The first part of the much-anticipated common-practice model for teaching maths and English has had a mixed reaction.
Education Minister Jan Tinetti announced in August last year the models were being developed as a way to make sure all teachers had the same understanding of how to teach the essential skills.
At the time she acknowledged the topics were being taught differently between schools, and sometimes between different classrooms in the same school.
Critics of the current education system say that meant students were getting different standards of learning.
One of those critics, Massey University’s James Chapman, told the Herald he had mixed feelings about the document but believed it was a good start.
The Herald this week launched its new education series, Making the Grade, which is looking at the failings of the country’s education system including the way children are being taught.
The first phase was released on the ministry’s website last Friday after taking on the views of a group of expert contributors and includes nine possible methods for teaching the subjects.
It sets out three possible teaching approaches specific to literacy: multi-literacies which “recognise multiple modes of making meaning (visual, gestural, audio, spatial and linguistic) within a range of social, cultural and linguistic contexts”; linguistically diverse learning which is a method still in development; and strengthening explicit teaching in literacy and communication which is a “purposeful way of teaching” and includes reference to structured literacy.
Two possible methods for maths teaching are : thinking and working mathematically which has a focus on problem-solving; and supporting ākonga relationships with maths which “encompass feelings and emotions related to maths”.
Four teaching methods could also be used for either subject: culturally responsive and sustaining which “fosters and values” the culture of all students; critical pedagogies which support students to use literacy and maths to understand society; communicating pedagogies which encourage students to share ideas and justify thinking with peers and teachers; and planned interactive learning which “creates the conditions for exploring, thinking, discussing, investigating and creating”.
The ministry explains phase one of the common practice model as an outline of the principles and evidence-informed pedagogical approaches for teaching literacy, communication and maths including a high-level description of each approach.
They are now seeking feedback from educators to identify areas for further development or clarification.
Phase two will be released later this year and will include more specific direction on how the practices look in the classroom.
Chapman, Professor Emeritus of Educational Psychology at Massey University, structured literacy advocate and one of those who contributed ideas for the model, said hewas pleased the document “signalled a big shift from balanced literacy” but disappointed the section on explicit teaching had been “condensed” and lacked detail.
“This is a very significant departure in New Zealand education, especially for junior primary school children learning to read, write and spell.”
The document acknowledged it was a “significant shift in literary and communication teaching advice”.
“In the first phase of learning in primary school, explicit teaching should focus on learning the alphabetic code and how to use this to decode and encode, phonological and phonemic awareness, handwriting, vocabulary development, oral language skills and sentence construction,” the document says in relation to the explicit teaching approach.
He was hopeful that the detail not included in the common practice model would be worked on and expanded in phase two of the model.
Chapman said he believed the multi-literacy and socio-cultural aspects of teaching were also important and believed that, with the right support and training, teachers would be able to incorporate many of the methods.
“I don’t see the other pedagogies detracting from the importance of explicit teaching.”
The document is part of the Literacy and Communication and Maths Strategy the Ministry is developing to “address inequality by lifting educational achievement for all” and is part of the wider refresh of the New Zealand curriculum.
National Party leader Christopher Luxon and education spokeswoman Erica Stanford yesterday unveiled its new education policy in which primary and intermediate schools would be required to teach at least one hour a day on each of the topics of reading, writing and maths.
National’s policy, called Teaching the Basics Brilliantly, was aimed at getting at least 80 per cent of Year 8 students at or above the expected curriculum level for their age in reading, writing, maths and science.
It also aimed to return New Zealand to the top 10 of the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment rankings by 2033.
“Children need the time to acquire knowledge, practice skills and master the basics so they stay with them for life,” Luxon said while announcing the policy today.
The policy also included the return of twice-yearly tests on reading, writing and maths for all children between Year 3 and Year 8 - a proposal similar to the controversial National Standards testing introduced by National when last in government.
Other elements of National’s plan include re-writing the curriculum to put more focus on reading, writing, maths and science and clearly set out what children should be taught at each stage.
“The curriculum’s wooliness means teachers are spending their weekends and evenings trying to figure out what they are supposed to be teaching. They should not have to do that. It should be clear.”
Stanford said she didn’t think the ministry’s curriculum refresh was what teachers wanted and it needed to be more clear.
Luxon said they would scrap the three-year bands in the current curriculum and instead set out explicit achievement expectations for each year level.
“At the moment, one curriculum level can span several school years, which makes it difficult to identify and help children who are falling behind,” Luxon told media yesterday.
There would be more training and resources for teachers and trainee teachers on how to teach the basics, and teacher registration fees would be scrapped.
National’s proposed resource centre for teachers would reflect other countries’ approach to giving teachers support on lesson plans, Luxon said, adding we should “steal it with pride”.
