I am thinking again… very dangerous (I could get hurt!)

There has been lots of discussion in NZ Education Circles about the upcoming national standards for literacy and numeracy… some informed… some less so…

My question is:

Are we going to have standards for creativity, analysis, contribution, caring, relationship and people skills, communication etc and all of the other things we need to value for the 21st Century learner – and arguably to make our country a better place?

I loved this poem (I read this in Ian Lillico’s Book, Homework Grid), however I have seen it elsewhere…

A SCULPTOR STOOD IN A STUDIO

I dreamed I stood in a studio

And watched two sculptors there,

The clay they used was a young child’s mind

And they fashioned it with care.

One was a teacher; the tools being used

Were books and music and art,

One a parent with a guiding hand

And a gentle, loving heart

Day after day the teacher toiled

With touch that was deft and sure,

While the parent laboured just as hard

And polished and smoothed it o’er

When at last their task was done,

They were proud of what they had wrought

For the things they had moulded into the child

Could neither be sold nor bought

And both agreed they would have failed

If they had worked alone;

For behind the parent stood the school

And behind the teacher, the home.

David Bowen

What a great piece of poetry! This highlights the importance of the home and school relationship.  I’ll post more on this later as I explore the concept a little deeper.

“…I think the  more information that’s out there the better…”  Anne Tolley

The above statement made by NZ Education Minister Anne Tolley in reference to National Standards and League Tables is at the very least, interesting.

I support the use of quality assessment and data to improve outcomes on a variety of levels – individual, cohort, school and national/international.  What interests me about the Minister’s statement is not how much information is out there, but the quality of information and how that information informs improvement.  More information is not necessarily better – we need to avoid ‘information overload‘ because it could lack quality, complicate our purpose and also lack validity.

I also have a caveat around the use of the standards and league tables, actually I have two caveats.  Number 1. I would be hesitant to let standards inform curriculum.  I am sure that Mary Chamberlain and her team will not allow this to happen and that our curriculum (and subsequently our literacy learning progressions etc.) will actually inform our standards.  I hope this is the case and wait with anticipation the consultation process and what these standards will potentially look like.  If the standards are being used to inform improvement across the board and not curriculum, then the first caveat could be a non-event.

Number 2.  I am very reluctant to see league tables become the tool by which School performance is measured (We have ERO for that!).  People in communities who blindly and ignorantly follow a league table are bound to be sadly misinformed and as a result we may see increased ‘School Flight’.  In this way league tables can perpetually maintain and reinforce the perceived ‘high achievement’ of certain schools.  To resolve this there needs to be some freedom around the standards to report on whole school achievement which is relevant to school improvement.  I believe that this would prevent direct comparison of schools against each other and the standards (unless they were all reporting against the same standard in the same year level AND curriculum area!).  As for the ignorance around it?  I maintain that ‘ignoritis’ can be cured through a good course of education.

Of course all of this is pie in the sky until we see the drafts and policy to determine what this will look like and how this resource can be used for School improvement.

Too much information?