Standard of learning

CLAIRE ALLISON

As primary schools prepare to introduce National Standards, features editor Claire Allison tries to figure out what she and other parents can expect to get from the new system, and why schools are so concerned.

The new National Standards for primary school students have been controversial from day one.

But at this stage, despite protests from the education sector, the Minister of Education has remained firm, and schools are obliged to report to parents against the standards by the end of this year.

The standards are descriptions of what students should know and be able to do in reading, writing and maths, at different points of their schooling from years 1 to 8. They were developed by Ministry of Education staff, academics and technical experts.

Therein lies a key element of the protests against the standards and their implementation. Educators say they weren't involved in their development, yet an open letter from Education Minister Anne Tolley says "thousands of board members, principals, teachers and parents also took part in the consultation".

The Ministry of Education says the standards will lead to improvements in student achievement by providing sound information about how students are progressing in relation to these national expectations. Identifying problems early will allow schools, teachers and parents to make informed decisions about how to improve the student's achievement and to provide appropriate support.

"Timely and targeted interventions will make the difference."

Teachers are to use the standards to:

plan and teach what children need to learn in reading, writing and maths across all curriculum subjects

work out where each child is at

work out each child's next steps and set goals for learning

report at least twice a year about each child's progress and achievement in relation to the standards.

Those reports are based on an an Overall Teacher Judgment (OTJ), which is to be based on the student's work, peer and self-assessment, classroom observation and formal and informal assessment activities. Those twice-yearly reports have to be in "plain language", and that's been a selling point to parents.

South Canterbury primary schools presently use a mixture of reporting methods – three-way or student-led conferences, written reports and some form of record book.

Schools can use templates provided by the Ministry of Education, develop their own, or modify the reports they already provide to parents to include specific reporting against national standards in reading, writing and maths.

The ministry recommends that all reports on the three key elements of reading, writing and maths contain:

the student's current learning goals

the student's progress and achievement in relation to the National Standards

what the school will do to support the student's learning

what parents/families can do to support the child's learning

results from assessments the student has undertaken

Schools have been told they can use a number of ways to show parents how the child is performing against the standards. The ministry suggests a four-point scale – above, at, below, or well-below the expected standard. Or terms used in the past can be adapted – working towards, working at, working above, or approaching, meeting or exceeding the expected standard.

Since the standards were announced, parental concern resulted in the advice that schools would have the flexibility to report in ways that met the needs of their communities, as long as the reports were measuring students against the standards. Parents were concerned about students being labelled, or schools no longer being able to use reporting practices parents were already happy with.

The overall premise is that if a student is working at or above the standards during their primary school years, they should be on track to leave secondary school with NCEA Level 2 or similar qualification.

It all sounds good. But South Canterbury principals and teachers say there are fish hooks, and they've been battling to put the brakes on.

Ian Poulter is the president of the South Canterbury Primary Principals Association. He says there's a need to separate out two aspects of the proposal. One is reporting to parents in plain English. The other is the standards themselves. No school is going to argue about the need to report to parents in plain English.

"Most schools in this district have been reporting to parents very well against the curriculum. But it would be true to say that there's room for improvement in some schools, to make the reports easier to understand and interpret."

The standards themselves are a tool against which to monitor progress. Poulter says there is no evidence or research worldwide that suggests national standards will raise student achievement. "The evidence is that the opposite will occur."

The standards are aspirations, not the norms. This could pose problems. "We have been reporting against the national curriculum and where children should be. Now the Government is wanting us to aim higher than the current situation. So the goal posts have shifted."

That could see a child previously reported as achieving well to appear to be performing at a lower level.

Principals are concerned at the rush to implement the standards and the flaws they see in them.

"As with any significant change in the real world, in the workplace, and at schools, if that change is going to really take, then you work with people, and you take them with you, so they take ownership and have the passion for it.

"But we have been given them without any consultation from our sector. And if we criticise, we get told off. That's kind of the way we feel we have been dealt with."

He says there are errors in the standards. Some don't read correctly, different techniques for assessing students' achievements can provide different results.

"Principals are not against the concept of improving achievement. But we are against something that's rushed, before the proper preparation, before they're fully understood. We've been given a manual and it's to be done yesterday. It takes time to read the manual, understand it, interpret it and do it reliably. We want time to do this properly."

Poulter says all schools want to see under-achieving students do better, but he says recent research suggests that the 20 per cent "tail" of students considered under-achieving by the time they leave primary school may not be that large.

"The National Education Monitoring Programme that's been done out of Otago for a number of years now, in year 7 and 8 students it's not a 20 per cent tail, it's a 10 per cent tail. The other 10 per cent do have the skills, but they are not motivated. And that might be because the high school style of learning doesn't motivate them, or their home backgrounds, or situations in their lives."

Poulter is quick to add that he's not accepting that 10 per cent is acceptable.

"You always want to minimise the tail."

But he says the $36 million being poured into the implementation of National Standards may have had a greater impact if it had been targeted on schools or students who were not succeeding.

Principals are concerned that the introduction of standards could see New Zealand's exceptional curriculum narrowing. If the focus is on reading, writing and maths standards, and those results are out there for the world to see, they question of the risk of that being at the expense of the broader curriculum.

Schools' results being in the public arena leads to the equally contentious issue of league tables. Ministry of Education website information about the standards provides the "frequently asked question": Do schools have to compare students to their class/school/other schools?, and answers that the only requirement is to assess the student's progress and achievement in relation to the National Standards.

The minister recently said that no viable alternative to league tables had been found. Poulter says that's come as no surprise. Schools were well aware that the moment common data was collected, it would be available for league tables.

"But if we want the children to do well and look good in league tables, will that result in a narrowing of the curriculum?

"I'd like to think not."

- © Fairfax NZ News