Why I am standing for EDUCANZ (anyway)

Source

Let's get a few things straight first.

Of course I am disappointed that we are losing a democratic means of voting on at least some of the council.

Of course I am disappointed that we are moving from a Code of Ethics to a Code of Conduct.

In fact I campaigned against these very things here and here.

And whilst I understand that PPTA's ballot is a matter of principle and was voted on, I simply do not understand how it will change anything.

Whether PPTA and members choose to "not accept nomination or appointment to the EDUCANZ council nor participate in the body’s consultation processes" or not does not change the fact that it will go ahead...regardless. 


PPTA have made a stand (fair enough, I respect that) but they have also ensured that there will be fewer left leaning and incredibly important voices missing in the establishment of EDUCANZ and throughout the code of conduct process. This is a crying shame.

I am also disappointed that in choosing to stand for EDUCANZ anyway it means I am forced to step down from the PPTA. I am a person who has deeply and passionately supported the PPTA as a member and as a part of the PPTA ICT Advisory Group. But I respect PPTA has made a decision, so I will leave, for now at least.

In terms of why I want to stand for EDUCANZ, here is some of my thinking.

I believe I could bring an articulate and positive secondary voice to EDUCANZ. I am passionate and well informed about educational issues and constantly seek ways to support and challenge NZ educators to be future-focused, open and reflective, as well as being recognised as the hardworking professionals they are.

I am very eager to be part of this establishment phase of EDUCANZ and would relish the opportunity to be involved in developing a vision for professional learning and ways we may lift the status of the teaching profession and publicly recognise the role quality teaching and educational leadership plays in raising student achievement. I also hope to be actively involved in the consultation process for developing the Code of Conduct. If it is going to happen, I want to do what I can to ensure it is the best it can be. 

As well as this, I believe I could bring a future-focused lens that will be important when reviewing or further developing the existing Graduating Teacher Standards and Registered Teacher Criteria - remember there is much more to EDUCANZ than non-democratic selection processes and a Code of Conduct. 

If we care about the future of our sector, well I reckon we need to be willing to be "at the table" talking about all of the issues.

To close, I want to come back to the statement made by PPTA “Members of EDUCANZ must understand that they will serve the minister and the government of the day ‒ not the teaching profession.”

I simply don't agree.

Handpicking aside, this council will be an independent statutory body which means it will not serve the minster anywhere near as directly as it does now. 

And I do I see myself as serving the teaching profession...in everything I do. At present I am a member of the NZTC (as secondary representative), the NetSafe board, N4L reference board, AUT Ed Futures team, NZQA brainstorming group and a member of Minister Kaye’s 21st Century Education Reference Group as well as being a Deputy Principal at a new secondary school where we make it our business to share our practice as widely as possibly. Aside from my main job I get paid nothing for any other roles. I do it because I am driven by a deep seated belief that we must change education to better serve the young people of New Zealand. I don't pretend to ever speak for the teaching profession, but I do serve it. Proudly. 

Of course I may not succeed in getting on EDUCANZ. At least I will (in my mind at least) have done the right thing.

At least I know I will have tried.

Share:

EDUCANZ - between a rock and a hard place

I feel the need to begin this post with a few disclaimers:

• I am a passionate and committed PPTA member. 
• I am current a member of a NZ Teachers Council. 
• I am feeling genuinely stuck...between a rock and hard place. 

 As many of you will have seen, EDUCANZ announced that nominations are now open.

Source: http://www.education.govt.nz/

This was followed (not unexpectedly) by an announcement from PPTA that a ballot would be held to determine whether they will be refusing to put up (or accept) nominations and whether they will be instructing members to do the same.

Source: Radio NZ

And of course I completely understand where PPTA is coming from. As one of the many who fought a number of the legislations that ended up in the Education Amendment Act 2015 I submitted a written submission and and presented an oral submission that clearly outline what I did and still do see as major flaws in this act.

There are several issues with the act in relation to EDUCANZ in particular. 

There is the issue that the process for forming the council is clearly undemocratic, with nominations being open to all, but final selection being made by the Minister of Education. This is of course even harder to accept when you consider that the council is actually funded by the teachers themselves.  

There is also the issue of changing the code of ethics (which are viewed as aspirational) to a code of conduct (which suggest a baseline for behaviour) which to be fair IS insulting, particularly in light of the claim that one of the aims of the new council forming is to elevate the status of teachers??

Add to this the concerns around the stated aim to "to ensure that appraisals made by professional leaders for the issue and renewal of practising certificates achieve a reasonable and consistent standard, by auditing and moderating the appraisals made for at least 10% of the practising certificates issued or renewed in each year " Source: Section 382 Education Amendment Act 2015 which I actually wouldn't have a huge issue with if it weren't for the implications this will have for council employee workloads and the potential practicing certificate fee increase this will undoubtedly lead to. 

A fee increase in and of itself don't actually cause me undue concern - the reality is that we have been paying comparatively low fees and even if we weren't about to change councils a fee increase of some sort would have to occur to sustain even business as usual.

Add to this the fact that I see real potential in the forming of EDUCANZ. I believe there are several functions that will be of benefit to our teaching profession such as those outlined below:

Source: Education Amendment Act 2015

There is also the small fact that a big part of me would love to be on EDUCANZ. I have loved my short stint on the NZTC and can already see huge potential for the way their work may be honoured, continued and built upon to develop and even stronger body for leading the education sector.

Add to this the fact that I have seen first hand the excellent work that the present staff do - remember EDUCANZ is not just a council it is a team of professionals that do the hard work of processing registrations, approving and reviewing ITE courses,  delivering PD and managing competence and disciplinary processes. If we turn our back on EDUCANZ are we also turning our back on them?

Consider also that "EDUCANZ will be independent of Government. Unlike NZTC, which is a crown entity, EDUCANZ will be an independent statutory body and will be able to make independent comment on education policy. This will enable EDUCANZ to lead the public debate on education.

The EDUCANZ Council will set its strategic direction in consultation with the sector." Source: EDCANZ Transition. Surely this is an excellent shift.

And then there is the million dollar question - will snubbing the nomination process and the council even make a difference? Will a vote of no confidence be enough to result in a change of legislation? Could we instead be presented with a situation where no left-leaning, future thinking folks stand and give Minister Parata absolutely no choice but to appoint conservative, status-quo protecting council members. Of course, she may well do this anyway, but there a part of me saying if I don't put my hat (or the hat of like-minded folk) in the ring there really is NO chance of having a voice for a good chunk of our sector. 

Yes, we could all disengage and stand shoulder to shoulder, resolute that nominating someone or nominating yourself is by it's very virtue acceptance of fundamentally flawed legislation - but I genuinely don't think it is as straight forward as that. 

As a active, passionate PPTA member I understand how unions operate and not engaging with EDUCANZ could work. 

I am however concerned that my freedom as an individual to make my own choice may (depending on the outcome of the ballot) paint me as a picket line crossing "scab" and may indeed make me vulnerable. Which is sort of ironic considering reducing one's vulnerability is the very reason many join PPTA in the first place. Or (again) maybe PPTA's strategy won't work and EDUCANZ will survive AND we will have missed a chance of at least nominating a genuinely diverse group of people to be considered for the council. 

As I said at the beginning I am conflicted and I am increasing feeling that I am stuck between a rock and a hard place.

At the end of the day, I still keep coming back to the voice in my head and the feeling in my gut that says if there is any chance that you can sit at the table - you should (at least bloody well try to) sit at the table! 

To be honest all of this just makes me appreciate what Ernest Hemingway's reportedly once said - 'Never sit a table when you can stand at the bar.'

Share:

Graduating Teacher Standards - Are they future-focused enough?

As you may (or may not) know, one of the many and varied roles of the New Zealand Teachers Council is to approve and review all Initial Teacher Education programmes. It was during my first council meeting where a number of the new Masters ITE programmes were being approved that the question came to me (once again): Are the Graduating Teacher Standards future focused enough?? The reason I asked myself and others this, is that I felt the courses we were looking at could have offered more. It wasn't that they weren't rigorous and well thought out, it was just that they felt lacking, particularly in the 'future-focused skills' area. When I voiced these concerns the response I got was, that we couldn't demand the courses to include anything that wasn't demanded in the graduating teacher standards. On reading the standards more closely I am not so sure. Surely if you take the second point of Standard One "have pedagogical content knowledge appropriate to the learners and learning areas of their   programme" and place this statement into a 21st century context aren't we demanding that courses provide them with the appropriate pedagogical content of the 21st century? Or are these standards too open to interpretation? Does one person's view of 'appropriate pedagogical content' vary so greatly that it in a sense becomes redundant? I can of course understand why the standards were written this way, anything too specific would become outdated within a heartbeat. But that said, is there something more we need to add?

I realise my ability to influence these discussions might be hampered by the fact that NZTC is now in it's twilight hours as we stare down the barrel of EDUCANZ taking over, still, no harm in trying.

So if the Graduating Teacher Standards in their present state are not (in my opinion) ensuring we have cutting edge, future-focused ITE programmes, what needs to change? Or is it not the place of the standards to determine this, it actually the providers themselves? My opinion is it probably a combination of the two. Firstly, you would hope that providers would take it upon themselves to ensure their courses were as future-focused as possible, I mean that is what they are preparing teachers for isn't it. Surely the courses wouldn't be designed to maintain the status quo? It's possible that our desire to base all practice on a strong evidence base is going to limit innovation in these courses. If you are only willing to offer what has proven to work in the past, then surely we have an issue. In terms of the graduating teacher standards changing, I think it is less about change and more about providing a current and future focused appendices to support the standards. This could be a document that gets reviewed annually, informed by what is being seen during ERO reports and areas that need focused on right now (I apologise if this doc already exists and I just don't know about it...). In a way I'd liken it to how I imagine the WOF system works (or seems to work from the outside), the same things might be on the list each year, but you get the sense they have another list somewhere that gives them an area to focus on, because current stats suggest it is an area that needs addressing. Wouldn't it be great if we had a group of innovators, risk takers and trail-blazers who helped to inform this secondary list of requirements. Recommended foci might include ensuring that every new teacher has researched how a range of IT interventions might best be used to support effective pedagogies. That all new teachers know how to make the most of a BYOD classroom environment. All new teachers would begin their career well versed in the work of Rachel Bolstad and Jane Gilbert, with Sue McDowall, Ally Bull, Sally Boyd and Rosemary Hipkins and the paper Supporting future-oriented learning and teaching - a New Zealand perspective and understand why we must prepare our students for the 'knowledge age' and prepare them for being increasing self-directed and self-reliant. And the likes of Professor Welby Ings might encourage teachers to value creative expression over rote learned "Excellence".

Maybe if we provided these annually updated insights into what our Graduating Teacher Standards look like in our current and future contexts we could make them available to all teachers, to provide an innovative and future-focused support document for our Registered Teacher Criteria as well. Then, taking it a step further, why don't we use these innovative, future focused, status quo challenging ideas as a basis for free online MOOCs available to all educators that could share their learning through an online teacher community (surely NZTC...or EDUCANZ and N4L's Pond could nail this one) and learning reflections could be make up part of a teachers online portfolio for appraisal. Okay. Now I'm getting sidetracked. But you get my gist, graduating teacher standards (and maybe even RTCs) are not enough in isolation to ensure that all ITE programmes are producing not only competent teachers, but innovative and future-focused educators as well.

The graduating teacher standards as the exist at present are below. Have a read and let me know what you think.

Future-focused or protecting the status quo?

Graduating Teacher Standards: Aotearoa New Zealand

These standards recognise that the Treaty of Waitangi extends equal status and rights to Māori and Pākehā alike.

Graduates entering the profession will understand the critical role teachers play in enabling the educational achievement of all learners.

Professional Knowledge 
Standard One: Graduating Teachers know what to teach

1. have content knowledge appropriate to the learners and learning areas of their programme
2. have pedagogical content knowledge appropriate to the learners and learning areas of their   programme
3. have knowledge of the relevant curriculum documents of Aotearoa New Zealand.
4. have content and pedagogical content knowledge for supporting English as an Additional Language (EAL) learners to succeed in the curriculum

Standard Two: Graduating Teachers know about learners and how they learn

1. have knowledge of a range of relevant theories and research about pedagogy, human development and learning.
2. have knowledge of a range of relevant theories, principles and purposes of assessment and evaluation.
3. know how to develop metacognitive strategies of diverse learners. 
4. know how to select curriculum content appropriate to the learners and the learning context.

Standard Three: Graduating Teachers understand how contextual factors influence teaching and learning

1. have an understanding of the complex influences that personal, social, and cultural factors may have on teachers and learners.
2. have knowledge of tikanga and te reo Māori to work effectively within the bicultural contexts of Aotearoa New Zealand.
3. have an understanding of education within the bicultural, multicultural, social, political, economic and historical contexts of Aotearoa New Zealand.

Professional Practice
Standard Four: Graduating Teachers use professional knowledge to plan for a safe, high quality teaching and learning environment

1. draw upon content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge when planning, teaching and evaluating. 
2. use and sequence a range of learning experiences to influence and promote learner achievement.
3. demonstrate high expectations of all learners, focus on learning and recognise and value diversity.
4. demonstrate proficiency in oral and written language (Māori and/or English), in numeracy and in ICT relevant to their professional role.
5. use te reo Māori me ngā tikanga-a-iwi appropriately in their practice. 
6. demonstrate commitment to and strategies for promoting and nurturing the physical and emotional safety of learners. 

7. Standard Five: Graduating Teachers use evidence to promote learning
8. systematically and critically engage with evidence to reflect on and refine their practice. 
9. gather, analyse and use assessment information to improve learning and inform planning.
10. know how to communicate assessment information appropriately to learners, their parents/caregivers and staff.

Professional Values & Relationships
Standard Six: Graduating Teachers develop positive relationships with learners and the members of learning communities

1. recognise how differing values and beliefs may impact on learners and their learning.
2. have the knowledge and dispositions to work effectively with colleagues, parents/caregivers, 
3. families/whānau and communities.
4. build effective relationships with their learners.
5. promote a learning culture which engages diverse learners effectively.
6. demonstrate respect for te reo Māori me ngā tikanga-a-iwi in their practice. 

Standard Seven: Graduating Teachers are committed members of the profession

1. uphold the New Zealand Teachers Council Code of Ethics/Ngā Tikanga Matatika. 
2. have knowledge and understanding of the ethical, professional and legal responsibilities of teachers. 
3. work co-operatively with those who share responsibility for the learning and wellbeing of learners.
4. are able to articulate and justify an emerging personal, professional philosophy of teaching and learning. 

Source: NZTC Website

Share:

Why I am standing for the NZTC and why you should vote in the upcoming election!

You can join my campaign page here to keep updated

First up, why am I standing for the New Zealand Teachers Council?

My reasons are two-fold. 

The first being that I believe I would be a great addition to the New Zealand Teachers Council. I am passionate and well informed about educational issues and am constantly seeking ways that I can both support and challenge NZ educators to be future-focused, sharing and reflective as well as being recognised by the wider community as the hardworking professionals that they are. I believe New Zealand educators desire to be both supported through ongoing professional learning and rigorous appraisal systems and challenged to be adaptive experts who are expected (and supported) to evolve their practice constantly to ensure they are meeting the needs of all of their learners. I believe that if I were to be elected to the NZTC I will be a positive and passionate voice for secondary educators.

My second reason is that this is the last chance (if the current plans proceed) New Zealand educators will have to elect their own representatives on the teachers council...even when it is the teachers' registration fees that actually fund the council. As many of you will be aware the NZTC is due to be disbanded in the near future (most likely next year) and will be then be replaced by Education Council of Aotearoa New Zealand, otherwise know as EDUCANZ. Irregardless of several rounds of consultation and many many educators voicing their concerns, plans have proceeded pretty much unchanged and there are many areas of deep concern. The two main issues I would like to raise awareness of are:

• The new EDUCANZ will be formed through undemocratic means, teachers will lose the right to elect members as they can at present. Instead all members of EDUCANZ will be appointed by the Minister of Education.
• EDUCANZ will replace the aspirational 'Code of Ethics' with what I believe to be a patronising 'Code of Conduct'.

I believe if I were to be elected as the secondary representative on NZTC I could use this opportunity (even if it is short-lived) to highlight issues surrounding the transition to EDUCANZ that I believe have not been heard or listened to during the consultation period. It is simply not good enough that an entire sector of highly qualified educators are not being recognised as the professionals they are. I believe my presence on the NZTC in it's final months will give all secondary educators the opportunity to have a loud, articulate voice to communicate how we feel about the formation of EDUCANZ. 

Why you should vote!
Of course I hope you vote for me, but irregardless of whether you can or do, the most important thing is, that if you are a registered educator - you must vote! This may be the last chance to challenge the perception that educators do not care about having the opportunity to elect their own representatives. We must show that we value this right and that we deserve to maintain the right to vote in at least a proportion of our own council.

Please share this post widely and ensure all registered educators are aware of the changes afoot. Below is the information from the EDUCANZ transition website that outlines the changes that are planned and the differences between the current NZTC and the future EDUCANZ.

Broader Scope
The proposed EDUCANZ remit is wider than that of the current Council and would include leadership as well as quality teaching across the early childhood education and schooling sectors.

EDUCANZ would be independent of Government
Unlike NZTC, which is a crown entity, EDUCANZ would be an independent statutory body and would be able to make independent comment on education policy. This would enable EDUCANZ to lead the public debate on education.

The EDUCANZ Council would set its strategic direction in consultation with the sector.

The EDUCANZ Council would be skills-based and all appointments made by the Minister
The new Council would have less members (nine versus the current 11 on NZTC). Candidates would be sought through an open nominations process based on specific criteria, that as a minimum would include taking in to account candidates':

• Knowledge of Education

• Experience of governance

• Leadership experience and skills

• Financial skills

• Understanding of the partnership principles of the Treaty of Waitangi

At least five candidates from this nomination process would be appointed by the Minister together with the balance being selected by the Minister. In making appointments the Minister would also be required to have regard for the collective skills, experience and knowledge making up the overall Council.

A minimum of five of the members would be people holding teacher registration and a practising certificate.

By comparison, the NZTC Board has 11 members, with four members directly appointed by the Minister of Education, three members appointed by the Minister following nomination by NZEI, NZSTA (School Trustees Association), PPTA and four members elected by the sector.

Registration and Practising Certificates would be separated
Currently, registration (to recognise membership of the profession) and practising certificates (focussed on assessing on-going competence of teachers) are combined. It is proposed that separate registration and practising certificates would be issued, in line with other professions.

Limited Authorities to Teach (LATs) could be linked to a person
Currently, LATs are issued for a specified position, location and time period. Under the proposed legislation LATs can be applied to a person as well as a specific position.

Changes to disciplinary proceedings
EDUCANZ would be able to investigate matters without having to wait for a complaint to be raised and all matters of serious misconduct would be automatically referred to the Disciplinary Tribunal. A member of the governing board would not need to be on the Disciplinary Tribunal, which is a current requirement.

Code of Conduct
EDUCANZ would develop a code of conduct to replace the current code of ethics.

See the EDUCANZ transition website for more details: 
http://www.educanztransition.org.nz/about-educanz/what-is-the-difference-between-educanz-and-nztc/

Share:

EDUCANZ - Here's my oral submission to the Education and Science Select Committee

Oral Submission to Education and Science Select Committee 

Education Amendment Bill (No 2)

Areas I would like to highlight are:
lack of teacher representation
lack of a democratic process
expanded functions of the Educational Council of Aotearoa New Zealand
changing the Code of Ethics to Code of Conduct
expansion of the Limited Authority to Teach

Lack of Teacher Representation
The lack of teacher representation (Section 380 and Schedule 22) is a major issue. The complete absence of elected teacher positions marks an absolute departure from democratic process. I believe this undermines teachers as professionals and suggests that teacher voice is not valued in decision making related to EDUCANZ.

Look if you will to the Medical Council of New Zealand:

Medical Council of New Zealand
We are governed by a 12-member council appointed by the Minister of Health.
The Council comprises:
four doctors elected by the profession
four doctors appointed by the Minister of Health
four laypersons. Note: a layperson is someone who is not registered (or qualified to be registered), as a health practitioner.

By law, the majority of Council members must be doctors.
Source: https://www.mcnz.org.nz/about-us/

Nursing Council of New Zealand
The Nursing Council itself is an organisation established under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act. The board of the Council is made up of nine (three of which are elected) members six of these are nurses and three are laypeople. The work of the Council is supported by the Chief Executive/Registrar and staff.
Source: http://www.nursingcouncil.org.nz/General-Public

Veterinary Council of New Zealand
There are seven members. Three of these are elected by veterinarians. Two are lay people appointed by the Minister for Primary Industries. One member is a veterinarian also appointed by the Minister. The seventh member is the Academic Programme Director of the Faculty of Veterinary Science at Massey University.
Source: http://www.vetcouncil.org.nz/about.php

Of these examples I would suggest a similar process to the Medical Council for appointment and spread of representation would be far more equitable, representative and democratic. So often we hear the need for teachers to be treated as or regarded as “professionals”, similar, one would hope, to how doctors are regarded. I would suggest that having a similar approach to Council formation, would be an excellent start.

Remember, teachers are in fact the people who fund the Council, surely, it would only seem fair that the Council made possible by teacher registration funds was at least in part elected by the teaching community.

Expanded functions of the Council
Another area of concern (at least without further information) is the expanded functions of the Council. It would seem that Council is going to have an increased leadership role over the profession. It would also seem that the Council will be disseminating best practice and fostering development of the profession. Whilst best practice and professional development is integral to raising teacher performance, it is also incredibly important that this leadership comes from within the profession and not from an external body. If the Council was definitely made up of at least eight highly regarded current practitioners this would not be of concern. However, at present, the make-up of the Council looks like it will not be representative of the teaching community at all. We are professionals, we have a vast pool of expertise within our community. Teachers must be represented, they must be recognised and they must be the people who lead their peers.

If, as you state in Section 382, the functions of the Education Council are as follows:

• to provide leadership to teachers and direction for the education profession:
• to enhance the status of teachers and education leaders:
• to identify and disseminate best practice in teaching and leadership and foster the education profession’s continued development in light of research, and evidence of changes in society and technology,

then you will need the Educational Council of Aotearoa to have mana, to have gravitas amongst New Zealand educators. This will only be achieved if educators have a sense of ownership of the Council.

Changing code of ethics to code of conduct
Another area of concern is the change of Code of Ethics to a Conduct of Conduct. Ethics is integral to the teaching profession, a shift to focus on conduct, or rather behaviour is simply insulting. It would suggest we as a profession need our behaviour monitored, rather than abiding by a set of ethical guidelines. This to me is preposterous. Again, we are professionals who deserve to be treated in the highest regard. In an age where the rhetoric of the classroom is shifting away from conduct and behaviour and is engaging increasingly in dispositional curricula that looks to develop ethical, world aware young people it seems almost absurd that the Council would like to move backwards in their language and approaches.

We need to ask the question, why the change of language needs to take place. Looking at the definitions of each word, it would seem that ethics is inclusive of the notion of conduct. This seems an unnecessary shift.

Definition of ethics
Moral principles that govern a person’s behaviour or the conducting of an activity: medical ethics also enter into the question
The branch of knowledge that deals with moral principles: neither metaphysics nor ethics is the home of religion
Source: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/ethics?q=ethics

Definition of conduct
The manner in which a person behaves, especially in a particular place or situation: they were arrested for disorderly conduct a code of conduct for directors of listed companies
The manner in which an organization or activity is managed or directed: the conduct of the elections
Source: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/conduct?q=conduct

Other models existing:
New Zealand Medical Association maintains a Code of Ethics  - http://www.nzma.org.nz/sites/all/files/Code_of_Ethics.pdf

Limited Authorities to Teach
A final area of concern outlined in this bill (Section 365) is the changes in provisions for Limited Authorities to Teach which will  mean that someone “with specialist skills but not a teaching qualification” can be authorised to teach for three years at a time without the employer having to prove that they have tried unsuccessfully to fill the position with a trained and qualified teacher. Whilst I believe it is becoming increasingly important for schools to partner with the wider community and to access the expertise of a range of specialists, I do not believe that this change is necessary.

The present model does suffice:

At present LATs can be issued for:

Up to Three Year LAT's will be issued for:
qualified to level 6 or above relating to role AND:
part time (up to 0.5) specialist teachers (such as a language specialist)
itinerant teachers
guidance counsellors (with teaching responsibilities)
applicants participating in initial teacher education programmes (only until the qualification is complete).

Up to Two Year LAT's will be issued for:
Māori medium settings
alternative education centres / special character settings / in a school in support of secondary-tertiary partnerships
isolated rural settings (using MOE criteria).

Up to One Year LAT's will be issued for:
day to day relievers
positions for which it is currently difficult to secure a registered teacher.

The amendment bill states:
Section 365 Purpose of limited authority to teach
The purpose of granting a limited authority to teach is to enable employers to have access to skills that are in short supply and to enable those with specialist skills but not a teaching qualification to teach.

All this will do is undermine the very profession that you suggest you are trying to elevate. It infers that registration and even teaching qualifications are not valued, or even required. If the government believes that the present teaching qualifications do not provide the skill set needed in schools, I would suggest you redirect your focus to those delivering the qualifications and not undermine an entire nation of registered teachers.

What is the actual reason for this?
There are three things an educator must be able to do: know the learner, know the New Zealand Curriculum and know what effective pedagogy feel like. That is why we must employ trained and qualified teachers, and look to simply ‘engage’ specialists.

If the issue is that the present skill set of teachers is not meeting the needs of the schools and students, then we need to address this in other ways. We can not simply undermine trained and qualified teachers with what equates to a ‘workaround’.

Summary
In summary, I have a number of real concerns about the aforementioned changes to the Education Amendment Bill. It is absolutely essential that the Council is representative of the teaching community, and that a democratic process is used to establish it. Without this representation, the increased functions of the Council is deeply concerning. The change of the Code of Ethics to a more menial Code of Conduct is also deeply troubling. This compounded with the elevation of “unqualified teacher” suggests an incredible lack of trust and low regard for the registered and qualified teachers of New Zealand. I would like to finish this submission by repeating my earlier refrain - teachers must be represented, they must be recognised and they must be the people who lead their peers.

Put bluntly, if this bill goes through as is, you are condoning the establishment of an educational autocracy. In a country that values democratic process I can only imagine the proposals outlined in the bill are actually an embarrassment.

Thank you.

Notes from oral submission by Claire Amos

Share: