A storm has blown up this week in New Zealand as people reacted to plans in the budget to cut teacher numbers, primarily affecting intermediate schools.
The whole sorry saga was a shambles. Once it became clear that some schools would lose up to 7 teachers, the government hastily backed down and found a mysterious $20 Million with which to cap losses at two teachers per school. Parents and teachers and even many pupils were suddenly moved to ask what the government is doing to our education system, what its plans are, and whether it actually thinks things through very carefully before trying to implement them. After all, if they can miscalculate the rejigging of technology teachers, what else might they be getting wrong?
Catherine Delahunty: When she told schools like Papatoetoe Intermediate School, which will lose seven teachers in 3 years’ time, that it was their choice how they cut staff, did she consider increasing class sizes to 40 or cutting technology altogether a fair choice?
Hon HEKIA PARATA: Successive Governments have provided a funding formula to schools. It is based on a number of aspects and responsibilities. Then the professional leadership of a school makes the decision as to how it will deliver the national curriculum—
(see whole exchange here)
So let me be clear. Government removes the funding for the teachers but it is the school’s fault the classes are too big (or removed entirely) as they decide how to implement the policy. Eh? Really? And the alternatives are what, exactly, Ms Parata? Because if you know some magic way to deal with that policy in another less painful manner we’d all love to hear it…
Oh wait – I remember now, the figures had been wrongly calculated and you are now so very generously capping the losses at two per school.
A knock-on effect of all of this debate has been that many educators and parents are once more asking questions about growing class sizes and their impact on student learning.
Ms Parata has also stated that she was in a class of 42 and it didn’t do her any harm (I’m paraphrasing – can anyone give me a link to the actual quote, please).
The government is saying that bigger class sizes are fine, they are no detriment to the learner or the teacher, and all will be well in the world. But at the same time as assuring us that all is well with the world, we know that many ministers choose to send children to private schools that boast of small class sizes as a key selling point. So what people want to know is this – does it matter, or does it not matter, and why are we getting hypocritical and contradictory answers from government.
“Prime Minister John Key’s son attended King’s College in Otahuhu, which said on its website:
“Class sizes are limited and our policy of a low pupil-to-teacher ratio
ensures students are given greater individual attention in the classroom.”
Mr Key’s daughter attended St Cuthbert’s College,
which similarly advertised the fact that it limited classes to 15 students
“to allow for individual attention to each student”.”
Let’s be very clear – myself and many others are not arguing there shouldn’t be private schools. One concern is that government doesn’t check its figures, correctly resulting is wild miscalculations. We worry, too, that the government does not take high quality factual information into account before launching policies. And we worry that key individuals are hypocritical and contradictory about important issues.
Maori Party education spokesman Te Ururoa Flavell said: “We are not convinced that the debate is adequately informed by evidence around what is the ideal ratio between teachers and students, and how much this matters to lifting achievement.” –source
The Secretary for Education Lesley Longstone said the “Ministry would ideally like to have “very small class sizes” and the resources to put into professional learning and development to improve the quality of teaching. Those things are going to have the biggest impact on student outcomes.” -source
So, does class size matter? What do you think?
For more, read: