lasting stigma.
The alternative, to allow pupils and their parents to believe they are succeeding when they are not, is unconscionable and smacks of an easy way out for teachers and schools.
Inevitably, national standards will lead to an unofficial grading of schools based on their results and standards. This is anathema to many teachers, who see it as ''naming and shaming''. Offsetting that is a parental right to know. And poor ratings should spur these schools and teachers to do better.
Secondary schools are ranked and the system has not collapsed. While teachers seem reluctant to acknowledge pupil failure, they also regard teacher performance to be uniform. All teachers are equal, so therefore there is no need for performance pay.
What Mrs Tolley should do is to drop the performance pay grenade into the current mix. This would divert teachers' attention from national standards to their own pay.
They will argue strenuously that they are all equal but, as the electorate is only too aware, some are more equal than others.
- © Fairfax NZ News
Sponsored links
Newest First
Oldest First
What perplexes me, is: How Pita Sharples figures, that the national standards will be "dangerous" for Maori? Either it's dangerous for all, or it isn't.
Jack - with School Cert half of all kids were 'expected to fail' their exams. So there was a general expectation that you would fail. With University, there are no expectations of failure, you are free to succeed if you put the work in.
Bravo Richard. This article sums the whole thing up perfectly. The unions are an absolute disgrace.
I wonder how many supporters of national standards have actually had a good look at them. I have, and I can tell you this. There will not be agreement between schools on interpreting these standards and there will not be agreement between schools on determining whether a student has met these standards. The result will be glaring inconsistencies between schools. How will the MOE cope then? A small army of moderators employed to march up and down the country trying to enforce consistency between schools? You can then kiss good teaching goodbye - it will all be about training kids to jump through assessment hoops.
I must comment on school leavers not having adequate reading and writing skills. I left school years ago with a few School Cert passes Biology and Home Economics! Rather useless subjects and my maths and reading and english were below average. Ended up at uni later in life and got a BA degree. Still was below average in maths and english but got my degree with an A average. I am not surprised because getting A passes at uni is easy as pie.Was for me anyway and I am considered below average intelligence with an IQ of 80! This must mean that the standards expected at uni level are rather low and also you are paying for your degree. A tutor told us once that they don't like to fail a student unless there is an exceptional reason why they should be failed. I am back for Post Grad study this year and with my low IQ being 80 and below average in maths and english I expect to sail though again! So leaving school with below average maths and reading and english was good for me!
I hope the new standards will encourage more trust of schools and teachers by parents and pupils. The NCEA examinations diluted that trust, and the reports on my children's progress diluted my trust of the system. What was reported to me by my children's teachers was that they were doing ok when what they really meant was for 'that particular school', they were doing ok. I only found out when the children changed schools that no, they were not according to the standards of the new school. Professionalism and trust is what its all about.
The whole 'league tables' "ant-failure' thing is a sideshow to the main issues regarding the proposed National Standards, and it's a pity the writer of this letter appears to have been sucked in to believing that is that is what the opposition is all about. It isn't. We already have standards and we already know when our kids are failing, I have no problem interpreting my children's tests and know exaclty how they are doing, so let's not pretend that 'National Standards' will give us standards where there were none before. Let me say this clearly - the National Standards are seriously flawed and will not deliver any improved benefits to our deducation system. As a professional in a relevant scientific field, I can state categorically that there are huge problems with this flawed scheme and I can't believe there isn't one person in the Ministry of Ed who hasn't picked that up. If the proposed scheme were handed to me by a tertiary student, they'd be lucky to get a C+. So lets tackle the real issues of this shoddy mess and stop pretending all the controversy is about not wanting to use the word 'fail'.
NZ police access Facebook evidence
Promoter dismisses bike helmet harm study
Lloyd Morrison: Leader of the pack
A burning issue: When coffins get too big
Woman, 91, rues not hitting thief with stick
Phoenix confident of finals spot
Police looking for missing Featherston woman
Dead woman's family says thanks
Infratil founder Lloyd Morrison dies
Warning: Man approaching children
NZ police access Facebook evidence
Plucky mother intent on recovery
Baby murder-accused sobs, sniffles in court
Lloyd Morrison: Leader of the pack
Promoter dismisses bike helmet harm study
Will bill make food safer or be a form of control?
Quakes blow Wellington's benchmark
EU courts Kiwis for science grants
ERA awards restructured employee $21,000
Apple factory hacked amid global activist stunt
Shoppers spend more on credit, debit cards
Helmet law halves cyclist numbers
Police looking for missing Featherston woman
Infratil founder Lloyd Morrison dies
Happy Feet at Wellington Airport
Dead woman's family says thanks
Phoenix confident of finals spot
Warning: Man approaching children
Crash blocks SH1 on the Kapiti Coast
Should bicycle helmets be mandatory?
Wouldn't it be great if teachers would just be able to teach, instead of doing hundreds of other jobs that they are required to do. Schools having to put in place programmes so children have something to eat before school so they can learn, having to do papertrails to get children that are struggling the help they need, only to have it turned down because there is no more government funding for special needs children. Teachers then have to deal with students with learning and behaviour problems disrupting classrooms because there is no help there. Maybe Anne Tolley and John Key need to sit in on a normal classroom and see how things work. I notice none of the National MP's took up the offer to walk a day in the shoes of Support Staff in Schools, maybe they need to walk to week in the shoes of a primary school teacher.