department of the parhamentary library · pam guilfoyle (consultant) education and welfare group...

,

Department of the

Parhamentary

Library

Legislating for Excellence?National Education Curriculum inEngland and Wales, New Zealand

and Australia

..",

,1.'t', ,:':.,

;+)1~"

" I '-'"

~_ .....·~..edl-~ . tI

ISSN 1037-2938

Copyright Conunonwealth of Australia 1992

Except to the extent of the uses pennitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication maybe reproduced or transmitted in any fann or by any means including infonnation storage and retrievalsystem, without the prior written consent of the Department of the Parliamentary Library, other thanby Members of the Australian Parliament in the course of their official duties.

Published by the Department of the Parliamentary Library, 1992

,

.'

<,

Pam Guilfoyle(consultant)

Education and Welfare Group25 May 1992

Parliamentary ResearchService

Background Paper Number 91992

Legislating for Excellence?National Education Curriculum inEngland and Wales, New Zealand

and Australia

Telephone: 062772410Facshnile:062772407

Biographical Note

Ms Pam Guilfoyle has been a teacher and Curriculum Consultant for 30 years. From1978 to 1990 she was a school principal in the New South Wales system. In 1990-92she worked for a time with the Education and Welfare Group of the ParliamentaryIWsearch Service covering education and community services issues. She now workswith the Parliamentary Education Office and is presently on the DEET consultativecommittee for the draft National Curriculum Statement 'Society and theEnvironment'.

•

The author wishes to thank Mr Spencer W. Harvey, former Assistant Director,Human Resources, NSW Department of Education and Lecturer in Education,Charles Sturt University; Mr Richard Gilbert, Director, Parliamentary EducationOffice; and Mr David Francis, Executive Director, Curriculum Corporation, who havereviewed and provided valuable comments on this paper. Thanks- also to PaulaO'Brien and Catherine BlIhm, Information Services, and Consie Larmour, KimJackson, Carole Wiggan and Kate Matthews of the Education and Welfare Group ofthe Parliamentary Library.

This paper has been prepared for general distribution to Members of the Australian Parliament.Readers outside the Parliament are reminded that this is not an Australian Government document, buta paper prepared by the author and published by the Parliamentary Research Service to contribute toconsideration of the issues by Senators and Members. The views ~xpressed in this Paper are those of theauthor and do not necessarily reflect those of the Parliamentary Research Service, and are not to bea~ributed to the Department oft~e Parliamentary Library.

"

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION "1

ENGLAND AND WALES 5

Chronology ". . . . . . . .. 5The Education Reform Act of England and Wales:

The Move Towards Reform 7

Administering for Excellence:

Politically Redefining the Role of Education . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9National Curriculum Enacted 10Community Reaction "12Outcomes ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15

Impact of Devolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16

NEW ZEALAND " 20

Chronology 20

The New Zealand Experience: The Move Towards Reform . . .. 22Administering for Excellence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 24

The Picot Report 24

The White Paper - Tomorrow's Schools. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 25

i Tomorrow's Schools administrationat the local level 26

"ii Accountability............................ 27iii Responsibility for staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 27

IV Responsibility for property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 27

v ResponsIbility for budgeting : . . . .. 27

vi Teaching positions within schools 28

vii The role of principal and staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 28

viii The Parent Advocacy Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 30National Curriculum Enacted 31

A Discussion Document, 7 May 1991 31

Principles of the National Curriculum 32

Essential Learning Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 32Essential Skills 32

Assessment Methods 32

Community Reaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 33

Outcomes: Policy changes under the Bolger Government .... 36

Impact of Changes . . . . . , : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 38

AUSTRALIA , 41Chronology '.' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 41The Move Towards Reform 45National Curriculum Frameworks 49A National Direction for Australia's Schools? 55Outcomes - A Different National Direction

for Australian Schools? 59

Concluding Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 62Abbreviations 63Bibliography 64

,

Legislating for Excellence 1

INTRODUCTION

In reviewing of trends in curriculum reform in 1990 Malcolm Skilbeck,a leading educationist now with the DECD, asserted:

National level curriculum and pedagogical change cannot be achieved by' workingon the curriculum and teaching methodologies alone. School organisation,teacher education, terms and conditions of service, school/work-place relationsand school/communitY. values impact upon the curriculum and way'" of teachingand learning. They' are all part of an exCeedingly' complex picture whoseelements are interrelated. Pressures for curriculum and pedagogical change arecoming from outside education as well as from within, they. are indirect as wellas direct and the achievement of change requires, it seems, widespreadparticipation. This, however, often as not, is in the form of a power struggle,not a concerted drive.!

The identification of pathways .through the forest of ideas,2

constituting curriculum development in the national interest, is acomplex task. Skills-based curriculum to serve social needs, oreducation as the prime tool for the engineering of social justice - thespectrum is broad and has been canvassed by most developed countriesin the last twenty years. Currently nations are in the grip of aninstrumentalist approach as evidenced in England and Wales, NewZealand and Australia.

Education reform in these countries has followed the global trend ofrestructuring in the state sector to meet national economic goals.Gaining a competitive international economic advantage andmaximising the potential of human capital have become goals to bereached through raising the level of skills acquired in the educationsystem. Education is required to supply a product which will meet theexpectations of the economic and business communities and bereceptive to re-training and the acquisition of new skills over aworking life. Legislating for a National Curriculum has been regardedas a major strategy in achieving these goals. The organisationalrestructuring of education in the United Kingdom and New Zealandhas been based on the corporate management model of globalbudgeting, corporate goals/mission statements, choice and diversity forthe clients, performance contracts and program evaluation for theproviders, competition in and between schools, and managementstructures paralleling those of business. The pattern of organisationis that of school trustees as a board of directors, and school principalsas chief executives of the corporation, with the central governmentdirecting the content of a compulsory curriculum.

1 Skilbeck, Malcolm. Curriculum Reform -An Overview of Trends, OEeD, 1990.

2 ibid.

2· Legislating for ExcellenceI

Business terminology appears paramount and articulates the newagendas for schooling. Schools are businesses, accountable at the locallevel. Parents are now the clients and children the product. Choiceand diversity are to help regulate the efficiency of schools. Schoolswhich produce poor products will lose custom. With the advent ofnational curriculum and national testing, and publication of results, itcan be. expected that poor test results will be equated with poorproducts - an oversimplified but likely comparison for parents and thecommunity.

Under national curriculum guidelines schools are required toimplement a core of subjects and deliver them to predeterminedstandards for various age groups. This has been described as a refined ..business model and has. been referred to as 'Kentucky FriedSchooling'.3

This reflects the on-going struggle over control of curriculum, thepriorities in knowledge and learning and the balance to be struckbetween a liberal education (as seen by education professionals) andtraining to serve changing economic fortunes. 4

Historically, nations have sought to address economic and monetaryproblems through restructuring education to suit the national interest.The current centralising of curriculum and decentralising of somefunding control has given rise to expectations of greater participationand control at the local level, especially by schools communities.However it can be seen that devolution of educational control has infact not occurred, and devolution of financial control could be describedas being the show rather than the substance ·as the limitationsattached to global/bulk funding become more apparent.

The overall impression is that there certainly has been an increase in localresponsibility. But a rush to devolution in the sense of a genuine transfer of realpower? Hardly.5 . .

The issues of funding and equity have caused a re-kindled fervour ineducational debate amongst parents and professional educators. Theper-capita funding system of England and Wales which favours formsix pupils (17-18 years of age) and which promotes 'mainstreaming' ofthe handicapped through increased loading for each disabled student

3 Ball, S. Markets, Morality and Equality in Education. Hillcote Group Paper 51990.

4 Pope, B. Setting the Policy Agenda for School Education. A background paperfor Educating the Clever Country Conference, July 1991.

5 Barrington, J. 'Todays Schools. Introduction and Overview'. Public Sector, v.13(4), Dec. 1990.

"


maybe a powerful incentive to seek students who will fulfil theschools' needs, rather than student needs being paramount.

On the other hand, the integration of children with special needs mayalso pose a threat to a school's attainment in a national testing system.In a school with high numbers, not immediately in need of the extrafinancial bonus applicable, it may be eaSy to refuse entry to suchchildren, thereby restricting choice and diversity to those who mostneed it. Where educational reform is driven by managerial concernssuch anomalies in delivering an improved or equitable service to theclient are inevitable.

Enlightening the community (through global budgeting or bulkfunding) on just what it does cost to run a school has been an overdueand sobering experience. 'Can do' communities have been activatedand the school enlivened as a result. However in poorer, notablydisadvantaged areas, or remote country regions, the effect has beendevastating to morale of parents and teachers and has widened the gapbetween schools.

Where total responsibility for staff salaries is incorporated into bulkfunding and a national curriculum is imposed, schools in financiallydisadvantaged or remote areas may be restricted to teaching only theassessable core curriculum to achieve competitive best results, and abroad general and enriching curriculum may be denied their students.

Theineed to become problem-solvers, analysers, .communicators flexible, adaptable and resourceful in thinking, working and living - .

. .

has"been identified as both an economic and educational necessity:However in the attempt to cut both educational delivery costs andensure that curriculum serves national goals, gains in one area maycancel out the other causing community disillusionment with what mayinitially have seemed a commonsense approach to schooling.

The arguments are not about the need for new directions in both theeconomy and education; but about the form new directions should take.'Education as a public good' has always been the philosophy ofprofessional educators. That it also has the capacity to become aconduit for the fulfilment of public economic and social policy reflectsanother educational role, that of a change agent. How effective thatrole will be depends on the input given by, and co-operation between,all sections of the community with a stake in educational outcomes:governments, parents, educators, business, unions, economists andsocial planners.

The move to seize control from the teachers and the educationbureaucracy and place it in the political domain happened most swiftlyin Britain as a result of the 10 years of groundwork by the Centre for

4 Legislating for Excellence

Policy Studies. This Conservative Think Tank formed in 1975 by MrsThatcher and Sir Keith J oseph reviewed all aspects of party policyafter the election defeat of 1974. The education study groupconstructed a set of radical policies aimed at eliminating what manysaw as the growing separation of education from 'real life' under theinfluence of progressivism, child-centred studies, and wideningcurriculum choice.

Britain's liberal tradition had relied on Local Education Authoritieschoosing the curriculum and syllabus content, and teachers translatingit as they saw fit at the individual class level. The individual classteacher was therefore the most influential force in a child's educationand co-ordinated curriculum became rare within school or county.

When James Callaghan asked in 1975 why some children left schoolswithout basic literacy and numeracy, and why girls rarely chose scienceor engineering6 he articulated the concerns of both parents andindustry. National curriculum was to serve a reconstructed Britisheconomy, reduce teacher domination of the curriculum and produce a'student whose knowledge could be tested nationally.

Margaret Thatcher voiced a warning when she,stated her opinion thatNational Curriculum 'with everybody doing the same thing' meant that'you have to get it all right'. The National Curriculum Centre and theNational Testing system will no doubt expand on this theme in thenext few years, as the results achieved in nation wide testing areanalysed, and improvement in curriculum effectiveness is gauged.

In New Zealand, the impetus to reform has been Treasury-prompted.The acknowledgment that an outcome of education is work, and thatthe delivery of education needs to be efficient, accountable, and costeffective, has created barriers of anxiety in the minds of educationprofessionals as they grapple with a management ethos thought to bethe domain of business or technology.

Although the concept of economy lis 'human capital' appears, for someeducators, to de-humanise the learner, for others it is a reminder thatboth education and industry have a key role in developing the specificskills needed to make sure that- their enterprise is' innovative andflexible. Both industry and teaching recognise the need to raise thepublic image and standing of their skilled personnel and to develop inthem a capacIty for lifelong development in response to change andcoping with new skills and practices.

6 Rae, J. Too Little Too Late. London: Collins, 1989.


ENGLAND AND WALES

CHRONOLOGY

,

".

1944

1950s-60s

1960s1976

197719791980

1981

1982

1986

19861986

1986

1987

1987

19881989

1990

19911991

Education Act - emphasising co-operation between localauthorities and central government.Introduction of Comprehensive Schools for 11-16 yearolds.'Progressive' Education Movement - Primary SchoolsFormation of the 'Education Group' within theConservative Party's Centre for Policy Studies.James Callaghan PM, 'Ruskin College Speech' Oxford.Conservative Party wins the General ElectionEducation Act (No 2) introduction of Assisted PlacesScheme. Government assistance for students whowished to attend private schools.Sir Keith J oseph - Education Portfolio. Education Act- Local Education Authorities (LEAs) required to set 'astandard number' of pupils for each school based on the1979-80 enrolments.Education Act - precursor to National Curriculum. Forthe first time subjects to be taught in schools are named.Kenneth Baker, Secretary of State, announced a pilotscheme to set up City Technology Colleges (C.T.Cs),partly sponsored by industry. Running costs from DES.Colleges to be selective and urban.Massive local election defeats for Conservatives.Teachers Pay and Conditions Act - withdrawal ofnegotiating rights, all teachers on contracts.Education Act - strengthened power ofgoverning bodies.Required boards to report annually to parents. Reducednumber ofLEA nominees on boards making apparent the'hold' of party politics on school boards.The National Curriculum 5-16 - a consultationdocument.Conservative Party manifesto places high priority onEducation. .The Education Reform Act of England and Wales.47 000 teacher resignations. Fifty per cent to otherwork/professions.Financial responsibility for all expenditure except capitaland certain collective services devolved to all schools ofover 200 pupils.Initial National Assessment of 7 year olds.Collapse of testing system for 7 year olds in Maths andScience under the great number of attainment targets tobe tested.


1991 John Major PM announces his intention of publishinglocal 'league tables' of school examination results as partof his 'Citizens Charter'.

1991 Independent schools pre-empt Prime Minister Major'sinitiative by publishing their own tables of A & B gradesin the final year A level examinations.

,.

•


THE EDUCATION REFORM ACT OF ENGLAND AND WALES:THE MOVE TOWARDS REFORM

In 1977 Labour Prime Minister James Callaghan articulated the'public's despair' at what the professionals - teachers, educationaltheorists, and ministry bureaucrats - had been doing to the nation'sschools. His emphatic and influential Ruskin College speech7 came atthe end of a decade of schooling in which Britain was in the forefront

.of primary school educational innovation, child-centred curriculumdevelopment and co-operative teaching practice, and which saw theBritish secondary comprehensive system adopted widely by otherdeveloped countries including Australia.

British education since 1944 had been characterised by three shifts inpublic concern about the effects of the system on children's education.The first move in the 1950s and 1960s was against the 'l1-plus'examination and for the introduction of comprehensive schools. Bothmoves claimed fairness and equality as their aim. Freeing childrenfrom the need to be streamed for academic or non-academic educationat age.eleven plus, and providing a single system of secondary schoolsinstead of grammar and secondary modern schools, were intended toeliminate elitism in State education.

During the 1960s to mid 1970 the second shift was towards more childoriented education and practice, and was commonly termed'progressive education'. Simultaneously a swing against comprehensiveschools was evident. The progressive education influence was largelyprimary-school oriented and focused on guided individual discovery anda more 'hands on', less abstract approach to subjects such asmathematics. Primary schools had long been regarded as 'the jewel inthe crown' of British education and funding from both private (eg theNuffield Foundation Maths Project) and state bodies, supportedinnovations in the teaching of the ages 5 to 11 primary school child.Confinement to the primary schools ofthis trend was a major problem.More conservative teaching and syllabus content in the comprehensivesmeant that the disparity between the two· systems left many childrenand parents confused and dissatisfied.

The third shift in public concernwas the increasingly negative attitudetowards comprehensive schools and the perceived results of'progressive education'8 viewed as a 'do as you please' system wherelaudable but generalised aims such as 'development of the whole child'took priority over practical instruction in the Basic Skills. During the

7 Prais, S.J. 'The Aftermath of an Act'. Times Literary Supplement, Feb. 1989.



1960s the assumption that the key to economic growth was throughincreased 'human capital' justified generous investment in education.

. Prime Minister Callaghan asked why the system, formed and fundedso confidently, was not working to expectations. His implication wasthat progressivism rather than the system itself was the cause.

Thus Prime Minister Callaghan's speech in 1977 marked the launchingof a public and political debate intended to shake education intobecoming more responsive to industry, and more accountable toparents, the public and the goyernment.9 This sudden public attackwas preceded in 1976 by the formation of the education group withinthe Conservative Party's Centre for Policy Studies, already setting thefoundations of the Party educational policy, finally articulated in theEducation Reform Act of 1988. Criticism of the performance ofeducation paralleled Britain's struggle to remain competitive withinthe European Economic community while frustrated by the global oilcrises of the mid 1970s.

Although educational investment is a product of decades, not spans ofgovernment, political and industrial opinion turned upon schools.Negative criticism of schools and teachers increased in the early yearsof the Thatcher government and was fuelled by the media. As a resultthe profession developed a siege mentality marked by increasing unrestin the teachers unions, and their assumption that educational criticismwas a fabrication of the conservative press. Margaret Thatcher's opendislike of the existing system of comprehensive education encouragedsimilar public optnion to surface. 10 This was an

educational upheaval complicated by the determination of teachers to confusethe practice of comprehensive education with the supposition ~hat all studentsare equal in interest and aptitude. ll

Comprehensive education meant, to most educators, subjects taughtsimilarly in method, pace and content to all children irrespective ofindividual abilities and learning areas.

.In 1981 the appointment to Education of monetarist Sir Keith Josephrevealed a portfolio direction characterised by

9 Simon, B. Bending the Rules. London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1988..


11 'Going against the National Odds'. Nature, vo!. 334, 25 Aug. 1988.

"

;iI.


• an under-resourced Education Budget which left an enormousbacklog of overdue maintenance and capital works programs12

,

badly eroding teacher, pupil and community morale.

• a concept of teachers and their work as mere agents for thedelivery of the Curriculum; his continued linking of teacher'appraisal' with differential rates of pay leading to teachers' paydisputes over a 12 month period, and"increasing parent anger.

• a move towards centralised control bypassing Local EducationAuthorities, teachers, and National Advisory Boards representinga wide variety of interest groups.

The turbulence created through the alienation of all parties directlyinvolved in education, the visible evidence of physically deterioratingschools, and increased media and public debate, contributed to massivemunicipal electoral defeats for the Government in May 1986.

ADMINISTERING FOR EXCELLENCE:POLITICALLY REDEFINING THE ROLE OF EDUCATION

It was then clear that before the next General Election of 1987 a newprofile for education was needed. The aim was to gain politicaladvantage by addressing a deteriorating situation as quickly as possibleand redirecting attention towards a new agenda for education, wherethe primary aim was political. The professionals were to continue tobe allowed to get on with teaching; but the objectives of schooling and the framework in which it was to be carried out - weresubsequently placed clearly in the arena of public choice andparliamentary approval.

The twin education goals ofthe Conservative Government under PrimeMinister Margaret Thatcher were to be standards and choice - thehighest possible standard of achievement for each child, and parentexercised choice of school, type of school and therefore type ofeducation. To facilitate this Kenneth Baker, Secretary of State forEducation, on 9 January 1987 at the North of England conference oflocal education authorities and on 23 January 1987 in a speech to theSociety of Education officers, foreshadowed the advent of a nationalcurriculum.

Despite such truisms as that ofW.E. Foster, President of the Board ofEducation in 1870, that 'it is no good trying to give technical training

12 ibid.

10, Legislating for Excellence

to our artisans witholit elementary education', Britain had no agreedconcept of school educational aims apart from the general belief thateducation was a 'good thing' aimed at producing 'decent sorts' ofpeople. The Public Schools had a monopoly on the British ideal ofeducation and the state schools followed suit as best they could, bycontinuing to aspire to the Public School curriculum. This resulted innationwide curriculum offerings which gave greater weight to classicsand humanities than to technical and scientific subjects. During thiscentury the universities co-operated in this preference for theeducation of scholars and 'gentlemen', rather than the 'men' oftechnology or commerce. The period of Post World War Two economicdecline in Britain coincided with a national educational avoidance ofthe new importance of technology.

Prior to the 1982 Education Act there was no statutory requirementfor the inclusion of any subject in the curriculum except religiouseducation, consistently the one mandatory British inclusion. This.situation (excepting religious education) was common in developedcountries, with the exception of Germany, France and Japan wherecentralised control of curriculum and timetables has had a longcultural history. In Britain responsibility for curriculum rested withschool governing bodies; in practice, most governors delegated controlto the headteacher.

NATIONAL CURRICULUM ENACTED

A Consultation Document The National Curriculum 5-16, waspublished on 24 July 1987. This stated the Government's intentionsand curriculum aims. The key aim was to raise stw:lent attainmentstandards. Other aims were: to ensure continuity, coherence,accountability, and some standardisation of study content within thenations schools.

Independent schools were not to be subject to national curriculum butwere required to 'take account of the principles of national curriculum'.The registration' of new independent schools and the reports on allindependent schools by Her Majesty's Inspectors would relate closelyto the schools' interpretation of national curriculum. 13

The national curriculum required that all schools teach the 'core'subjects of English, Maths and Science each of which would beNationally tested at ages 7, 11, 14 and 16. Schools were also requiredto teach seven foundation subjects: history, geography, technology,music, art and physical education to pupils of all ages and a modern

13 Education Reform Bill, Reference Sheet No 87/6, House of Commons LibraryResearch Division, London, 1987,


foreign language to pupils from 11 to 16: music and art were latermade non-compulsory for students aged over 14, the Secretary ofStatefor Education stating the pointlessness of trying to motivate all pupilsof ages 14 plus in such subjects. It was expected that the core andfoundation subjects would use 70 per cent of teaching time and 30 percent would remain for optional subjects including the alreadycompulsory Religious Education. 14

Attainment targets would be set in each subject for each of the keystages at ages 7, 11, 14 and 16. National testing would evaluate eachof these targets. Widespread concern resulted over the huge numberof targets to be tested - fourteen at each stage in maths and seventeenin science, requiring over 5 weeks of school time for test completion atStage I (age 7).

The Education Reform Act of 1988 outlined the Government's goals forthe reform of education through

• introducing, by law, a national curriculum for all publicly fundedschools together with pupil assessment and public examinations

• financial delegation to governors and headteachers of all publiclyfunded schools

• allowing schools to 'opt out' of Local Education Authority (LEA),control by a ballot of parents, and be funded directly from thecentre ie. Whitehall (These are called Grant Maintained Schools)

..;requiring schools to admit pupils up to their full capacity exceptfor Grant Maintained Schools

• creation of 'City Technology Colleges' (CTC) government fundedschools with independent school based management

• controls on the government and finance of polytechnics anduniversities.

The Act was the largest single piece of legislation to pass through theBritish Parliament since 1945. One month was allowed forconsultation before the passing of the Act with only minor changes,despite 16 500 mainly critical responses. This gave the Secretary ofState for Education 182 new powers covering everything from the

14 ibid.

12 Legislating for ExceIIence

definition of the national curriculum to the future shape ofuniversities. 15

The prospect· of mass professional resistance to the Act had beensomewhat deflected by the Teachers Pay 'and Conditions Act of 1986which withdrew the right of teachers to negotiate over their pay andconditions, and placed all teachers on new contracts. 16 Meanwhilecommunity attention was focused on the imminent devolution offinancial responsibility to schools. This strategy was to become aprecursor for education restructuring in other systems, notably NewZealand and Australia.

COMMUNITY REACTION

Immediately public and press attention was directed towards the 'newautonomy' and corporate responsibility of individual schools, and theimplications of national curriculum were initially minimised. Theconcept of 'opting out' of local authority control was at firstmisunderstood by many parents as meaning a chance to gain greatercontrol over curriculum content by moving their schools into the GrantMaintained category. This aspect of 'parent control' has not beenrealised.

Teachers however, had reached a crisis of uncertainty. The concept ofprofessional democracy included teacher control ofcurriculum and non-. . .interference with teaching activity in the classroom. Arguments thata wide range of people and interests could also propose alternativecurricula met with statements on the unique ability of teachers todiagnose and cater for individual differences on the basis ofpedagogical theory and specialist understandings of child growth anddevelopment.

In fact, although these were worthy aims, the ability at the Primary'School level to adequately cater for all individual interests of childrenin all subjects in any classroom was severely restricted by the size of'the class, teacher time, school resources, and level of teacher expertise

academic freedom doeS not encompass freedom to teach at whim or personalinterest level regardless of the people who are paying the saiaries. 17

15 Furlong, J. 'British Educations Radical Changes'. Current Affairs BuIIetin,1988.

16 Keating, J. 'The Great Reform Bill'. The Victorian Teacher, May, 1988.


c.


The feeling' was widespread that 'over the years the content of youngpeople's education had become too dependent on whim and chance,.l8

School syllabuses giving general guidelines on what should be taughthad always existed and teachers were free to teach within theseguidelines. What a national curriculum and system of testing was toachieve was access for all children to each part of the curriculumwhether or not it stirred a teacher's professional interest. What wasprescribed had to be taught. However, the difficulty of delivering acohesive. curriculum at the single school level has been described asfollows by one headm'lster:

One of the fundamental difficulties that a good headmaster may face in tryingto improve standards in a local authority school, has been that neither he nor hisboard of governors has ultimate authority over the teachers in his school. Thusto take what is by no means an unusual situation· - each teacher is free tochoose his own syllabus and texts, irrespective of teaching in parallel orsuccessor classes. The headmaster's status in attempting to put some logic intohis school is not that of a chief executive, but closer to a chairman of'a cooperative in which the only available 'tools of management' are consultativemeetings and co-ordination by extended persuasion. Dismissal of a juniorteacher usually requires a two-year round of unpleasant sessions involving localauthority sub-committees, full committees, appeal committees and so on. ToCounter this anomie local school management and financial delegation wereintroduced as a main feature of the new Act; governors of each school are to beresponsible for hiring and firing. However, the local authority remains the legalemployer while the governors are someh~w to manage the staff....... Ouly byfollowing the path of complete 'opting out' (ie out of local education authoritycontrol), byjoining the new category ofGrant Maintair..ed Schools, can governors~nd headmasters attain full control of their staff. l9

\_1

The'tlear commitment towards teaching technology and maths andthree branches of science to all pupils to age 16 was commended by allsections of the public and the profession. The unions wondered wherethe extra teachers were to be found to teach three times as muchscience as previously; mathematics teachers were already in shortsupply; technology teachers needed to be seen as more than Secretaryof State Bakers initial description of their role as teaching 'some craft'.Meanwhile the universities showed no interest in modifying their entryrequirements from the traditional separate subject strands of physicsand chemistry to accommodate a single certification in modularscience.2o

18 'Going Against the National Odds'. Nature, vol. 334, 25 Aug. 1988.

19 Prais, S.J. 'The Mtermath of an Act'. Times Literary Supplement, Feb. 1989.

20 Professional Association of teachers, National curriculum 5-16 Response 28 Sept.1~~ .


The National Association of Schoolmasters and Union of WomenTeachers (NASUWT) surveyed 50 per cent (15 170) of all schools andfound a vacancy level of 10 000 teaching positions in England andWales.21 The government had claimed that 15 000 additional (to theoptimum) teachers would be needed to teach the National Curriculum.This was preceded by 47 000 resignations in 1989 half of which werefrom teachers leaving the profession to find other work. Unions alsoreacted against the 'poor' representation of the profession on theNational Curriculum' Council and the apparent' disregard ofconsultation with the profession on curriculum outlines, their concern .being recorded and discussed in professional journals in Australia:

Plans for education may appear beneficial but there is a strong EUspicion thatchanges rushed through often against professional advice, a~8 politicallymotivated. Whatever the case, education in Britain has rarely seen such aprolonged period of debilitating turmoil.22

Assessment at ages 7, 11, 14 and 16 and its implications generateddissension across all sectors of the community and was fully reportedin the press:

Proclamation of the national curriculum is the easy bit. What matters is howyou do it and how you test performance.23

The old hostility felt by teachers· towards teaching to a test, againsurfaced. 'Mere facts', 'parrot learning' and 'narrow academic teachingmethods' were cited as the inevitable result of a nationally testedcurriculum.24 Conflict between criterion reference testing anddiagnostic testing continued. Many in the profession saw attainmenttests as instruments of 'educational apartheid',25 with childrenlabelled as intelligent or unintelligent. The need for specialist primaryschool mathematics and science teachers to satisfy the needs ofassessment in these areas was also predicted. The question of failureat key stages and whether children would be held back at that stageuntil successful completion, as happened in Europe, was raised. Thepublication of aggregated results of each class and each school, wasseen as an invitation to the community to make inappropriatecomparisons between individual teachers, on the basis of results from

21 NASUWT Report, no. 16, Birmingham, Nov. 1990.

22 Educare Digest, no. 5, Melbourne, July 1988.

23 Plaskow, M. Times Educational Supplement, 1988.

24 Mount, Ferdinand. 'Could do Better, Must Try Harder'. The Daily Telegraph,20 April 1990, London.

25 ibid.

,

l'


different classes and between different schools. However detailed andconfidential reporting to parents on progress based on the tests waswell received.26 Prime Minister Major's announced intention topublish local league tables of schools examination results, as a part ofhis Citizens Charter, prompted the Independent Schools to publish thefirst ever table of their schools receiving the highest proportion of Aand B grades at Final year A level examinations.27

OUTCOMES

The most important factor in this 'package deal' was that in makingboth the curriculum and testing compulsory, access was given topreviously disenfranchised groups such as those in schools for thementally or physically handicapped, who were subject to curriculum·developed at the school level and often quite remote from the usualcurriculum of primary schools. The entry of these children both intomainstream schools and mainstream curriculum in special schoolsprompted the Secretary of the State for Education to announce thatprovision for testing would be adapted to suit special needs andexemption may be applicable in some cases.

A national curriculum also meant that gender, and race could notmitigate against girls being taught three sciences, ie physics, chemistryand biology, to age 16; all ethnic groups being educated in the historyand language of the nation; all subjects being allocated a set time-spanof periods over a teaching week.

When the strict conditions imposed on Grant Maintained Schools (iethose which 'opt out') are examined, selection of staff emerges as oneof the few advantages. Even then, staff relinquish their LocalEducation Authority flexibility for employment by a single school boardand head teacher, perhaps under quite different conditions of service,with fewer support services than those received by teachers in LocalEducation Authority schools. These teachers are of course still subjectto the demands of National Curriculum and assessment and theirconsequences.

The initial assessment of 7-year-olds in April 1991 coveredmathematics and science and prompted the DES on 8 May 1991 torespond to 'widespread concern about the present number of

26 Nutall, Desmond. 'The Implications of National Curriculum Assessment'.Curriculum Perspectives, March 1990, Australia.

27 Heron, E. 'League Creates D,ivisions'. Times Education Supplement, 6 Sept.1991.


. attainment targets'.28 The Department found that the assessmentstructure of 17 attainment targets for science and 14 for maths, wasover elaborate:

It expected too much of teachers in assessing and recording pupils' progress andreporting to parents. It has caused problems in the design of reliable nationaltests (SATS) and it would have threatened the consistency of GCSEstandards.29

The tasks to be attained and tested were reduced to five in bothsubjects, the same as in the other core subject, English. Noadjustment, however, was to be made to the testing system before 1993leaving teachers and many parents very dissatisfied at the prospect of2 further years of unmanageable and time consuming procedures.Eleven and fourteen year old testing is to develop progressively from1992:

The teaching force, particularly in the primary school where the same teacherwill have to assess a number of different subjects, have neither the time nor thesophistication to cope with the hundreds of individual assessments which wereto have been carried out for each pupil. Even with the reduction that has nowbeen agreed the workload will remain daunting.30

In addition to 'daunting workloads' the enormous costs inadministration and delivery of such a system were becomingincreasingly apparent.

IMPACT OF DEVOLUTION

The question now being raised is whether a national curriculum iscompatible with the concept of devolution of school management:

Is it compatible to centralise and to decentralise at one and the same time?Does it make sense to tryto do so? Is it compatible to give professional teacherstheir freedom to teach, and then try to lay down in detail what they shouldteach? Is it compatible to restore freedom of choice to parents and their childrenand then to impose a uniformity from which to choose? Are we in danger ofinterpreting freedom of choice in the way Henry Ford gave freedom of choice tohis first customers.... you can have any colour of car you like as long as it isblack.3! .

28 . Department of Education and Science News, circular 145/91, 8 May 1991.

29 ibid.

30 Cashdan, A. & Wilson, D. 'Assessment: the State of the Art'. Education, 26April 1991, York.

31 Sexton, S. 'Are National Curriculum and School Based Management Compatible?'International Journal ofEducology, vol. 3, no. 2, 1989.

c

"


Even in schools which choose to 'opt out', national curriculum is stillcompulsory, so a choice of subject content and combination does notexist, and the program will parallel that in State Schools.

Opting out involves provision for publicly funded local educationauthority schools, to opt out of local control and. become directlyfunded by Whitehall on a per-capita basis, thereby gaining'independent management' of the school. The opting out proposal gives·centrally funded schools the opportunity to decide what type of schoolthey wish to be after an initial operating period of 5 years. When thisis linked with the open enrolment policy which enables any parent topetition any school to accept their children, it becomes possible for.some parents to move children across a large area to enrol in a schoolwhich most reflects their own social, ethnic, or educationalbackground. The process of investigating individual schools, makingconvincing application and presenting effectively at interviewadvantages the articulate, the politically and educationallysophisticated, and the financially able. In practice schools which 'optout' could be financially disadvantaged by being isolated from theprofessional services provided by the Local Education Authorities. Theschool would still be governed by a Board of Trustees and the HeadTeacher, and parent influence may be no greater-than in an LEA·school.

So why' construct such a system?

Margaret Thatcher described it as three systems: one for those whowishto stay with the local authority, a direct-grant system funded byWhitehall, and the independent sector for which the state wouldprovide some assisted places. She claimed that this approach wouldprovide variety and a wider choice of public provision for people whoare not satisfied with the existing system. It is worth restating thatindependent schools are generally not subject to the nationalcurriculum and therefore 'assisted places' in these schools could beconstrued as state funded methods of avoiding national curriculum.

The Grant Maintained system of schools was designed for those.unhappy with local control, who. want a greater say in the type ofservice a school provides and who can afford to support the schoolthrough fees or other charges which may be decided by the Board ofTrustees. In practice parental choice may be limited to merelychoosing the school, and control beyond that level will be minimal.The character of the school can be changed only after a five-yearperiod by vote of the parents of children already attending, feederschools being ineligible to vote. Resultant changes are thereforeunlikely to be of use to those voting:


What the Act does not provide is support for a national system of schoolsteaching a national curriculum. It will provide a variable sector of schoolsranging from the good to the indifferent and relying heavily on the commitmentof the participating parents to form an adequate and functional framework forthe delivery of a national curriculum.32

Surprisingly little media comment is available on this consequence ofthe reforms. The geographic pattern of schools 'opting out' will tell itsown story: in several years time. Considering that Britain's ethnicminorities are in large cities and industrial areas, it may simply reflectthe inability of people confined to highly urban work and living, toafford the dubious luxury of encouraging their local school to opt ·out.The provision gives the appearance of choice, but is unlikely to fulfilthe expectations of the parents. In all Local Authority Schoolsnumerical barriers to enrolment were introduced to stop the lesspopular schools from becoming depleted. The higher 1979-80enrolment limits have been imposed. As funding will be directly linkedto the number of school pupils, deprived inner city schools may becomedepleted of both pupils, resources and access to more able staff. Manymay become simply not viable.

Devolution of financial and managerial responsibility also poses athreat to teacher unions by eliminating ~heir global role in wagenegotiation. The possibility ofemployment ofunqualified teachers andthe introduction of local employment and fIXed term contracts by -localSchool Boards may change the composition ofthe profession and unionmembership. Opting out provisions are seen by the professionaleducators, and some groups of parents, as an attempt to destroy thesecondary comprehensive school system, and as discriminating againstthe poor and deprived. Less choice for the parents, and more for theschools to choose the parent!l they want, is feared. Popular schools, itis thought, will develop waiting lists of parents who are able andwilling to transport their children across several districts to the chosenschool.

It will be a case of what a parent can do for a school. If they are accountantsor lawyers and they can offer their services to the school, they will be the oneswhose children get places. They are the parents who have always been able tomake effective choices.33

Whilst the teachers' unions and associations remain opposed toperformance-related pay packets, the Government is cautious on the

32 Rae, J. Too Little Too Late. London: CoIlins, 1989.

33 Morrissey, Margaret. National Confederation ofParent Teachers Associations.May 1991.

"

',~

,:;'", ~'-'


issue.34 Teachers claim that devolution has increased their workloadand many parents involved in school management find their taskonerous. 'Management on the cheap' is a claim made by schooltrustees spending countless hours doing what is really 'a full time job, .and there are people already paid to do it'35 (ie the educationprofessionals and local education authorities). The active educationalpartnership of parents and teachers, once the years of trial and errorpass, should help schools to become effective autonomous operations.Where parents assume control over staff and dominate headteachersin the selection Of personnel, the leadership element would be badlyfragmented and damage the quality of the school. Such tensions andforces are still disturbing the fabric of schools and the teachers' abilityto be whole-heartedly committed to these changes. The collapse of theStage I assessments (age seven) amidst an avalanche of assessmenttasks and paper work, forced a revised system for 1993. However the1991 failed process is to be repeated in 1992 - not a morale boostingpiece of news for teachers of seven-year-olds.

The educational juggernaut maintains its pace and momentum asstudents, teachers, parents, governors and head teachers attempt tocome to terms with its progress. Whether participating groups feelthey are driving, riding, being run over or bypassed by the events ofthe next few years, will determine the climate and outcome of thiscontinuing experiment in national curriculum.

34. Times Education Supplement, May 1991: 6., ,

35 ibid,


NEWZEALAND

CHRONOLOGY

April 1987 A Nation At Risk, Education manifesto of the NationalParty of New Zealand, issued by Ruth Richardson.This manifesto contained many of the argumentsarticulated by the Treasury.

April 1987 'The Lost Generation: Victims of the Great EducationalExperiment'. Metro - Auckland based magazine.An influential article arguing for the wresting of controlfrom the vested interests in education in particular thoseof 'liberal and feminist' dominated teacher unions.

1987 Government Management: VolIL Education Issues.Treasury briefing paper to the· reelected LabourGovernment.

1987 . How Fair is New Zealand Education?The New Zealand Council's report to the RoyalCommission in Social Policy.Part II: Fairness in Maori Education.

1988 New Zealand Business Round TableArgues that post-school provision is in need of reform.

1988 Reforming Tertiary Education in New Zealand. .Report issued by the New Zealand Business Roundtable.

April 1988 Picot Report Administering for Excellence: EffectiveAdministration in Education.A taskforce review.

July 1988 Report for the Cabinet Social Equity Committee on PostCompulsory Education and Training. Known as theHawke Report.

August 1988 Tomorrow's Schools: the Reform of EducationalAdministration in New Zealand.Government White Paper.

August 1988 'Education to be More'.Early Childhood Care and Education. Known as theMeade Report.

December1988

Before Five: Early Childhood Care and Education inNew Zealand.

1988

February1989

August1989

October1989

October1989

March 1990


The Government's response to the Meade Report.

Learning for Life: Education and Training Beyond theAge of Fifteen.Government's response to the Hawke Report.

Learning for Life [LGovernment Policy Decisions.

Assessment for Better LearningA public discussion document, Dept. of Education(ABEL).

Implementation of Tomorrows Schools educationaladministrative reforms.

Tomorrows Standards..,. The report of the MinisterialWorking Party on Assessment for Better Learning(ABEL Committee).

March 1990 'There's No Going Back' Collaborative CurriculumDecision Making in Education. Curriculum ReviewResearch in Schools Project.Education Department, University ofWaikato, Hamilton.

1990 .Tomorrows Skills, Paul Callister, New Zealand PlanningCouncil.

;. October1990

QualityEducation for allAccording to their needs: Brieffor the Incoming Government. Ministry of Education.

May 7 1991 The National Curriculum of New Zealand - Draft.


THE NEW ZEALAND EXPERIENCE: THE MOVE TOWARDSREFORM

In 1983 the United States Department of Education in its report 'ANation at Risk' stated

The educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a risingtide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people... Ifan unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose... the mediocre educationalperformance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act ofwar.36

In quoting this document, in its brief to the reelected LabourGovernment in 1987,37 the New Zealand Treasury has stated itsbelief that education can be analysed in a similar way to any otherservice. Treasury's agenda for education was implicit in the questionsit sought to address and answer from an economic rationalistviewpoint.

Treasury's preferred view of education was that it was a market placecommodity providing services to clients, the most effective promoter ofsuch a service being not necessarily the State, but a free marketsystem.

This document arrived at a time when the Labour Government in NewZealand had followed the Treasury policy recommendations in the areaof macro and micro economics in its previous term in office. On its reelection in 1987 it focused on the social and education sectors ofreform in New Zealand.

Treasury therefore had quickly gained the 'high ground' in educationopinion and stated the position of New Zealand education to be asfollows:

• Previously too much emphasis had been placed on the ability oftheeducation system to raise the level of economic growth andimprove equality of opportunity.

• Econ::Jmic performance and improved educational standards cannotnecessarily be linked directly to increased expenditure oneducation. .

36 The National Commission on Excellence in Education, A Nation At Risk - theImperative for Education Reform. A Report to the Nation and the Secretary ofEducation, United States Department of Education, 1983.

37 Government Management, vo!. 2, Education Issues.

,,"'


• Education has not changed rapidly enough nor has it beenresponsive to the needs of the ·economy.

• Education has failed to keep pace with the change in society buthas also performed badly despite increased expenditure.

• This has been due to the education interest groups of teachers andthe education bureaucracy addressing only their own interestsrather than that of their clients, and government intervention onbehalf of lobby groups, and minority group pressures.

A most powerful part of this Treasury document was the conclusion,drawn from these statements, that government intervention wouldgradually weaken· the influence of society over its institutions. Acritique of the Treasury document stated that:

The linchpin of Treasury's attack on New Zealand education centres on therelated. claims that increased educational expenditure does not lead toimprovements in learning, improved educational attainments do not necessarilylead to economic growtb, and increased educational expenditure does not leadto greater equality of educational opportunity.38

Throughout the document there is an

...oft repeated insistence that there will be considerable cost to the countryunless New Zealand education orients itself to the economy.. If there is nonecessary connection between educational outcomes and economic growth, thequestion is why should Treasury be concerned?39

In citing the United States document A Nation at Risk which referredto 'a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as aNation and a people', Treasury endorsed a view that inadequateeducation alone causes declining standards and hence a decline innational economic growth. This was the position on which NewZealand education debate and subsequent reforms would be focusedover the next two years.

38 Lauder, H., Middleton, S., Boston, J., Wylie, C., 'The Third Wave: a critique ofthe New Zealand Treasury's Report on Education'. New Zealand Journal ofEducational Studies, vo1.23, no.l, 1988.

39 ibid.


ADMINISTERING FOR EXCELLENCE

The Picot Report

On the 21 July 1987 the Cabinet Social Equity Committee announcedthat an advisory task force to be called the Picot Committee had beenformed and would report on Education to the Parliament-on 10 May1988.

Chairman Brian Picot, prominent businessman and a Prochancellor ofAuckland University was assisted by Peter Ramsey, associate ProfessorofEducation at Waikato University, known for research into successfuland unsuccessful schools; Margaret Rosemergy, Senior Lecturer atWellington College of Education and a formulator of Labour Party·EducationPolicy; WhetumaramaWeretaofNgaiterangi-Ngatiranganui,a social statistician, and Colin Wise, a successful businessman fromDunedin. The taskforce spent nine months talking and listening toover 700 people and organIsations.

The Report's findings on the current system of administration· werethat it

• is not sufficiently oriented to the needs of the learner• contains too many layers of administration• centralises decision making too much• is not sufficiently sensitive either to the Maori Tangatawhenua

[people] or other minorities• lacks accountability, and• gives the consumers of education too little input into the decision

making process.

The Committee worked on the assumptions that the State wouldcontinue to be the -main funder of formal education, that educationwould remain compulsory for 6-15 year olds, and that the provisionsof the Treaty of Waitangi would continue to be observed.

The Report made ,the following recommendations:

System· Objectives-.

• every learner should gain the maximum individual and socialbenefits from the money spent on education

• education should be fair and just for every learner regardless ofgender and of social, cultural or geographic circumstances.


Core Values for the System

• choice for parents• an assumption of the individual competence of teachers• cultural sensitivity• good management practices.

The report was to affect both school curriculum and administration.

The administrative system should have as few layers and sectors aspossible. Decisions affecting an institution would be made by theinstitution itself. Bulk grants would allow schools financial control.

A massive reversal in discretionary versus non-discretionary schoolexpenditure emerged for primary and secondary schools. This changein itself caused much debate in the teaching profession and in localcommunities, and influenced educational restructuring in other placesoutside New Zealand, specifically in New South Wales.

The key areas of curriculum, financial management and social goalswere clearly targeted as the major areas of change in nationaleducation.

The White Paper - Tomorrow's Schools: the Reform of EducationAdministration in NewZealand (Aug. 1988 implemented nationally1 Oct. 1989)

;, The Picot Report was followed by a White Paper in August 1988 called(l,o' Tomorrows Schools which accepted most of the. Picot ideas and

reforms and set out. a process for implementation to begin on 1October 1989. There followed an unprecedented sequence of reformswhich restructured New Zealand education, altered teacher conditionsof service and passed through Parliament the State Sector Bill whichradically altered the delivery of education along with other stateservices.

Prime Minister Lange's intention for education was immediatelyapparent in the preface to the document Tomorrows Schools, in hisquote from Thomas J efferson:

I know of no safe depository of the ultimate power of the society but the peoplethemselves, and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise theircontrol with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, butto inform 'their discretion.


The five critical policy outcomes of Tomorrow's Schools were

• parent and community responsibility• school ba,sed management• clear accountability at all levels• widening of the provider-base of education• local determination of conditions of employment, including

contracts for principals and teachers.

Between 1987 and October 1989 a comprehensive group of proposals,reports and The. White Paper, Tomorrow's Schools, had becomeprecursors of the restructuring of New Zealand education.

Parts of the education sector viewed the coming changes as predetermined, leaving only minor operational details or superficialchanges in the hands of both educators and the community. Thedirection taken in Tomorrow's Schools was consistent with theadministrative philosophy generally being applied in the New ZealandPublic Service at the time. Parent bodies had been lobbying for manyyears for greater participation and local decision making, however, thebreadth of responsibility directed to individual schools and Boards ofTrustees was daunting to previously bypassed participants.

1 Tomorrow's Schools - administration at the local level

a) Each individual school became subject to the overall policycontrol of a Board of Trustees, with the daily operation of theschool and the implementation of policy in the hands of thePrincipal. The Principal was also designated as theprofessional leader of the school and would be responsible tothe board.

b) Each Board of Trustees was required to develop a Charter forthe school in collaboration with the Principal, the staff and thecommunity. The Charter for each school was expected toencompass

• the particular interests of the students and potentialstudents within the school's area

• the special skills and qualifications of the staff• the resources of the community• the particular wishes of the school's community.

The Charter of each institution must be approved by the Minister,then becomes a contract between the state and the institution, andbetween the institution and the community. It was expected thecharters would be reviewed as local conditions or National Objectiveschanged.


ii Accountability

The Board is required to report regularly to the community on howwell the objectives of the school are being achieved. The school's andthe Board's performance is reviewed approximately every two years bythe Central Review and Audit agency. The Board may request areview where there is public disquiet about the school's performanceor other causes of public concern.

Trustees are individually liable for fraud or wrongdoing. Boards areexpected to follow the National Guidelines Co'deofConduct for Boards.

Hi Responsibility for staff

The Board appoints the Principal and approves the appointment ofBasic Scale teaching staff and non-academic support staff on therecommendation of the Principal. Appointments above the Basic Scaleare to be made by a school staffing committee, the Board thenapproving the recommendations. Boards will advertise all teachingpositions nationally. .

The Board as the legal employer of the teachers is responsible forinstituting procedures of teacher appraisal and discipline, approvingleave of staff, reimbursing teachers day-to-day expense claims, andapproving staff development programs on the advice of the PrincipaLFunding for such programs is included in the school's bulk grant.

;',

;iv Responsibility for property

Major capital works and maintenance are the responsibility of theMinistry with annual bulk grant provision in the case of minormaintenance.

v . Responsibility for budgeting

All funding, with the exception of teachers salaries is the responsibilityof the Board. The Board will prepare the accounts with auditprovision by a qualified acco"untant. The Board can also borrow moneycommercially. Fees are paid to compensate Board members for lostincome, child care, travel and other costs. The Government alsoexamined the possibility of requiring employers to give up to six daysunpaid leave each year to employees who are Board members to enablethem to participate fully in Board business. This anticipates that eachperson who is a member of the Board, be they school Principal,teacher, student or community member, is likely to be expected tospend at least forty-eight hours a year in Board business funded byemployers. The carry-over of work load outside meeting hours has notbeen considered as a factor in fee schedules for Board members.


vi Teaching positions within schools

School Boards

• are the legal employers of staff• appoint the Principal on contract• appoint the top senior teacher in primary schools, and the top two

teachers in secondary schools.

Teachers are

• employees within nationally-established salary scales• funded centrally for removal expenses. All other costs, including

national advertising, and interviewing respondents, would befunded by the school itself.

Schools will

• make their own arrangements for employing relieving teachers.However in the case of some teachers' leave, eg maternity leave,the Ministry pays the salary.

vii The role of the principal and staff

This section of the document details the ongoing and expected roles ofthe professional staff, their responsibility for community involvement,staffdevelopment, fair allocation ofduties, development ofperformanceobjectives, reporting to parents on pupils, and the collaborative natureof decision making. The document states that:

...the role of teachers in their institution will not change dramatically. They will,however, have a more direct relationship with their employer (the Board ofTrustees) and will be expected to participate in decisions made about budgetsand about their own use of the institution's resources. .

Schoois will be able to buy in extra administrative support through. their bulk grant. However, the size of the grant will not be enlarged

to accommodate this.

New responsibilities are to be given to principals and teachers

•••••••

accountingadministrationglobal budgetingfinancial resource allocationmediation with the schools communityeffective participation on school boardsability to communicate effectively the schools needs to the Board

-


• goal formulation• reporting on achievements.

No further consideration is given to the impact such a major changewill have on the. roles of principal and teachers, especially forprincipals. The whole weight of economic, social, educational,structural and maintenance programs, staff salaries in some instances,community liaison, educational goaland objective setting is transferredto the professionals at the school, and thrusts them into a positionneither contemplated, nor expected.

Principals' diaries across the' country, and particularly those of teachingprincipals, reveal working weeks of 60 hours as the norm. As the year endsevidence is mounting that much of the extra work is permanent and not merelytransitional..... parents expectstions about their capacity to change the structureof the school, have had to adjust as they confront the limitations of their powersand resources.....disappointment has generated tensions within schools, andprincipals in particular have been blamed for situations beyond their control.40

Most principals have more than 15-20 years experience in education,fifteen of which are likely to be as classroom teachers. Those who holddegrees are likely to be Arts graduates, with post graduate diplomas ofeducation, who through their own understanding of the role and theiremployers' expectations aspire to attain visionary educationalleadership. At age 40-55+ the language of corporate management andfinancial devolution has come to dominate their careers, and erode outof-:;;chool, family and relaxation time.

In~,~rvice training at the executive level is concerned with spreadsheets,cOI1J;puter driven office systems, lectures in investment and corporatesponsorship.

Tertiary e~ucation courses have yet to take account of the changingrole of the school executive and expand their traditional courses to'meet the current reality, and the time frames of already 'stretched'executives.

Given that any curriculum or syllabus is only as effective as theteacher implementing it, the morale and commitment of the teachingservice is of paramount importance.

The New Zealand National Curriculum Discussion Document followedfour years of reports, Royal Commissions and inquiries and farreaching changes to teachers' employment conditions including thegradual erosion of the negotiating power of teacher unions of whichthe State Sector Act 1988 was the first step. This Act was inclusive of

40 Noonan, R. 'The Primary Reforms'. The Public Sector, vol. 13, no. 4, 1990.


areas previously considered industrial such as teacher training,working hours, discipline and clas~ification. Collective action byunions was to be minimised and decisions on pay and conditions to benegotiated as a local managementprerogative.41

In grappling with administrative, teaching· and curriculum changesmuch in-service support is needed; however teacher release days arenow allocated within schools' bulk grants at about $200 per staff whichcovers about 1.5 days per year.

Teachers' morale depends on professional development and provisionfor time to do administrative tasks at least partly in school hours. Thenew dependence on individual school boards to deliver adequateworking conditions and ultimately fair salary packages has produceduncertainty and anxiety amongst teachers and unions.

viii The Parent Advocacy Council

The move to provide a more client-responsive structure, resulted in theformation of a Parent Advocacy Council, a body to operate at theNational level. -

In accordance with Part IV of the Education Act 1989 it was to

• inform parents and groups within the education system of theirrights and obligations, and to provide information on the schoolsystem

• assist parents who feel the system is not meeting their needs• make evident the interests of parents in relation to the education

of their own children• be available to assist parents ofchildren being educated outside the

state school system• assist parents in their efforts to establish an early childhood

facility for their children• report to the Minister on any educational matter.

This government funded body was formed to act as a filtering andadjustment mechanism within the system. Its composition was decidedby the Minister with regard to personal attributes of members, and theneed to reflect New Zealand's population - in gender, locality, incomeand ethnic areas. In structure, and according to the objectives set outin the Education Act, the Parent Advocacy Council could beresponsible for handling all community liaison on education andparental complaints about the system and the needs of their children.

41 Capper, P. & Munro, R. 'Professionals or Workers', Critical Perspectives-NewZealand Today, eds Middleton, COOd, Jones. Australia: Alien & Unwin, 1990.


Liaising with the independent school system and assisting in theestablishment of pre-schools would also fall under its jurisdiction. ADirector and a small permanent staff was responsible for theadministration of the council. Department of Education staff assistedthe Council to handle parents' enquires on the education system andtheir rights within it.

This removed a large sector of public relations and liaison activitiesfrom the Ministry and the Department of Education and returnedresponsibility to those considered closest to the problem, thusdevolving a large amount of time-consuming consultation to parents.Council was empowered to examine matters which it believed hadgeneral application across the education system, but not to act asarbiter in individual or group disputes.

However, the September 1991 Budget abolished funding for the ParentAdvocacy Council, which has subsequently ceased to exist.

NATIONAL CURRICULUM ENACTED

A Discussion Document 7 May 1991

Provision for a national curriculum was made in the Education Act of1989, the discussion document revealing a preference for the model ofEngland and Wales in its chosen Essential Learning Areas and theprovision for Standardised Attainment Testing at specific ages.

New"Zealand teachers have always worked from mandatory subjectsyllabuses; 'recent revisions of the syllabuses have attempted to providea balance between national direction and local responsiveness'.42

The New Zealand Educational Institute stated that 'a curriculumframework which draws together contributions from a wide range ofteachers over a long period of time, in a ;:ommon language, is new'.43

The document outlines a set ofcurriculum principles, essential learningareas and essential skills to be acquired as well as possible assessmentrequirements.

The Institute described all these initiatives, except assessment, asworthy aims but further declared

42 New Zealand Educational Institute, Special Circular 1991/35 to AIl Schools.Wellington, June 1991.

43 ibid.


...a document that consistently relates learning outcomes toeconomic demands and competition is a level of direct politicalinterference with teaching and learning programs in primaryschools not experienced before.44

This set the tone for the reception of the curriculum in New Zealand,one of cautious acceptance of all but assessment.

The document outlined the following essential features:

Principles of the National Curriculum

These principles are intended to safeguard the learning needs of eachstudent by accommodating:

a) sound learning theory and practiceb) the different needs of groups within New Zealandc) requirements of New Zealand society, its economy and its

position in the international market placed) the prior knowledge, understanding and expectations of the

individual students.

Essential Learning Areas

The essential learning areas will be language, mathematics, science andenvironment, technology, social sCiences, the arts, physical andpersonal development.

The Essential Skills

These skills are to be taught and applied across all learning areas.

communication skills, numeracy skills, information skills, problem solving anddecision making skills, self management skills, work and study skills.

Assessment Methods

It is proposed that nationwide testing will take place for all eight yearolds, twelve year olds and fifteen year olds. This will encompass bothclassroom and national assessment procedures.

National testing will be confined to assessing achievements in English,mathematics and science. As national testing will take place in onlythree of the students' years of compulsory schooling, teaching staff willcontinue to have responsibility for assessing the students' achievementsas part of their teaching programs. Teachers are encouraged to use

44 ibid.


the national curriculum objectives as a level against which they canassess their children at any particular stage in the learning.

Teachers have been diagnosing children for many years usingstandardised tests. However what will be new to many will be theneed to diagnose or assess children against a national level ofobjectives, and to devise methods which demonstrate the student'sposition in relation to those objectives. Classroom assessment willbecome a much more structured process, clearly in line with the set ofobjectives prescribed from the centre, instead of teacher formed goalsfor specific groups of children.

While this has advantages in giving a clear direction to the nationaleducation process, modification will need to be used in cases ofchildren with specific learning needs, areas of educational, physical, oremotional disability, itinerant family situations, specific ethnicbackgrounds, or socio-economic deprivation.

COMMUNITY REACTION

-The draft document was received with relief in some editorials,enthusiasm by sectors of trade and industry, hostility by groupsconcerned with Maori interests, and qualified approval by the teachingprofession.

'The introduction of a basic core of subjects to the fifth form, the lastyear of compulsory school attendance,. replaces the current single'compulsory requirement of English.

The essential learning areas of English, mathematics, science andenvi,\onment, and technology are seen as expanding the base ofcompulsory examinable subjects at the end of the schooling cycle. Theinclusion ofsocial scienclls, the arts, physical and personal developmentas co-compulsory subjects to form five was almost entirely ignored bythe press except for an editorial45 lamenting the 'dilution' of historyinto the 'intellectually softer' subject of social sciences.

However Dr Smith, Minister for Education, said that the compulsorystatus of Social Science would give History and Geography moreprominence, areas in which New Zealand students had been 'illinformed'. Citizenship education would be a part of this subject and

45 Otago Daily Times, Editorial, 30 April 1991: 8.


would include business operation, the nation's economy and individualresponsibilities in a democracy.46

Heads of Polytechnics, the Professional Engineers Institution,Chambers of Commerce, the Past Primary Teachers Association, andPrincipals welcomed the introduction of Technology as a compulsorysubject, but sounded some warning notes.

The introduction ofTechnology as a full subject would be delayed threeyears whilst the resources and teacher training components wereassembled to cope with its introduction as a compulsory subject. TheProfessional Engineers Institution offered its services to ensure thatthe implementation was not delayed. The Institution offered to supplyequipment and practical aid, as well as to assist in the development ofthe Technology Syllabus.47

Teachers Associations also emphasised the need to train more mathsand science teachers.48 The training of teachers of primary schoolmaths received comment.49 Primary teacher trainees currentlyreceive only 72 hours of Mathematics education in a three year course,and large numbers of children under 12 are taught by teachers whohave no post-compulsory education in Mathematics. The situation inScience teacher-training is similar.

The provision of computers to schools has yet to be resolved. Whether,under the self-managing entrepreneurial system schools will berequired to raise the funds themselves, or whether extra grants will beprovided by the government has not been decided.

Maori MP Bruce Gregory gave voice to the concerns of the Maoripopulation that the draft document made scant reference to learnin~

Maori language, Maori culture, or to the Treaty of Waitangi.5Teachers were also concerned that Dr Smith had emphasised Asianlanguages and their economic importance but that the document onlytouched 'on the importance of the Maori language, but in a wishy-washy form'.51 .

46 Evening Post, 12 June 1991: 4.

47 New Zealand Herald, 15 May 1991: 2.

48 .Evening Post, 2 May, 1991: 4.

49 Evening Post, 1 May, 1991: 6 'Editorial'.

50 Evening Post, 30 April, 1991: 2.

51 New Zealand Herald, 5 May, 1991: 2.

Legislating for Excellence

Some parents' organisations and teachers were concerned at theincreasing Government emphasis on tests and exams, seeing continualassessment as setting up educational hurdles and making childrenfailures before they were ready for a formal testing system.

The examination ofcore subjects gave no scope for children to competeeducationally outside those areas, or to supplement their curriculumwith optional subjects which may be more suited to their individualabilities. Environment, family circumstance and interest levels wereseen as pre-disposing some children towards the academic coresubjects, and as mitigating against others.

Checks and balances were seen as necessary to ensure that all childrenbenefited from the education they received.

High school principals were also concerned at the danger ofspecialising too soon, and 6f making curriculum narrow and inflexiblefor a percentage of students who were not interested or able tocompete in mathematics, science or technology.52

The greatest concerns expressed on the release of the Draft NationalCurriculum and its plans for assessment were at the primary schoollevel where educators and parents feared a narrowing of focus to thefour main examinable curriculum subjects. In a climate where schoolsare held accountable for a value added return on their educationalinput, the examinable outcomes may be seen as paramount, especiallyif a/system for national comparison of school achievements is set up forthe'under twelves.

The President of the New Zealand Educational Institute, Ms CarolParker, stated that the right kinds of tests must be used at ages 7, 11,and 13 to avoid narrowing the focus of primary school children.53 DrSmith's view that tests needed to be quite rigorous, was not the viewof the Educational Institute which preferred developmental testing torigid pencil and paper type exams with computerised national results.The conclusion of the Institute was that no changes should be madeunless they were educationally sound, administratively efficient, betterfor schools and teachers and better than the status quo. Ms Parker'sview was that none of the changes made in the past four months hadstood up to the test of those criteria. The New Zealand EducationalInstitute and teacher and education unions firmly stated that'education is a public good, not a matter for private responsibility as

52 Evening Post, 29 April 1991: 2.

53 Otago Daily Times, 4 May, 1991: 3.

35

,

36 Legislating for Excellenr;e

Treasury, the Business Roundtable and some right-wing politicianswould have us believe,.54

The education profession's concern is with the reconciliation of theconflicting requirements of the 1989 legislation that 'desirablestandards of learning' are coupled with 'sound educational practice'.Assessment is the means by which 'desirable standards' are madeevident. Assessment also has the ability to lock learning into neatpackages. The danger is that assessment will dictate curriculum andin defining the focus, may diminish the scope of knowledge gained andabilities developed, especially in children under 13.

The profession appears united in supporting a core curriculum and thetype of diagnostic testing program which will support better learning,but remains sceptical about testing policies which appear to emphasisenational' scaling and ranking of student performance on criterionreferenced tests, and the ranking of school against school on the basisof test results.

OUTCOMES: POLICY CHANGES UNDER THE BOLGERGOVERNMENT

Prime Minister Bolger's National Party Government took power on 2November 1990, thereby shifting the emphasis in education to reflectthe attitudes of a new governing party towards educatio,nal reform.The Prime Minister, in his official ministerial biography 1982, listed'education as among his parliamentary interests, and he has served onthe Select Committee for Education.55 In statements made before theelection Mr Bolger outlined his intention to give New Zealand a worldclass education system and equip students with skills to compete in theinternational market place.

Mr Bolger made it clear during an address to the New ZealandTeachers Association that access to education was the foundation ofthe 'enterprise society'.56

Whilst acknowledging the call within New Zealand for the preservationof the Maori language he stated

54 ibid.

55 Reference Section, Parliamentary Library, Wellington, New Zealand.

56 'Education, Enterprise & Jobs are at the Top of Bolgers List', New ZealandHerald, 2 Oct. 1990.


many other people want to preserve their own language. But we must beproficient in English. There must be a recognition of the fact that theinternational language of business is English.57

In the National Government's first Budget in 1991, in the Ministry ofEducation's Brief for the Incoming Government, 'Quality Education forAll According .to their Needs' (October 1990), major changes toeducation were outlined:

• National Curriculum scope was extended to include the earlychildhood sector.

• The Ministry of Education set National Curriculum objectives.Curriculum activities and content development are then contractedout by the Ministry, and from these resulting national guidelinesschools and teachers make the decisions as to what will be learntand taught.

This document summarised the tension between the priorities placedby schools on the development of local curriculum objectives in theircharters, and the need for students to develop new or modified skillsand abilities which are perceived to be in the national interest.

The document addressed the dilemma of greater centralised control ofcurriculum versus increased local financial autonomy by stating:

Effecting national curriculum change is now more difficult, given the greaterautonomy and funding given to local institutions, and the perception that schoolsand early childhood institutions must meet the immediate needs of their

(;. students. These immediate needs may not be seen as identical with the skills" that are perceived to be in the national interest - say, for the economy, or the

workforce - in the longer term.oS

By this stage the debate over national testing, hotly argued by theteachers' professional unions, had resulted in the conclusion by theMinistry in its brief:

The relationship between curriculum and assessment is also a significant policyissue. Government decisions about national form of assessment will have amaterial impact upon the curriculum.o9

57 National Education, July 1987.

58 Quality Education for All According to their Needs: Brief for the incomingGovernment. Ministry of Education, Wellington, Oct. 1990.

59 ibid.

38 Legislating for EXCE;llence

And no doubt after following closely the costly structure developed inBritain to administer national testing, the financial implications werebeginning to appear onerous.

In the '1991 Budget the Government maintained the overalladministrative structure for Primary and Secondary Education.However some contentious changes are evident. The proposal to bulkfund schools for teachers salaries (as suggested in Picot Report),coupled With the easing of controls over staffing levels andqualifications, is strongly opposed by the teacher unions and likely tobe a source of ongoing struggle.

On the issue of qualifications, ai? in Britain it is proposed thatgraduates with no education training be' trained 'on-the-job' bypractising classroom teachers and assessed by senior teachers, probablyat the school level.

The problems of teaching a National Curriculum, participating inNational assessment at four levels - ages 7, 11,14 and 16 - as well asteacher training by classroom teachers, are immense, and will form theunions agenda for the foreseeable future. 'Training on the cheap' willbe the claim and the unions will seek to prove that increased spendingon pre-school and the Parents as First Teachers Scheme could benegated once the child reaches primary school due to overloadedteachers and the complexity of training graduates only in theclassroom.

The Education bureaucracy was also described as having reproducedi'~selfin the new structures; therefore the Parent Advocacy Council wasabolished and teacher registration was made voluntary, reducing thefunction of the Teacher Registration Board. The Budget declares thatschool boards should be free to select the teacher 'most suitable'whether or not that teacher satisfies current registration policies. Thiswould seem to open the door to a less-qualified and potentially-cheaperworkforce.

IMPACT OF CHANGES

The 1991 Budget again changes the direction of education in NewZealand and has directly challenged the unions. While the governmentsees the changes as enhancing education and freeing it fromunnecessary bureaucratic restraints, the unions and Opposition see thechanges asa definite move towards 'commodification' of education.

,The concept pf education reform in New Zealand, adopted readily fromBritain, may prove to be inappropriate in a much smaller, moresocially-cohesive country.


Professor Rugh Lauder sounded a warning when he condemned thelack of research into the relationships between education and theeconomy, and the advantages and disadvantages of choice andcompetition. Re believes that the assumption that competition willpromote better standards is naive. The trend of teaching to a test canpromote labelling and streaming of children and the belief that a 7year-old who is below average on National Tests at that age is a failureforever:

...once parents see what is happening, that their children may be streamed andlabelled at age 7 and won't be able to fulfIl their aspirations in tertiaryeducation, enormous electoral pressure will build up. And if the Governmentcontinues down this road, there is no mechanism for recovery.60

Shona Ream, President of the New Zealand Post Primary TeachersAssociation gave another perspective to testable and competitivenational curriculum:

.The principal and ·staff raised with me the fact that some of their neighbouringschools were now teaching directly and narrowly to the externally moderatedcomponents of the curriculum....in a competitive urban environment, thepressure to follow suit and ignore the internally assessed components isincreasingly difficult to resist. Their point was that with the disappearance ofthe inspectorate, there was nothing but their professional consciences to keepthem honest - no-one to tell the school next door to teach the whole syllabus,not just the testable part of it.61

There is no doubt that an enormous pool of creative talent, initiative,energy and expertise is available amongst the schools of any country.That adequate skills can be formed quickly in a transition period ofeighteen months is unlikely. Changing job expectations of seniorprofessionals so dramatically can cause resentment, confusion, andoverwhelming work· loads. Public opinion on the transfer ofresponsibilities from the administrative centre in Wellington to theschool was often exasperated and angry. The devolution experienceaffected the ability of staff to cope positively and tenaciously with theNational Curriculum Draft proposals issued in May 1991. So it wasa case of major change being repeated quickly and regularly, atintervals of 8-9 months. Stamina indeed is required when such anenormous restructuring of education takes place so quickly, and.stretches the teaching resources of the nation.

60 Hugh Lauder Launches Report, Post Primary Teachezs Association News, Aug.1991.

61 Hearn, Shona. Address to New Zealand Post Primary Teacher" AssociationCurriculum Conference, May 1991.


Devolution has begun to mean fragmentation and loss of coherence interms of national curriculum. In the New Zealand system of 2,500primary schools (the majority of which are one or two teacher schools),and slightly more than 300 secondary schools, broad central control ofcurriculum with local flexibility was a workable option. Whatappearedto be less workable from a government viewpoint was the centralcurriculum development section of the Department of Education, thelocal inspectorate system, and the permanent regional level adviserswho helped implement broad central curriculum at the school level.Micro-economic reform has retained a centrally-based curriculumwhich is now written and developed by 'contractors'. A huge range ofprofessional curriculum expertise was dispersed and abandoned,leaving small schools to fill in the implementation and assessment gapsas best they could.

Community reaction to the New Zealand model is beginning tocrystallise with the increasing liaison between all education-sectorunions, Boards of Trustees, parent and community groups such as theFederated Farmers, alarmed of the potential closure, and financial,administrative and educational difficulties, encountered by small ruralschools.

Centralised curriculum complete with total financial devolutionincluding the bulk funding of teachers' salaries, has produced a NewZealand educational reform model more radical than that of Englandand Wales.

Whether a country as small in infrastructure and centralisedpopulation as. New Zealand can survive such radical change withouteducational destabilisation is the big question of the 1990s.


AUSTRALIA

CHRONOLOGY

1985 Quality of Education Review Committee (QERC) chairedby Professor Peter KarmelTask: Justify the 50 percent increase per pupil Federalexpenditure between 1973-1983.

0' 1987 i) Abolition of the Commonwealth SchoolsCommission.

23 May1988

ii) Departments amalgamated into Department ofEmployment, Education and Training - JohnDawkins, Minister.

iii) Review and rationalisation of all associatedstatutory bodies.

iv) Policy advisory, policy making and policyimplementation powers separated.

v) National Board of Employment, Education andTraining (NBEET) established, with foursubsidiary councils: the Schools Council, theHigher Education Council, the Employment andSkills Formation Council, and the AustralianResearch Council.

vi) Strengthening the policy making power of theAustralian Education Council (AEC).

Strengthening Australia's schools, Minister Dawkinsemphasised:

i) Common National Curriculum framework

ii) regular assessment of effectiveness of schoolstandards

iii) improvement in teaching quality

iv) retention of young people beyond compulsoryschooling age.


24 July1988

10 October1988

10 October1988

January1989

1989

1989

November.1989

1989

1990

Announcement by Minister Dawkins that the ACTU, theNational Council· of Independent Schools, theIndependent Teachers Federation of Australia, theAustralian High Schools Principals Association, and theNational Catholic Education Commission had agreed to

.participate in development of National goals andpriorities to strengthen the role and performance ofAustralia's schools.

The Hobart Declaration on Schooling: Adoption by theAustralian Education Council (Federal and StateMembers of Education, assisted by a Standing committeeof Directors General of Education and their counterpartsin tertiary, further and higher education) of Commonand Agreed Goals for Australian Schooling. .

Decision to set up a National Curriculum companyCurriculum Corporation (CC).

Federal Cabinet endorsed Dawkins proposals forAustralian core curriculum, assessment, and starting age.

Mapping the Australian Curriculum, Vol I The GeneralCurriculum, Vol 2 The Mathematics Curriculum,Canberra, Department of Education, Employment andTraining on behalf of the AEC.

National Report on Schooling in Australia andStatistical Index, published by the CC for the AEC.

Girls in Schools 2- Report on the National Policy forthe Education of Girls in Australian Schools, DepartmentofEducation, Employment and Training, Canberra 1989.

A Fair Go: the Federal Government's Strategy for RuralEducation and Training.

Curriculum Mapping ofScienceCurriculum Mapping of TechnologyCurriculum Mapping ofEnglishCurriculum Mapping of Society and Environment(including Aboriginal Studies). Published by the CC forAEC.

1990 •

•

Legisla.ting for Excellence 43

Audit of environmental resource materials.Published by the CC.National Statement on Mathematics for AustralianSchools, and accompanying statement· for thecommunity, Mathematics in our Schools.Published by the CC.

March 1990 Mobile Students - a set of support materials for schoolsand families involved with mobile students.

8 March1990

September1990

December1990

13 Dec.1990

The Gender Equity in Curriculum Reform Project - tofacilitate curriculum which leads to equality for womenand men in home, work and public life.

Leaving School 1990: A guide to year 12 Certificate andTertiary Entrance in Australia.

The Shape of Teacher Education: Some Proposals.

The Language ofAustralia: Discussion Paper onAustralian Literacy, Language Policy for the 1990s, JohnDawkins (Green Paper).

1991 Audit of Aboriginal studies materialsMapping of Studies of Society and Environment(including Aboriginal Studies).

1991;

19 Feb.1991

June 1991

July 1991

Aug. 1991

2 Sept.1991

The Effective Schools Project. 3-year community-basedcampaign.Development ofresotirce materials on 'Chance and Data'supporting National Statement on Mathematics.Published by the CC.

National Project on the Quality of Teaching andLearning.

National Statement on English for Australian SchoolsDraft for Consultation.

National Statement on Technology Education forAustralian School Systems - Draft for Consultation.

Curriculum and Assessment Committee established bythe AEC - involving also the Accrediting Agency.

National Policy on Language and Literature forAustralia.


1991

October1991

June 1993

Mapping equivalence ofYear 12 certificates - undertakenby Australian Conference ofAssessment and CertificationAuthorities (ACACA).

Publication of the 1990 National Report on Schooling bythe CC.

National Statements on each of the 8 Learning areas tobe completed: English, Mathematics, Science, Languagesother than English (LOTE), the Arts, Technology,Studies of Science· and the Environment, Health including Physical Education and Personal Development.


THE MOVE TOWARDS REFORM

It is now recognised that we will need flexibility and a depth of .creativity, imagination, ente~rise and innovation, as well as thehuman capacity for foresight 2 if educational restructuring to meetnational goals is to produce quality education rather than confusion.

Thus Margaret Thatcher, a proponent of National Curriculum in theUnited Kingdom, warned early in 1990 that a curriculum determinedby a central authority may appear a reasonable proposition, but 'if youget it wrong, th,e situation is worse afterwards than before.' In theyear which saw the finalisation of National Testing plans for sevenyear olds in England and Wales, were these second thoughts?

Events in New Zealand, also have indicated a cumulative policycharacterised by a 'do it now, correct it later' approach. Phil Copper 63

(New Zealand Post Primary Teachers Association) describes thestruggles between teachers and parents, between teachers and theiremployers and between teachers and teachers as struggles inquicksand: 'the contestants were being overtaken by events'.

'Picking up the pieces' headlines have abounded in the United Kingdomand NZ as post national curriculum commentators reflect on the taskof making their legislation deliver at the individual school level. TheUnited Kingdom and New Zealand are launched on a post-legislativepath of reactive adjustment and fine· tuning which may well continuefor years.

Like New Zealand, the restructuring of the Australian public servicepreceded the onset of a corporate manageralist structure for educationin Australia. With its format of central articulation of policy goals anddevolution of service delivery functions, it is part of the response tofunding pressures producing a 'more for less' productivity philosophy.

Pressure from outside government had been building for fifteen yearsfor recognition of public and business perceptions of education'sinability to deliver 'acceptable products'. Curriculum appeared as anissue in most complaints about education. Unlike the United Kingdom,Australia produced directive curricula and syllabi which, in the late1960s-1970s, evolved as 'guidelines' of comprehensive form. Why thena concern over absence of useful curriculum at both the student andthe employer level?

62 Lyons, J. 'Outlook on the Future', Parliament Research Service BackgroundPaper, Parliament of Australia, 10 Sept. 1991.

63 Barcan, Alan. 'Dawkins and the schools - the debate opens'. AustralianEducation Quarterly, Winter 1989.


The school-based curriculum movement of the 1970s emphasised theneed for content appropriate to local social and geographical conditionsand recognised the increasing professionalism of teachers whosetraining requirements were being extended. The freedom to plan atschool level also imposed new constraints and more sophisticatedrequirements on teachers.

Skills were needed in analysing community needs, resources, childability, interests, teacher expertise and potential for co-operativeplanning. Decisions were required on the form, development,structure, concepts, skills and content to be learned. Appropriatemethods of transmission needed to be devised, and evaluationstrategies set up. Some schools buckled under the strain, others :JC'oledknowledge and resources and sought help through support servicessuch as federal grants and state consultancy services. Still othersachieved remarkable gems of innovation and learning under inspiredleadership, and with enthusiastic staff relishing the challenge. Muchdepended on the mix of staff and leadership .and the vision of theparticular regional and state bureaucracies, as well as access to fundingto allow a wide range of support services for new initiatives. Suchdiversity of enthusiasms produced a corresponding concern at thebureaucratic level that schools may be proceeding in directions whichwould be difficult to evaluate.

School-based curriculum development became the precursor to schoolbased management. Policies were to justify curriculum and to providemechanisms for measuring its effectiveness. Thus accountability atschool management level became a controlling factor for the settingand teaching of curriculum. Freedom given to teachers particularly inthe primary schools, was seen as producing problems. In a report in1989 on Citizenship Education, the Senate Standing Committee onEmployment, Education and Training, remarked that formalstatements of policy are not always a reliable guide to what is actuallytaking place.64

The gap between prescribed curriculum and the classroom product wasoften wide. Given the permission to investigate what children neededat the local level, teachers turned their attention towards specific needssuch as transition education, work experience and expanded curriculumdesigned to equip the student for the world beyond school.

These gradual expansions of curriculum paramet~rs produced anavalanche of extra curricular studies sometimes termed crosscurriculum perspectives. Peace studies, women's studies, computereducation, Aboriginal studies, multicultural studies, driver education,

64 .Barcan, Alan. 'The Control of Schools and the Curriculum'. AustralianQuarterly, Winter 1990.


road safety education, stranger-danger, media studies, legal studies,technics, sex education, life education studies, and outdoor education

, all received varying levels of bureaucratic approval and some weremandatory inclusions in classroom curriculum. All were aimed atsatisfying strong beliefs within the community of the necessity ofcurriculum relating to particular interest areas.

Overloaded timetables, confusing policy directives, fragmentedcurriculum, blurring of priorities and frustration at all levels bothinside and outside schools often resulted. Many schools became therepository of organised special interest groups, and in the effort toappear responsive to the demands of a pluralistic society, became inmany eases the target for its dissatisfaction.

Antagonism surfaced most noticeably at secondary school level whereclaims of illiterate and innumerate students came from industry andfrom tertiary educators. Even in 1991 industry spokesmen such asPeter Laver (BHP), chair of the National Board of Employment,Education and Training (NBEET), were still claiming that schoolleavers 'couldn't add up and couldn't spell', but also noting that theywere thinking better, were more aware, and better personally andsocially adjusted.65 However, the 'trickle down' effect of suchcriticism at the secondary level created an anxiety in some primaryschool parents who transferred their demands for formalisation,structure and guaranteed outcomes to the under 12s.

Schools were being squeezed from all sides and in the 1980s whenresource funding and available teaching positions began to be reduced,able':teaching candidates turned away from an increasingly distressedprofession to other tertiary studies. State departmental heads ofeducation when queried on the quality of candidates being acceptedinto courses claimed that they were the best available, as the demandfor careers in education was declining.66

Australia had emerged into post-industrial society with educationalproblems and needs similar to those of many OECD countries. Thetask ofdefining which values, disciplines, areas ofknowledge skills andthemes are necessary for competence in today's world, and therecognition that these must be learned as well as taught, raised theissue of the process of transmitting knowledge and facilitatinglearning. Core curriculum may produce cohesion but not necessarilycompetency or excellence.

65 Laver, Peter. Address to conference, 'Educating The Clever Country', CanberraJuly 1991.

66 Sharpe, Dr .Fenton. quoted in 'New Directions in Teacher Education' by AlienTaylor, Education Monitor, Winter 1990. .


OECD countries aware of the tensions involved in restructuringeducation to generate citizens of foresight, would acknowledge thattensions will not be resolved merely by the issuin¥ of policy guidelines,frameworks or directions or even by legislation.6 The bottom line is,of course, children and teachers - and unfortunately often insufficientteachers. Critical shortages in all States of teachers of maths andscience and technology have left some final year high school studentswith subject-qualified teachers for only part of their last year. Thisproblem was raised at the Education: Pathways to Reform Conference'in 1989:

The quality of the teaching force is a big factor in achieving any set ofobjectives;68 and

Preservice and inservice programs must provide classroom teachers with a firmknowledge of the subject areas they are to teach and with flexible skills in howto teach the mh<ofstudents they will encounter. Teachers also need to be welleducated people in a much broader sense. They need to be open minded,tolerant, critical thinkers who operate flexibly and creatively, know a lot aboutthe world, who value knowledge and difference and who know how to managechange.69

Teacher-education reform is already on the Australian agenda. One ofthe difficulties the 'new teacher' and indeed those remaining in thesystem will have to contend with is the 'new pupil'. Torsten Husendescribes this new 'underclass' as some 10 per cent to 20 per cent ofthe entire student body:

...from psychologically underprivileged homes, verbally unstimuIated, affectivelyundernourished and disturbed by sheer neglect or force ofcircumstance. Unableto keep up with classmates from more privileged backgrounds or to rise to theexpectations of teachers they lag behind from the outset of schooling.70

These students are stifled by failure from the start and as theyprogress through school, Husen says, they become described (inSweden) as 'book-tired' and are gently pushed 'into what he describesas 'adjusted courses of study'. The academic nature of secondary andperhaps eventually primary school curriculum does not assist these

67 Skilbeck, Malcolm, Curriculum Refonn -An OverviewofTrends. OECD,1990.

68 Baker, Kenneth. (UK) addressing Education: Pathways to Reform, ConferenceSydney May 1989 reported in 'New Dimensions in Teacher Education'.Education Monitor, Winter 1990,

69 McCelland, Jan, Assistant Director General (Human Resources) NSW, op.cit,

70 Husen, T, 'Schools for the 19908', Scandinavian Journal of Educational .Research, vol. 33, no. 1, 1989.


children although they may be retained for longer periods of time. Weare left with Husen's statement that

gainful employment in today's society tends not to be a characteristic of youthbelow the age of 20. Prolonged schooling has become the main labour marketpolicy instrument in an era when the absorptive capacity of the employmentsystem has been drastically reduced due to new technology and more costeffective use of labour.71

Re-structuring curriculum will not solve the tensions of late teenageunemployment: at best it will change the type of student received bytertiary institutions - which may not be to their satisfaction - andperhaps provide alternatives for those not willing or able to continueeducation into their twenties.

In seeking to resolve the tensions between

• curriculum content and process• curriculum materials development and professional development• curriculum and assessment• the economic and cultural roles of schooling72

the possibility of narrowing the focus of education arises. 'Skilling'convinces wary educators that education is to be geared to specificeconomic needs.

Is this actually articulating a grass-roots Australian belief thateducation should be basically for utilitarian purposes? Or is it inopposition to a strongly held belief that education should be universaland.i~hould prepare students for personal life, commitment to theirsociety, and to the achievement of social justice? Hard economic timesbring demand for more competitive and job-related education. Affluenteconomies encourage breadth of choice beyond a solely job-orientedcurriculum.

NATIONAL CURRICULUM FRAMEWORKS

The curriculum mapping exercises 1988-1991 showed us clearly wherewe were and, considering the cohesion across the States, met part of

71 ibid.

72 Kemmis, S. 'Curriculum in Australia: contemporary issues'. Issues in AustralianEducation,. Edited by J V D'Cruz and P E Langford, Melbourne, 1990.


one of Minister Dawkins' key proposals in, Strengthening Australia'sschools,73 representing the development of a national perspective.

It has been suggested that the Minister's other proposals included

• a clear statement of fundamental purposes and co-operative effortfor schools

• a common curriculum framework for Australian schools, and• a common approach to assessment.74

The implication is th~t the Australian Education Council (AEC) willneed to define, for the nation, what is meant by a national perspective,a common curriculum, a common framework and a common approachto assessment.

This amounts to a national mission statement of intent, quite different, from the 10 National Goals for schooling known as The Hobart

Declaration. It is difficult to see how national curriculum frameworksand guidelines can be credibly established or used by schools unlessthere is an acceptance that existing commonalities across States'curricula are inadequate or do not reflect the as-yet-undefined 'nationalperspective'.75 Malcolm Skilbeck, a leading educationist, claims that:

In an open democracy it's not good enough to have the shape, outline, strategiescontours and directions of teaching and learning determined without publicdiscussion and debate. The Government has failed to have an open nationalinquiry on education. Australia is the only OECD country where it would bepossible for this to happen. We need to ensure that the AEC opens up a ~rocess

of widespread public discussion on directions ,on Australian curriculum. 6

Why did the Commonwealth Government decide to opt out of aleadership role in national curriculum development?77 Was theseparate constitutional responsibility ofthe States and Commonwealthin relation to curriculum the prime factor? In its Key Objectives

73 Dawkins, John. StrengtheningAustralia's schools: a consideration of the focusand content ofschooling, DEET, 1988.

74 Piper, Kevin. 'National Curriculum: Prospects and Possibilities'. CurriculumPerspectives, Newsletter Edition, Sept. 1989.

75 Dawkins;·J. StrengtheningAustralia's schools: a consideration ofthe focus andcontent ofschooling, DEET, 1988.

76 Skilbeck, Malcolm speaking on Education Now, ABC Radio National, July 1991(interviewed by Lyndal Jones).

77 Piper, K. 'National Curriculum Two Years On: An undelivered paper'Curriculum Perspectives, Sept. 1991.


Statement for 1990-91 DEET's only reference to schools curriculum isthat it will:

...raise the quality of curriculum in Australian schools through involvement inthe Australian Education Council.78

It also makes clear its commitment to teachers' award re-structuring.However the intention to take up a position of review and evaluationis stated somewhat ambiguously:

Examine the efficiency and effectiveness of schools programs with relevantStatetrerritory a;-encies in the light of the current review of Commonwealth State relations.7

From the time of proclaiming a National Agenda for schooling in 19871988, Federal Minister Dawkins had necessarily to work through theStates Education Ministers, whilst also holding a monitoring briefoversome Australia-wide aspects of education.

Diminution of the Federal Minister's initiative appears to coincide withthe proposal (April 1989) to set up a national curriculum agency to beknown as the Curriculum Corporation (CC). The refusal of the largestState, New South Wales, under the leadership of Dr Terry Metherell,to join the Corporation was influential in ensuring that theCorporation would not lead all States, together, into a new age of cooperative curriculum development, textbook publishing and related'corPorate' initiatives, as originally implied. In 1990 the CurriculumCornoration in its 'mission statement' had outlined its role as:

•.<)

.,facilitating collaboration between schools, systems and authoritiesin curriculum development and information sharing

• avoiding unnecessary differences in curriculum between States andTerritories

• encouraging more effective use of resources by eliminatingunnecessary duplication of effort in curriculum development andthe provision of information services

• providing advice to the AEC on national curriculum issues referredto by the AEC.80

The mission statement delineates the Corporation's role in supportiveterms.

78 Our Corporate Directions 1990-91 and Beyond, DEET, Canberra, Nov. 1990.

79 ibid.

80 Curriculum Corporation. Strategic Plan, 1991/92.


It ~ndertakes to

• provide management services where requested to· nationalcollaborative curriculum activities agreed to by the AEC

• facilitate and undertake cornmissionised project work in relationto curriculum development and information sharing andcategorising

• arrange for the printing, publication, distribution and sale ofeducational materials requested by the AEC.

The CC is, therefore, a coordinating agency for dissemination of'frameworks', 'statements', and 'guidelines' initiated by bodies such asthe Conference of Directors of Curriculum, and less significant in thefunction of defining a national perspective on .education, which is seenbythe Curriculum Corporation as a function of the AEC.

The AEC's curriculum mapping project teams have delivered theirreports in individual subject areas (see Chronology Chart) which havebeen followed closely by National Statements on those areas.

Mapping exercises were a collaborative operation contracted toparticular States. For example, in the case of Science, these. were theAustralian Capital Territory, Northern Territory, and Queensland,with one project team officer from each State, the work of the projectteam being overseen by a steering committee drawn from theConference of (State) Directors of Curriculum, and a reference groupof officers representing all the systems. The State Directors ofCurriculum had assumed collaborative control of the process and haverequested the AEC's endorsement of their Strategic Plan for NationalCollaborative Curriculum Development 1991-93.

The path towards National Curriculum appears carefully non-didactic,but still aimed at co-ordination across the States whilst promoting llldextending the use ofnew and relevant approaches to content, as statedby the Curriculum Corporation..Thus:

The purpose ofthe National Statement on Mathematics for Australian Schoolsis to provide a framework around which systems and schools may build theirmathematics curriculum. It does not provide a syllabus or curriCUlum, indeed,ita structure makes it inappropriate for direct use in that way. Rather, it shouldprovide a foundation for appropriate courses which will meet students' needs and

. reflect advances in our knowledge - both ofthe su~ectof mathematics itself andof the way in which students learn mathematics. 1

The release of such statements, although excellent documents inthemselves raises further questions: Who are they for? How will they

81 A National Statement on Mathematics for Australian School, CurriculumCorporation and Australian Education Council, Dec. 1990.

Legislating for ExceIlence 53

be used? How do they relate to current practice? Do they indicatenew directions? Are they relevant to on-going curriculum developmentindependently undertaken in each State? .

The National Mathematics Statement answers:

Precisely how it will be used, or by whom, will depend on the particulardistribution ofresponsibilities for curriculum development within each State andTerritory. In some places it will be used by the education authorities to reviewthe advice and curriculum support they currently provide for the teeching ofmathematics. In other places schools may use the document to 8llIIist them inrevising their mathematics curriculum. Teacher institutions will also find it ofuse in planning curriculum courses. Thus its major audience is curriculumdevelopel'B at the system, refonal or school level, but it will also be of interestto the broader community.S .

This position appears somewhat distant from the common frameworksought in StrengtheningAustralia's schools. There is no obligation onany part of the system to use such a statement as anything butreference material. However the statements do provide the first openand accessible basis for public discussion of curriculum and as suchmay become a catalyst for more co-operative analysis of Australia'sneeds in this area. It indicates, however, a lengthy process but onewhich may include broader consultation.

A further emphasis in· Strengthening Australia's schools was onreporting. It was stated that the nation needed to receive an annualreport on the situation of its schools. The first report was endorsed bythe:: AEC in December 1990. The report itself outlines itsint~rpretationof 'reporting' in its preface. It was to fill a gap in theAu~tralianpublic's knowledge about the nation's education systems andtheir effectiveness. The report would:

comment:report:describe:summarise:

on operations and participationon school curriculumstudent outcomesfinancial resources.

Major aims were to:

• raise public awareness of schooling in Australia• provide a sound basis for informed comment• highlight national and state innovations in schooling• draw public attention to particular schooling activities or programs

82 ibid.

,.

54 Legislating for Excel1ence

• satisfY the legal requirements for the Federal Government toaccount for the expenditure of Commonwealth funds inschooling:83

The 1990 report, the National Report on Schooling in Australia, wasindeed descriptive, but it was not an evaluative report usingcomparative measurement summation, or indicating future directions.It did not fulfil the requirement of 'reporting to the nation on how wellour schools are performing against established goals'.84 By its ownaim of 'raising public awareness', providing public access is widespread,it will probably inform and give the education debate an establishedstarting point. It may well be the first step through the complexitiesof federalism in clarifYing what we all mean by 'Australian Education'- a step long overdue.

A more contentious area, that of National Frameworks for assessmentyears 1-10, appears to be the consolidation into subject profiles of theintended outcomes for all eight key learning areas. The relationshipbetween the Frameworks and the profiles will be an interesting study,as will the usefulness of both if they are incorporated Australia wideon the same basis as the National Statements on subject areas.National Evaluation profiles are useful only if they are indeed nationaland not merely to 'support... assist... find it of use.... also be ofinterest,.85

A reading of all reports, frameworks, guidelines, policies, statementssince 1989 against the background of StrengtheningAustralia's schoolsshows some interesting and very Australian characteristics. Whilstguarding their independence vigorously the States have neverthelesscontributed detailed, necessary and previously almost inaccessible datato National Reports and Projects. The initial purpose of theCurriculum Corporation as the co-ordinating force may well have beendiminished but the States' educational curriculum agents have openeda dialogue with each other which also carries responsibility forproducing cohesive, balanced and useful documents on where theNation is in specific subject areas. Having done this the naturalfollow-on has been to state expected outcomes in the form ofsubjectprofiles. These achievements in a federal system are quite remarkable.

83 National P..eport on Schooling in Australia, and Statistical Index.

84 Dawkins, J. StrengtheningAWiitralia's schools: a consideration of the focus andcontent ofschooling, DEET, 1988.

85 National Statement on Mathematics for Australian Schools. CurriculumCorporation, AEC, Dec. 1990: 6.


The question remains as to whether public and industry expectationsof our 'imminent' National Curriculum been falsely raised? Therhetoric on educational disadvantage incurred by mobile families,different school starting ages, and even the educationallyinconsequential differences in States' handwriting styles, has abated,perhaps having served its purpose of focusing public attention onsimple, accessible education issues understood by all.

A National Curriculum amongst a system of federated States has beenscarcely more than a vision or term with which to galvanise the Statesinto a dialogue and level of co-operation long overdue. The resultingreports show that the States are now responsible for the Curriculumagenda but that the Federal Minister targeted areas within his control,without which curriculum reform would be null and void.

Minister Dawkins' new direction and emphasis on teacher-educationquality, and effective teaching methods, showed a welcome return tothe basis of educational reform: How can we get children to learnmore willingly and effectively and for longer?

There are and always have been .... teachers who are to learning as Dr Grantly. Dick Read was held to be to childbirth - rendering it both enjoyable andpainless. Regrettably there are not enough of these super-human professionalsto go around all of us who need them.86

A NATIONAL DIRECTION FOR AUSTRALIA'S SCHOOLS?;j',

In the 1970s the catch phrases of education were equity, diversity,devdlution ofresponsibility, community involvementand disadvantagedschools. The early 1980s saw participation and equity, and equality ofoutcomes as the key words. With John Dawkins in the new portfolioof Employment, Education and Training the emphasis moved to 'skillsformation', 'training', 'productivity', 'effectiveness' and 'efficiency'.87

This change of emphasis and the sense of alienation through the useof economic terminology caused many in education to adopt highlydefensive positions. Whilst most in the profession saw the need forchange and restructuring as evident at many levels, they were notenthused by change which appeared to address economic imperativesrather than what they saw as the needs of young children. Theabsence of a middle-ground opinion, or even a possible alternative to

86 Connors, L. 'Futures for Schooling in Australia: Nationalisation, Privatisation orUnification'. Australian College of Education, Canberra, 1989.

87 Pope, Beverly, 'Setting the Policy Agenda for School Education', Backgroundpaper for conference 'Educating the Clever Country', Canberra, July 1991.

56 Legislating for Exrellence

this structure, was marked. 'Remedies' such as 'voucher systems',parent power through 'voting with their feet', increased subsidies for'popular schools' (ie supposedly effective and achieving schools), allindicated an inability to examine the system from the bottom up andto identify areas of inappropriate ,management and service deliverywhich required overhauling.

Some States, for instance New South Wales with the Scott and Carrickreports, identified managerial restructuring as the first step towardsmaking schools function better for today's needs. This strengthenedthe position of the senior bureaucrats cif the Department of Educationand under the 'line management' model proposed in the Scott Report,placed greater power at the Regional and Directorate levels. The NSWTeachers Federation saw this as a threat to the professional positionof teachers, with the real losers being parents and students.88

Teachers and schools have been defined as part of the problem ratherthim as part of the solution. The general perception of teachers, weare told, is of people in a 'low-grade, dead-end occupation, and onlyinterested in themselves,.89 And, further, 'there exists a good deal ofmutual hostility and bitterness at the industrial level,.9o It isunsurprising then that the general exclusion of teachers from thereform process has created strain. Teachers' unions are increasinglybeing forced into the role of exercising only the power of veto, throughindustrial action, and if the New Zealand experience is any indication,may oppose each new proposal to its limit. Principals, caught blltweentheir new corporate managerialist roles, and allegiance to theirteaching staff, have a difficult task in projecting a positive, pro-active,leadership image whilst addressing the demands and implications ofboth State and the National Goals for schooling.

Greg Taylor, Secretary DEET, sees award re-structuring for teachers'salaries as an attempt to find a co-operative level of action. TheNational Benchmark for the top of the teaching scale was raised to$38,000 per annum plus margins above that for Advanced SkillsTeachers.9! Unions saw this as creating an'extra step for teachers onthe last level of the scale who were continuing to developprofessionally. Their position was that 'you can't have too many

88 Cross, Phil. 'The Scott Review', Education: Journal of the NSW TeachersFederation, 12 June 1989.

89 Taylor, Greg. Secretary DEET. Address to conference Educating the CleverCountry, Canberra, July 1991.

90 ibid.

91 ibid.


skilled teachers'. However, after quotas were imposed on the numbersof ASTs, permitted in each State, they began to realise that:

You can't have too many skilled teachers, but if you have, you can't reward allof them.92

Teachers are clearly not seen as major players in either award restructuring or national curriculum project initiatives. Grass rootsignorance of the national agenda is widespread, many teachers havingbarely enough time to absorb professional award restructuring, andState level re-organisation let alone divine what influence the AEC orNBEET may have on the future of children and learning in Australia..The teacher member on NBEET· is nominated by that body itself.Together the State Ministers who form the AEC direct the CurriculumCorporation in its formulation of such initiatives as NationalAssessment Profiles. The AEC appears as an inaccessible groupoperating to an unpublicised agenda and remote from current debate.Revisions are constantly being made to its position, direction, andprogram, the reasons for which are inaccessible to the public.Teachers' salary positions may well have been enhanced through theNational Benchmark decisions but, by marginalising them asconsultees or even recipients of updated information, the AEC maywell be de-skilling them.93

Those involved in reconstructingAustralian education look askance atthe UK model as regulating 'inputs' rather than nominating outcomes.But are we in a position of national accord as to what those outcomessho~ld be? The extensive Australian curriculum mapping exerciseshavg .shown that similarities are many and differences few in majorcurriculum content across the nation. In one hundred years ofcompulsory education we appear to have achieved the impossible in afederal system - a surprisingly cohesive set of State curricula.

Where then do the dilemmas lie? Why the rhetoric about fallingstandards, illiteracy, innumeracy, poor teaching, and the need for amore market-responsive product? Have we adopted the post-moderncompulsion to measure, audit, weigh and assess and have applied itwith flimsy rationale, to schools?94

92 Richards, Rosemary. Address to conference Educating the Clever Country,.Canberra, July 1991.

93 Kenway, Jane. Deakin University, address to 'Educating the Clever Country'Canberra, July 1991.

94 Trip, David H. 'The Idea of Meta-Curriculum as a Common NationalCurriculum'. Curriculum Perspectives, vol 9. no. 4, 1989.


An address on Educating the Clever Country, posed three questionsabout education:

1 How much in total should we spend on education alone in comparison withall the other competing budgetary demands?

2 What is the optimum allocation within each of the education sectors - preschool, primary, secondary, tertiary?

3 .How do we formulate an efficiency/effectiveness equation over the wholesystem?95 .

To achieve a co-ordinated system with satisfactory communicationbetween States, presumably resulting in 'clearly defined objectives,negotiation, and gives and takes'96 industry has to know what itwants in its graduates of schools, TAFEs and universities, andarticulate that need in ways which are accessible to the providers oftheir workforce, the educators. How can industry be encouragedtherefore, to assess its needs?

Industry needs to assess what it is already getting. How do we assess first yeargraduates? Often as a group, rather than individuals with varying skills andbackgrounds. Sometimes objectively, sometimes subjectively.97

It would seem a commonsense task to many teachers and schools thatto assist a student's progress effectively, methods for assessing currentcapacities and knowledge should be devised· and used. Schools havebeen using such assessments for years. That such a debate over whatstudents need to know should take place without industry and businesshaving to define their industrial needs, and in the light of those needs,examine the product they are receiving from the education system,seems untenable. A co-ordinated system should examine theaspirations of all parties and begin a dialogue which looks for thesimilarities in criteria outcome preferences and uses them as a startingpoint for creating an intelligent discourse.

If the role of NBEET is to re-structure policy to determine the qualityof delivery98, then policy ownership by the deliverers should be apriority. Instead the profession sees NBEET as reducing the role ofthe unions and delivering policy decisions into the hands of non-

95 Laver, Peter. BHP Now Chair NBEET. Address to Conference 'Educating theClever Country' Canberra, July 1991.

96 ibid.

97 ibid.

98 ibid.

,


educationalist managers, and politicians, and the Dawkins program asbringing further deprofessionalisation.99

It could be said that, within the profession, the concept of 'NationalCurriculum' has an image problem.

OUTCOMES - A DIFFERENT NATIONAL DIRECTION FORAUSTRALIAN SCHOOLS?

Increasingly teaching has attracted less-qualified candidates asgraduates perceive that teaching has become a lower-status and poorlypaid profession, with limited promotion opportunities, diminishingautonomy, in a climate, both inside and outside schoolrooms, ofantagonism towards the process and products of the education system.

An OECD report, describes possible strategies for selecting moresuitable teaching candidates:

Of those recruited into the profession, some are not suited to teaching forpersonality reasons. The solution to the problem lies in, firstly developing moreeffective selection procedures, possibly by involving practising teachers andassessing candidates on pre-course teaching experience. The second part of thesolution relates to identifying unsuccessful teachers in the classroom, givingthem whatever help is possible including in-service education and furthertraining, but if all else fails, encouraging them to leave the profession. 100

Another commentator suggests:~+~

'lA four-pronged approach is called for which attracts ,good recruits, prepares newteachers more effectively, takes measures to maintain the competence ofpractising teachers and generally seeks to raise teacher morale andmotivation. IOI

Teachers and curriculum are mutually dependent. Any attempt at aNational Curriculum depends for its success on the commitment andskill of those who are to teach it. Their career problems must beaddressed if the nation's needs are to be met through the introductionof national curriculum. This is a path not followed in England andWales or New Zealand where reactive adjustment to teacherdissatisfaction has followed the introduction of National Curriculum.

99 Barcan, Alan, 'The Dawkins Agenda for Schools - the debate opens'. AustralianQuarterly, Winter, 1989.

•100 Schools and Quality, An International Report, OEeD, Paris 1989.

101 Fairservice, D. 'Grasping the National Agenda'. Education, Journal of the NSWTeachers Federation, 25 Oct, 1991.


In Australia the post-compulsory education years will be affected bythe National Project on the Quality of Teaching and Learning(NPQTL) which arose in 1991 from negotiations in awardrestructuring in teaching~ The NPQTL's three priorities for researchand development are in

• Teacher's work organisation and related pedagogical issues• Portability issues, recognition of qualifications and teacher

registration .• Teachers' professional preparation and career development.

The 1991 NPQTL is committed to addressing the skills students needto work and live in tomorrow's Australia. These.skills are expressedin terms of 'key competencies' and will be the basis for a system ofNational Student Profiling thereby providing all Australian childrenwith a similar spread of assessed criteria at each level of schooling.The implications of this process will be extensive as educators grapplewith the term 'competencies'. Are these skills, a series of skills, aprocess or a demonstrable product? What is the relationship betweencompetencies and outcomes, and are they any different from skills andtestable results? Is an outcome achieved because a competency isevident? Some standardisation of expectation, assessment andreporting are required if there is to be an effective and equitablesystem of profiling for all students. These concerns were detailed ina NSW Teachers Federation Journal report:

This raises the question of where the professional judgement of teachers isinvolved or are we going to be encumbered with a plethora of mechanistic basicskills tests for post-compulsory education.......it is important that teachers andschools have input into the debRte to help create the curriculum practices andeducation structures that. teachers, parents and students want rather thanmerely becoming subservient to the needs of politicians and industry.l02

The Australian approach to national curricu~um is providing broadcurriculum statements and subject attainment profiles for childrenfrom age 5 to 16 years. These are to act as guidelines for the Statesin any subsequent revision of their existing curricula, imd by theirexistence drawing States' curricula closer together. The question ofnational assessment for the years ofcompulsory schooling has not beenfully addressed and is still a subject of contention:

A significant difficulty exists in defining what is the level of competency at Year3, Year 6, Year 10 or Year 12. We must not build in automatic failure by settingstandards at 'average levels'. At the same time competency standards cannot beset at such a low level that there is no improvement in the quality of

102 ibid.

,


perfonnance of these skills. Student assessment will continue to be a majordebate.103

The NPQTL, giving priority to the re-organisation of the last twoyears of secondary schooling to accommodate the implications of theKey Competency criteria, will begin a trickle-down effect on the yearsof compulsory schooling as well. The selection of these two years ofpost-compulsory schooling as the experimental base for therestructuring of approaches to teaching and learning will place lateralpressure on both compulsory schooling to prepare children for thischange, and higher education to incorporate new organisationalstructures to cope with a new type of entrant.

We are not talking about nationaI basic skills testing, but a total restructuringof the educational system. In essence, if competency-based education is to beimplemented then there needs to be a complete cultural change within theteaching service....requiring a major allocation of resources.104

Australia, with its federal structure is unable in a single Act oflegislation to change the way its children learn. The paths towardsnational restructuring of education are longer, more tortuous, andmore diverse, operating on many levels simultaneously, than that oflegislation. More negotiation is required, more consultation'with cooperation from States and national education interest groups.Structures expected to suit the needs of Australians beyond 2000 arebeing manoeuvred and negotiated into place with surprisingly littlemedia or public discussion beyond the occasional headline or articlefocusing on the concept of National Curriculum or National Testing.Very little is yet known outside the profession or the State Ministriesof tfie sweeping changes which may occur with the transition fromtraditional subject structures and disciplines to the studying of 'areasof key competencies in a co-operative and democratic process'. Therestructuring of year 11 and year 12 subject departments intocompetency areas and the introduction of cross-curricula subjects andactivities applying primary school group-learning methodology to thesecondary school105 may give rise to a backlash from the communityon the grounds that academic rigour is being sacrificed for the sake ofco-operative learning. Like the deliberations of the AEC, discussionand consultation obviously take place but access to these deliberationsis strictly limited and once again public debate is restricted to the

103 Phi! Cross. 'The Future for Teachers'. Education Journal ofthe NSW TeachersFederation, 25 Nov. 1991.

104 ibid.

105 Quality Time, publication of NPQTL, Nov. 1991.


catchy but sometimes misleading headline, such as 'Nonsense on aNational Scale.'106

The current initiatives being discussed by the NPQTL are far removedaway from the 'Back to Basics' rhetoric and the insistence of thebusiness lobby on national testing. This 'awareness' gap may poseproblems of acceptance as the project reaches agreement with theStates on the re-organisation of post-compulsory schooling. Informedattempts to communicate the aspirations of the NPQTL to educationand business communities and the general public are essential.Trivialising ofsuch Australia-wide initiatives, through inconsequentialheadlines and 'expert' commentary based on incomplete information,creates a poor climate for intelligent public discussion on 'in issuelikely to affect the next generation of school leavers.

CONCLUDING COMMENTS

National curriculum and national testing have been perceived to havean image problem in all three systems studied in this paper.

Through the co-operation in the NPQTL of members from ministries,teacher unions, independent schools and state schools, educationdepartments, the ACTU, the Catholic Education Commission, theDepartment of Employment Education and Training, and a StateDirector of Education, the interests of the teaching profession will beconsidered and communication should in future become regular andadequate. .

What of the general public and their role in participating in debate?Information vacuums can be destabilising and· counterproductive tochanges which will influence the next generations' of schoolchildren.Preparing the ground now for effective community discussion is ameans of strengthening national resolve on education initiatives andsharing ownership ofthe goals ofa restructured Australian educationalcurriculum aimed at excellence.

106 Kramer, Leonie. 'Nonsense on a National Scale'. The Australian, 2 Sept. 1991.

Legislating for ExceIlence 63

ABBREVIATIONS

United Kingdom (UK)

,.

..

CTCDESGCSEGMSLEANASUWT

NUTOECD

SAT

City Technology SchoolsDepartment of Education and ScienceGeneral Certificate of School EducationGrant Maintained SchoolLocal Education AuthorityNational Association of Schoolmasters and Union ofWomen TeachersNational Union of TeachersOrganisation for Economic Co-operation andDevelopmentStandardised Attainment Test

New Zealand

ABELNZEI

/,NZPPTA

"

Australia

< ACAQA

ACTUAECAHSPAARCBHPCCCDCCSCDEETESFCHECITFANBEET

NCECNCISNPQTL

QERC

Assessment for Better Learning reportNew Zealand Education InstituteNew Zealand Post Primary Teachers Association

Australian Conference ofAssessment and CertificationAuthoritiesAustralian Council of Trade UnionsAustralian Education CouncilAustralian High Schools Principals AssociationAustralian Research CouncilBroken Hill Proprietary LimitedCurriculum CorporationCurriculum Development CentreCommonwealth Schools CommissionDepartment of Employment, Education and TrainingEmployment Skills Formation CouncilHigher Education CouncilIndependent Teachers Federation of AustraliaNational Board of Employment, Education andTrainingNational Catholic Education CommissionNational Council of Independent SchoolsNational Project on the Quality of Teaching andLearningQuality of Education Review Committee


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ball, S. 'Markets, Morality and Equality', Education, Hillcote GroupPaper 5, UK 1990.

Barcan, Alan. 'Dawkins and the schoolsAustralian Education Quarterly, Winter 1989.

the debate opens',

.'Barcan, Alan. 'The Control of Schools and the Curriculum', AustralianQuarterly, Winter 1990.

Barrington, J. 'Todays Schools. Introduction and Overview', PublicSector, vol. 13, (4), Dec; 1990.

Cashdan, A. and Wilson, D. 'Assessment: the State of the Art',Education, York, UK, 26 April 1991.

Connors, L. Futures for Schooling in Australia: Nationalisation,Privatisation or Unification, Occasional Paper No. is, AustralianCollege of Education, Canberra, 1989.

Cross, Phil. 'The Future for Teachers', Education, Journal of the NSWTeachers Federation, 25 Nov. 1991.

Curriculum Corporation, for, the Australian Education Council. "ANational Statement on Mathematics for Australian Schools, Canberra,Dec. 1990.

Curriculum Corporation for the Australian Education Council,National Report on Schooling in Australia, & Statistical Index,Canberra, Dec. 1989.

Dawkins, John. 'Strengthening Australia's schools: a consideration ofthe focus and content of schooling', DEET, Canberra, 1988.

Department of Education and Science News, circular 145/91, UK, 8May 1991.

Department of Employment, Education and Training, Our CorporateDirections 1990-91 and Beyond, Canberra, Nov. 1990.

Department of Employment, Education and Training, Quality Time,publication of NPQTL, Nov., 1991.

Educare Digest, no. 5, Melbourne, July 1988.

Education Reform Bill, Reference Sheet no. 87/6, House of CommonsLibrary Research Division, London, 1987.

\.

•


Fairser~ice,D. 'Grasping the National Agenda', Education, Journal of .the NSW Teachers Federation, 25 Nov. 1991.

Furlong, J. 'British Education's Radical Changes', Current AffairsBulletin, 1988.

'Government Management: Volume 2. Education Issues,' N.Z. Treasury,1987.

Hargreaves, A. Decomprehensivation, U.K., 1989.

Husen, T. 'Schools for the 1990s', Scandinavian Journal ofEducationalResearch, vol. 33, no. 1, 1989.

Keating, J. 'The Great Reform Bill', The Victorian Teacher, May 1988.

Kemmis, S. 'Curriculum in Australia, Contemporary issues', Issues inAustralian Education, Edited by J. V. De'Cruz and P. E. Langford.

Kenway, Jane. Deakin University, Address to conference Educatingthe Clever Country, Canberra, July 1991.

Lauder, H., Middleton, S, Boston, J. & Wylie, C. 'The Third Wave: acritique of the New Zealand Treasury's Report on Education', NewZealand Journal ofEducational Studies, vol. 23, no. 1, 1988.

Laver, Peter. Address to conference, Education the Clever Country,Canberra, July 1991. .

Lyons, J. Outlook on the Future, Parliamentary Library ResearchService Background Paper, Parliament of Australia, 10 Sept. 1991.

Minister of Education, 'Quality Education for all According to theirNeeds', Brieffor the incoming Government, Wellington, Oct. 1990.

Morrissey, Margaret. 'National Confederation of Parent TeachersAssociations', UK, May 1991.

NASUWT Report, no. 16, Birmingham, Nov. 1990.

National Commission on Excellence in Education, A Nation at Riskthe Operative for Education Reform. A Report to the Nation and theSecretary vf Education, United States Department of Education, 1983.

New Zealand Education Institute Annual Meeting Report, NationalEducation, Journal of NZEI, N.Z., July 1987.


New Zealand Educational Institute, Special Circular 1991/35 to allschools, Wellington, June 1991.

Noonan, R. 'The Primary Reforms', The Public Sector, vo!' 13, no. 4,1990.

Nutall, Desmond. 'The Implications of National CurriculumAssessment', Curriculum Perspectives, Australia, March 1990.

OECD, 'Schools & Quality', An International Report, Paris, 1989.

Piper, Kevin. 'National Curriculum: Prospects and Possibilities',Curriculum Perspectives, Newsletter Edition, September 1989.

Piper, K. 'National Curriculum Two Years On: An undelivered paper',Curriculum Perspectives, Sept. 1991.

Pope, Beverly. Setting the Policy Agenda for School Education,Background paper for conference 'Educating the Clever Country',Canberra, July 1991. .

Professional Association of Teachers, National Curriculum Response,28 Sept. 1987.

Rae, J. Too Little Too Late, London: Collins, 1989.

Sexton, S. 'Are National Curriculum and School Based ManagementCompatible?', International Journal ofEducology, vo!' 3, no. 2, Canada,1989.

Sharpe, Dr Fenton. Quoted in: 'New Dimensions in TeacherEducation', AlIen Taylor, Education Monitor, Winter 1990.

Simon, B. Bending the Rules. London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1988.

Skilbeck, Malcolm. Curriculum Reform - An Overview of Trends.OECD,1990.

Skilbeck, Malcolm. Education Now, ABC Radio National, July 1991.

Taylor, Greg. Secretary DEET, Address to conference Educating theClever Country, Canberra, July 1991.

Trip, David H. 'The Idea of Meta-Curriculum as a Common NationalCurriculum' 'Curriculum PerspeCtives, vo!' 9, no. 4, 1989.

"

,

"

department of the parhamentary library · pam guilfoyle (consultant) education and welfare group...

Documents