TEACHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING
IN NEW ZEALAND
Geoffrey Partington
EDUCATION FORUM
October 1997
First published in 1997 by the Education Forum,
PO Box 38218, Howick, Auckland, New Zealand
ISBN 0-9583540-2-2
© Edition: Education Forum
© Text: Geoffrey Partington
Production by Daphne Brasell Associates Ltd, Wellington
Printed by Astra DPS, Wellington
AUTHOR AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Dr Geoffrey Partington's qualifications include B.A. (Hons), M.Ed. (Bristol
University), P.G.C.E, Advanced Diploma of Education, BSc. (Hons) (London University),
and Ph.D. (Adelaide University). He has been a history teacher, a secondary
school headmaster and an inspector of schools in England, and a teacher educator
in Doncaster College of Education and Coventry College of Education, now part
of the University of Warwick, in England; in Flinders University, South Australia;
and the University of the South Pacific in Fiji. As a teacher educator he taught
courses in curriculum theory, philosophy of education, history of education,
sociology of education, and educational evaluation and assessment, and special
methods courses in the teaching of history, social studies and economics. He
also served as coordinator of post-graduate diploma of education courses and
practicums. In different professional capacities he has supervised large numbers
of student-teachers and beginning teachers, and advised experienced teachers,
in many subjects and over wide age ranges.
His books include: Women Teachers in the Twentieth Century (1976) and The Idea of an Historical Education (1980), both published by the National Foundation for Educational Research/Routledge; The Australian Nation: Its British and Irish Roots (1994), published by the Australian Scholarly Press, Melbourne; and Hasluck versus Coombs - White Politics and Australia's Aborigines (1996), published by Quakers Hill Press, Sydney. He has written over 100 articles which have appeared in various journals including the British Journal of Educational Studies, the Oxford Journal of Education, Comparative Education, the Australian Journal of Education, the Canadian Journal of Education, the Journal of Moral Education, the Journal of Religious Education, the International Journal of Social Education, Quadrant, Encounter, Education Research and Perspectives, the Victorian Historical Journal, the Journal of the Royal Historical Society of Australia, and History of Education. He also assisted the Education Forum in the preparation of submissions on the two drafts of the Social Studies curriculum statement.
This report contains a foreword by Professor Roger Scruton, an academic philosopher who has been professor of philosophy at Birkbeck College, London, and at Boston University, Massachusetts. He has held visiting posts at many other institutions including Princetown, Stanford, Louvain, Guelph (Ontario), Witwatersrand (South Africa), Waterloo (Ontario), Oslo and Bordeaux. He is currently visiting professor in the Department of Philosophy, Birkbeck College. He is the editor of The Salisbury Review, composer, broadcaster, a reviewer of opera, a columnist on architectural thought, and writer of opinion pieces and book reviews for the Times. He has published numerous academic articles and over 20 books. His books include Art and Imagination (1974), The Aesthetics of Architecture (1979), A Short History of Modern Philosophy (1982, second edition 1995), A Dictionary of Modern Thought (1982, second edition 1996), Modern Philosophy (1994), The Intelligent Person's Guide to Philosophy (1996) and The Aesthetics of Music (forthcoming 1997). His books and articles have appeared in 20 languages, including all the major European languages.
Dr Partington wishes to record his appreciation of the many valuable comments and suggestions made on earlier drafts of this report by Alan Barcan, Harold Entwistle, Ian Hall, Roger Kerr, Reg Lockstone, Dennis McGrath, Harvey McQueen, Roger Openshaw and Simon Smelt. An unpublished report on research undertaken for the Education Forum by David Trebeck of ACIL Australia Pty Limited was also of assistance. He is also grateful to the many college of education and university staff and their present and former students who generously gave their time and the benefit of their experience and expertise during interviews conducted for this report. His greatest debt is to Michael Irwin of the New Zealand Business Roundtable for unfailing encouragement and incisive yet highly constructive criticism.
The interpretations, conclusions and the recommendations in this report are solely those of the author and should not be ascribed to any of those whose assistance is acknowledged above. Further, the views expressed in this report are not necessarily those of the Education Forum.
SUMMARY OF CONTENTS
page
Foreword by Roger Scruton xi
Preface xvii
Executive summary xxi
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
Chapter 2 Background 7
Chapter 3 Admission into teacher education 33
Chapter 4 The established providers 47
Chapter 5 New providers 75
Chapter 6 Knowledge and teacher education 87
Chapter 7 Quality controls 115
Chapter 8 Ideological capture 135
Chapter 9 The practicum 153
Chapter 10 School-based teacher education 181
Chapter 11 Maori teacher education 191
Chapter 12 Summary, conclusions and recommendations 215
Appendix A Auckland College of Education - 1994 - Essay by
an intending secondary school teacher 231
Appendix B Copy of letter sent to colleges of education and education
departments and faculties of the universities about this
review of initial teacher education 233
References 253
CONTENTS
page
FOREWORD by Roger Scruton xi
PREFACE xvii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xxi
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Contestability 1
1.2 Two kinds of recommendation 5
1.3 Governments and teacher education 6
1.4 Recommendation 6
Chapter 2 BACKGROUND 7
2.1 Historical sketch 7
2.2 The current organisational structure 11
2.3 Current controls 17
2.4 External regulatory agencies 18
2.5 Internal controls 21
2.6 Extent of autonomy 23
2.7 Client satisfaction 23
2.8 Client criticisms 26
2.9 Recommendations 31
Chapter 3 ADMISSION INTO TEACHER EDUCATION 33
3.1 Introduction 33
3.2 Numbers 33
3.3 Entry requirements: qualifications 35
3.4 Entry requirements: character 37
3.5 Accusations of bias 40
3.6 Niche markets 41
3.7 Recommendations 45
Chapter 4 THE ESTABLISHED PROVIDERS 47
4.1 Auckland College of Education (ACE) 47
4.2 Christchurch College of Education 54
4.3 University of Canterbury 58
4.4 Dunedin College of Education 58
4.5 University of Otago 61
4.6 Massey University College of Education 61
4.7 University of Waikato 64
4.8 Wellington College of Education 66
4.9 Victoria University of Wellington 70
4.10 Recommendations 73
Chapter 5 NEW PROVIDERS 75
5.1 Introduction 75
5.2 University of Auckland 76
5.3 Auckland Institute of Technology (AIT) 76
5.4 Manukau Institute of Technology 77
5.5 UNITEC Institute of Technology (formerly Carrington
Polytechnic) 77
5.6 Christchurch Polytechnic 78
5.7 Bethlehem Teachers College 78
5.8 MASTERS Institute, Auckland 78
5.9 New Zealand Graduate School of Education (Christchurch) 81
5.10 Attitudes to new providers 82
5.11 Recommendations 85
Chapter 6 KNOWLEDGE AND TEACHER EDUCATION 87
6.1 The issue of priorities 87
6.2 Substantive curriculum knowledge 88
6.3 Inadequacies in substantive curriculum knowledge 90
6.4 Specialism and generalism in early childhood and
primary teacher education 97
6.5 Educational theory 101
6.6 Liberal knowledge 108
6.7 Transmission of public information 109
6.8 Teachers-only university courses? 109
6.9 Research in teacher education 110
6.10 Recommendations 112
Chapter 7 QUALITY CONTROLS 115
7.1 The educational case for assessment 115
7.2 Antagonism to assessment 119
7.3 Assessment of student-teachers 123
7.4 NZQA and unit standards 125
7.5 Assessment of teacher educators 130
7.6 Recommendations 133
Chapter 8 IDEOLOGICAL CAPTURE 135
8.1 Overview 135
8.2 Gender issues 139
8.3 Case studies of courses 144
8.4 Recommendations 151
Chapter 9 THE PRACTICUM 153
9.1 Introduction 153
9.2 Selection of lecturers for supervision of practicum 156
9.3 Appointment of associate and liaison teachers 158
9.4 Student-teachers and lecturer-supervisors 158
9.5 Lecturer-supervisors and associate teachers 162
9.6 Student-teachers and associate teachers 166
9.7 Length of practicum 169
9.8 Practicum profiles 172
9.9 Fundamental theoretical considerations 174
9.10 Recommendations 179
Chapter 10 SCHOOL-BASED TEACHER EDUCATION 181
10.1 The case against school-based teacher education 181
10.2 Arguments for school-based teacher education 182
10.3 Recommendations 190
Chapter 11 MAORI TEACHER EDUCATION 191
11.1 'Waitangism' 191
11.2 Maori in teacher education 194
11.3 The problem of secrecy 198
11.4 Some pedagogical problems 201
11.5 Maori language 202
11.6 Maori science education 203
11.7 Wanganui and the immersion approach 206
11.8 Te Whare Wananga Awanuiarangi 214
11.9 Recommendations 214
Chapter 12 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS 215
12.1 Summary and conclusions 215
12.2 Recommendations 224
APPENDIX A Auckland College of Education - 1994 - Essay by
an intending secondary school teacher 231
APPENDIX B Copy of letter sent to colleges of education and education
departments and faculties of the universities about this
review of initial teacher education 233
REFERENCES 253
FOREWORD
Educational reform is high on the agenda of modern democracies, and New Zealand
is no exception. Almost every aspect of schooling is now in question - the curriculum,
how we teach it, how we teach the teachers, and how we test the results. And
in every country there is conflict between the vested interests - the teachers
and the colleges which train them, whose lives get easier as standards decline
- and the general public, most of whom want standards to be maintained or improved.
Moreover, there are disputes over educational philosophy, both within the teaching
profession and outside it. And because people are less and less sure of what
education is for, they are less and less able to choose a policy that would
improve it. The situation is exacerbated by religious decline and its inevitable
conjunct: a loss of confidence in Western civilisation, a turning away from
traditional authority, and a sentimental leaning towards those most easily seen
as 'other' and as 'victims'.
This last fact is particularly important in New Zealand. Like Australians, whose destiny they closely follow, New Zealanders have identified themselves as part of the European diaspora, whose language, culture, politics and law were made in England, and whose educational system was designed to perpetuate the knowledge and culture on which that inheritance depends. Post-colonial guilt and 'oikophobia' (the contempt for home that afflicts the modern intellectual) have seriously damaged this self image - not perhaps among ordinary New Zealanders, but certainly among those whose job it is to teach them. As Geoffrey Partington shows, a near-uniform dissent towards the European inheritance emanates from the colleges of education, and there has been a serious and ongoing attempt to transcribe this dissent into educational policy. The boundary between education and indoctrination has been dissolved, and educational 'theory' has become an excuse for political attitudinising.
The process is fuelled by the presence in New Zealand of another and (by local standards) older civilisation, with which to castigate the civilisation of 'Dead White European Males'. Feminism, gay liberation, and assaults on the traditional curriculum, therefore go hand in hand with an emphasis on the Maori, as the true natives of New Zealand, the victims of colonial usurpation whose culture deserves a place in the educational system at least equal to the place given to the culture of their oppressors. The effects of this are documented by Dr Geoffrey Partington in Chapter 11, and it is clear that they present a serious threat to the continuity and content of the school curriculum. It is now widely assumed that henceforth education in New Zealand must be 'bicultural', and that this means a complete reform of the ends and means of teaching.
What, however, does 'biculturalism' really mean? Does it mean that each pupil should learn two languages, and become acquainted with the artistic and literary documents of two civilisations? The suggestion is not seriously made, for the simple reason that, in the age of television, video and pop, pupils find it ever more difficult to learn one language, let alone two, and teachers are rarely capable of teaching in any language but their own. Furthermore, if the transmission of a culture involves the study of literary and artistic monuments, it would be fair to say that the modern curriculum, as it is developing under the guidance of feminists, egalitarians and the movement for a 'child-centred' education, is more or less a-cultural, and designedly so. The curriculum that we inherited was in any case not monocultural. It was multicultural, just like the religion upon which it was based. Until the last war, those who came to New Zealand from Britain, if they had any education at all, would know the Hebrew Bible, the Greek New Testament, the language and literature of Greece and Rome, the fairy tales of Muslim Baghdad, the literature of France and England, the music of Germany, and the customs of the Empire. In comparison with this, one can only say that the standard product of a teacher-training college today is at best monocultural, at worst without any culture at all.
To decide what policy to adopt, we must know what education is for. This deep and difficult question underlies all the current disputes, and it is for this reason, no doubt, that Dr Partington recommends that prospective teachers be taught some of the philosophy of education. My own experience suggests, however, that a little philosophy is worse than none, and a little philosophy is all you will ever get in a school of education.
Moreover, philosophy is responsible for many of our problems. I am thinking in particular of the educational philosophy of John Dewey, who first invited us to switch from a 'knowledge-centred' to a 'child-centred' approach to schooling. As is often the case, it was not the reasonableness of this approach that caused so many people to adopt it but the fact that it coincided with a vague and powerful sentiment. Traditional education was designed to turn children into adults, by transmitting the knowledge necessary for adult life. At a certain point, with the loss of religious confidence, people began to question whether the adult life was really worth it. Maybe it was better to remain a child. It was at this point that Dewey stepped in and presented a wholly new image of education, as a way of perpetuating childhood, rather than abolishing it. The child became the single authority over what and how to learn. And a kind of Rousseau-ist fantasy was constructed in terms of which educational reform was henceforth to be conducted. Children were to be encouraged to express themselves, to find their own way to their own knowledge; they must be free from the constraints of old authority, of grammar, of rigorous mathematics, of facts and rules and rote learning, which merely deaden their creative potential. Learning must be a creative process, in which the child remains intact, the author of his or her own being, like God. Read the authorities most frequently cited in the schools of education even today, and you will find this sentimental vision constantly endorsed and elaborated, and Dr Partington gives some telling examples. The child has been 'deified' precisely so that he or she need not be taught.
As Dr Partington argues, the child-centred approach damages the child. It also damages society. It was child-centred theorists who introduced and insisted on the 'look-say' method of teaching reading (which Dr Partington criticises). 'Look-say' makes the child and not the text the principal authority as to what is happening on the page. After years of resistance from the teacher-training colleges, it has at last been conceded, in Britain and the United States at any rate, that this method has substantially raised the rate of illiteracy. And while progressive educationists may regard illiteracy as a good thing since it undermines the capitalist order by making the workforce unemployable, this is not a view that would be shared either by the general public or the government.
More important, however, is the loss of knowledge that ensues, when the child
is the sole authority. Societies depend upon a cognitive inheritance - a mass
of information, knowledge, skills, culture and know-how, which was not acquired
in a single generation and which could never be elicited from children merely
by allowing them to express themselves. If education has a social function,
it surely lies here: in the transmission of this cognitive inheritance to the
next generation. And that, surely, is why governments have an interest in it,
and why they have the right to compel each successive generation to sit for
days in the classroom until the necessary skills and information have been absorbed.
If, however, teachers no longer transmit this cognitive inheritance - either
because they can't or because they won't - then the government no longer has
the right to compel children to go to school. And this, it seems to me, is the
crux of the matter. By taking charge of education, modern governments generated
a vast body of public servants - the teachers and educational administrators
- over whom they exerted little or no control. Pupils were conscripts, and the
curriculum and examinations were established largely by the teachers themselves.
Hence the rooted hostility to assessment that Dr Partington describes. For any
assessment of the pupil is an assessment of the teacher.
Many of the educational theories mentioned by Dr Partington owe their popularity
to the fact that they grant freedom to the teachers, and release them from the
burden of transmitting the knowledge and culture on which the next generation
depends. It is hard to get modern children to recite Shakespeare; hard to get
them to learn poetry by heart; hard to sit them down to study differential equations
or Bach fugues; hard to give them a real grounding in another language, be it
French, German, Latin or classical Greek. The subversive theories which tells
us that these things are, in any case, just bourgeois ideology, or the curriculum
of Dead White European Males, or ways of damming up children's creative potential
or alienating them from their true culture, will always gain more of a hearing
in teacher-training colleges than the old-fashioned idea that these things ought
to be taught since they are proven forms of knowledge. But that does not alter
the fact that the old-fashioned view is the right one, and also explains why
those fields of study have survived. It is because the calculus is a genuine
piece of knowledge, a cognitive acquisition, that those who know it want to
teach it, and those who don't yet know it, but recognise the difference between
knowledge and ignorance, want to learn. And the same is true of Shakespeare.
Granted, study of Shakespeare's plays produces knowledge of a different kind.
But that this knowledge is valuable and improving would be denied by no-one
who has made the effort to acquire it.
British governments in the 1960s were influenced by those who saw education not as a means for transmitting knowledge, but as a way of removing social disadvantage and generating equality in the classroom. However, it is easy to make people educationally equal; it sufficient to ensure that they all learn nothing. But it is hard to transmit knowledge, and impossible to do so without distinguishing those who acquire it from those who don't. There is no third way: no way of reconciling the social function of education (which is to transmit the cognitive inheritance) with egalitarian social engineering. And the general public knows this. We should not be surprised therefore if the reforms initiated during the 1960s led to educational decline, or if people are now reacting against them, regardless of their political orientation.
One reform in particular should be singled out, since it bears on the situation in New Zealand, and this was the introduction of a compulsory graduate certificate of education for those who wished to teach in state schools. This meant that, for the first time in our history, knowledge of a subject (even when testified by a first-class degree) was not considered sufficient qualification for teaching it. Students must also sit through fatuous courses in the theory, psychology and philosophy of education, and waste a year of life, before they could fulfil their ambition and teach in a school. The result was either to drive the best teachers out of the state system into the private sector, or to drive them out of teaching altogether. The fact is that nothing useful is taught in the graduate certificate, since the curriculum is so deeply contested as to contain only a tiny residue of recognised knowledge. The only useful part of the course is the teaching practice (the practicum), and this is surely better undertaken as a paid apprenticeship than as a course of study - not the least because this would channel money to beginning teachers, and away from those who pretend to instruct them.
People have begun to wake up to the fact that the best qualification for teaching, and the only one that can be reliably tested in advance of the classroom, is the knowledge and love of a subject. This qualification - the sine qua non of education in the traditional model - gradually sank during the 1960s and 1970s to the bottom of the educational agenda. And, Dr Partington argues, it is still at the bottom of the agenda in New Zealand. More important for the colleges were ideological conformity, attitude training, and the child-centred teaching methods which ensure that knowledge will not be transmitted in any case, even if the teacher possesses it. Knowledge was driven out of the system, and replaced by professional criteria designed to prevent the competent, the enthusiastic, the politically incorrect - in short, anyone who might threaten the complacent mediocrity of the state system - from entering the profession.
Nothing would have changed had reforms been entrusted entirely to the teacher-training colleges. For the colleges were the problem, as they are today in New Zealand. Only by challenging their monopoly over entrants to the profession could knowledge once again be restored to its central place in the educational process. Every town and village in Britain contains quantities of undisplayed knowledge - knowledge that will be passed on only if someone happens to ask for it. Our village, for example, contains an amateur historian, a competent pianist, several excellent mechanics, a blacksmith, a retired theologian, a native speaker of Arabic and another of German, all of them intelligent and enthusiastic people who could pass on their knowledge given a chance. The local school, however, contains teachers who know nothing at all, apart from a few politically correct nostrums about gender identity, racial discrimination, and the 'social reproduction of disadvantage'. The solution is to allow those with knowledge into the classroom, in the hope that they will drive out those without it. This is the solution that is being tried.
Not surprisingly the teachers and their unions resist such reforms. Incompetent people fear nothing so much as competition. But there is hope, and not all teachers are afraid of knowledge or reluctant to acquire it. Essential to any reform, however, is to break the state monopolies - the monopoly over schools, over qualifications, and over examinations. For the mediocrity that we have witnessed, both in Britain and in New Zealand, is the direct result of the absence of independent controls. This is why Dr Partington's recommendation, that we should develop alternative routes into the profession, must be taken seriously. Equally important, however, is investment in private schools and private universities. People must be encouraged to see private institutions, not as centres of privilege, but as attempts to preserve, transmit and enhance the store of knowledge for the benefit of society as a whole.
Roger Scruton
PREFACE
In 1996 I agreed to a request to undertake a review of initial teacher education
in New Zealand on behalf of the Education Forum. As part of the preliminaries
to undertaking this review, I attended the June 1996 Conference of the New Zealand
Council for Teacher Education held at Dunedin College of Education. This proved
an excellent opportunity to meet men and women at present active and influential
in teacher education in New Zealand and to become acquainted with their views
and concerns.
Michael Irwin, on behalf of the Education Forum, wrote to the principals, chief executive officers or heads of department of all state and most private teacher education institutions in the country to arrange meetings for me with them and with representative staff members and students. Attached to the letter was a paper I had prepared outlining some of what I perceived to be the key questions in teacher education: both the letter and the attachment are included in this report as Appendix B.
The response to the letter was very encouraging and meetings were arranged with staff and students at the Dunedin, Christchurch, Wellington and Auckland Colleges of Education, the Universities of Otago and Canterbury, Victoria University of Wellington, the College of Education at Massey University, the School of Education at the University of Waikato, the Wanganui Regional Community Polytechnic, the Auckland Institute of Technology, the MASTERS Institute in Auckland and the New Zealand Graduate School of Education in Christchurch. Meetings were also held with a number of principals of schools and with recently qualified or re-qualified teachers, some arranged by the teacher education institutions and some by the Education Forum.
Every courtesy and consideration was accorded to me in every institution that
I visited. Substantial documentation, as well as the opportunity to meet a wide
range of senior staff and representative students, was provided. All interviews
and discussions were taped by agreement with my hosts. References to views expressed
or facts adduced by various persons are all taken verbatim or with minimum paraphrase
from the tapes. Oral comments in this report which are attributed to named individuals
were sent to their sources for clearance.
Some judgments reached in this report are critical of New Zealand teacher education
as a whole and aspects of the work of some institutions are evaluated harshly.
One can only state the truth as one sees it, and it is very much hoped that
no recipient of any criticism will attribute it either to personal animus or
ideological hostility. My own educational values and priorities have changed
considerably during a long teaching career, even since I first became a teacher
educator in 1966 in England. It was with deep sincerity that I held views I
subsequently rejected, and I acknowledge the equal sincerity of all those I
have met in New Zealand who hold opinions different from my own on teacher education
and related issues.
The following review covers only initial teacher education. As such it does not cover in-service education which is, of course, a vital component of the professional development of teachers, and one that is of particular significance when a workforce is ageing, as is the case with teachers in New Zealand at present. However, initial teacher education is a major issue in its own right. Further, to the extent that in-service training is undertaken in the same institutions as initial preparation some of the findings of this review will be pertinent to it as well.
Renwick and Vize suggested about their Windows on Teacher Education research:
We are confident that our representative sample allows us to generalise across the cohort as a whole. Even a low number of students making a criticism does not mean that the criticism should not be taken notice of … . One perceptive comment may be of more potential use to the college than a widely shared opinion which merely repeats a criticism of which the college is already aware.
My 'sample' is necessarily smaller and less representative of students than that of Renwick and Vize, but I am confident that the critical points I make of existing practices, together with my suggestions for change and reform, deserve careful attention from all teacher educators, irrespective of their specific educational values. The wisest educators have always been willing to listen to those who speak in a different accent from their own.
Teacher education in New Zealand is, of course, changing very rapidly in some important respects. For example, the number of institutions offering teacher education is increasing and some existing relationships between colleges and universities are changing or are under review. It is also a time of teacher shortage which presents both opportunities and challenges. Thus, in some respects my report will speedily be overtaken by events, but the main substance is likely to remain pertinent for a considerable time.
The title of this report, Teacher Education and Training in New Zealand, acknowledges the composite and changing character of teacher preparation, which has distinctive components never easy to keep in balance. Substantive knowledge of what is to be taught is essential, as is skill in teaching, which in its turn extends beyond techniques and tricks of the trade to a wider theoretical dimension. Although this report holds that teacher education in New Zealand can significantly be improved, it does not claim to have the final answer to matters of legitimate contest.
In conclusion I would make the obvious but important observation that teacher education is only a part - albeit a vital part - of a much broader picture. The health of this activity will undoubtedly be affected to an important extent by factors well outside the scope of this review, and in particular I would refer to the morale of the school teaching service and its ability to attract and retain high calibre men and women.
Geoffrey Partington
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 1997 New Zealand teacher education remains mainly in the hands of established
state providers: four free-standing colleges of education with teacher education
as their chief but not only function, and two university colleges of education.
There are significant differences in approach among the established providers
of teacher education, but the government should not seek to impose one approach.
It should encourage diversity of provision rather than uniformity.
The established providers have experienced rapid organisational changes, and their responses to new challenges have often been constructive. However, despite the reduction of central control brought about by the Education Act 1989, they still have to negotiate with numerous external bodies, as well as arrive at decisions within cumbersome college councils, before they undertake significant initiatives. These unwieldy councils are stacked with representatives of vested interests who have no final responsibility for the ultimate success of a college's endeavours. Existing controls should be reviewed with a view to making each institution more genuinely autonomous.
Within the constraints of the overall budget for tertiary education, student numbers admitted into teacher education should be left to market forces, specifically student demand and institutional supply. Teacher education institutions should have greater flexibility in respect of academic entry qualifications, provided that they make full public disclosure of the reasons for, and the results of, their admission policies.
It would be advisable to raise the age at which qualifications of a lower standard are accepted for admission into teacher education, since the effect of current policy is to encourage some would-be applicants to wait until they are 20 when they may have easier access, rather than make serious efforts to raise their academic qualifications. Although rigid exclusion from other courses would be inappropriate, provision of entry on lower qualifications for older applicants should be directed mainly to those seeking to teach in areas or types of school or subjects in which there are chronic shortages.
Most teacher education institutions share with the Teacher Registration Board a propensity for making extensive lists of highly desirable qualities sought in teachers, combined with acceptance in practice of all applicants who satisfy basic academic requirements, provided they have not been sentenced for criminal behaviour or, it seems in some cases, have not attended an independent secondary school. The institutions should have wide discretion in admission policy in respect of the character, race, gender and backgrounds of applicants. It is ridiculous, for instance, that Christian providers such as Bethlehem Teachers College and the MASTERS Institute should not be able to make Christian belief a condition of enrolment. All such policies should be made public: purported adherence to open entry combined with covert exclusions is quite unacceptable. Accusations of bias, when shown prima facie to have substance, should be dealt with in an open and public manner.
Whether reformed or not, there is no justification for established providers having a monopoly or quasi-monopoly of teacher education. The government should place no obstacles before those who wish to enter the field. It should finance public and independent providers on a common and equitable basis. Established teacher education institutions should be encouraged to cooperate with new providers, not only because New Zealand is currently short of teachers or because such cooperation is expected of professionals genuinely committed to educational progress, but because they themselves may well learn and benefit from cooperation.
Established providers of teacher education can offer numerous testimonials of client satisfaction, both from students and schools. This is hardly surprising, since the same set of educational ideas is broadly shared by all key players in contemporary New Zealand education, apart from parents. More surprising is the volume of criticism from individuals and groups whose educational ideas are very similar to those dominant in teacher education.
Although the content balance of courses is essentially contestable and should
not be subject to governmental control, there is an overwhelming case for giving
highest priority in teacher education to ensuring that future teachers have
adequate substantive knowledge in the subjects to be taught. This is true not
only for subject specialists in secondary schools but also for primary and early
childhood teachers. Significant improvements could be made in teaching reading,
mathematics, science, social sciences, and other curricular areas if a large
part of current ideological baggage were discarded and more time spent on substantive
knowledge and the best methods of imparting it.
Government and teacher education institutions should cooperate in encouraging
greater teacher specialisation in primary schools and, to a lesser extent, in
early childhood centres. A model that could well be considered for large primary
schools as an alternative to current practice would be for a double class to
be shared by two teachers: one specially qualified in language and the social
sciences and the other in mathematics and sciences. There could be specialist
support in such areas as music, art and physical education.
Secondary schools and teacher educators should provide more feedback as to whether they find typical university first-degree courses the best preparation for their needs. Although there are some sensible objections to the provision by universities of courses of a broader and more general character, with consequent deferment of specialisation, many university departments might well modify some courses to meet the needs of secondary schools better, if they knew what these needs are.
Although top priority should be given to substantive knowledge in subjects to be taught, it is very desirable for teachers' professional competence and the effective working of the educational system, as well as for their own intellectual cultivation, that they should have sound knowledge of at least the main educational disciplines. These are philosophy of education, the history of education, the sociology of education, educational psychology and learning theory and comparative education.
It is highly desirable that New Zealand's teachers should be themselves liberally educated, equipped with a broad knowledge. Given that in education at every level there is far more worth knowing than there is time to teach and learn, tensions will continue between depth and breadth of knowledge, and contestation will remain about the optimum balance of kinds of knowledge in teacher education courses. Such decisions should be made by teacher education institutions, not the government. However, the prime importance of knowledge and the constraints of time should constantly be in the minds of teacher educators and should deter them from trivial pursuits.
Research by teacher educators should be encouraged, but not every teacher educator need be engaged in educational research. Those who are so engaged should not be confined to learning theory, classroom interaction and other kinds of micro-educational research.
One of the gravest weaknesses in current teacher education in New Zealand is the hostility of many prominent teacher educators to the very concept that educational achievement can be fairly and objectively assessed. Teacher educators at every level should try to develop more adequate assessment of educational achievement.
Although at least one established institution, the Auckland College of Education, and at least one new provider, the New Zealand Graduate School of Education in Christchurch, have developed courses which seek specifically to meet the requirements of the New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) unit standards for teacher education, these should not generally be required of teacher education institutions. In general, unit standards provide useful check lists but cannot be used to assess quality of work.
There should be no requirement by the government about the length of practicums in any type of teacher education. As long as teacher education institutions are responsible for awarding an approved diploma of teaching, they must have ultimate control of the conditions on which it is awarded. However, the institutions would be well advised to use their own staff as specialist supervisors in their areas of expertise, leaving general supervision to associate teachers.
Irrespective of the balance between schools and teacher education institutions, the latter should consider restoring marks of distinction for practicum. Although student-teachers face very different levels of challenge on practicum, it is possible to make adequate allowance for such different levels of challenge and for different contexts of teaching. Improving 'value-added' methods of evaluating teaching effectiveness would be a major contribution to in-service education of experienced teachers, as well to pre-service teacher education.
Claims by teacher educators that they are themselves highly 'reflective' or 'effective', or that their courses ensure that their students are 'reflective' or 'effective', should be treated with caution, unless public evidence is provided of 'reflectiveness' or 'effectiveness'. Special attention should be paid to ways in which student-teachers and teachers add to the stock of knowledge and skills mastered by their students. Government and teacher education institutions would be well advised to commission a leading scholar in the field of 'value-added' teaching to make a detailed study of the current New Zealand approaches to evaluating teacher effectiveness.
The government should encourage the adoption of school-based schemes such as those for 'licensed' and 'articled' teachers which have been developed in England and Wales and which bypass direct enrolment in teacher education institutions. A pilot scheme could be directed at university graduates. Under such school-based arrangements, schools would be encouraged to form themselves into groups and to seek outside support from established and/or new providers of teacher education for aspects of teacher education difficult to provide effectively within the resources of the schools themselves. There would still be a partnership between schools and teacher education institutions, but the needs of the schools would become paramount.
The government should encourage a variety of approaches in Maori teacher education so that teacher education is less subject to the ideological imposition of the Treaty of Waitangi as the critical reference point in all teacher education courses.
Maori and non-Maori teacher educators alike should take more fully into account the obstacles in the way of learning sometimes imposed by traditional Maori concepts, especially those relating to tapu. Maori parents should be provided with ample objective information about the balance of advantage for their children in schools where they will be integrated with other New Zealanders, as compared with full-immersion, part-immersion and other possible educational policies.
A very disturbing feature of teacher education in New Zealand is the extent
of ideological capture by groups holding views which are almost certainly not
shared by the majority of the population. Failure by institutions to counteract
ideological indoctrination within their walls makes a mockery of elaborate formal
mechanisms of quality control. Teacher education should embrace the principle
of educational contestability and accept that people of equal intelligence and
experience may legitimately choose very different educational priorities. However,
the best way to counter ideological takeover is not direct government action,
but the opening up of courses and reading lists to public and professional scrutiny.
Students would vote with their feet and employers of teachers take appropriate
action if only they realised how one-sided and distorted teacher education courses
are in some of New Zealand's tertiary institutions.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Contestability
The basic approach to education adopted in this report is that it is essentially contestable. By this is meant, following Gallie, that sensible people may know all the relevant facts and yet hold conflicting priorities and values, as in democratic politics. This approach holds choice and variety in education, including teacher education, to be preferable to prescription and regulation.
Educational theories can be divided into five clusters, each with a different priority:
" transcendental education: what is of greatest value to God's purposes;
" instrumental education: what is of greatest value to society broadly
as it is;
" liberal education: what is of greatest value to the development of the
mind;
" reconstructionist education: what is of greatest value in transforming
society as it is to one of a radically different character; and
" child-centred education: what is of greatest value or interest to the
child.
Within each cluster there are many choices of an essentially contestable character. Arguments about just what is of greatest value to a society at any given moment provide the content of much political as well as educational debate. There are many disputes among reconstructionists about what sort of new society ought to be created and how education might best accelerate the process. Each religion, whilst urging the priority of transcendental over worldly values, has its own set of beliefs about the nature of God and the created world. Child-centred educators disagree about what constitute children's natural needs and upon whether these are basically the same for all children, or whether each group or individual child has different needs. Liberal educators, from Plato and Aristotle onwards, have disagreed about which knowledge is of most worth in the development of the mind.
It should be clearly understood that this typology of clusters does not correspond to simple or conventional distinctions between 'right' and 'left', 'radical' and 'conservative'. For example, earlier in this century, when communist political movements were successful in overthrowing existing regimes, Marxist theorists often changed overnight from being reconstructionists, which they were in respect to the old order, to being instrumentalists, which they were in regard to the new one. Furthermore, adherents to one type of theory may appreciate insights contributed by those of a different perspective. For example, people generally unsympathetic to reconstructionism may value aspects of the educational thought of Marxists such as the Italian Antonio Gramsci and the Frenchman Pierre Bourdieu. There are sometimes alliances between two or more clusters, usually against another that threatens them all, but such alliances are usually fleeting and always unstable.
'Moments of truth', or 'critical moments', occur when choices must be made between conflicting priorities. Many early childhood and primary teachers have been attracted both to reconstructionist, especially feminist, theories, but also to child-centred ones. Yet when children exert their choices between activities in 'traditional gender-oriented' fashion, these teachers are in their turn forced into a very difficult choice: shall they be child-centred and let girls and boys go their different ways by and large, or be reconstructionist and try to get boys and girls to engage in activities each gender associates negatively with the other? Some temporary alliances between clusters are local rather than international. In English-speaking countries during the 1970s and 1980s there were tactical alliances against child-centred and reconstructionist policies between instrumentalists and transcendentalists, although issues such as 'Creation Science' divided them as well. However, there were no such even temporary alliances in many Islamic countries, where instrumentalism and transcendentalism were in sharp opposition.
Despite conflicts within clusters of ideas and leaps of sympathy from one to
the other from time to time, the fivefold division provides a useful model of
how basic educational ideas relate to each other. Such an approach requires,
of course, openness and choice, as the Picot Report understood:
Only if people are free to choose, can a true co-operative partnership develop
between the community and learning institutions.
Some teacher educators are reluctant to accept the concept of contestability
and pine for consensus imposed by a national authority, always providing consensus
is based on their ideas. Grant McMillan of the New Zealand Educational Institute
holds, for example, that "NZ primary teaching is child centred not subject
oriented". Lester Taylor, Principal of the Dunedin College of Education,
believes that what is needed is that we "decide as a society what we want"
in education. Taylor seems confident that educational needs are capable of being
consensually established: it just needs the stakeholders to be brought together.
X can speak for parents, Y for employers, and so on. This ultra-empiricist confidence
that we can all agree on educational priorities, if only we understand all the
relevant facts and other peoples' points of view, is more characteristic in
New Zealand of the old 'college' tradition than of university educationalists.
Contestability should not be confused with arbitrariness. Although there are a number of different value positions that can be held in the light of all relevant information, some contentions within each cluster must be rejected as conceptually incoherent or factually wrong.
Dennis McGrath of the Auckland College of Education says that it is not unreasonable for parents, politicians, and school trustees and principals to want the highest quality of teacher education and assurance that good teachers are being produced. But he is wrong to suggest that it would be "a bizarre question" to ask which institution offers the best teacher education in New Zealand. McGrath considers the question bizarre because there are different dimensions we might compare, such as 'attributes' of graduates and research output. Yet, there is nothing inherently difficult in ranking institutions, or departments within institutions, in respect, say, of research and publication achievement. If it were impossible to make such comparisons, then the whole system of so-called quality assurance would be a sham from start to finish.
If McGrath simply means that one institution may be superior to others on one dimension but inferior in another, he is right - just as an individual student may be superior to others in learning a new language but inferior in some other ways. Yet this truth does not prevent comparisons, but helps to refine them. Thus, when McGrath argues that questions such as "Does one of the institutions add more value [than the others] to the student intake?" are "really irrelevant to principals and school trustees, to parents in general and … to politicians", he is doubly wrong. He is wrong factually because many individuals in these groups are interested in such questions. He is also wrong normatively in that all of them ought to be interested.
McGrath claimed that "Teaching as a profession has not had a tradition of writing and assembling the 'wisdom of practice'. We are not able to point to evidence of standards to clarify what teacher education is about." Yet, there is much quantitative and statistical material, although not as much as is desirable, that is highly relevant to the establishment of educational standards. Even more to the point, our educational traditions contain much 'wisdom of practice' which form a rich treasure of thought available to all teacher educators.
Although it is inevitable that thoughtful people will form different priorities in education, as in politics and ways of life as a whole, there are some concerns that all educators in a democratic society should possess. The first of these is a willingness to embrace openness and debate between contending positions. The best elements in each cluster value freedom of discussion and believe in the maxim magna veritas et praevalebit (great is truth and it shall prevail). Yet no cluster has been entirely immune from totalitarian tendencies when in the ascendancy. Varieties of transcendentalist and reconstructionist theories have been most associated with intolerance, but the Prussian founders of mass compulsory schooling were instrumentalist thinkers with authoritarian views, while Plato, one of the founders of liberal educational ideas, sought to impose his ideas by the force of the state. Child-centred theories have been least susceptible to authoritarian capture, but Froebel, for example, had a rigid view of what constitutes the natural growth of the child and vigorously rooted out as 'weeds' any influences he considered inimical to growth in the direction he approved.
The second shared concern should be with objective assessment of the results of our teaching. Honesty demands that we subject our methods to scrupulous testing for their suitability and effectiveness. Otherwise we can have little clear idea as to the extent of our success in attaining our goals, whatever they may be. When our activity is publicly funded, there is the additional responsibility to ensure that the public is adequately informed of our comparative failures as well as of our partial successes. Without full disclosure of results, the value of different methods cannot be properly evaluated, so that innovation and experiment are carried out in vain.
1.2 Two kinds of recommendation
One of the many reasons why the political terms 'right' and 'left', and most of their equivalents, have very limited descriptive or analytical value is that they fail to distinguish between the continuum that runs from conservative to radical, themselves also problematic terms, and the one that runs independently from authoritarian to libertarian. Many people are, of course, opportunistic and support regulation when in office but seek freedom from governmental control when in opposition. Indeed, consistency is hard to achieve, but it is vital to seek it. An organisation concerned to improve educational standards may contain both people who seek to do so through national quality controls and those who believe that higher standards and greater student and parental satisfaction will arise from wider choice and less central control. The two are not incompatible, but they are not easily yoked together.
In reading this report it would be wise to distinguish between recommendations to government - sometimes advice to refrain from rather than to take action, from recommendations to institutions and individuals. There is much we consider wise and sensible which we would never seek to make compulsory. Education is more complex than, say, motor vehicle manufacture, but there are useful analogies. Governments not only may but ought to impose standards in safety precautions, and ensure that factual claims about performance and petrol consumption can be substantiated. On the other hand governments ought not only to refrain from manufacturing motor cars but also from prescribing their colour, names, shapes or levels of comfort. In teacher education this report advocates freedom for students and employers to choose from a range of institutions which may adopt very different priorities. On the other hand, it urges diligence in seeking to establish objective standards of educational achievement.
An obvious feature of this report and its recommendations is that they are the work of an 'outsider'. All 'insiders' will be very aware that this particular outsider is ignorant of many things the importance and relevance of which they are keenly aware. On the other hand an outsider may sometimes be of service through having a different perspective from that of even the best informed 'insider'. Time spent reading the report may well be most profitably used by paying particular attention to insights, however sparse some may feel they are, that arise from outsider background and experience.
1.3 Governments and teacher education
The Education Review Office (ERO) rightly noted that the New Zealand government
has a deep legitimate interest in teacher education, because it:
" requires parents to send their children to school and places responsibility
for the care and education of those children in the hands of schools and teachers;
" is ultimately responsible for the quality of education delivered by schools
to students in New Zealand;
" substantially funds pre-service teacher training programmes;
" funds the employment of most New Zealand teachers and regulates and negotiates
their conditions of employment;
" is the 'owner' of most of the institutions that provide pre-service teacher
training;
" determines policy decisions on issues such as the minimum school leaving
age, new curriculum requirements, and staff/student ratios that can have a significant
impact on the demand for and job requirements of teachers; and
" determines policy decisions on matters such as immigration policy for
overseas teachers and registration requirements for teachers which could have
a significant impact on teacher supply.
These considerations do not entail, however, that the New Zealand government
should itself provide all or even part of teacher education. Liberal democracies
are concerned about children's physical welfare, and parents are vulnerable
to prosecution for neglect unless they feed their children. But the state does
not act as baker or butcher or fishmonger.
1.4 Recommendation
1 Teacher education should embrace the principle of educational contestability
and accept that people of equal intelligence and experience may legitimately
choose very different educational priorities.
CHAPTER 2
BACKGROUND
2.1 Historical sketch
Teacher education is a recent innovation in historical terms, as indeed is mass education. In the anglomorph world, of which New Zealand remains a part, most teachers before the end of the nineteenth century learned 'on the job'. In the independent and grammar schools, teachers rarely received any teacher training, but were recruited as university graduates, or from men and women who had previously pursued other occupations. It was not until after the Second World War that the most prestigious independent schools, such as Eton and Harrow in Britain or Scots College and King's College in New Zealand, usually appointed staff who had undertaken teacher education courses. Teacher training for secondary schools only became compulsory in most anglomorph countries during the 1960s and 1970s. For several generations the staff of most elementary schools in anglomorph countries were former pupil-teachers, who became apprenticed at around 13 and became assistant teachers at 18 after an apprenticeship to a head teacher. A few obtained a place in a training college for one or two years, but it was only during the twentieth century that the majority of elementary teachers had a training college education.
This system, described by English educationalist David Hargreaves as 'pre-technocratic', came under strong attack, to be replaced by teacher education based in tertiary institutions, the 'technocratic stage' in Hargreaves' model. Although secondary schools with their untrained graduates and elementary schools with ex-pupil-teachers who had no higher education at all enjoyed some successes, there were powerful arguments for providing graduates with some systematic pedagogic knowledge before they entered secondary teaching, and for providing elementary/primary teachers with a more liberal education. Imitation of experienced practitioners might be suitable for relatively simple and stable crafts, it was held, but not for a protean and dynamic activity such as teaching.
The history of the Christchurch College of Education epitomises that of New Zealand teacher education as a whole. It began in 1877 with 31 students, 25 women and six men, and was initially an offshoot of the Christchurch Normal School. In 1905 it became the Christchurch Training College and operated a system of pupil-teaching, the pupil-teaching phase being between the ages of 13 and 16, followed by study in the college from 16 to 18, after which the students became full members of the teaching profession. The long period during which they were institutionally free of university control, although not, of course, from that of government, enabled the colleges to develop distinctive traditions in which they took justifiable pride.
In recent years Normal Schools have been regarded as performing a service role to teacher educational institutions rather than being such institutions themselves. A massive switch to school-based teacher education would in some ways represent a return to that original pattern. Pupil-teaching ended finally in 1931. Subsequently, except for emergency conditions of shortage in wartime and at the height of the 'baby boom', intending non-graduate teachers entered teachers' colleges at the end of a full secondary education.
In 1954 the Christchurch Training College organised its secondary training provision in a more systematic way with the establishment of a Post Primary Department, later designated the Secondary Department. In 1959 the whole institution changed its name to Christchurch Teachers College, the term 'training' being by then regarded as limiting and restrictive. The next change of name was in 1989 to the present one of Christchurch College of Education. In 1991 the additional name was adopted of Te Whare Whai Matauraka Ki Otautahi. The 1960s and 1970s were years of rapid expansion: secondary enrolments, for example, increased to over 900 during the early 1970s. During the same years the standard diploma of teaching was extended from a two-year to a three-year course.
Lower birthrates and other economic influences led to the end of expansion
and then to retrenchment. In 1983 the students intake was sharply reduced, and
33 staff members accepted an early retirement offer. A change of government
in 1984 led quickly to a further reversal, and by 1987 there had been a new
wave of staff recruitment and building to cope with increased quotas in all
the programmes. In 1989 the new reform package was introduced in education as
a whole and the Christchurch College of Education, like the rest, gained much
greater autonomy for budgeting and staffing, with government financial support
being given on the basis of a grant determined by a formula based on, inter
alia, the approved number of equivalent full-time student places (the EFTS funding
system).
Very early links were formed between the Christchurch College of Education and
the University of Canterbury. College trainees attended some university lectures
in English and the principles of education, which were taught by the College
Principal doubling as university lecturer (although not with the title of Professor
of Education in the university, as in the Dunedin College of Education-University
of Otago relationship). A joint four-year B.Ed. was first offered by the Christchurch
College of Education and the University of Canterbury in 1980 and administered
by a joint board of studies.
The change of name to College of Education indicated that its role had become wider than provision of pre-service teacher education. Some new courses were closely related to the 'core business' of teacher education, such as speech and language therapy training. There are also two-year Diploma of Teaching courses for specialist Maori teachers, Pacific Island trained teachers, university graduates or near graduates, and a one-year workshop craft retraining course.
Differences between, on the one hand, the teachers' colleges, training colleges and colleges of education and, on the other, university departments of education as they developed have been deep in all anglomorph countries. In most cases university departments of education were designed initially to prepare graduates for secondary teaching in one-year courses, whereas the colleges prepared intending primary teachers who entered their training courses directly on leaving school. Thus the staff of university education departments tended to be scholars in disciplines such as philosophy, history or psychology, who applied their scholarship to the study of education. College staff tended to be ex-teachers who took further courses, often with university scholars as their lecturers, in order to broaden their theoretical understanding of teaching and to raise their academic status. By and large the university department of education staff looked for approval to colleagues in other university departments and scholars in their own fields internationally. College staff generally sought to gain the esteem of principals and teachers of schools and of educational administrators. University staff were largely judged by the quality of their publications, whereas it was not incumbent on college staff to publish at all, although praiseworthy if they did so. In teacher education in New Zealand today there is still often uneasy co-existence between the two traditions, irrespective of whether formal mergers have taken place between institutions.
The differences between the two traditions were described by Professor Ivan
Snook of Massey University's Department of Education when in 1993 acrimonious
negotiations were taking place about a possible merger between Massey University
and the Palmerston North College of Education. Snook held that the old college
model:
… sees teaching as a practical craft centred on classrooms and the meeting
of children's needs. The good teacher understands children, has sound teaching
methods, a general familiarity with all aspects of the curriculum and the ability
to control a class.
He considered that "all these elements are important and need to be preserved",
but added that "the model is limited and is quite inappropriate to the
challenges ahead". The old university tradition, in Snook's view:
… sees teaching as a learned profession. Its practitioners have a broad
grasp of schooling in its social, historical and political context. They are
able to provide expert advice on the theory of education and on educational
policy. Their approach to teaching is informed and critical. Their methods are
based on the best research available although they know very well the limitations
of this research.
This comparison to their disfavour was endorsed by very few of the academic
staff of the Palmerston North College of Education.
Considerable differences persist in typical qualifications held by academic
staff in the two types of institution. In 1997 35 percent of the Dunedin College
of Education and 32 percent of the Christchurch College of Education academic
staff have never gained a degree, whereas in their partner universities, the
Universities of Otago and Canterbury respectively, almost all the education
department academics hold a higher degree. At the University of Waikato, even
though the merger with the Hamilton College of Education took place only five
years ago, only 7 percent of the staff are non-graduates. Colleges make the
best case they can in respect to the comparatively modest scholarship of many
of their lecturers. Dunedin makes the point that the great majority of its teaching
staff have been appointed directly from successful teaching careers in primary
and secondary schools or early childhood centres. However, pride in the practical
experience of their staff does not prevent colleges from urging all those who
are non-graduates to gain degrees.
2.2 The current organisational structure
The Gandar Report
The 1974 government paper, Directions for Educational Development, called for a comprehensive review of teacher education, but this was not carried out thoroughly until the 1979 Review of Teacher Training, usually known as the Gandar Report. Its criticisms included:
o inadequate interview procedures, selection processes and means of ensuring
that the most suitable applicants enter teaching;
o unnecessarily constraining regulations and requirements;
o apparent irrelevance of some college programmes;
o inadequate staff movement into and out of teachers' colleges;
o aspects of practical training; and
o insufficient training opportunities for teachers in the tertiary sector.
Some criticisms centred on aspects of teacher education which its practitioners
considered they had long since brought to a fine art, including the organisation
of teaching practice. The Gandar Report claimed:
There is a lack of close coordination between the colleges and schools, a lack
of appreciation by many associate teachers of the aims of in-school training
and a lack of coordination between the stage of college courses and what the
student does in school.
The Gandar Report welcomed the extension from two to three years of training
for primary teachers that had recently been introduced, commenting that "many
school principals and instructors confirmed that the beginning teachers entering
the profession are generally better prepared" and that "overall, the
academic qualifications of entrants to primary teachers' colleges are continuing
to rise". It recommended that "the timing, nature and length of in-school
practice experiences should be examined" and further efforts should be
made to establish "systematic and effective methods of evaluating teacher
education".
Quality of teaching
During 1985 the Education and Science Select Committee of Parliament, chaired by Noel Scott, held an inquiry into the Quality of Teaching and published its report under that title in 1986. The report included comments and recommendations on initial teacher training. The committee was impressed with some aspects of the efforts of several teacher colleges and the integrated approach of the Hamilton Teachers' College and the education department of the University of Waikato. However, the committee reported that it was "strongly concerned about considerable evidence that teacher training, both initial and induction, shows major weaknesses." The committee recommended, inter alia, more research into course design, clearer identification of teaching skills and competencies, more flexible courses, and that college lecturers should be appointed on five-year renewable contracts.
The Picot Report
In 1988 the Taskforce to Review Education Administration published Administering
for Excellence, usually known as the Picot Report after its chairman Brian Picot.
On teacher training it "could find no compelling reasons for continuing
the present arrangements for the training of teachers". It rejected independent
single-purpose institutions and recommended that teachers' colleges:
… become semi-autonomous schools of teacher education within the universities,
but that the relationship be such that the integrity of teacher preparation
be retained. Each school of teacher education should have a charter. Funding
would be provided as a specific item within Vote: Education, but teacher education
schools would be free to train as many teachers as they are able within this
and any other funding they can obtain.
The Picot taskforce recommended unrestricted access to teacher education for
those wishing to train as teachers. It was willing to leave to potential applicants
decisions about future job supply. It is unlikely that such applicants could
have miscalculated future teacher supply and demand more than have successive
New Zealand governments and their expert advisers.
Like the 1962 Report of the Currie Commission on Education in New Zealand and several other of its predecessors, the Picot taskforce advocated a graduate teaching profession. This is a worthy idea, provided that it means that all teachers possess the academic level traditionally deemed appropriate for graduation and does not mean that courses once considered below graduate level attract degrees. Which of these two may be taking place in New Zealand requires careful examination.
The legislative basis for the present structure of teacher education was constructed broadly in response to the Picot criticisms. Its main components are the Public Finance Act 1989 and the Education Act 1989, supplemented by the Education Act 1989 (as amended in 1990) which created the New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) with its wide overseeing powers. The structure emerging from these changes is outlined below.
The institutions
Initial teacher education in the mid-1990s is provided by four autonomous colleges of education, three university departments of education, five polytechnics and a growing number of recently established smaller providers. The autonomous colleges are Dunedin College of Education, Christchurch College of Education, Wellington College of Education and the Auckland College of Education. These are large institutions, ranging from about 2000 in equivalent full-time pre-service teacher-student places under the EFTS funding system in the Auckland College of Education to about 900 in the Dunedin College of Education. Each of these, except the Auckland College of Education as from 1996, cooperates closely with its local university. The Auckland College of Education offered a joint B.Ed. with the University of Auckland, but the two institutions have now gone their separate ways, with no new intakes from 1996. The joint B.Ed. will remain until phased out. The non-university teacher education institutions form the New Zealand Council for Teacher Education (NZCTE) which, through the Colleges of Education Accreditation Committee (CEAC), exerts supervision over each institution's awards and courses, whilst acting at the same time as lobbyist for all of them.
In contrast to the separatist, or independent, direction taken by the Auckland College of Education, the former Hamilton College of Education fully amalgamated in 1992 with the University of Waikato. A similar development took place in 1996 between the former Palmerston North College of Education and Massey University, except that the Palmerston North college retained more of its past institutional shape as the Massey University College of Education than did the Hamilton college within the University of Waikato. All the universities offer higher degrees in education.
Over the last two years several new providers of initial teacher education have entered the field. This expansion has involved both state institutions (polytechnics and wananga) and independent providers. The University of Auckland has become an independent provider, instead of working conjointly with the Auckland College of Education. Several polytechnics have become providers, namely the Auckland Institute of Technology (AIT), the UNITEC Institute of Technology, the Manukau Polytechnic, Christchurch Polytechnic, and Wanganui Regional Community Polytechnic. Te Whare Wananga Awanuiarangi at Whakatane has been a pioneer wananga in teacher education. Independent Christian institutions have been established: Bethlehem Teachers College and the MASTERS Institute. The New Zealand Graduate School of Education in Christchurch is an independent initiative of a secular character.
The ERO considered in 1996 that the colleges of education and universities have not only very little direct competition from actual or potential alternative providers except one another, but are unlikely to do so in the foreseeable future. The ERO took this view because polytechnics and private training institutions face significant market barriers if they wish to provide pre-service teacher training, including the need to obtain course approvals and provider accreditation before applying for funding. They also have to establish arrangements with schools for practical teaching experience and supervision. However, what the ERO described as only a few alternative providers that cater merely for small numbers of trainees in a specific and specialised way, is already creating considerable alarm in some established institutions. The latter may prove more acute than the ERO, in this respect at least, since, given anything like a level playing field on which to compete, several new providers seem likely to flourish.
The post-1988 reforms in teacher education increased competition between established providers, even before new institutions entered the field. Recruitment campaigns for students are far more vigorous than before. The Wellington College of Education, for example, has a marketing manager and liaison staff who travel nationwide to try to widen enrolment. They are backed up by extensive advertising and public relations exercises. Similarly, the Christchurch College of Education has a liaison officer with a generous budget which inter alia makes possible an impressive range of display and promotional materials. The Massey University College of Education is equally active and makes considerable use of the university's Corporate Communications Division. The University of Waikato employs radio as well as newspapers for promotion of its courses. The Christchurch Polytechnic advertises its new teacher education programmes extensively in the press. In order to combat fears of ice and snow, the Dunedin College of Education offers incentives such as lower fees and a free return air trip for students who live outside the Otago and Southland provinces. Overall, the results of freeing up provision of teacher education since 1989 have been positive and encouraging.
The standard courses
The colleges of education offer some courses not directly related to teacher preparation, for example in social work, librarianship and business studies, but overwhelmingly teacher education is their 'core business'. In general, students intending to become early childhood and primary teachers take a three-year course which leads to a diploma in teaching, with some students taking an extra year to gain a B.Ed. At the Wellington College of Education the Diploma of Teaching (Primary) is awarded after completion of three years of study, with the option of a fourth year for the B.Ed. of the Victoria University of Wellington. At Dunedin, most of the programme for the first two years is taught in the Dunedin College of Education, most of the third year in the University of Otago, and the fourth year mainly back in the college. As from 1997 the Auckland College of Education is awarding a bachelor of teaching degree after only three years, not merely a diploma. This has triggered off comparable changes elsewhere: Massey University College of Education and the Wellington College of Education are already planning three-year programmes at the end of which all students will have both a degree and a teaching qualification. This is a very expeditious way in which to achieve a graduate profession!
Intending secondary teachers may proceed the same way as the early childhood and primary students in three-year concurrent courses, or take a one-year post-graduate diploma of education after a first degree without any teacher education component. In addition, concurrent four-year courses leading to a Diploma of Teaching (Secondary) and a B.Ed. are offered by the Christchurch College of Education, Massey University College of Education and the University of Waikato. Commonly in secondary programmes students are expected to take one major and one or two minor teaching subjects. Alan Hall, Associate Dean of the Waikato School of Education, argues that the integrated concurrent secondary programme at Waikato has changed perspectives, compared with an 'end-on' approach. He considers that the changes to the B.Ed. programme, since its introduction in 1966, reflect a view of teacher education as involving the systematic development of applied knowledge rather than as a B.A. in Education with some curriculum courses added.
Three- and four-year teacher training programmes result in a long lead time before changes in the funding of teacher education can make much change in the number of trained teachers being produced. In general, therefore, the Ministry of Education and the ERO favour short end-on courses. End-on post-graduate programmes reduce lead time and may also be attractive to graduates who did not consider teaching as a career when they left school. On the other hand, some teacher educators fear that short end-on courses may not only focus on immediate instrumental goals, discarding deeper considerations as 'irrelevant', but may become indoctrinative, by presenting one way of achieving an objective as if it were the only legitimate method and as if the objective might not itself be in competition with other valuable educational ends.
After initial accreditation, beginning teachers undertake a two-year internship in schools, in which one senior teacher acts as 'mentor' to monitor overall professional progress. On completion of the two-year period, application is made for full registration with the Teacher Registration Board.
Contracts
All colleges of education have tendered successfully in recent years for contracts, usually for curriculum or teacher development, with the Ministry of Education and other funding agencies. This has some drawbacks. Sometimes a contract has to be completed quickly, and in these circumstances it is difficult to make adjustments to staff teaching duties, although outsiders may be brought in on a temporary basis. Also time spent on drawing up proposals or bids may be regarded as wasted if no contract ensues.
Stronger considerations on the positive side are that contracts in areas such as teacher support and curriculum development bring college staff into closer contact with schools, whilst temporary replacements from the schools may well assist some facets of college work, especially the practicums. Tim McMahon and Catherine McMechan of the Ministry of Education, although they find the situation patchy nationally, consider that the winning of contracts for in-service education by colleges is a tribute to their vitality and is likely to be of considerable help in overcoming the lack of cohesion often alleged between pre-service courses and in-service training.
Off-campus courses
Many teacher educators consider they have responded positively to the need to make training more accessible. Local 'outpost' courses have been set up to meet the needs of 'immobile' trainees, and 'distance learning' courses are being developed and offered. Consideration is being given also to delivering programmes in ways that will allow trainees to combine training with paid employment. By mid-1997 there were 44 teacher education programmes on offer in 26 centres. The Christchurch College of Education is now providing courses in eight places, four in the North Island. The University of Waikato now delivers teacher education programmes in Rotorua, Gisborne, Thames and Taumarunui. Like most institutions today, it makes considerable use of the internet, e-mail and other modern techniques for rapid communication. Massey University now provides teacher education in Napier, New Plymouth and Albany, as well as at Palmerston North, and received the major award recently of the Distance Education Association of New Zealand in its Applied Teaching projects category. Off-campus courses in teacher education are now also available in Hawera, Hastings, Wairoa, Te Kuiti, Otaki, Masterton, Buller, Nelson, Blenheim and Invercargill. Off-campus courses usually prove expensive compared with college-based courses, and there are sometimes problems with local communities who consider some of their own people are experts in teacher education while the college concerned thinks otherwise. However, these initiatives are in general to be applauded. They are in keeping with a commitment to openness and contestability.
2.3 Current controls
Policy decisions by the government in the late 1980s and subsequent legislation established the principle that educational institutions should be given as much independence and freedom to make operational and management decisions as possible, and in some significant ways that principle has been implemented. The Ministry of Education was established with a clear policy focus and without many of the operational functions of the former Department of Education. Ownership of assets was transferred to the institutions and balance sheets established. Their statements of objectives specify the maximum allowable debt: equity ratio, and maximum debt: income ratio. Within the set limits colleges are able to embark upon capital transactions without prior government or ministerial approval. Private institutions and other types of providers are able to negotiate charters with the ministry, although government funding may not necessarily follow.
Overall, the operations of colleges of education have been considerably freed up, with much less day-to-day interference from the ministry in areas of course content, services offered and detailed operations. They may remain independent or merge with other tertiary institutions such as universities or polytechnics. They may offer a much wider variety of courses than merely pre-service teacher training. These new courses may attract private sector and/or student funding or may involve contractual services to the ministry for in-service training of teachers, assistance with curriculum development, and so on. The rolls of colleges are no longer controlled by government projections of the future demand for teachers. Colleges now select their own students. They may take full fee-paying students over and above those being assisted by taxpayers. They may engage in entrepreneurial activities. A cardinal principle of the bulk funding system is that tertiary institutions can make their own decisions as to how the total sums of money received are spent, in order to meet their objectives and the delivery of agreed outputs. Nevertheless teacher educational institutions remain subject to many regulatory controls, and these are considered below.
2.4 External regulatory agencies
The Ministry of Education
Although the ministry has only an 'arms length' relationship with teacher education institutions and does not exercise a quality assurance function, it influences them as a policy adviser to the government in several ways: as an allocator of EFTS places across the tertiary sector and between institutions, based mainly on the past performance of each institution in filling the places for which it has bid and the total number of EFTS places available; as a monitor of institutions' reporting against EFTS funding; and as an agent of the Minister of Education in establishing funding agreements with the New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) and the Teacher Registration Board (TRB).
The ministry has a potentially important role in pre-service teaching training, in that it is responsible, in consultation with boards of trustees and the State Services Commission (SSC), for negotiating collective employment contracts for teachers. The outcome of these negotiations sends important signals to potential entrants about rewards in teaching.
The New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA)
The NZQA has, under sections 253 and 260 of the Education Act 1989, responsibility to promote and monitor inter-institutional course approvals and moderation procedures and to delegate these powers when it considers it appropriate to do so. The NZQA has delegated wide powers in teacher education to the Colleges of Education Accreditation Committee (CEAC), which was established under section 260 of the above-named Act.
CEAC has three main functions:
to establish criteria and procedures for accreditation, within the parameters
of NZQA guidelines, and to accredit colleges of education to deliver programmes
based on unit standards registered on the National Qualifications Framework,
or other programmes or qualifications for which accreditation is required;
to approve courses and programmes, delivered in colleges of education,
which are not based on unit standards registered on the National Qualifications
Framework; and
to ensure inter-institutional monitoring systems of programmes are in
place.
CEAC operates at two levels: through its member institutions which are the
colleges of education forming the New Zealand Council for Teacher Education
(NZCTE), and through its own independent operations. CEAC consists of four college
principals or their representatives and seven outsiders, or six if the chairperson
is classified as an insider, since this post is nominated by the NZCTE. One
outsider is a nominee of the New Zealand Vice-Chancellors' Committee and the
other of the Association of Polytechnics in New Zealand. Four are independent
members eminent in the employment/industrial field, at least one of whom must
be Maori. In May 1996 these were the chair of the central region of the New
Zealand School Trustees Association (NZSTA), the former Principal of Wellington
High School, an employee of the New Zealand Employers Federation, and the chief
executive of Whitireia Polytechnic who was also the independent Maori member.
As well as delegating powers over the colleges of education to CEAC, NZQA has
devolved authority to the New Zealand Polytechnic Programmes Committee for teacher
education undertaken by polytechnics, whilst the New Zealand Vice-Chancellors'
Committee has statutory powers independent of NZQA. NZQA acts directly in regard
to private training institutions including independent colleges of education.
The Education Review Office (ERO)
The Education Review Office (ERO) has an interest in the quality of graduates from training institutions as this ultimately impacts on the ability of schools and early childhood institutions to deliver good quality education. It is also concerned with the quality of programmes at school level for developing the skills of graduate teachers, particularly in the two years leading to full registration.
The State Services Commission (SSC)
Colleges of education are required to consult with the State Services Commission (SSC) on the negotiation of collective employment contracts for college lecturers.
Boards of trustees
Boards of trustees are legally the employers of teaching staff in schools, although they do not exercise all of the ordinary powers of an employer. They have the power to appoint teachers, to manage the performance of teachers and to discipline and dismiss teachers. While boards have a responsibility for ensuring that schools are fully and adequately staffed, they do not have responsibility for fixing teachers' pay. Nor, except in the case of directly resourced schools, do they determine in any significant sense the number of teachers employed in the school. Boards of trustees and teacher education institutions interact in a range of ways. Some colleges involve boards in student selection and in advisory committees on course content.
The Teacher Registration Board (TRB)
The Teacher Registration Board (TRB) has the power to grant provisional registration
or, under a recent amendment to the Education Act 1989, limited authority to
teach to applicants who meet certain criteria. Full registration requires the
satisfactory completion, within the past five years, of two years' uninterrupted
employment as a teacher.
2.5 Internal controls
In addition to external controls, teacher educators work under a complex apparatus of internal regulation. In respect of their education departments or faculties, New Zealand universities have their own systems for course approval and accreditation under the auspices of the New Zealand Vice-Chancellors' Committee. Each college of education is required by statute to have a council which comprises between 12 and 20 members. Details are set out in section 171 of the Education Act 1989 (as amended in 1990). The term of office of council members, other than the chief executive officer and student representatives, is four years. Student representatives have a one-year term of office (section 173 of the above-named Act).
Fairly typical of the councils is that of the Wellington College of Education. This council is governed by a council of 18 members all of whom, apart from the chief executive officer and one co-opted member, are nominated by various groups, as follows:
4 ministerial nominees;
2 Maori group nominees;
1 Pacific Islands nominee;
1 Employers' Association nominee;
1 New Zealand Council of Trade Unions' nominee;
1 Education Employers' nominee;
1 Education Employees' nominee
1 Victoria University of Wellington nominee;
1 Wellington College of Education Trainee Association nominee;
1 academic staff nominee;
1 general staff nominee; and
1 Association of Staff in Tertiary Education nominee.
Harvey McQueen, Executive Director of the NZCTE, says that in his judgment 'smaller, leaner councils' would be preferable.
McQueen considers that more genuine freedom of action for principals would enable teacher education to be more proactive and to avoid having to respond belatedly to changed conditions, especially to reversals in 'policies in respect of funding and numbers. In his opinion the current purchase model invests too much power in Wellington and inhibits the pace of reform. He also argues that the present position of the government as monopoly employer, albeit through the intermediation of school boards of trustees, makes it difficult for teacher education to respond to changing educational markets. Overall, the current EFTS funding system creates powerful incentives for institutions to get and retain the maximum possible number of students for as long as possible by maximising the length of programmes they offer. However, it is also the case that this policy could be reversed at very short notice.
As a further condition of receiving grants for teacher education, each college is required to submit to the Secretary for Education a statement of objectives based on its charter in respect of three consecutive academic years. Reporting against the objectives and the EFTS funding is by way of a statement of service performance which is required for all Crown entities by the Public Finance Act l989.
Irrespective of, or because of, these various controls, current educational ideology suffuses official teacher education documents at nearly every level. For example, the charter of the Dunedin College of Education proclaims that it will always:
o acknowledge the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi with recognition that
the achievement of a partnership with tangata whenua in the provision of Post-School
Education and Training programmes is a matter of priority;
o promote and systematically achieve identified equity objectives for the socially
and economically disadvantaged and for those for whom inequities currently exist;
o promote equal educational opportunity for low income groups, Maori, women,
people with disabilities and special needs, people with literacy/learning needs,
people requiring special learning assistance, rural groups, Pacific Island groups,
other ethnic groups specially identified by the institution as disadvantaged
and other groups identified as disadvantaged;
o acknowledge and value active commitment to biculturalism; and
o [maintain] partnership goals [which] ensure that the principles and articles
of the Treaty of Waitangi are translated into the immediate work environment,
policies, personal behaviours and professional services of this College, ensure
Maori representation on all policy making groups, acknowledge and support Maori
ways of learning and teaching, and provide Maori language and tikanga Maori
courses for staff, students and community.
At the Massey University College of Education, in order to ascertain progress on 'social equity', the corporate plan requires that annual statistics of female percentages be compiled of students, academic staff, general staff and teacher support staff. If the statistics show 'under-representation' of women, then further action is needed. However, if there are proportionally far more women than men, as in early childhood and primary education, no action need apparently be taken. Massey and Dunedin are little different from the rest in respect of 'equity', or in their devotion to the Treaty of Waitangi.
2.6 Extent of autonomy
Despite the considerable constraints which still impinge on them, teacher educators have more freedom of action than in the past. Bryan Hennessey, Principal of the Massey University College of Education, illustrates the contrast between the very limited autonomy enjoyed by colleges of education before 1989 and the present situation. He worked then in the Teacher Education Division of the Department of Education in Wellington, which treated the six colleges as if essentially they were one. In Hennessey's metaphor, each received a set of jam jars with specified money for libraries, student travel, academic staff salaries, general staff salaries and so on contained in each. Almost every item was pre-determined except that the balance between employing part-time and full-time staff within the maximum permitted full-time equivalents could be determined by each institution. Furthermore, as late as the 1980s the Minister of Education of the day actually prescribed the number of hours in every course that was to be held in every college in the country, and the number of contact hours that students had to have to qualify for allowances was defined. And woe betide anybody who moved away from those hours.
At least since 1989 each college gets its funds in bulk, so that more decisions on the allocation of resources can be made by each college. The new financial structure, Hennessey argues, has enabled prudent organisations such as Massey to invest wisely with a long-term view and to help educational development in this way. His view that a rather high minimum size is necessary for such advanced institutional planning is more open to debate.
2.7 Client satisfaction
Despite strains and tensions of many kinds, there is a wide area of agreement between most teacher educators and most teachers, especially those in early childhood and primary education, about educational values and priorities. Sometimes the two sides exchange sincerely meant compliments which outsiders do not share. This observation is not intended to negate praise conferred by school principals and others, but as a reminder that in a contestable field they line up with the teacher educators on most of the contested questions.
It is hardly surprising that principals of Normal Schools, which work particularly closely with teacher education institutions, are in general supportive of the institutions' aims and activities. It can be assumed that one important question asked when these principals were interviewed for appointment would have concerned their evaluation of the relevant teacher education institution. In interviews for this report principals of Normal Schools supported the child-centred beliefs that dominate college courses. They also expressed satisfaction with the average quality of student-teachers, whom they consider are keeping up a strong tradition for quality teaching which has given New Zealand education high prestige in Britain and elsewhere overseas.
Jean Packman, Principal of Ngaio School, generally has praise for the Wellington College of Education, although she considers that some beginning teachers would have benefited from a longer time in college. She claims to have a lot of good applicants for vacancies on her staff - the pick of the crop with As and Bs in their courses. Because she is generally satisfied with their knowledge basis, she looks for 'people people' most of all. On the other hand, she is aware that many teachers whom she would be very reluctant to employ still enter the system. She is critical of principals and others who fail to be firm enough in their requirements of student-teachers and allow some to pass the practicum when they ought to have required them to repeat it or failed them.
Jean Packman is among many who make the point that too often external critics judge schools by an unrepresentative minority of lazy or ineffective teachers. This is a fair argument, but it raises questions about the effectiveness of so-called 'quality controls' when such people can pass all the courses in teacher education and be appointed to schools. Moreover, while teachers, once appointed, are not immune from dismissal it would seem that the procedures for doing so are not often invoked.
All the college principals and chief executives claim (and there is no reason at all to doubt them) that they spend a lot of time and effort on ascertaining whether teachers and boards of trustees are satisfied with their efforts. Dennis McGrath describes the Auckland College of Education as client-oriented and seeking to tailor its courses to the needs of schools, whether in music and the arts or commerce and technology. He advises that over 90 percent of principals canvassed are satisfied with the quality of student-teachers and new staff members from the Auckland College of Education.
Bryan Hennessey of the Massey University School of Education also considers schools are generally satisfied with teacher education. He holds that most employers are happy with the skill levels and attitudes of school leavers, and that parents and boards of trustees are satisfied with the schools. He considers the educational situation overall in New Zealand to be a good one, except for inadequate funding, but subject to excessive and unfair attacks from ill-informed outsiders.
Evaluations by students are also said to show that courses are satisfactory, although it is not clear with what students are able to compare their own experiences. Hennessey concedes there are some unsatisfactory teachers, since some principals have approached Massey to provide them with distance education programmes to raise the professional and educational level of unqualified teaching staff employed in schools. But, on the whole, he considers all is well in standards of teaching and teacher education.
Many teacher educators argue that the high rate of employment of their graduates and the fact that so many of them are given responsibilities very speedily constitute evidence of the quality of their courses. Yet it is almost inevitable in a period of teacher shortage that most graduates seeking jobs and willing to move residence will get them. One should no more congratulate the teacher educators on this than one should blame schools when there are large numbers of school leavers unemployed, unless it can be shown that school inefficiencies are a significant factor in generating unemployment. In early childhood education, an area including many people with few if any formal qualifications, the employment rate of graduates is even less a warranty of quality. Attention to job applications is, however, an area in which teacher education shines. Far too much attention was given, in the view of some recent graduates, to preparation of curriculum vitae and job applications, although they conceded that other students were very appreciative of the time spent on these activities.
Many teacher education students consider their courses adequate and better than adequate. For example, several Waikato students, especially those in early childhood education, are gratified that some of their tutors and lecturers are at the cutting edge of their subject as a result of writing many of the unit standards relating to this field for the NZQA's National Qualifications Framework. Sometimes teachers in the schools regard the student-teachers as more knowledgeable than themselves about new curriculum requirements.
Dr Anne Meade, Director of the New Zealand Council for Educational Research (NZCER), is generally happy with the state of teacher education in New Zealand. She sees a 'positive spiral' in current trends to encourage more research among teacher educators and teachers themselves. She considers that standards among teachers in early childhood education, a special interest of hers, have risen significantly in recent years. She defended the colleges from the criticism that they spend too much time on gender and race issues.
2.8 Client criticisms
New Zealand teacher education has not lacked critics as well as admirers during recent years. Teachers themselves are often critical of the colleges and university departments in which they received teacher education, and are hostile to claims by education lecturers to understand teaching better than they do. Teacher educators are often seen as out of touch with the realities of schools. On issues of practicum teachers generally hold that schools should have the predominant influence and also that teaching practice should form a larger proportion of courses. Even though they value the possession of an academic qualification, many consider teacher training, apart from teaching practice, largely irrelevant to the 'real' world of classrooms. Many student-teachers claim that teaching practice is the only really valuable part of teacher education courses.
Harvey McQueen, of the NZCTE, is well aware that many New Zealand teachers hold very negative opinions of teacher education, both as it is now and as it was when they experienced it. Teachers have said to him: " 'Never learnt much', 'The sections were the only useful thing', 'They had forgotten what the classroom was like'. We hear such comments. Not often do we hear 'So and so inspired me'. 'Gee, they made me realise how many skills a teacher required,' 'I was well prepared'." He went on to observe that "If I had been paid a $1000 for every time I've heard a teacher say, 'we could train them better and more cheaply', I'd be a millionaire." Although McQueen holds that "one of the biggest distractions has been the continuing demand for information from groups wanting to review teacher education", he accepts that there is considerable disquiet and that "Whatever the reasons, the fact it is happening reflects something out there. Without a fire there can't be smoke. I believe we would be very foolish to deny the existence of the fire." McQueen considers that "The scorn that some educators pour upon words like 'profit' or 'market' reflects a mental mindset that puts their own enterprise at risk."
Windows on Teacher Education
Windows on Teacher Education was a major research project undertaken by Margery Renwick and June Vize for the New Zealand Council for Educational Research (NZCER). The project, commissioned by the Ministry of Education, involved following, via detailed questionnaires and interviews, the progress of the 1989 entry into primary teacher training at the Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch Colleges of Education. The study was in three phases, each covered in a separate report. The results of this three-year longitudinal research project were fed into the colleges as it developed, and this led to modifications in college programmes during the course of the research.
After six months at college, the overall assessments by students were more
positive than negative, and colleges were seen as friendly and supportive, especially
compared with universities. On the other hand, many students found the courses
less challenging than their last year at school and much less demanding and
rigorous than university courses in the judgment of students taking both. Regarding
the assessment of student work, common reactions were that courses were too
easy to pass, standards were not high enough, and that inadequate constructive
criticism was provided. There were many criticisms that courses were badly organised
and taught, and that students were treated as schoolchildren. Students at all
three colleges had favourable comments about teaching practice sections and
wanted more. However, visiting college lecturers were frequently criticised
for spending too little time with each student.
Renwick and Vize observed:
When we interviewed students we anticipated that those taking university courses
might consider college courses less demanding. What we didn't expect was that
students would compare their present workload with their previous year at school,
and find it less challenging. … Again and again student comments referred
to the quality of individual lecturers, with particular reference to those who
had been at college 'for ever' and were not in touch with the classroom. …
The importance students attach to the quality of individual lecturers makes
it clear that no matter how frequently college programmes are reviewed and reorganised,
students will tend to judge their college experience by the performance of individual
lecturers.
The main results of the second phase of the study were:
o more than 80 percent of students were at least as motivated to be primary
teachers as when they began the course, frequently because of increased confidence
in the classroom;
o many students at Wellington and, particularly, Christchurch thought the second
year programme an improvement on the first; Auckland students were less positive
- but they thought the first year programme was better than at the other colleges;
o courses where there was a clear link between theory and practice were valued;
reading, maths and physical education were seen as the three most useful to
the classroom;
o most students did not think the college had articulated a view of what makes
a 'good teacher';
o most students regarded their teaching practice as the most valuable part of
the course and would like more of it; similarly, associate teachers were frequently
seen as the most important influence on students' teaching style;
o students wanted assessments to assist with learning and provide a valid credential
at the end of the course;
o students undertaking university courses felt those courses would be of direct
use in the classroom; those who didn't do university courses mainly explained
their decision in terms of the extra fees involved; and
o graduate students doing a two-year course felt the course length was about
right, though they all believed the course content and organisation could be
improved.
The main findings of the third phase can be summarised as follows:
o at the end of their training, 97 percent of students were either confident
(57 percent) or very confident (40 percent) about teaching;
o similar high percentages applied to confidence in curriculum content, except
Maori language where 48 percent were not at all confident;
o the most useful part of training was teaching practice sessions, supported
by specific courses and individual lecturers;
o while 62 percent of Christchurch students thought their course length about
right, 61 percent of Auckland and 52 percent of Wellington students thought
it too long;
o two-thirds of the students thought their profiles were an accurate reflection
of their student performance, but many said they were not sufficiently specific
and did not differentiate between students;
o the main reasons students did not take university courses were the extra fees
and expenses, and most regretted that decision; and
o 60 percent of students said they were as motivated or more motivated to be
a teacher as when they commenced training (somewhat lower than the 80 percent
at the end of year 2).
Students' general impressions at the end of their course were thus generally positive - partly perhaps, the researchers suggested, because the college period was coming to an end and they would soon be actually teaching. Criticisms, as previously noted, centred on the lack of challenging work, poor organisation and administration and a few poor lecturers. Various positive and negative comments were reported about individual courses. On the positive side, art, computer studies, education, maths, Maori studies, science, professional studies, reading and multicultural studies were mentioned. Negative comments referred to education, social studies, English and educational media.
It should be borne in mind that about 80 percent of the students said they were in sympathy with the teaching methods advocated by the colleges. Many adopted their lecturers' beliefs and were worried by children's (and, to a lesser extent, teachers') attitudes they encountered in schools. Criticisms might well have been much fiercer if most students had dissenting educational values and priorities. Even as it was, however, the range of complaints made by the students sent shock waves through the colleges of education.
Since the Windows research caused such concern among its old allies, the NZCER seems to have gone out of its way to defend teacher education institutions, together with mother tongue immersion and other politically correct causes. At the nadir of the Christchurch College of Education's misfortunes, Margery Renwick wrote of "the college's overriding concern for academic excellence", while the conflicts between the Wellington College of Education and the Victoria University of Wellington were sublimated as a "collaborative approach" with "the emphasis [in discussions between the two institutions] on school curriculum and practical experience, essential to effective teacher education, being recognised through B.Ed. programmes."
The Education Accord
An Education Accord working party on teacher training, consisting of key people from such organisations as the Post Primary Teachers' Association (PPTA), the New Zealand Educational Institute (NZEI), the Secondary Principals' Association of New Zealand Inc. (SPANZ), New Zealand Principals' Federation, the New Zealand School Trustees Association (NZSTA), Proprietors of Integrated Schools, and the New Zealand Intermediate and Middle Schools Association, was highly critical of New Zealand teacher education in 1996. The working party had several aims: to "show our dissatisfaction; to put [the] onus on [the] Ministry to do [an] evaluation"; and "to have training colleges responsive to our needs and for us to see them as credible".
The working party alleged several shortcomings among teacher educators, such as inflexibility, underestimation of the value of practicums, and out-of-date teaching styles. Their proposals included greater emphasis on, and more time for, the practicum, more ongoing school experience for lecturers, release of capable teachers to lecture at colleges, and professional recognition for quality performance by lecturers in practicum support as opposed to research.
The Education Accord also argues that present courses contain "too much dead time for students". It makes several suggestions, for example that colleges should use the time "more wisely" with courses being "compressed and therefore less costly" and that the programmes should be "skill and competency based". Not all of the Education Accord's criticisms and proposals are supported in this report, but they reveal that a wide gulf now exists between the satisfaction with themselves generally expressed by teacher educators and the dissatisfactions of many teachers who share most of the ideas dominant in teacher education.
Marilyn Yeoman, speaking for the Education Accord, claimed in June 1996 that there is a perception among her colleagues that some new entrants may not be adequately prepared to work with the new National Curriculum and new techniques of teaching. She agreed there was little solid evidence one way or the other, itself a condemnation of teacher educators, so her committee presented a questionnaire to the colleges of education. During the same month the President of the Principals' Council of the PPTA, Karen Sewell, claimed there were similar concerns in secondary schools about what appeared to be the shrinking pool of students from which teacher education can recruit.
2.9 Recommendations
1 The government should further reduce the external controls which inhibit the freedom of action of teacher education institutions.
2 The government should reduce the size of college councils, especially in respect of the representation of outside vested interests. In trying to please all, principals have difficulty in pleasing any, and have insufficient powers to undertake proactive policies.
3 Teacher educators should listen to a wider range of voices, not only to those
of groups who share most of their educational ideas. In particular, they should
listen when those who do share most of their educational ideas are critical
of them, instead of attributing criticism to ignorance or the influence of the
'New Right'.
CHAPTER 3
ADMISSION INTO
TEACHER EDUCATION
3.1 Introduction
For information about teaching, their prospects in the profession and teacher training requirements, prospective teacher trainees are largely reliant on the recruitment activities of training institutions and school-based and national careers advisory services. Whether job opportunities increase or decline depends largely on government policies. Indicative projections of the likely supply of, and demand for, teachers at a national level and by location, subject speciality and so on are not made in an ongoing, systematic way and communicated to training institutions or prospective student-teachers.
3.2 Numbers
In 1996, there were 7499 EFTS places funded for teacher training, costing $60
million. The breakdown by programme type was:
Early Childhood 1,166
Primary 5,120
Secondary 1,109
Special Supplementary Grant 104
The breakdown by institution type was:
Polytechnics 151
Colleges of Education 6,121
Other providers 102
Universities 1, 125
About four-fifths of student-teachers were female. The age composition of student-teachers has changed significantly over recent years; 55 percent were under 21 in 1989 compared with 41 percent in 1993. Over the same period the percentage of Maori students had risen to about 14 percent of the student total, very close to their representation in the general population. Numbers of applicants to enter teacher education have been falling and there is a general, although not uncontested, view that the average quality has fallen during the 1990s, even though the formal minimum entry requirement is now higher than before. Teacher shortages have encouraged lower entrance requirements for students aged 20 or over.
Before the 1990s numbers in teacher education were determined by the Department of Education in Wellington on the basis of demographic surveys aiming to quantify overall national needs for teachers of different types. The department then allocated quotas to each approved teacher education institution. The present equivalent full-time student (EFTS) system of grants was introduced by the Education Act 1989 (as amended in 1990). Under the system, institutions bid for and are awarded a specific number of student places on courses. Each of these places has a known and previously determined dollar value which varies depending on the nature of the course and how it is going to be delivered. The Minister of Education may also pay one or more supplementary grants to be used for purposes specified by the minister. The total grant to an institution is calculated by adding up the value of all EFTS funded places awarded to that institution in a given year.
Private teacher training establishments are dealt with under separate arrangements which include a contestable funding system and explicit contracts with each provider to deliver courses to a prescribed number of students. To access the contestable public fund, private training institutions must be accredited by the NZQA, which must satisfy itself that certain criteria are met. Private training institutions are required to report against expenditure of the grant, including full disclosure of their financial position at the beginning and end of the period covered by the grant.
Close government control over numbers entering teacher education has not been justified by its results. Instead of ensuring regularity of supply, central planning has helped to create alternating periods of teacher shortage and surplus. It would be much preferable if a voucher system were introduced whereby persons qualified to enter teacher education courses, as against other kinds of tertiary education, could do so, irrespective of forecasts about future teacher demand and supply. Such information, or indeed informed guesswork, as is possessed by the government should, of course, be made available to all interested in teaching as a career, but the number of places in teacher education should be left to market forces. Providing that no entrants are led to believe that they are certain of future employment as teachers, suitable applicants should not be excluded from teacher education, any more than from arts, science or any other courses, within the overall finance available for tertiary education as a whole. If the spirit of this report's recommendations were adopted, there would be no more reason to consider time spent in teacher education wasted, even were no teaching jobs available, than time spent in non-vocational courses.
3.3 Entry requirements: qualifications
At the very start of formal teacher education in Britain, there was disagreement as to whether it was desirable, undesirable or merely irrelevant whether elementary teachers need be of a high intellectual standard and/or liberally educated. Sir James Kay-Shuttleworth shaped his Battersea College so that its students, mainly artisan in origin, would not seek knowledge beyond what was needed to teach in elementary classrooms, or acquire aspirations above their station in life and seek to enter other more prestigious professions such as the Christian ministry. In contrast, the Reverend Derwent Coleridge planned St Mark's College, Chelsea, on a more liberal basis and was gratified when critics complained that many of its products were not content with the life of an elementary schoolteacher, but sought to enter higher professions.
However, entry into teaching, whether in Britain, New Zealand or elsewhere, has generally depended at least as much upon short-term supply and demand considerations as upon judgments as to which qualities should be required for admission and at what levels they should be. In New Zealand today the standard minimum entry requirement for diploma of teaching courses for applicants aged under 20 is a Sixth Form Certificate with a maximum of 20 points in the four best subjects. These subjects must include a mark of 5 or better in either English or Maori. School leavers with a score 16 or less in the four best subjects are commonly offered direct entry, but others may be required to come for interview. Referees' reports are required. Applicants with a mark of 5 or better in Maori must have no more than 6 in English. Entry to B.Ed. programmes for applicants aged under 20 is C or better in three Bursary subjects, but the diploma requirement will commonly secure provisional registration, conditional on first year performance. Leaving out Maori students, about two-fifths of students entering three-year diploma courses in the colleges of education possess University Entrance qualifications, the remainder mostly having Bursary or Higher School Certificate qualifications.
For diploma applicants aged 20 and over there is a much looser standard requirement of evidence of recent study and relevant experience. This age distinction might seem more appropriate in respect to applicants aged, say, over 30, some of whom perhaps had limited educational opportunity and many of whom may well have gained significant relevant experiences. But it seems strange that there should be such a concession for applicants in their early 20s, including some who may have merely waited until they were over 20 to seek entry on lower requirements. In 1995 a review team investigating the B.Ed. programme provided jointly by the Wellington College of Education and Victoria University of Wellington recommended "that the ordinary expectation should be that students have satisfied the standard university entrance requirements", but also that "careful and generous use should be made of the University's Provisional Entrance Regulations for students 20 years and under, as well as the provisions of Special Entrance for students 21 years and over". An each-way bet, one might think.
A lower academic requirement for older applicants is in line with the advice of Dr Martin Haberman of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, a leading American advocate of school-based teacher education. Haberman argues that selection of teacher education entrants mainly on academic qualifications does not take into account the strong likelihood that large numbers of them will simply not be able and/or willing to teach where the main teacher shortages exist. Among those who do undertake such jobs, the turnover rate is very high. Haberman considers that, irrespective of course content, most young graduates are still late adolescents themselves and are incapable of exerting control over difficult teenagers.
Although Haberman welcomes students with good school marks becoming teachers,
he notes that good grades correlate only weakly with later teaching performance.
His selection instrument "is based on star teachers … teachers whom
everybody agrees are outstanding", who constitute about 5-8 percent of
the teaching force. Haberman has tried to get the essence of "their reactions
to what the critical issues are" and how they describe their day-to-day
functions. Applicants for teacher education are then selected on the basis of
how close they get to the specifications based on the 'star teachers'.
3.4 Entry requirements: character
In the decades before New Zealand was settled by the British, teachers of the poor in Britain were not generally regarded as people of high character, whilst many a failure and drop-out from other walks of life taught in middle-class schools. The Victorian era saw in Britain and New Zealand determined efforts to end that situation and to recruit teachers of good character who would be admirable role models in moral terms. Some twentieth century critics of Victorian morality argue that too much fuss is made about teachers' characters. The sociologist Willard Waller mocked the typical American public school of the 1930s as "a museum of virtue", which sought to promote values which were largely disregarded in the world outside the school. He opposed the idea that teachers ought to try to impose social control and middle-class standards upon children.
As late as 1966 the council of the Palmerston North Teachers College determined that studentships should be terminated, not only for academic failure, but also for "disturbing deviations such as homosexuality, alcoholism and sexual promiscuity", but the spirit of Waller was gaining ground in the permissive 1960s. By the 1990s it was more likely that students would be excluded for 'homophobia', expressions of distaste for homosexuality, rather than for being homosexual themselves, however promiscuous.
Many teacher educators seem to have split minds about admission policy. With one part of their minds they seek 'inclusive' recruitment to teaching and hold that the more representative teachers are of the general unredeemed population the better. With another part they feel that selection procedures for student-teachers should include concern for personal as well as academic and professional standards. From this standpoint some people should be excluded as morally deficient, just as others are as academically unsuitable for teacher education.
From this conflict of aims has developed gross incongruity between high rhetoric employed in formal pronouncements and reality in which the rhetoric is almost completely ignored. The Teacher Registration Board has developed a list of personal qualities against which judgment can be made of a registration candidate's fitness to teach. Teachers are required to maintain "the highest standards" of: trustworthiness, honesty, reliability, sensitivity and compassion, respect for others, imagination, enthusiasm and dedication, communication skills, and physical and mental toughness. In practice, the requirements for registration as a teacher that one is of "good character" and "fit to be a teacher" are deemed by the Teacher Registration Board to have been met unless there is evidence to the contrary, such as a criminal conviction. Otherwise, the board assumes adequacy in all who are accepted for training by institutions and who subsequently graduate. This gap in admission policy between rhetoric and reality is replicated in many forms of 'quality control'.
Teacher education institutions provide careful written guidance on how applicants are to be selected. Where direct entry is not offered on high academic achievement and unqualified referee support, there is an assessment process which includes interaction with children and an interview. The formal criteria for admission are usually impressive and even more demanding than those stipulated by the Teacher Registration Board. For example, the Auckland College of Education's list of qualities required for entry includes:
Express idea orally in a fluent manner
Present ideas coherently in writing
Listen empathically
Shows self-esteem by manner and language
Has a positive outlook on life, sense of humour and vitality
Shows adaptability and initiative in a variety of situations
Shows caring and concern for others
Shows open-mindedness, awareness and acceptance of the value of different cultures
Has supportive evidence indicating integrity
Demonstrates an ability to take responsibility for own learning
Shows evidence of industriousness and tenacity
Indicates a capacity for analytical thought
Indicates a capacity for critical judgement
Reads widely with well-informed views of current issues
Shows a personal commitment to education and the challenge of teaching.
In practice, however, applicants are unlikely to be excluded for any supposed weakness of character that has not brought them to the attention of the courts. Since unsuccessful applicants have the right to look at their interview records, interviewers are bound to be cautious in their written assessments. In the current legal climate, rejection of applicants on any grounds other than those of inadequate academic qualifications seem open to challenge on grounds of bias and irrelevant personal preferences. Some of the primary staff at Dunedin claim they do not find this inhibiting, but one of the Massey staff stated he would be reluctant to exclude any applicant who had adequate academic entry qualifications.
Disagreements about the value of interviews, as compared with 'objective' evidence of academic and other achievements, have often arisen among New Zealand teacher educators. In general, groups in ideological ascendancy tend to favour interviews in order to exclude applicants who are politically incorrect. Currently it would be important to show attachment to feminist and Treaty of Waitangi values. At other times very different beliefs have been favoured in intending teachers.
Lester Taylor, Principal of the Dunedin College of Education, is one of several college principals who have found difficulties in securing broad-based community approval for teacher selection, especially at a time when community opinion is increasingly diverse. He, too, notes that, apart from criminality, it is not clear on what grounds there should be non-academic exclusions, and that institutions are very vulnerable to anti discrimination cases. The representation on college councils of sectional groups with vested interests (see section 2.5) does not make the task of identifying desirable qualities among future teachers any easier and often increases tensions. Applications by persons whose sexual tastes seem of possible danger to children placed in their charge are especially delicate matters. Principals suspect that council members who strongly oppose any exclusions on sexual grounds may be among the most critical if any successful applicant subsequently commits molestation or child abuse. Taylor thinks there is a strong case that those with ultimate professional responsibility for initial teacher training should have greater control over initial selection.
Martin Haberman suggests that character and experience count for some 80 percent of successful teaching in tough areas and that "the training is of negligible consequence if you get the right people." To get the "right people" Haberman claims to have developed an interview that is nearly 100 percent reliable in predictive success and which is used widely in American inner-city districts. However, his system is largely ignored by teacher educators who, he claims, "don't want to turn away the customers", that is the "late-adolescents" who now enter teacher education. Haberman advocates recruiting as student-teachers people who have reached what he calls the developmental level of adulthood (usually 25 or over) and who have demonstrated an ability to establish rapport with low-income children or youth of diverse ethnic background. In many ways this is very like the approaches of the Maori immersion programme at the Wanganui Regional Community Polytechnic and the MASTERS Institute in Auckland.
Dennis McGrath, Principal of the Auckland College of Education, rejects the charge that teacher education institutions have admitted unsuitable students out of self-interest in order to boost their own numbers and jobs, and cites evidence that the average standard of entrants is higher than in the past when the central government, not individual institutions, controlled entry standards.
3.5 Accusations of bias
The third Renwick and Vize Windows report quoted claims by students at the Auckland College of Education that some students were admitted only to achieve target numbers of Maori or Pacific Islanders. The same claim was made in interviews with recent Auckland College of Education students now teaching in Auckland. Several secondary heads who were interviewed accused some institutions, especially the Auckland college, of unfair discrimination, based on ideological grounds, against their students. These principals consider such discrimination to be deplorable social engineering.
Dennis McGrath denies there is or has been any such unfair discrimination against applicants from non-government schools. Some Auckland College of Education staff members observed that unsuitable applicants have to be screened out, but this is irrelevant to cases in which character references are satisfactory or better. Lecturers in several institutions, including the Auckland college, said that students from a "privileged background" lack sufficient experience of the real world to succeed in teaching. By a 'privileged background' they mean essentially education in an independent school.
It would be interesting if the claim about lack of 'real world' experience of applicants from independent schools were put to the test by research which would allow comparison of completion rates in teacher education of students from different types of secondary school. Even then, however, it would be an extreme case of stereotyping to exclude individual students from independent schools on the basis of any general tendencies detected by research. Such an application of a blanket generalisation to individual cases is the quintessence of prejudice and unfair discrimination. When challenged, lecturers who hold this view of students from independent schools deny they are engaged in unfair discrimination, claiming that, on the contrary, they are helping to reverse existing inequalities which unfairly discriminate in favour of these students.
3.6 Niche markets
Age niches
i. Early childhood
A significant section of public opinion considers that for some teaching roles, such as in early childhood centres and in educating intellectually backward children, high academic ability is largely irrelevant. Dr Dennis O'Keeffe of the University of North London, an influential figure in conservative educational thought in Britain, is "inclined to think that what you need, to be a good teacher of the very young, is to be a highly literate, highly numerate, well-educated person who likes children and is good at teaching them, and good at controlling them - which is often almost the same thing." O'Keeffe points out that in Britain it is hard enough to get enough people as early childhood teachers who are highly literate and numerate. He doubts whether academic studies to graduate level are highly relevant in this context, although he considers some teacher education appropriate even for those who possess relevant personal qualities in abundance.
Most early childhood lecturers in New Zealand are distressed by claims such as those of O'Keeffe. Grievances abound about the low prestige of those who work in this sector and about the perception that 'size of foot' of those being taught is used as a yardstick for determining the pay and qualifications of teachers and of the level of public funding in the various education sectors. Most early childhood teacher educators deny that any less intellectual demand is made in their courses than in any others, or that their field requires any less input of expertise from tertiary education. However, many others are fearful that highly academic university-based courses may prove to be more of an irrelevant distraction to many student-teachers than help them to meet the needs of children.
The Wellington College of Education suggests that "it is sometimes difficult for graduates entering early childhood to take on the philosophy and skills they need", although it concedes that "some of them are brilliant, of course". The difficulty implied is that some of these graduates may be unwilling to accept on trust the theories and practices now dominating early childhood education. As it is, very few graduates from non-education disciplines enter early childhood courses. At the Wellington College of Education, as elsewhere, a large number of entrants are mature women who have raised families or are still doing so, and many of them did not think about teaching in their late teens or, if they did, lacked requisite entry qualifications. Many have gained very valuable experiences and will no doubt prove excellent early childhood teachers. However, few of them seem likely to develop the theoretical interests in metacognition and action research required in the Bachelor of Education degree offered by the Department of Teacher Education at the Victoria University of Wellington.
Despite protests by lecturers, the intellectual demands made on student-teachers in early childhood courses do seem lower than in other courses. This need not be so. If, as suggested later in this report, far more time were devoted to the mastery of phonics, as well as 'real language' methods of teaching reading, and to methodologies of basic initiation into mathematics, early childhood courses might well be the most highly demanding of all in teacher education. In practice, however, far more time seems to be devoted to relatively trivial 'busy-work' and to various fantasies about gender, race and culture, than to such taxing yet far more important studies.
ii. Secondary education
At the opposite end of pre-tertiary education provision, it is often argued that the needs of secondary schools are very different from those of primary and early childhood teaching. In particular, it is argued that the central requirement for successful specialist teaching in a secondary school with serious academic standards is a good subject knowledge, and that this is best acquired through a tightly structured university degree course without any distraction from pedagogical studies. The most that those who advance this case would concede is that there should be some teacher education, perhaps of a compressed or accelerated character, at the end of a degree course. They are very unhappy with concurrent three- or four-year teacher education courses, with admission at the end of secondary school.
Unless established teacher educators are able to demonstrate that they are highly successful in enabling well-qualified graduate subject specialists to teach their subjects well, they will face niche competition from polytechnics and others, to say nothing of teacher education based on groups of secondary schools with external providers brought in for special services.
Special needs
i. 'Tough' areas
In relatively attractive geographical areas of many countries similar to New Zealand there are vast teacher surpluses in primary schools, and in the humanities and arts in secondary schools. In sharp contrast, there are often acute shortages in similar teaching jobs in the toughest areas, where the problem of finding teachers, generally in short supply nationally, can be horrendous. Dr Martin Haberman contrasts the schools of "small-town rural and suburban America", staffed and potentially vastly over-staffed by teachers who entered the profession as "late-adolescent middle-class girls" and became fully qualified teachers, with the school systems of America's tough inner-city areas, in which there are large numbers of uncertificated teachers, largely male, who entered teaching over the age of 30.
Very often shortages in key subjects and tough districts lead to expansion of places in courses which simply increase the number willing and available to teach in already well-provided places and subject areas. Lester Taylor of the Dunedin College of Education is one principal who does not consider there is a single 'teaching pool' in New Zealand, but rather a series of 'puddles'. South Auckland, for example, does not have access to many of those 'puddles'. During the present period of teacher shortage in New Zealand, schools deemed especially 'tough', some with 5 percent or less of mainstream students, are finding it increasingly difficult to recruit fully qualified teaching staff. The result is that informally, if not by law, there may be developing a long continuum of varieties of teacher, or at least two significantly different types of teaching service. Tim McMahon and Catherine McMechan of the Ministry of Education feel the good teacher should be able to teach equally well in Chicago or Idaho, Dunedin or South Auckland, but this may be becoming increasingly difficult to achieve.
ii. 'Different' areas
Tim McMahon and Catherine McMechan also argue that the operation of market forces in education may well increase differences between types of schools and lead to greater concentration of some cultures and groups in some schools. This may be so, but this tendency may be only slightly less strong when there is little or no parental choice of school. What happens is that birds of a feather flock together in respect of housing. Making the curriculum of some schools especially 'friendly' to minority ethnic cultures and the use of a range of mother tongues as the mode of instruction can immensely accelerate ethnic concentration.
Harvey McQueen thinks that some country areas may develop teacher shortages comparable with those of South Auckland, particularly because not so many country girls, once the mainstay of teaching, are entering the profession. He is not worried that expansion in teacher education now might create a surplus in a few years, since he believes moderate over supply would give schools wider choice and be good for education. However, he is fearful of excessive government policy changes, which can turn off the financial tap just as easily as they can turn it on, with severely disturbing consequences for affected institutions, and may create very different employment prospects for successive groups of school leavers and tertiary graduates. Opening and closing institutions, urgent recruitment of staff and then redundancies, have, in his view, too often characterised teacher education.
The Education Review Office has argued that:
… the teacher labour market is subject to segmentation. Given the homogeneous
nature of wage settings and the weak pricing signals represented by staffing
difficulty differentials it is reasonable to conclude that the length of the
applicants' queue for a vacancy at a particular school is primarily determined
by non-pecuniary factors.
It is likely that the negative effects of these non-pecuniary factors will be
most strongly felt in schools where the character is defined by one or a number
of the following factors: geographical remoteness, low socio-economic setting,
poor educational attainment of students and poor public reputation.
Thus at present salary rates and other incentives are insufficiently flexible
to adjust to highly differentiated rates of demand.
The case for a distinctive Maori teacher education for separate Maori schools is discussed in Chapter 11.
3.7 Recommendations
1 Within the constraints of the overall budget for tertiary education, student numbers admitted into teacher education should be left to market forces, specifically student demand and institutional supply.
2 Teacher education institutions should have greater flexibility in respect of academic entry qualifications, provided that they make full public disclosure of the reasons for, and the results of, their admission policies.
3 It would be advisable to raise the age at which lower admission qualifications into teacher education are required, since the effect of current policy is to encourage some would-be applicants to wait until they are 20 when they may have easier access, rather than make serious efforts to raise their academic qualifications.
4 Although rigid exclusion from other courses would be inappropriate, provision of entry on lower qualifications for older applicants should be directed mainly to those seeking to teach in areas or types of school or subjects in which there are chronic shortages. These include schools with severe disciplinary problems, and schools in which Maori and other non-English languages are the languages of instruction. It is not necessary to have uniform entry requirements for every sort of teacher education, from early childhood to training industrial apprentices or teaching nuclear physics.
5 Teacher education institutions should have wider discretion in admission
policy in respect of the character of applicants, provided that the principles
on which such policies are based are made public. If it is proper, as it may
well be, for a fully funded institution such as the Wanganui Regional Community
Polytechnic to restrict entry to teacher education courses, effectively if not
completely, to Maori, it may well be proper for other institutions to seek other
kinds of background. Quite unacceptable, however, is apparent adherence to open
entry, combined with covert exclusions. Wider discretion must entail greater
accountability against mere arbitrariness. Accusations of bias, when shown prima
facie to have substance, should be dealt with in an open and public manner.
6 The gap should be reduced between the extravagant rhetoric used by the Teacher
Registration Board and teacher education institutions about requirements for
admission into teacher education and teaching itself, and the modest requirements
which operate in practice. When unrealisable requirements are stipulated, the
effect is not to improve standards, but to make it wellnigh impossible to impose
adequate standards that are realisable.
CHAPTER 4
THE ESTABLISHED PROVIDERS
4.1 Auckland College of Education (ACE)
The Auckland College of Education (ACE) is the biggest free-standing teacher education institution in New Zealand. In 1995 its EFTS allocations were 295 in early childhood, 951 in primary, 303 in secondary, 173 in Maori specialist programmes and 54 in other specialist programmes in teacher education. In 1994 it contained just under one third of all students in colleges of education. Of its student body in 1994, 20 percent were Maori and 10 percent Pacific Islanders. The college's Prinicpal, Dennis McGrath, is one of the longest serving and most influential figures in New Zealand teacher education.
In the Windows reports ACE fared comparatively well. It was frequently seen as "a fun place", but several of its lecturers and lectures were regarded by first-year students as high quality and the teaching practice as valuable. Negative comments revolved around a lack of intellectual stimulation and students being "babied". Second-year students at ACE praised it as friendly and a good place to meet friends, whilst the staff were regarded as generally supportive and the best as excellent, teaching well-run and helpful classes. Features criticised included time wasting, poor timetabling, inadequate contact hours, lack of challenge yet too much 'busy-work', together with poor administration, communication and coordination. Some courses were found lacking in relevance and poorly prepared.
The principals of some Auckland secondary schools interviewed for this report were in general very critical of mainstream teacher education, and nowhere more so than in ACE. They consider many of its staff were mediocre teachers before appointment to ACE, rather than in the front rank in their subjects or of high reputation within their schools. Many teacher educators, they maintain, have in any case been far too long away from schools to be able to speak of them with any authority. These principals condemn much in current teacher education as a mixture of unfocused child-centred methodology and ideological radicalism. They would like to see much greater concentration on how to transmit content effectively to school students. Although they agree that there are some generic skills in class management that all teachers need to possess and consider many young teachers to be unduly weak in them, they hold that these skills are mainly acquired on the job. In their view, teacher education should concentrate much more on equipping young men and women with the subject knowledge they will be required to transmit effectively in schools.
Some principals would prefer a shorter, more compressed, teacher education course for secondary teaching. However, they all agree that if graduates are to have a year engaged on a Diploma of Education programme, it should be a demanding and extending experience. They would like young teachers to be knowledgeable about the major educational traditions of western civilization, to understand which are the key ongoing issues of contention in contemporary education and to have a sound grasp of learning theories. They argue that the human and physical facilities available in teacher education are not put to use for a large enough part of the year. While they disagree among themselves about what the ideal balance should be in teacher education based in tertiary institutions, all support a wider range of diversity and choice.
Young teachers interviewed for this report were more critical of ACE than of any other teacher education institution in New Zealand. Early childhood teachers interviewed were very enthusiastic about their teaching and its importance, but were scathing about many aspects of their ACE courses. They complained of lack of adequate organisation and frequent infliction on students of last minute changes. One thought there was some excuse in her case, since the members of her group were 'guinea-pigs' when a newly structured course was launched, but others also complained of ongoing and inconsistent changes, including retrospective demands to take courses they had been told earlier they did not need to take. One woman, it was claimed, was told half-way through her third year that before she could gain the diploma she must pass in two courses which she had not expected ever to take. No extra support was, apparently, given to help her cope with a double burden in the following semester.
Another teacher complained about her initial rejection from entry into the early childhood course. She claimed that she had been asked to attend an early childhood centre and to find a child with whom she should demonstrate that she was able to 'relate'. Unfortunately there were as many staff as children at the centre on that day, and she had only just been able to start talking to a child when the college tutor arrived and decided that her relationship with the child was not close enough. The applicant then undertook further study and entered the course the following year.
Several young teachers interviewed alleged that some lecturers were slack and inefficient, but that it was very difficult for students to make an effective complaint. College lecturers sometimes excused themselves from dealing with students' concerns on the grounds that administrative demands on them were so great that they did not have any time for them. One interviewee considered a tutor had been very unfair and disrespectful in her references to Froebel and Montessori, but felt afraid of voicing her concern. Another asserted that talk of encouraging 'challenge' and 'a critical standpoint' at ACE' was "bullshit", adding: "If we challenged anything, we were simply told 'That's just the way we do it here in ACE' ".
In a case instanced by these teachers, a lecturer was strongly criticised by students, but no response was made to their criticisms. Fear of reprisals to criticism of courses led a group of students to decide that any of their number interviewed by a member of the staff should take along two other students as witnesses. These teachers had no confidence at all in the elaborate formal regulations for 'quality control' in the Auckland College of Education.
As mature students they were typical in age of their cohorts, whose average age was just under 30. They considered that some tutors and lecturers regarded students' experiences as mothers or in non-education university courses as a threat, rather than as a resource to be used constructively. This feeling was strengthened when some students and several staff members found themselves on the same university course, with the students, it was claimed, doing better than the staff, who became very defensive and insecure in consequence.
These teachers viewed much of what they were taught as dull and repetitive. While there were exceptions among the ACE teaching staff whom they praised highly, they considered that many lecturers gave them very little support. Those with experience of University of Auckland courses claimed that its standard of lecturing was much higher on the whole than that in ACE. They claimed that they were treated like children in the College, but as adults in the university. By contrast, students at the Christchurch and Dunedin colleges of education claimed their universities treated them like numbers, but their colleges like individuals.
These ACE-trained teachers all complained that their assignments were in general inadequately marked and that they received poor feedback from tutors and lecturers. They claimed that much of what they were taught involved repeated activities and was irrelevant to their work as teachers. Towards the middle of the first semester many students ceased to attend some classes other than to register the minimum number of requisite appearances. One said "We finished up as people who just sat at the back and couldn't get out of the door fast enough." Another said "It got to the state that we regularly asked our lecturers 'How many lectures do we have to turn up for?' "
Some courses, such as Language and Language Arts and Working with Families were roundly condemned as a waste of time and badly constructed. Ironically, several courses most criticised were among those in which students had most interest initially. They thought some courses had been constructed to suit the interests of the lecturers, not the needs of the students.
Given these criticisms of ACE, high praise received by members of staff must have been well earned. A lecturer in teaching children with special needs was regarded as excellent. "It's a pity the whole course didn't revolve around her", was one comment. On the other hand this same lecturer was considered to have performed less well when teaching another course in a different year, apparently because she had been put down to teach it at the last minute. This confirmed these teachers' perception of ad hoc organisation in ACE. '"They didn't know whether they were coming or going, and neither did we after a time", said one. These teachers conceded that sometimes lecturers might have been victims of poor organisation, but they did not consider this exonerated ACE.
Criticisms of ACE secondary courses were also harsh. One young teacher studied at the University of Auckland for several years before deciding she would like to teach English. Looking back at the ACE course, her "overwhelming emotion" was one of disappointment and of money (about $2000), time and effort wasted. She was involved with a young teachers group and claims that almost all its members share her very negative view of teacher education at ACE. She considered about 70 percent of her courses - approximately 15 hours a week - was a waste of time. She found her courses in language, Maori, education studies and professional studies especially poor, deficient in content and taught in an uninspiring way. The pace was usually slow and undemanding. She "couldn't stop laughing at the course" because it was "so wet and shallow". She suspected that some courses were taught slowly and with little content so as not to over stretch students with very limited command of English.
The Auckland College of Educaton takes a positive pride in the wide range of nationalities and mother tongues among its students, which would be fine, one young teacher commented, if there were equal concern for worthwhile academic and educational standards. Other classes seemed geared to the lowest denominator, rather than taking advantage of a rich variety of academic and personal experience among the students. All were treated like beginners in life. There was little intellectual challenge and courses were uninspiring and flat. Many of the best secondary students began to attend the minimum number of classes needed to satisfy course requirements. There was a lot of 'babywork', with feedback, which was very little in most courses, being given in format and language suitable for young children. One post-graduate student-teacher was given a green 'Well Done Certificate' for having handed in three lesson plans. Although not to the same extent as the primary and early childhood students, secondary students spent considerable time on 'trusting games' such as falling back into another person's arms and being guided blindfold across a room full of obstacles. Brainstorming and the planning of content-free lessons were explained over and over.
One English teacher found some of the courses which she eagerly anticipated proved to be the most disappointing. The electives she found to be the best were not in her main teaching subjects but in art and art history. These were taught by a lecturer who '"was really doing the job" and who had written some of the unit standards in these subjects. But in the young teacher's own subject she found a mixture of the out-of-date and the trendy. There was more 'how to teach' material on Shortland Street in their 'English Workshops' than on Shakespeare. There was even more 'teaching about how to teach groups', however, than about Shakespeare and Shortland Street put together. The mystique of group teaching was also offered in several other courses, but it was never made clear which aspects of a subject might best be taught to the whole class, which in groups (whether duos, trios, quartets, and so on) and which best learned individually, or how teachers might most rationally decide between methods in different contexts. This teacher considered that since she began teaching she has had to unlearn most of what she was taught at ACE.
Indoctrination, it was suggested, took place chiefly by the presentation of something which is in essence very controversial as though it were undisputed and accepted by all thinking people. For example, one lecturer handed out to each student a copy of a YWCA publication entitled Sisters. Its basic message is that being heterosexual, lesbian and bisexual are simply different types of sexuality and that only biased and prejudiced people reject any of these as wrong without even having tried them. In this course there were no explanations why societies have usually held heterosexuality in higher esteem than homosexuality. The ideological fix of some ACE staff was shown when one young woman asked to be called 'Mrs', since she had just been married. She was told with disdain by an academic 'Ms' that only women with no self-esteem who were dependent on men called themselves 'Mrs'.
Conflicting explanations have been given for the decision by ACE to establish its own teacher education degree and to end its previous association with the University of Auckland. Dennis McGrath argues that ACE had been under pressure of numbers in different ways. As the biggest single provider of teacher education in the country, it felt it had a special responsibility to set standards in the field, yet having only one tenth of the student numbers of the University of Auckland it had been unable to determine its own priorities. He tells of problems experienced by student-teachers in ACE arising from overlapping demands of practicum and university courses. Several school principals had complained that some ACE students faced with such dilemmas put their university courses first, so that their commitment to the practicum was impaired.
Staff members attributed ACE's recent changes to a variety of causes. Some claimed they are essentially a constructive response to the new 'essential learning areas' in the National Curriculum and to unit standards. Others emphasised practical difficulties encountered in recent collaboration with the University of Auckland. Some claim that university tutors often could not be found by ACE students who needed them, whereas ACE staff were generally at hand. They drew attention to problems of working on three sites a considerable distance apart, and the near impossibility of posting students in South Auckland if they undertook university-based courses.
'Site' is also a metaphor, according to one ACE lecturer, for the perceived gap between the 'student-friendly' ways of ACE and the 'cold indifference' of the university. Difficulties were alleged in trying to get university lecturers to make their material more relevant to the needs of early childhood and primary teacher education students, whereas ACE courses are considered by the college staff to be relevant, appropriate and well structured. Several claim that ACE and the schools speak the same language, but one that is a foreign tongue to the university.
Attitudes to assessment were different in the two institutions: ACE lecturers
consider their own approach to be formative, diagnostic and criterion-referenced
and that of the university summative and norm-referenced. One described the
approach of the University of Auckland as "one stroke and you are out",
but depicted ACE as thoughtful of student interests and offering suggestions
for future improvement and personal support. At the same time ACE staff objected
to widely canvassed assertions that their assessment system was far easier than
that of the university.
The 1995 Annual Report of the Auckland College of Education gives no inkling
of difficulties with the University of Auckland or of plans to end the relationship.
Dennis McGrath refers to "a review of our conjoint B.Ed. programme with
the University of Auckland" and added that "Partly as a result of
that review and partly because of other competitive external factors we decided,
in late 1995, to proceed with the development of a professional teaching qualification
for the primary and early childhood sectors", but he did not suggest that
this qualification would not be offered conjointly with the University of Auckland.
The only straws in the wind in that annual report were the statements that "the
recruitment of students was more difficult in 1995" and that "we have
developed new strategies for public-relations and marketing for 1996."
In that report, Stuart Windross, a key figure in the development of the new
three-year ACE degree, answers the question "What was the process for developing
the 'provider' degree?" without mentioning that, whilst developing it,
ACE was also engaged in negotiations with the University of Auckland for improvements
in the existing education degree structure.
Whatever the reasons for the split may have been, it does not seem surprising that the University of Auckland decided to enter teacher education directly itself, if only to make up the EFTS it will lose through the winding down of the association with ACE. However, Dennis McGrath believes personal relationships will continue to be close between ACE and the University of Auckland. Furthermore, ACE will continue some collaboration with the university in providing some specialist courses such as those for the Bachelor of Music Education, Bachelor of Education (Food and Fabric Technology) and the National Diploma in Business Education/Diploma of Teaching after the conjoint B.Ed. has ended.
Dennis McGrath denies that the break with the University of Auckland implies
any reduction in the academic rigour of ACE courses and claims that ample resources
have been earmarked for research and scholarship to ensure there is no neglect.
The formal structure for course approvals is certainly very complex and thorough
and consists of six internal stages before going to CEAC for its approval. Yet
major changes in policy and structure seem often to be made without analysis
of earlier, even very recent, changes. Dennis McGrath admits that when ACE had
been engaged in conjoint B.Ed. planning with the University of Auckland over
a number of years,
"What [the university and ACE] hadn't done … was to really investigate
what a teacher education course should be. Or what the outcomes of such a course
should be to prepare a beginning teacher for the future." Yet, had anyone
criticised him as college principal during those years for failing to investigate
what a teacher education course or its outcomes should be, he would no doubt
have been highly indignant and denied the charge. The same might well be true
of those in charge of the university contribution to conjoint teacher education
programmes.
4.2 Christchurch College of Education
In 1995 there were 1662 EFTS funded places in the Christchurch College of Education. The teacher education share included contributions from a diploma course in early childhood education, separated from primary (and with a B.Ed. option), and a Diploma in Teaching offered through distance education. The Christchurch College of Education has now a specialist Bachelor of Education in Science programme taught in association with the University of Canterbury, although all the science seems to be provided by the university. The college has been successful in winning several major teacher development contracts with the Ministry of Education, and has participated in international research consortia. In addition, with the decentralisation of the old Department of Education in Wellington, school advisers, reading recovery tutors, coordinators of programmes for new settlers and multicultural education, and the staff of teacher centres within the region were transferred to the staff of the college under the designation of support services, although not all, of course, are stationed in Christchurch itself.
The college also undertook activities much less closely related to the core business of teacher education. It became a shareholder in the Christchurch College of English Language, based on the main campus, and established a Business Training Centre offering the New Zealand Diploma in Business Studies. Other activities which are substantially dependent on private sector funding include a tertiary transition programme for overseas students, a video production unit, English as a second language (ESL) courses, and Japanese language courses (and associated accommodation facilities for Japanese students). The balance between the different activities was one of the contentious issues that beset the Christchurch College of Education during the mid-1990s.
In the Windows research Christchurch was severely criticised for weaknesses in its initial orientation programme, which was described as an almost total disaster - poorly organised, slack, confusing, boring, and tokenist (in terms of the Maori welcome). Most college students expressed positive comments of the first year as a whole, but there were negative comments regarding courses, workload and individual lecturers. Many students at the college thought the second-year programme an improvement on the first, and considered most of the courses practical and a help in preparing for the classroom. Criticisms were lack of coordination, leading to wasted time and timetabling confusion. The college was thought by some students to lack a strong corporate feeling.
Several young teachers who had trained in the Christchurch College of Education and who were interviewed in the preparation of this report made serious complaints. Their main concerns were that there was inadequate control by lecturers over standards of work, so that the better students felt little challenge, and that too many lecturers were concerned to propagate their own personal views and idiosyncrasies. However, the young teachers were very ready to name exceptions, one of the lecturers in communication skills gaining high commendation from them.
Even when the content was arguably appropriate, the interviewees considered there was too much repetition and time-wasting. Learning theory was cited as an example, although the complainants considered there was value to be gained from knowledge of Piaget, Freud and other schools of psychology. In particular, these young teachers emphasised the almost total absence in their courses of any genuinely critical or reflective thought, even though these terms were frequently used by their lecturers. The young teachers considered some college lecturers positively anti-intellectual and hostile to university culture. They claimed that one leading figure in primary teacher education advised them that it was a waste of talent for a really able graduate to enter primary teaching.
One graduate student specialising in an area of special education at the college
was very critical of his course. The student had worked intensively in earlier
degree studies and was dismayed at what he considered slackness and lethargy
in his courses, even though there seemed to him to be an enormous amount of
relevant knowledge that ought to be acquired for even adequacy in his chosen
profession. One of his lecturers was good, he believed, in enabling students
to identify individual needs, but in general there was very little critical
investigation into alternative ways of coping with disadvantages, and the orthodoxies
of mainstreaming and inclusion were, he said, never questioned by any of the
lecturers.
During the early 1990s the college was the subject of several criticisms, and
in June 1994 the then chief executive, Dr Colin Knight, set up an External Audit
Group of 15 people to examine its basic operations. The External Audit Group
considered that "much excellent work is being done in the college",
but several aspects of its work raised concern. Unsatisfactory features included
poor fit between the core business of teacher education and recent innovations
of a non-core character, chiefly concerned with business education. There were
problems of resource allocation and of hostility by some teacher educators to
anything smacking of the entrepreneurial.
The External Audit Group offered no evidence that it had given much thought to the matter, but it supported "the NZQA approach which establishes core teaching competencies across all levels of teaching, and presumes teacher training based on this will integrate the current primary and secondary training paths." This is indeed a presumption, since there is little evidence that generic teaching skills are more important than specific ones: the best approach to teaching six-year-olds to read is not necessarily the best approach to teaching ten-year-olds how to swim or fourteen-year-olds how to solve quadratic equations.
The External Audit Group called for a closer curricular fit between college courses and the work of primary schools and early childhood centres. For example, outdoor education seemed to be comparatively much more important in the college curriculum than it is in schools and early childhood centres. Furthermore, there seemed a proliferation of options which distracted from core curricular needs. It was concerned, too, that there were few horizontal links between subjects and curriculum content. In order to achieve greater integration, the External Audit Group suggested that the early childhood, primary and secondary programmes would work together in a School of Pre-employment Teacher Education, with a single managing director.
The External Audit Group was alarmed that many college staff took it for granted
that it could and should seek to offer its own degrees. The group warned of
the implications of section 254 (3) of the Education Act 1989 which requires
that awards described as 'degrees' shall only be recognised when "taught
mainly by people engaged in research", which the majority of college staff
are not, at least in any serious sense of the term, even though there was "evidence
of increased research activity over the past 2-3 years." The group supported
existing arrangements, with the University of Canterbury as the degree-awarding
institution, with the college's role acknowledged in some appropriate way on
the degree certificates.
Some of the External Audit Group's recommendations have little to do with teacher
education as such. In fact, it disclaimed any "inspectorial role"
and declined to "examine individual programmes, or observe teaching practice",
but confined itself mainly to assessing "the management procedures the
College has in place to ensure quality in these areas." It is all too common
that supposed quality control measures of teacher education fail even to look
at matters requiring most attention. However, a very damning recommendation
was that the college should appoint someone from outside to implement the reforms
it proposed. Evidently no person in such a large institution was thought to
possess the necessary competence.
Overall, the report of the External Audit Group was not a significant, in-depth examination of the aims and priorities of teacher education in the Christchurch College of Education or of its degree of success in achieving them. The Action Plan issued in September 1995 as the college's response to the report did not go very deep either. It bypassed, rather than solved, the issue of the relationship between its core business of teacher education and business training by simply redefining core business to include business training. It increased the class size for courses in which teaching is predominantly by lecture, whereas previously college lecture audiences had been small, on the curious grounds that this made them more like school classes and thus more relevant in teacher education. Many fine-sounding declarations were made about future quality control, the production of creative, imaginative and reflective thinkers, efficiency, and the suitability and appropriateness of all parts of the institution.
Ian Hall, the new Principal of the college, believes, as a matter of principle or test of altruism, that the Christchurch College of Education should provide comprehensive coverage of all teacher education needs even though some courses may not be cost-effective and may require subsidisation from other programmes. There are arguments against each institution seeking to achieve all things, rather than excel on a more restricted front. However, if institutional autonomy has real meaning, Dr Hall should be allowed to pursue his strategy. It is possible he will be proved right.
4.3 University of Canterbury
The education department of the University of Canterbury is fairly typical in the range of interests and standpoints of its academic staff, most of whom are engaged mainly in higher degree work, whereas the concern of this report is initial teacher education, but some courses are considered in the chapter on ideological capture.
4.4 Dunedin College of Education
The Dunedin College of Education gives a strong impression that it is run on very efficient lines. The Chairman, a term evidently not yet outlawed in Otago, was able to report a net operating surplus of $1,377,455 in 1995, almost 10 percent of total income. The college was able to provide teacher education for 10 percent more students than provided for in its government grants. In 1995 317 students graduated: 40 in early childhood, 188 in primary, 40 in secondary, 34 in human service and 15 in foundation studies.
The college gained consultancies with the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade for projects in the Solomon Islands and for early childhood teaching programmes. Teaching has begun in programmes to train teachers in the Pacific Islands and Maori specialist courses on the Southland campus in 1996. The College Handbook claims that all new courses are "monitored to ensure inclusion of cultural content wherever possible." Dunedin follows very closely the future careers of its graduates and seeks to learn lessons from feedback. This is a claim widely made, but carries greater conviction in Dunedin than in some other places.
In early childhood and primary teacher education the basic course at the college is the three-year Diploma of Teaching, the current official minimum qualification for teaching in a primary or intermediate school. A two-year programme may be offered to graduates or others with more than two-thirds of a degree. Each year's programmes include some compulsory university papers in education as well as college courses. In addition a B.Ed. degree is offered. It is a four-year programme studied concurrently with the Diploma of Teaching, and entrants must be qualified for admission to the University of Otago. The programmes in year one and year two are college-based, although some courses are taken at the university. The year three programme is university-based, and that for year four is college-based.
The college courses are broken down into professional studies, curriculum studies, education studies, subject studies and teaching practice. Professional studies courses (i.e. about 'how to teach') are taught within the college and include teaching methods, learning strategies, classroom management, working with parents, information and communication technology, and techniques for evaluation and assessment. Also taught within the college are curriculum studies courses (i.e. about 'what to teach') in the subjects of the primary curriculum. Education studies (i.e. 'how we learn') includes courses in human development, the learning and teaching process, and the place of education in society. (The last-named seems oddly placed as a 'how we learn' subject.) Subject studies for personal intellectual development, as distinct from knowing enough about a subject to teach it in primary schools, may be taken in the college or the university. Special reference is made to the development in the college of students' understanding of Maori culture and language, as well as an understanding of the educational needs, but not necessarily the languages, of other cultural groups in New Zealand.
No concurrent secondary teaching qualification is offered by the college and the University of Otago. A one-year end-on Diploma of Teaching in secondary education is offered, which includes as core studies: professional studies, information and communication technology, language across the curriculum, Maoritanga and education outside the classroom. A wide range of specialised secondary school teaching subjects is offered, including art, economics, English, Maori, music, physical education, text and information management, food and materials technology, languages, mathematics and workshop technology. Half units are offered in accounting, art history, classical studies, geography, health education, junior mathematics, science, biology, chemistry, physics, drama, history, social studies and outdoor education.
It must be borne in mind that there is a particular shortage of maths teachers, so a reduced course in maths for lower secondary classes may well be justified, whilst the National Curriculum places history and geography under social studies in the primary and early secondary years and similarly integrates biology, chemistry and physics into science. Yet it does seem odd that economics should warrant a full unit, but history and geography only half-units. It is even more unusual that an end-on secondary qualification should be entirely under the control of a college of education, when part of the Early Childhood and Primary Diplomas of Teaching, as well as part of the four-year B.Ed., are taught in a university. There are three blocks of teaching practice each of four to five weeks duration.
In an interview for this report, the Principal, Lester Taylor, offered coherent arguments for the current college/University of Otago relationship, which he considers to be the optimum arrangement for the college. He sees "real strengths in stand-alone" teacher education institutions, but thinks they are immensely enhanced by a close university link. He sees the university as essentially research-oriented in its basic role, extending and disseminating knowledge. The free-standing college of education should also have a research basis, but one which, in his view, concentrates on learning theory and related pedagogical issues. A college of education should not, in his view, forget that its main role is an applied one, to produce people able to carry out a defined profession, although a profession of many facets. To carry out this role a college must have very close relationships with schools and practising teachers, which much of the essential work of the university does not require.
The college-university relationship Taylor envisages seems to be realised more in the Dunedin College of Education-University of Otago relationship than those achieved between the Christchurch College of Education and the University of Canterbury, or between the Wellington College of Education and Victoria University of Wellington. The Dunedin-Otago relationship is the oldest in New Zealand, but a long relationship does not always mean ongoing organisational harmony. Taylor does not deny overlap, considering some to be inevitable and valuable, but sees a worth and separate dignity in different roles. He points to the 1980 review which found that little difference could be found in the scholarly quality of lectures at the college and the University of Otago in comparable fields, but does not feel the college must aspire to do everything the university does.
Some Dunedin staff complain of being pushed in recent years into a more 'business' type of model, which they compare unfavourably with a former collegiality when time seemed more plentiful for personal and professional development. On the other hand, there is consensus that they have more autonomy than 10 years ago. Their complaint is to some extent that their innovatory work is at their own expense and inadequately acknowledged. Some consider that a larger number of students at present seem to need special support than in the past, although it may be that staff are now more conscious of such problems. More students seem to need financial and emotional support, and more are from other cultures and find it difficult to settle down.
Several Dunedin students interviewed for this report thought that greater direct personal concern was shown for their academic progress in University of Otago courses than in college ones, but in general they found most of their college lecturers very supportive, and were proud of those lecturers who are national figures in their fields. One regret expressed by students was that they did not always have the opportunity for contact with eminent lecturers whose courses were outside their own sphere. A round of public seminars on a three-yearly cycle might enable all students to have some contact with staff who are of high national and international reputation.
Some students admitted to lack of confidence in their mathematical abilities. They disagreed among themselves in a thoughtful way as to whether the college itself should concentrate on building on their strengths or remedying their weaknesses in areas in which, as primary generalists, they will have to teach. However, they all gave the college high marks for providing remedial support to students in any perceived areas of weakness. Several students voiced a concern that it was difficult to shift between college and university courses, not so much because of content in some cases, but because assessment systems were very different in the two institutions.
4.5 University of Otago
As well as contributing to the B.Ed., which is conferred in its name (although the main input is that of the Dunedin College of Education), the University of Otago offers an Education major in the B.A., which can be carried on to B.A. (Hons.) and beyond. However, this report is chiefly concerned with the university's role in initial teacher education. Comment on some of these courses is provided in the chapter on ideological capture.
4.6 Massey University College of Education
Staff of the former Palmerston North Teachers College had a clear view about
what distinguished them from academics in the education department of Massey
University. Typical was the claim made in 1973 by the college staff in response
to Aspects of Teacher Education: Paper Two, Relationships Between Teachers Colleges
and Universities:
In a teachers college, the so-called traditional subjects are taught with the
needs of teachers in mind and are often very different in content and style
of teaching from an equivalent university course. This alone justifies their
continued existence.
When consultations took place during the 1980s about the creation of a joint B.Ed., the university staff, perhaps particularly sensitive to Massey's own precarious status in a new field for it institutionally, generally gave highest priority to ensuring high academic credentials for the award, whereas some college staff dismissed such concerns as largely academic snobbery. Some college staff resented the supervision exercised by university academics over their courses and examinations. By 1984 the college Principal, Athol Forrest, was highly indignant since, or so it appeared to him, college credits required far more time and effort to achieve than those gained in Massey.
When merger discussions began, college staff were appalled at the prospect of being separated and dispersed in different faculties in the new university, demanding instead that the old college be converted 'lock, stock and barrel' into the existing university structure, even though this meant there would be duplicate academic departments in many fields. Later the Massey University Department of Education feared the proposed merger, since it might well be marginalised if the college took over responsibility for all pre-service teacher education, as the college staff wanted. Professor Ivan Snook, then Head of Massey's education department, condemned the college's programmes as based on a limited vision which was "gravely defective as a means to a new vision" and restricted teaching to "a practical craft centred on classrooms and the meeting of children's needs". Roger Openshaw claims that "By the end of 1991, personal and institutional hostilities had become open". Openshaw concluded his 1996 history of the old Palmerston North College of Education, just after the amalgamation, with the guarded judgment, "the outstanding issues between the two institutions were far from being resolved".
In the new Massey University College of Education, to some extent the former college writ large, the basic pattern in early childhood (about 160-220 students) and primary (about 650-750 students) teacher education is of a four-year B.Ed. programme, with facilities for exit at the end of three years with the Diploma of Teaching. These courses may be taken in Palmerston North or Napier. The primary programmes will also be offered from 1997 onwards in external mode. A concentrated 14-month Diploma of Teaching (Primary) is now offered in Palmerston North and Albany for graduates whose degrees contain subjects relating closely to the essential learning areas of the New Zealand National Curriculum. In at least one other institution, it seems likely that the award offered for the successful completion of this course would be a B.Ed. rather than a diploma.
Emphasis is placed in every programme on ample facilities for learning and teaching Maori culture. Health and physical education majors are claimed to be especially strong in the new Massey campus, as in the former Palmerston North College of Education, and this is shown in the four-year Bachelor of Education Degree and the Diploma of Teaching (Physical Education), which has a high national reputation. Specialist courses include the Diploma in the Education of Students with Special Teaching Needs which is a one-year post-graduate award for teachers with recent successful teaching experience. A well-developed area is Professional and Community Education (PACE), which attracts numerous experienced teachers, as well as applicants from other walks of life. The Massey promotional material is very well organised, and its attention to the detail of students' 'Professional Profiles' could hardly be bettered.
The number enrolled in the one-year end-on post-graduate Diploma in Teaching (Secondary) is rather small, 30-40 students, and they are spread across 14 teaching subjects in schools. Given that each student takes a major (40 hours contact time) and a minor (25 hours), this gives an average size of about six students a subject, even with major and minor students combined in each subject course. This is bound to be considered an expensive investment of resources, although at present only one outsider, a secondary school economics teacher, teaches any of the secondary curriculum courses. On the other hand, the current small number makes it relatively easy for the course coordinator to choose schools and associate teachers which fit in with the diploma programmes.
Principal Bryan Hennessey argued in an interview for this report that the old
Palmerston North college was strong in arts, physical education and music, but
that the growing links with Massey provide greater academic rigour. Many of
the former Palmerston North staff are teacher educators who pride themselves
on being leaders in teaching methods in their own subjects, and in producing
teachers who really develop primary children's abilities. Mathematics, art and
music are three such areas that are particularly impressive.
4.7 University of Waikato
The School of Education of the University of Waikato was formally established in 1992 by the amalgamation of the Hamilton Teachers' College with the University of Waikato. It provides combined degree/diploma courses for primary and secondary teacher trainees, as well as courses in early childhood care and education. Among its specialised courses are a two-year course for science graduates which attracts both a Master of Science degree and a Diploma of Teaching, and a B.Ed. in Music and a Diploma of Teaching for Kura Kaupapa Maori students, followed for some by a special Maori-oriented B.Ed.(Teaching).
Recent experiences in teacher education at Waikato indicate that significant disputes about priorities in teacher education may well arise within a unified institution, just as they can between a university and a college of education. This in itself should not cause surprise or alarm, since education as a whole and teacher education as part of it are essentially contestable. The biggest worry is when genuine differences are suppressed, but at Waikato debate seems to have been open and generally productive. Waikato teacher educators have agonised more than most about what should be the optimal balance between the four main components of the degree structure: education studies, curriculum studies, professional practice/practicum, and general or liberal studies.
For the most part, the Waikato staff seem satisfied that the 1992 merger has been for the good of teacher education. However, the principal of a Normal School in close association with Waikato expressed a different opinion. He considers there is now too great an emphasis on theory and not enough attention to the practical realities of schools. He detects a tendency in some university staff to consider that they know best about everything. On the other hand, although many of his colleagues in other parts of the country resent a tendency of teacher educators to regard schools merely as 'child-banks' for teaching practice, not as sources of educational wisdom, and find this fault more in university than college staff, he does not find that Waikato staff regard his school in this invidious way. In teacher education at Waikato at present he considers the students well prepared in maths and English, and in lesson preparation. Physical education, art and social sudies, on the other hand, he believes, are taught worse than in the past and are neglected in favour of core subjects. He believes that, in general, primary teachers are better prepared than secondary, and claims that several secondary heads deliberately recruit primary-trained staff because of their superior classroom skills. This is associated in his thinking with strong preference for concurrent as against end-on teacher education. He considers there is too little time for reflection about teaching in one-year graduate courses.
Most of the other school principals interviewed for this report hold that the amalgamation of the Hamilton College of Education with the University of Waikato improved intellectual standards without losing what had been best in the college tradition. However, one principal suggested that some students who would once have applied for admission to Waikato now look elsewhere, because they consider the new Waikato course too academic in character. Most of these principals consider that in recent years their graduates are better able than in the past to articulate their views on educational goals, theories and methods and are more professional in their attitudes on teaching practice. They claim that New Zealand teachers are highly regarded in other parts of the world, so that the system must have a lot going for it.
Under the arrangements operating between 1992 and 1995, exit was possible after three years with a Diploma in Teaching, as at the Dunedin College of Education. However, the course structure required that all practicum was completed in the first three years, so that there was no school experience in the fourth year of the B.Ed. programme. This caused justifiable complaints. Under the current scheme there is practicum in each year of an integrated four-year programme, but the remedy means that no three-year course is available in Waikato for the normal school leaving entrant into teacher education.
The current pre-service programmes are designed as integrated four-year degree programmes, whether for early childhood, primary or secondary teaching. Six parallel programmes lead to the B.Ed.: early childhood (65 students), ki taiao (early childhood, Maori immersion) (20), primary (220), rumaki (primary, Maori immersion) (30), secondary (5), and secondary (concurrent) (50).
The leaders of the School of Education at Waikato feel constrained by current funding policies, and would and could expand its graduate programmes if there were better financial support. Their distance programmes, which make extensive use of information technology, are trying to overcome obstacles to helping isolated areas such as Gisborne, but the costs are very high for a limited number of students.
Waikato students interviewed for this report generally thought the college-university merger had provided them with a wider range of courses and resources and welcomed the change. The students did not feel they were being indoctrinated by the more ideologically committed lecturers, since there seemed to be a reasonable balance in viewpoints presented. One student thought he was able to 'mix and match' to produce his own educational theory as a result of exposure to a range of views.
4.8 Wellington College of Education
The Wellington College of Education set a target in 1996 of 1062 EFTS funded places at undergraduate level: 211 in early childhood (40 in B.Ed. and 171 diploma), 771 in primary (331 B.Ed. and 440 diploma), and 80 in secondary (diploma). The diploma course is of three years, the B.Ed. of four years. The targeted graduate entry into teacher education was 71 in early childhood (9 B.Ed. and 62 diploma), 214 primary (109 B.Ed. and 105 diploma), and 75 secondary (diploma). In early childhood and primary the post-graduate diploma is a one-year course, and the B.Ed. a two-year course. The concurrent undergraduate secondary programme is a three-year course, and the post-graduate secondary programme is a one-year course. The college also offers specialised one-year post-graduate education in bilingual education (10) and special education (45). The 1996 target for part-time studies for Teachers with Advanced Qualifications is 131 EFTS, or 917 individual enrolments. A major librarianship course accounts for 124 EFTS. Maori student percentages range from 15 percent in primary courses to 2 percent in secondary and special education courses. Several Wellington College of Education programmes are available at the Open Polytechnic, some of which are expected to be delivered via the internet in the near future.
In the Windows research some first-year students claimed the college was too laid back, the courses too easy, and standards of excellence lacking. There were hostile references to concern about "the calibre of teachers who will just fall out of this place", and as absenteeism as "the only way to fail". Some second-year Wellington students in the Windows survey praised it because it was supportive, positive and relaxed, encouraged students' personal development and provided good course choice. On the whole second-year courses were thought more relevant and challenging than first-year ones. Amongst poor features identified were that course content was too easy, some lecturers too lenient and poorly organised, some courses repetitive, not integrated, or not relevant to the classroom, college administration poor and assessment inadequate.
Teacher education in Wellington has been in turmoil in recent years. In 1991 a joint working party report of the Wellington College of Education and the Victoria University of Wellington recommended that a conjoint B.Ed. degree be established, awarded by the university but with the college and university collaborating in its delivery. The proposed four-year degree was to have four components:
o Column A, being papers taken from existing university degree programmes;
o Column B, being papers to be developed collaboratively between university
and college;
o Column C, being teaching and curriculum studies already taught by the college
as the three-year Diploma of Teaching; and
o Column D, being the practicum elements which were to be under joint supervision
of the college and associate teachers in schools.
A three-year programme for the Diploma of Teaching was built into the B.Ed., so that, unlike the current Waikato model, students could exit with a teaching qualification after three years. The new structure was approved in 1992 and the first students enrolled in 1993. Three streams co-existed: early childhood, primary, and bilingual. A proposal for a secondary stream was rejected by the Committee on University Academic Programmes (CUAP) of the New Zealand Vice-Chancellors' Committee.
It did not take long for fissures to show in the structure erected in 1992-1993. Some weaknesses were contributed by the Wellington College of Education and some by the newly established Faculty of Education of the Victoria University of Wellington. By 1994 it had become clear that the whole enterprise was in jeopardy. Two reviews were commissioned, one a joint review of the B.Ed. by college and university, the other a university-based review of the Faculty of Education.
The team reviewing the B.Ed. programme found some strengths in the college and praised staff who "have played significant roles as contractors for Ministry of Education research projects, and in the development of curricula for New Zealand schools and in Early Childhood curriculum developments." However, it found many faults in what seemed to it an ad hoc structure in which common institutional interest was shown only in a small number of conjoint papers developed as Column B. Although the review team "was not able to gain a detailed insight into the operations of the different streams within the B.Ed.", it was "made aware that both the early childhood stream and the bilingual stream consider that not enough focus has been given to their concerns in the conjoint papers in Column B." It expressed misgivings as to whether the B.Ed. programme paid enough attention to ensuring that "primary teachers have adequate subject matter knowledge in the disciplines represented in the school curriculum." On the other hand, it considered that the understandings and skills necessary for the beginning teacher could be gained in less time on practicum than was provided, and the time thus saved used in more profitable ways.
The review team deplored the absence of clear articulation of common goals and found that even "the wording and form of the statute" under which the B.Ed. operated "needs major revision to make it intelligible to students and staff alike, and legally reliable". It alluded to a report to the Faculty of Education dated October 1995 by the University Teaching Development Centre, based on student evaluation of the conjoint papers in column B. That report "documented clear student views as to improvements and changes that need to be made in the design and delivery of this component."
In respect of a substantial portion of the conjoint B.Ed., the review team expressed doubt as to whether "staff responsible for the programme areas have the capacity and support to make the changes and improvements that are needed." The review team saw the B.Ed. programme as "in danger of collapsing into the empty spaces that lie between the two quite different cultures, policies and operating systems of two distinct institutions. And it is the students who will be the chief casualties, if the deficiencies are not remedied." A college internal audit concluded similarly in June 1995 that "two sets of policies and procedures" co-existed uneasily, creating difficulties for students entering the B.Ed. programme.
The review team found that as early as 1991 a decision had been taken to establish
two joint working parties, one to "examine and make recommendations on
affiliation between VUW and WCE at the management and governance levels"
and the other "to prepare detailed proposals on the administration, staffing,
accommodation and resources that will be needed for the Faculty of Education."
However, "to the best of the review team's knowledge, the two working parties
were never constituted (or certainly no reports became available, if constituted)."
It was not surprising that by early 1994 a wide range of issues "required
urgent attention".
A very experienced educator, Mr Jack Shallcrass, was commissioned in 1994 to
undertake a review of the B.Ed. conjoint courses, but his two reports did not
lead to a resolution of the problems. Instead "the relationship between
the university and the college with respect to the operation of the B.Ed. programme
seriously deteriorated over 1995", to the extent that each partner was
drawing up contingency plans to go it alone. A university task force reported
in June 1995 to the Vice-Chancellor that the current relationship was untenable.
It claimed that "There are major difficulties in terms of management ...
, staff relationships, and widely different cultures. These difficulties were
not addressed in the contractual basis established between the two institutions."
Yet, if one inspects the brochures and public documents of both institutions
during this period of stress and confusion, one finds no hint of anything but
harmony in ensuring the highest quality of teacher education. This is a useful
corrective to credulity when faced by institutional rhetoric.
A temporary agreement was patched up in September 1995, but this was not well received by college staff, some of whom thought they were badly treated in the reallocation of buildings and in "the perceived arbitrary division of responsibility for the conjoint papers between the University and the College." On the other hand, university staff felt aggrieved in that all college staff engaged in any way in the B.Ed. were members of the Faculty of Education and vastly outnumbered the old university education staff, since voting on key organisational issues was generally on institutional lines.
The review team noted the stress under which most people concerned were working. Clearly this stress was not the result of government or any other external pressures, but internal conflicts. The review team's impression was that "low priority has been given to what is in the best interests of the students in the programme". It provided as examples lecture times and places apparently arranged to accommodate staff and institutional rather than student interests. Arrangements were further complicated because the two groups of staff had very different priorities.
The review team had to choose between recommending fresh attempts to build
full collaboration in the B.Ed., partial collaboration, and separation. This
last course was in the process of adoption at this very time by the Auckland
College of Education, which had decided to end its conjoint B.Ed. programme
with the University of Auckland. The review team recommended reconciliation
and renewal of full cooperation. It made some organisational suggestions, including
a range of new joint appointments to help bridge the cultural gaps between college
and university. The review team set out reasonably fairly the pros and cons
of each policy, but obviously had a partiality for large size and uniformity.
Its most dubious claim (at p. 50) was that:
It is unlikely that the market in teacher education in Wellington could sustain
direct competition between the University and the College. This would lead to
one or the other, or both, being unable to sustain a quality and viable programme,
or to an agreement between them to focus on different aspects of teacher education,
which removes the supposed benefit of the action of competition.
No specific evidence for this common argument for the continuation of monopolies
was put forward, and indeed no such evidence is available. The two sides in
Wellington accepted the advice of the review team and are now trying to rebuild
a better system of full collaboration than existed in the past.
In preparing this report, supporters of the Wellington College of Education were found as well as critics. Jean Packman, Principal of Ngaio School, considers that the graduates her school has appointed in recent years have more Maori skills and computer skills than in the past, and have come equipped with up-to-date knowledge of the requirements of the National Curriculum. In contrast, some established staff members have had to discard some of the old and acquire some of the new in more demanding circumstances. A first-year teacher who had studied at the college considered there had been improvements there during her three years. As described to her, the past ways of the college had been "too slaphappy", but she found her own course "more professional". A teacher who had recently retrained at the college after an 18-year gap in her teaching career considered current teacher education better than what she recalled of her time at the Hamilton College of Education where she had first studied. Both these teachers also valued their time at the college and university as a wonderful cultural experience, quite apart from their contribution to their teaching abilities.
4.9 Victoria University of Wellington
At the same time as the review team centred on the Wellington College of Education was considering the B.Ed., a separate review of the Faculty of Education was being undertaken by Victoria University of Wellington alone. The review panel reported to the Vice-Chancellor in October 1995. Like the review team, the review panel found that recent changes "had not occurred within a well planned environment" and that "staff were increasingly stressed by the pressures of the changing environment … and there had been a serious underestimation of the difficulties of establishing satisfactory working relationships with the College." Overall, the review panel concluded, "Morale was low and declining".
This review panel decided that it :
… should not consider any matters concerned with the B.Ed. or with inter-institutional
matters directly linked to teaching, management and administration of the B.Ed.
programme except when they could be shown to have a direct effect on the remaining
activities of the Faculty.
Even in respect of the education major and higher degree courses in education,
the review panel did not see it "as part of its remit to examine and pronounce
on course outlines in detail." Again, one must suggest that such omissions
are all too typical of what purport to be serious reviews of the quality of
teacher education. Although in its limited examination the review panel soon
found that "the most noticeable characteristics of the 300-level papers
are their issues based nature and their relative lack of coherence", it
was apparently blind to the powerful ideological, rather than professional or
educational, thrust of some of these courses (see Chapter 8).
The review resulted in the creation in September 1995 of a separate Department of Teacher Education within the Faculty of Education. This Department comprised newly appointed staff selected for their professional, academic and research experience in teacher education. It now consists of six staff in full-time equivalent terms, who see themselves as representing best international standards using the reflective professional model of teacher education outlined by Doyle (1990) in the Handbook for Research on Teacher Education. In an interview for this report, the three leading figures, Professor Adrienne Alton-Lee, Penny Fenwick (then the acting Dean) and Dr Valda Kirkwood, described the reflective professional model as emphasising the "dynamic inter-relationship of research, theory, craft knowledge, personal knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge". Professor Alton-Lee stressed the importance of international research in teacher education in informing the programme.
Their main concerns are with the primary pre-service programme, in-service upgrading and research at masters and doctoral levels in teacher education. The pre-service upgrading emphasises learning, scaffolding, metacognition, assessment, social and cultural contexts, task design, research-based pedagogy and the dynamic inter-relation between research, theory and educational practice. They consider that until recently the models of teacher education pre-service students encountered in Wellington did not place sufficient weight on the role of research in informing practice.
The three academics advised that in the new Department of Teacher Education all teacher educators are researchers involved in a range of research programmes and studies of learning, teaching and teacher education. Professor Alton-Lee explained her intention to develop at Victoria the work that she carried out with her co-director, Professor Graham Nuthall, in the Understanding Learning and Teaching Project at the University of Canterbury to ensure that the teacher education programmes would be informed by intensive classroom research carried out with teachers in Wellington schools.
These academics see their mission, in terms of section 162(4)(a) of the Education Act 1989 as having the characteristics required of universities, namely:
(i) They are primarily concerned with more advanced learning, the principal
aim being to develop intellectual independence:
(ii) Their research and teaching are closely interdependent and most of their
teaching is done by people who are active in advancing knowledge:
(iii) They meet international standards of research and teaching:
(iv) They are a repository of knowledge and expertise:
(v) They accept a role as critic and conscience of society … .
Professor Alton-Lee and her colleagues considered there to be gains for teacher education in mergers between colleges and universities in terms of meeting the requirement for international standards and efficiency of administration. However, they were concerned about the vulnerability of teacher education in the current tertiary funding context. In particular they would be concerned if clinical supervision programmes were to become at risk. They considered the government's move to make teacher education widely contestable to be a threat to international standards of research-based teacher education.
Their sentiments about the future are mixed. Professor Alton-Lee stated her
view that there was a need for research to inform all seven essential learning
areas of the new National Curriculum. She stated that, if it were not for her
deep concern about the future of New Zealand education, she would immediately
go to another country in which international standards of research-based teacher
education were supported and she were afforded the time to carry out research
necessary for quality teacher education.
4.10 Recommendations
1 There are significant differences in approach among the established providers of teacher education, quite apart from the obvious difference between free-standing colleges of education and university departments of education. Some of these approaches find favour in this report and others do not, but the main recommendation to the government must be to avoid a search for the one type of institution that embodies all virtues and eschews all pitfalls. The government should encourage greater diversity, not uniformity of provision.
2 Each institution should take a keen interest in initiatives carried out in
all other providers of teacher education, rather than be inward-looking. However,
institutions cannot learn much from each other unless there is better monitoring
of the effectiveness of courses and wider public dissemination of appropriate
information.
CHAPTER 5
NEW PROVIDERS
5.1 Introduction
Over the last two years several new providers of initial teacher education have entered the field. This expansion has involved both state institutions (polytechnics and wananga) and independent providers. The University of Auckland has become an independent provider, instead of working conjointly with the Auckland College of Education. Several polytechnics have become providers, namely the Auckland Institute of Technology (AIT), the UNITEC Institute of Technology (formerly Carrington Polytechnic), the Manukau Institute of Technology, the Christchurch Polytechnic, and the Wanganui Regional Community Polytechnic. Te Whare Wananga Awanuiarangi at Whakatane has been a pioneer wananga in teacher education. Independent Christian institutions have been established: Bethlehem Teachers College and the MASTERS Institute. An independent initiative of a secular character is the development of the New Zealand Graduate School of Education in Christchurch. More specialised providers may also appear, such as the Freelance Art School Ltd., whose Director, Barry Pearce, is considering supplementing a specialist course in training graphic designers with a compressed course in general teacher education.
The total number of places in independent providers is, however, a very small percentage of the total. The number of EFTS funded places allocated for pre-service primary and secondary teacher education in 1997 to private training establishments (PTEs) was less than 1 percent of the total allocation - 74 out of 8069.
One important distinction between the state and private providers is in the level of state subsidy available. For 1997 the base rate for PTEs offering pre-service teacher education is $5,398 per EFTS place. The equivalent for colleges of education, polytechnics and university courses with a strong practical component is $9,316. This presumably has led to a higher level of student fees at the PTEs, compared with those charged by state institutions, and can be expected to curtail their rate of growth. There appears to be no good reason for this distinction in level of state funding between state and private providers; ownership should not be a factor in determining level of support. Both types of institution have to obtain the same academic approvals by the New Zealand Qualifications Authority and the Teacher Registration Board. This discrimination against PTEs limits the choices available to students and the competitive pressures on state providers to perform. The new providers are briefly described below, except for the two new Maori immersion programme providers, the Wanganui Regional Community Polytechnic and Te Whare Wananga Awanuiarangi at Whakatane, which are considered in Chapter 11.
5.2 University of Auckland
After the withdrawal of the Auckland College of Education from their collaborative B.Ed., the University of Auckland bid for and won a contract for a one-year graduate diploma programme enrolling up to 50 primary and 50 secondary trainees. Its aim is to increase the numbers to 100 primary and 75 secondary trainees. Two additional staff with wide experience and good qualifications were appointed to control the two new programmes.
The programmes are very much school-oriented. The division of time in the primary programme is 360 hours of practicum, 200 hours of school-based courses and 280 hours of university-based courses. The University of Auckland defines its programme as consortium-based, since it depends on close partnership between it and the collaborating schools, currently 37 in number. It is closer to recent developments in England and Wales than is any other public provider of teacher education in New Zealand, although one private provider, the new New Zealand Graduate School of Education, is also being organised on similar lines.
Special emphasis is placed on school mentors, whose role incorporates much of what college tutors have done in traditional teacher education courses. A novel feature is that, as a condition of appointment, mentors must enrol in a course at masters level in mentoring and counselling.
5.3 Auckland Institute of Technology (AIT)
Auckland Institute of Technology (AIT) President Dr John Hinchcliff sees the AIT as offering student-centred, focused and employment-oriented education. He frequently uses the language of needs and relevance familiar in the established teacher education institutions. He has no sentimental yearnings for the Newmanesque style of university education and considers his own education to have been too concerned with European and British traditions and languages, whilst neglectful of Maori, the Pacific Islands, and Asia.
Hinchcliff thinks AIT's approach to teacher education is more like that of the colleges of education than that of the universities. AIT and the colleges exist to teach teachers how to teach, as well as learn theories about teaching. Their teaching integrates theory and practice and enables graduates to perform in the workplace.
AIT has four teacher qualifications: a Graduate Diploma in Teacher Education (Secondary) which is run as a full-time one-year course, a Graduate Diploma in Teacher Education (Tertiary), a Certificate in Teacher Education (Tertiary) and a Graduate Certificate in Teacher Education (Career Development) run by the AIT Careers Centre.
The Graduate Diploma in Teacher Education (Secondary) follows the pattern set in England and Wales under the previous Conservative government by increasing the role of the practicum and the control exerted over it by the partner secondary schools. Half the programme is school-based. AIT has made a heads of agreement with the Bay of Plenty Polytechnic for providing teacher education courses in Tauranga and Rotorua.
5.4 Manukau Institute of Technology
The Manukau Institute of Technology in Otara makes available the Christchurch College of Education secondary teaching courses. Given the importance the established institutions place on the experience and understanding of their own permanent staff, there are clearly some problems in contracting out whole programmes. Christchurch and Manukau seek to resolve such difficulties by regular visits of Christchurch staff to Manukau and to schools where Manukau students are on practicum, visits by Manukau staff to Christchurch for briefings, joint assessment of work by Manukau students, and the establishment of an external advisory committee to review the teaching of Christchurch programmes at Manukau.
5.5 UNITEC Institute of Technology (formerly Carrington Polytechnic)
Auckland-based UNITEC Institute of Technology offers a one-year programme of 40 weeks for graduates. It uses the New Zealand Curriculum Framework as a matrix for the so-called seven essential learning areas and the NZQA unit standards for other elements in teacher preparation. Another core component centres on learning theory and its practical applications. Apart from the ubiquitous Treaty of Waitangi and gender treatments, UNITEC's courses contain no philosophy or history of education, but are severely classroom-oriented. In addition the practicum component is high: there are three blocks of three weeks which follow four or five Thursdays in schools at the start of the course. UNITEC has made its teacher education courses available through the Christchurch and Wairarapa Polytechnics.
5.6 Christchurch Polytechnic
In addition to purchasing the UNITEC programme, Christchurch Polytechnic has contracted specialists in each topic area who are to write course outlines and supporting materials to supplement it.
5.7 Bethlehem Teachers College
Bethlehem Teachers College, based at Tauranga, offers a three-year programme for a Diploma in Teaching. It has a markedly Christian perspective and there are compulsory courses in Christian knowledge, but the overall balance of the programme is comparable to those of the established providers. In some ways the college is a reminder of nineteenth century teacher education, since it arose out of a desire to provide suitable teachers for the now 900-strong Bethlehem college, which enrols children from early childhood to Form Seven. That is how several Normal Schools emerged as the earliest providers of teacher education. Students at the college are placed under the guidance of a 'Master Teacher' in the main school.
Since the college is clearly based on the concept of Christian discipleship, it seems ludicrous that it has felt compelled, through fear of the implications of the Human Rights Act 1993, to remove profession of Christian belief from requirements for entry.
5.8 MASTERS Institute, Auckland
The MASTERS Institute at Mt Roskill, Auckland, is a Christian teacher education
institution not associated with any particular denomination. Its prospectus
states:
The Institute's educational philosophy is based on the presupposition that all
things were made by God through Jesus, in whom lies all God's treasures of wisdom
and knowledge.
Its Principal, Mrs Bev Norsworthy, has been a principal of Christian schools
in Australia and New Zealand. She has long been generally dissatisfied with
teacher education in both countries, mostly in relation to the ability of graduates
to plan and teach effective learning programmes and to manage workloads. She
considered a large number of beginning teachers to be limited in vision, lacking
a sense of mission and deficient in instructional skills. She found as a principal
that she had virtually to retrain many young teachers.
The teacher education course offered at MASTERS began in 1992, after application had been made to the NZQA in 1991. Its Diploma of Teaching is now recognised by the Teacher Registration Board. So far the MASTERS Institute has not introduced the unit standards of the National Qualifications Framework for teacher education, partly because Norsworthy believes that these are very likely to be considerably modified soon.
There are now 28 students at various stages of a three-year course, each operational year being significantly longer than the standard teacher education year. Their students are of higher average age than those of the typical teacher education course. Many have had lengthy experience in other jobs or of raising families, but believe they have something valuable to contribute to the education of children.
Half the MASTERS Institute's course is school-based and half in college. The college-centred courses are based on what Norsworthy terms a unified and coherent biblical Christian world view, reflecting 'good practice' research. The approach adopted is holistic, with emphasis on enabling student-teachers to gain an adequate overview and to achieve broad understanding of processes and frameworks, on skills and methods rather than mere content. Norsworthy claims that her approach demystifies the learning process. She said that a strong and distinctive component of the MASTERS' course considers the 'then and there' as part of understanding the 'here and now'. The central religious impulse of the course has led, Norsworthy maintains, to serious engagement with transcendentalist educators who have examined the relationship of religious belief and theology to other forms of knowledge and experience.
The students showed up in discussion as open and fair in their appraisal of non-Christian thought and practice, and as willing to confront challenges about possible indoctrination in their courses. Indeed, the institute seemed more open to alternative pedagogic approaches than some of the mainstream ones that were visited during the preparation of this report. The MASTERS Institute has produced a formula which requires that entrants have "read and discussed overview material to ensure compatibility and empathy with the aims and objectives of the course", but it feels it cannot require formal commitment to the Christian beliefs on which it is based. Some established institutions appear to have few such scruples in requiring adherence to the tenets of feminism and 'Waitangism'.
Norsworthy believes that a small institution may often be able to target special needs better than a large one. Because of the tight focus adopted by the institute, she considers it well able to satisfy the needs of schools based on a comparable explicit philosophy. She claims, however, as do several of the students, that the institute's graduates are welcome in a wide range of schools. Several schools which do not share the institute's world view value the commitment and character of its student-teachers. The institute's range of practicum schools is increasing rapidly, mainly through principal-to-principal recommendation. Norsworthy believes that their graduates will give long as well as valuable service to education. Most of the 30 schools used on practicum make their curriculum resources available to the institute's students. Some support is also received from overseas through the agency of the International Christian Education Conference. The directors of the MASTERS Institute believe that advanced technology is on their side, since the internet will make library resources worldwide available to small as well as large institutions. In this view, access, not ownership, will be the key.
Resources at the institute are much more limited than in the state colleges of education. The directors strongly condemn what they consider to be discriminatory funding which unduly favours public against private providers of teacher education. They claim that they suffer more than established institutions do from late decision-making and frequent lurches in funding policies in Wellington, since they have no reserves to call upon and are especially vulnerable. It is very difficult for them to plan their fee structure and course provision in sufficient time to enable prospective students to reflect on what they have to offer.
The morale of students at the MASTERS Institute is very high, comparable only to that of the Wanganui Maori students. Many see themselves as missionaries to a new heathendom, but also as having a teaching ministry with emphases on basic education and the development of character. Paying a high fee in advance also concentrates the mind and combines sacred and secular motivation to work hard and succeed. The institute is now in its sixth year, and there appears to be no indications that this high sense of endeavour will not be sustained.
5.9 New Zealand Graduate School of Education (Christchurch)
In Christchurch Dr John Langley, Lois Chick and Dr Kevin Knight have established the New Zealand Graduate School of Education (NZGSE). John Langley is the Principal of South New Brighton School and, like Chick and Knight, a former lecturer at the Christchurch College of Education. The anticipated time for entrants to gain the Diploma of Teaching is from one to two years depending on existing skills and knowledge and subsequent individual progress. The directors argue that it is ridiculous that teacher education should be time-based, rather than achievement- or competency-based, and that the same time to qualify should be expected of a 17-year-old school leaver and a 30-year-old with wide experience of life.
NZGSE will use satisfaction of the unit standards in teacher education laid down by NZQA as the base argument for accreditation by NZQA, but its programmes are highly individualised so that satisfying the unit standards does not produce uniformity. Satisfying the unit standards in itself is far from being a guarantee of quality, but NZGSE is providing an intensive and demanding preparation for each of its enrolled students.
NZGSE could be considered the first mainstream alternative teachers college in New Zealand. It is not based on a distinctive religious faith, or a particularly technological thrust, but originated in the frustrations of highly capable mainstream teacher educators with unwieldy and inefficient bureaucracies. The directors have not escaped completely from bureaucratic controls, however, since the process of accreditation they have undergone is very tedious and time-consuming.
NZGSE targets university graduates, adult students and professionals interested in retraining as teachers. All of the entrants are graduates, or graduate-equivalent. It opened with an intake of primary trainees in October 1996, with 35 students in the first full year of working, and rather more in primary than secondary training.
It started off with two full-time tutors, Chick and Knight, backed by a range of well-qualified persons, including part-time teachers, who will supply specialised advice as and when needed. Chick and Knight work closely in schools with students and supervising teachers, rather than appear as occasional visitors. Two-thirds of the training takes place in schools under the direction of teacher mentors. This approach, like that increasingly adopted in England, is based on the assumption that the best place to train people is in the type of situation in which they will finally have to work.
It is not anticipated that difficulties will be found in finding sufficient schools for the type of partnership envisaged, despite angry gestures by some teacher unionists. Host schools will enter into contracts with NZGSE for joint supervision of school-based practicums. Sometimes it will be a straightforward cash transaction, sometimes there will be exchanges of services, such as in-service training of staff by the directors and other experts in particular fields. While waiting to meet NZQA accreditation requirements, Chick and Knight ran staff development and other in-service courses and consultancy services for parents and students.
The professional and scholarly repertoire of the three directors includes behaviour management, teaching gifted and exceptional children, and catering for special learning needs. It is always possible that it will be in such specific areas of expertise that NZGSE will develop, but its initial aim is to make a significant contribution to general teacher education.
5.10 Attitudes to new providers
Attitudes towards new providers vary immensely among staff in established institutions. Sometimes the new institutions are decried as insignificant, unimportant and likely to be found very unimpressive by prospective employers of teachers. At the opposite end of the spectrum they are viewed with alarm as a great danger to mainstream teacher education.
The teacher unions are, not surprisingly, opposed to the entry of new providers into teacher education, as to any reduction in established educational monopolies. Martin Cooney of the Post Primary Teachers' Association (PPTA) claimed these initiatives "could compromise quality of training" and threatened that his members were likely to "resist" moves to train teachers in non-traditional settings. Resistance might take the form of not being "willing to cooperate with private providers in giving them the practicum they require."
One unexpected effect of the emergence of new providers in teacher education is that the New Zealand Educational Institute (NZEI) has changed tack on the specification of standards. In the past NZEI was generally hostile to such specifications, but now it seems to see them as a way of keeping new providers at bay. After noting that "the list of approved (and hopeful) new providers is growing rapidly", Grant McMillan of NZEI asked teacher educators a rather mystifying question: "Can we risk assuming they will all understand the implications of and be able to apply such sweeping statements as 'All teaching is context specific, that is it relates to particular learners and particular localities'?" McMillan's answer was, "NZEI-Te Riu Roa thinks not." Well, that would seem to decide it. Pack up your bags, new providers.
The directors of the NZGSE hope for positive relationships with the Christchurch College of Education, even though they believe they can contribute more outside it than they once did within it. The new principal of the Christchurch College of Education, Dr Ian Hall, faces competition from the Christchurch Polytechnic's Te Rangakura primary teachers' programme, which was launched in July 1996, as well as from the ex-Christchurch College of Education staff at NZGSE. It would be too much to expect delight from Dr Hall at these developments, but his personal responses are unlikely to be of a negative character. New Zealand is, after all, facing a teacher shortage. Some Dunedin lecturers oppose the emergence of competition from new providers on the grounds that this will reduce national collaboration between teacher educators, but it is incumbent on those who have this concern to set a good example.
Bryan Hennessey, Principal of the Massey University College of Education, is
suspicious of the quality of some new providers. He concedes that the proof
of the pudding must lie in the eating, that is in the performances of graduates
from such institutions in the schools. However, he considers that new providers
should supply a guarantee of quality. At the heart of this inquiry and, one
hopes, of future ones is a search for ways of establishing what constitutes
intrinsic content in teacher education and then for ways of guaranteeing that
it is being achieved. Most of the new providers seem as likely as established
providers to meet whatever criteria may be established in the future.
Several Massey staff note that there is now much more 'shopping around' different
teacher education institutions, both by individual students and by schools requiring
support by distance education. Some positively welcome this challenge and competition.
Perhaps in the future some of them may follow their Christchurch colleagues
and become private providers themselves.
Some principals of schools linked to the School of Education in the University of Waikato do not favour the entry of new providers into teacher education. They think it unlikely new providers can offer the wealth of experience accumulated over the years by the established institutions. They are doubtful whether student-teachers prepared in specialised courses for particular niches will be able to teach anywhere. One principal suggested that graduates of specialised institutions should have a qualification limiting them to a particular type of teaching. However, another principal had himself been prepared for intermediate school teaching but had soon found himself appointed to teach reading to junior children, whilst yet another praises the old Hamilton primary course because several of its graduates had been appointed to secondary schools in preference to candidates specially prepared for secondary teaching.
Tim McMahon and Catherine McMechan of the Ministry of Education also have concerns about new providers in the field. McMahon considers competition good in principle as likely to keep individuals and institutions on their toes, but he also considers that New Zealand is too small and short of relevant resources to be able to cope with duplication of provision. However, if there were some sharing of library and comparable facilities provided initially at public cost this problem would be at least partly overcome. McMechan correctly noted that geographical isolation made parental choice virtually impossible in many areas, but that seems no reason not to provide choice where this is possible. The same would apply to everything else in life as well as education.
This report fully endorses Susan Hitchiner's judgment that there are, even
after the innovations of 1996 and 1997:
… few incentives created from the weak competitive environment for pre-service
education. … in general terms the barriers to entry are too high. These
barriers include the relatively high entry costs such as the initial investment
in course development and premises.
5.11 Recommendations
1 The government should allow a range of new providers to enter teacher education by financing state and private providers on a common and equitable basis.
2 Established teacher education institutions should cooperate with new providers,
not only because New Zealand is currently short of teachers and because such
cooperation is expected of professionals genuinely committed to educational
progress, but because they themselves may well learn and benefit from cooperation.
CHAPTER 6
KNOWLEDGE AND
TEACHER EDUCATION
6.1 The issue of priorities
The range of information, knowledge, understandings, and skills which are valuable and candidates for inclusion in teacher education is far more extensive than could ever be included. Every institution is constantly faced with difficult choices between breadth and depth, both between subjects or activities and within them. We would like students to have a broad-based education, but we are also fearful of superficiality. 'A little learning is a dangerous thing', yet no one ever gained great learning in anything without first knowing very little.
Discussion about what constitutes the optimum balance of knowledge which student teachers might gain in pre-service education has always taken place, of course, in the colleges and university education departments. Such discussions are often stimulated by the threat, or promise, of mergers or re-organisation. This has been the case in recent years in New Zealand. Among the best reported discussions are those in the School of Education in the University of Waikato. There, broadly speaking, staff teaching primary curriculum subjects, such as mathematics, social studies and science (and how to teach them), wanted much less time to be spent on 'theory' related to philosophy, history, sociology, psychology (the 'disciplines of education'), whereas others argued for the ongoing relevance of knowledge of broader social, political and philosophical contexts in which teachers work. Dr Clive McGee notes that the arguments advanced at Waikato were very similar to those analysed in the United Kingdom by Bennett and Carre. Time devoted to practicum was sharply contested, despite claims elsewhere that the amount of time is far less important than its quality. On assessment issues, some staff argued that a separate course was needed in the light of new national curriculum demands, whereas others argued that these were already amply covered in every curriculum course.
6.2 Substantive curriculum knowledge
Gaining adequate knowledge has logical precedence over acquiring the best ways of communicating that knowledge to others. Inculcation of substantive knowledge is not, of course, the exclusive field of teacher education, but, if not constantly attended to, other courses will be studied to little purpose. Content knowledge affects not only what teachers teach but how they teach it. Teachers with depth of knowledge are more likely to stress conceptual understanding and to see many connections between different elements of study, whereas non-specialists more often simply teach the content as represented in a prescribed text.
The claims advanced for integrated or thematic teaching in early childhood and primary education are often severely weakened because teachers lack the knowledge to make appropriate connections. Professor Cliff Turney of Sydney University was surely right in claiming in 1988 that in Australia, "Teachers who have a commanding sense of authority and a deep and abiding interest in what they teach are desperately needed. We need scholar teachers who require of their pupils factual accuracy, conceptual clarity, critical analysis and an appropriate level of sophistication in all their studies." The required scholarship must relate in the first place to the content of instruction.
All this may seem a mere truism to those outside teacher education and constructivist
pedagogy, but within these fields contrary doctrines have gained sway. Clive
McGee has noted:
It is generally accepted by teacher educators and the teaching profession that
student teachers should learn the teaching matter that belongs to the various
subjects they will teach.
However, McGee immediately added:
Curiously, however, research into teacher education has given little attention
to this aspect of knowledge compared with processes of teaching and learning.
In the course of a critique of 'traditional' or 'knowledge-based' teaching methods,
the American scholars Floden and Buckman went so far as to claim there are no
studies which demonstrate an empirical link between teachers' content knowledge
of a subject and the pupil learning. If, deplorably, this were the case, two
considerations might explain it. One is that it is so obvious that people who
know something well are in general better able to convey it to others than are
people who know it weakly or not at all, that it has not seemed worthwhile to
put the proposition to empirical testing. The other is that those who purport
to reject any significant connection between knowing something well and teaching
it well know better than to put the matter to the test.
Contrary to the assertion of Floden and Buckman, there is ample evidence that those who have mastery of content teach it better than others. An excellent example of the way depth of relevant knowledge informs good teaching was provided at the Dunedin 1996 NZCTE Conference by Colin Gibbs of Massey University College of Education and Graeme Aitken of the Auckland College of Education. They compared three ways of answering the question: "How can a teacher best explain to year six pupils the concept of electricity as demonstrated by the lighting of a simple light bulb which is connected to a cell by copper wire?" Their perceptive analysis of how a teacher might best provide such an explanation took into account the prior experience of students, but that explanation could not have been provided by anyone without appropriate substantive knowledge in depth, however well that person might know the background and interests of the students.
All this might seem totally obvious, yet scepticism of a destructive character about the value and significance of knowledge is currently widespread in many western countries, perhaps none more so than in New Zealand. Normally sensible people are often affected by this sentiment, which sometimes seems attractively democratic and egalitarian, putting as it does those who know something on a similar level with those who do not. The present Minister of Education, Hon. Wyatt Creech, told teacher educators at Dunedin in 1996 that "Having a Ph.D. does not necessarily mean someone is a good teacher. I think we all know from our experiences of cases of very intelligent and very well qualified people who can't teach - they just can't get it across". Wyatt Creech is, of course, right that such situations arise from time to time, but the more fundamental point is that it is much more feasible to train, say, a physics Ph.D. who is a rather inept communicator to become a good physics teacher than to transform into a physics teacher the typical non-science teacher who bubbles over with communication skills. Were this not so, there would be few shortage areas of specialist teachers in any country. In the present intellectual climate, it would be unfortunate to give teacher-educators messages which may strengthen hostility to intellectual achievement or increase still further scepticism about the importance of knowledge.
6.3 Inadequacies in substantive curriculum knowledge
At any given moment there is some sort of curriculum in existence. It may be a national one or a school-based one, but the beginning teacher has to be able to teach it with at least minimum competence, which entails basic relevant curriculum knowledge. This is more important than that beginning teachers have other sorts of knowledge not directly related to their teaching, or possess communication and organisational skills, or display other attributes, however valuable these may be. Yet teacher education often fails to embrace this simple order of priority, even with respect to the basic subjects of the primary curriculum. This is not to suggest that there was once a golden age when all teachers had adequate substantive knowledge. The 1962 Currie Report displayed similar concerns.
Teaching of reading
Teaching of reading is arguably the most important single aspect of teaching in any country. The main weakness in New Zealand early childhood and primary courses in this respect is not that inadequate time is made available, but that, with the blessing of the relevant National Curriculum documents, 'whole-language' approaches virtually monopolise attention to the exclusion of systems that include phonic elements. 'Whole-language' and 'look-say' approaches broadly hold that reading can effectively be taught by providing children with highly interesting material to read, without much need for drill in rules and patterns of language. Some extreme advocates hold that drills put children off reading and are thus not only of little value but actually harmful.
In the preparation of this report, the impression was gained that students in early childhood and primary teacher education have little opportunity to consider phonetic methods as part of the range of strategies needed to teach reading. Instead they are usually given a distorted 'strawman' idea of what critics of whole language methods of learning to read wish to put in its place. Young teachers who had graduated from the Christchurch College of Education said that reading methods there were uniformly hostile to phonetic methods.
Dame Marie Clay, the main influence in recent years on government policy and
teacher education methodology as regards the teaching of reading, urged:
We should only dwell on detail long enough for the child to discover its existence
and then encourage the use of it in isolation only when absolutely necessary.
Tom Nicholson of the University of Auckland claims that "In New Zealand
the use of context cues is regarded as a major factor in the reading process",
whereas use of letter-sound analysis is seen as of only secondary significance
when used at all.
After extensive debate internationally the balance of argument lies with those
who urge the inclusion of a powerful phonic component in the teaching of reading.
Adams and Bruck concluded an exhaustive review of relevant research as follows:
Whenever children who cannot discover the alphabetic principle independently
are denied explicit instruction on the regularities and conventions of the letter
strings, reading-disability may well be the eventual consequence.
Although most children entering early childhood centres or their equivalents
can discriminate phonemes (i.e. individual speech sounds), progress with reading
requires the further ability to manipulate them in thought and speech, which
for many children requires some phonic drills, as well as 'whole-language' experience.
Some of New Zealand's best scholars in the field, such as Tom Nicholson and Bill Tunmer at Massey University, have demonstrated theoretical weaknesses and practical inadequacies in whole-language approaches. It comes then as no surprise that figures for reading referral and failure in New Zealand are very high. Heather Ryan and Roger Openshaw of Massey University note that "in 1992, just under one third of all six year olds were assigned to Reading Recovery (RR) because they had failed to reach minimum satisfactory reading levels after one year's instruction.". Warwick Roger suggests that "if nearly 1 in 3 six-year-olds are deemed not to be able to read adequately for their age (this) should suggest to the Ministry of Education that the whole-language approach to reading is not working well."
As Nicholson and Tunmer have shown, reading recovery does not systematically address essential metalinguistic skills, such as phonological awareness, phonological recoding and syntactic awareness, which seem directly associated with skilled fluent reading. Tunmer stresses that "cipher knowledge is not the same as explicit knowledge of phonics rules, the application of which is slow and laborious", but that "phonological recoding appears to involve sequentially converting graphemic units into phonemes (a process that may be subject to position-specific constraints and 'marker' letters)."
Ryan and Openshaw argue persuasively that in New Zealand the dominant brand
of radical educational theory has been counter-productive for the very groups
supposedly its special beneficiaries. This is because claims that the main reasons
for low educational achievement lie in social injustice and inequality, not
in specific learning deficiencies, readily lead schools to neglect the immediate
tasks they ought much more to attend to, and in which they might well succeed,
in favour of rhetorical attacks on social conditions external to the schools
and not directly amenable to their influence. An alarming feature of the situation
in reading methods is what Ryan and Openshaw term a "reluctance to engage
in policy debate", which has been "extremely detrimental." Openshaw
has argued:
In New Zealand, the historical method of teaching reading through emphasis on
phonics and grammar, became in effect a dirty word among teachers.
Openshaw recalls that rational challenges to prevailing orthodoxy on reading,
such as those mounted by Margaret Hooton of the Remuera Reading Clinic in 1978
and over the years by Doris Ferry on Wellington's Kapiti coast led to bitter
attacks which put the critics "in danger of becoming professional outcasts".
At the University of Waikato School of Education, Catherine Lang found that reading was one of four aspects of teaching that third-year primary student-teachers felt themselves relatively well prepared for (the others being understanding the importance of planning, provision of practical classroom teaching experience, and understanding the importance of assessment). Yet there is no evidence that their pupils need reading recovery any less than those taught by graduates of other institutions, and such evidence is unlikely to emerge, given that Waikato emphasises 'real-book' (i.e. whole-language) methods in the same one-sided way as the rest.
This report does not propose that the current orthodoxy be replaced by governmental fiat with reading approaches which concentrate only on word drills and phonetic guidance. Indeed, much of what enthusiasts for word recognition methods have developed is of considerable value and should be incorporated into any new reading schemes. Our concern is that, in general, student-teachers in early childhood and primary courses are left unaware of phonic-based approaches, such as those advocated by Nicholson and Tunmer, or are given a brief and inadequate version of them, and that the effects of this one-sidedness are very damaging.
Quite apart from the issue of how children are best taught to read is the neglect in recent years in primary, secondary and tertiary education alike of grammar and syntax. A vicious circle has been started in which many teachers themselves are weak in basic language skills and in a poor position to ensure that the next generation is not even weaker.
Hostility to what they condemned as unnecessary and deadening formalism in
language teaching was initially expressed most strongly by teacher educators,
rather than among any other group within or outside the educational professions.
In place of traditional language or literature studies, the new English concentrated
on students' discussions of their personal experiences and was infused by encouragement
of spontaneity. Many of the first generation of teacher educators, and teachers
in general as well, who adopted this approach were able to achieve some success,
since they themselves had received some grounding in the mainstream of English
literature, as well as in grammar and spelling. Such teachers were thus able
to provide sound guidance in language skills and guidance to wider reading,
even though their courses were largely based on informal group activities. However,
few of the students they taught were able in their turn to give such guidance
when they became teachers.
Several examples were made available, although not by the institutions themselves,
of poor use of English uncorrected by lecturers. One is provided as Appendix
A. Young teachers who had studied in the Christchurch College of Education said
in interview that they considered inadequate attention was paid in their teacher
education, and in most of the classrooms they encountered, to teaching grammar
and syntax. Language weaknesses in many student-teachers were revealed in an
internal minute in the Christchurch College of Education, where in 1994 and
1995 approximately 50 students failed to meet the standard stipulated at the
end of a 48-hour CS104 course in written language competencies. The course does
not seem to be very demanding and ought to be well within the capacity of every
legitimate college entrant, especially since all of them were supposed to have
successfully completed a written literacy test before entering tertiary study.
The Subject Advisory Committee on Primary Language at Christchurch was sensibly
alarmed that even more of the 1996 entrants, who were not required to complete
a written literacy test, would fail to meet the set standard, because they were
to have only 30 instead of 48 hours in the course.
Teaching of mathematics
The main difference between the language and mathematical weaknesses of many entrants into teacher education may be that large numbers acknowledge they are poor in the maths, whereas they fail to appreciate that their use of language is inadequate for full success as teachers. Anna Buzeika investigated the mathematics ability of students entering the Primary Teacher Training programme at the Auckland College of Education in 1991 and 1992. She uncovered an appalling level of mathematical ignorance. The brief test was simple and undemanding, being pitched at an upper-primary or lower-intermediate level of competence. The 1991 test had 12 questions, the 1992 test 15. In order to lessen supposed test anxiety and novelty effects, a version of the test was sent to all prospective students some weeks before the college test and interview, and students could bring relatives to sit with them during the test.
The results of the 338 students successful in gaining entry to the primary
programme at the Auckland College of Education ranged from a low of 5 percent
(16) incorrect to a high of 41 percent incorrect. The question found easiest
was "Matapa pays for a pizza with a $20 note. The pizza costs $16.35. How
much change should she get?" The question found hardest, with over two
in five would-be student-teachers unable to get it right, was "Sandals
cost $62 before GST. How much will the sandals cost including GST at 12.5%?"
Over one quarter could not decide correctly whether the height of a door in
a room is about 58cm, 108mm, 2m or 120cm. The college regarded a score of 5
or more out of 15 as satisfactory performance in this test.
Buzeika blamed the grim situation she disclosed on "traditional" teaching
of "a content based programme with little focus on the mathematical processes"
and urged that the solution lies in "a constructivist approach to the teaching
of mathematics" which requires teachers to "encourage presentation
and discussion of conflicting points of view together with the skills to work
toward consensus in which various mathematical ideas are co-ordinated"
This assessment seems to be as wrong as it could be. If more simple paper and
pencil tests of this type were administered, rather than cumbersome but less
illuminating assignments for unit standards, they would soon show what kinds
of mathematics teaching work best. The smart money would not be on constructivist
pedagogics. Simple competency tests would rapidly puncture the inflated rhetoric
in which teacher education is encased.
Evidence of a weird streak of irrationality in current teacher education is an article by Maggie Haynes of ACE on "some of the issues impacting on the provision of equitable programmes in mathematics by six beginning primary teachers." If being equitable is the main goal, then mathematical knowledge is bound to take a back seat. The ideological slant is spelled out thus: "The framework within which the data was collected was designed around the teachers' beliefs in constructivism and in their ability to implement an equitable mathematics programme according to those beliefs." You no longer have to subscribe to the Thirty-Nine Articles or be a confirmed member of the Church of England to graduate in the University of Oxford, but you may have to demonstrate beliefs in equitable constructivism and many other doctrines to graduate as a teacher in New Zealand in the 1990s! Haynes downplays mere "technical rationality which focuses on classroom competency and effectiveness demonstrated by measurable outcomes" and "practical action where the teacher analyses behaviours in terms of a value commitment to some belief framework". Instead she commends "critical reflection in which the teacher incorporates moral and ethical criteria such as whether important human needs are being met". It is an anticlimax to read the choicest reflections of Haynes' students. Examples provided for "technical rationality (classroom competency)" are "the children needed clearer directions on how to choose the equipment", which seems sensible enough, and "I know I aimed too high but it was interesting nevertheless. I still want to stick with my mixed ability groups though", which is perhaps less sensible.
Haynes wants her students to take the viewpoint, "I need to acknowledge all the experiences they had prior to school so that I can try to match their mathematics to their interests". Just imagine trying to list every experience every child had before starting school. The examples Haynes gives for "critical reflection (gender equity)" are "I tried to use the gender-neutral resources today like pegs and geo-boards", and "I don't like girls-only days but I ask who wants to go on the Mobilo and if there are girls with their hands up I choose them first".
A coursework requirement at the Christchurch College of Education in Mathematics 101 is to "show an awareness of current issues in mathematics education including gender equity and biculturalism." Similar stipulations are found in many other maths courses in teacher education. One young teacher who trained at the Christchurch college admitted in interview that she entered teacher education very weak in maths and science. She believes the college gave her insufficient support and seemed more interested in developing correct gender attitudes than clearer mathematical insights.
Tim McMahon of the Ministry of Education notes there has been less public controversy about the National Curriculum in mathematics than in every other area so far, yet maths teaching is probably weaker than most other areas. Given that it usually proves very difficult for children weak in maths at the age of 11 subsequently to make good their deficiencies during their secondary education, the importance of improving maths teaching during the formative years is paramount. This requires better mathematical levels among entrants to teacher education and greater effectiveness in teacher education courses. If this seems a vicious circle, it is nonetheless one that must be broken.
Aesthetic subjects
Suzanne Renner of the Dunedin College of Education has discussed overall inadequacies
of the generalist primary teacher in dance. She noted that "most trainees
entering Colleges of Education are likely to have little or no academic knowledge
about dance or experience of it as a disciplined and aesthetic form." She
found when she surveyed primary teachers in 11 Dunedin schools that "at
least half of the participants felt that their teacher-training did not prepare
them adequately for teaching dance in the curriculum", although all the
schools had dance as part of their curriculum. Her guarded conclusion was that:
Generalist-teacher training has not been totally sufficient or satisfactory
as preparation for dance in schools. The under-development of teachers and dance
at this level has, in turn, contributed to its limited development opportunities
for children.
One could substitute for 'dance' many subjects identified in the National Curriculum
as areas of essential learning.
Graham Parsons of the Massey University College of Education is pleased that art and music are now included in the National Curriculum requirements, but he argues cogently that separate courses with distinctive criteria for inclusion are needed for each discipline, not simply for a thematic or integrated arts course. He considers that many primary school children are seriously under-stretched in art, music, dance and drama. He surmises that there may have been actual deterioration in many places, although here as so often there is little reliable evidence to back up claims of improvement, deterioration or steady-state. When improvements can be identified, as in band performance in secondary schools, this is almost always because a gifted and energetic expert has exerted an influence.
Some young teachers with special musical interests said that they were disappointed with their music courses at ACE. Although they liked the music staff as individuals and took advantage of very good musical facilities, they finished up feeling very little confidence in their ability to teach music in the classroom.
6.4 Specialism and generalism in early childhood and primary teacher education
Many early childhood teacher education students believe and bemoan that they
are held in low esteem. Some at the Dunedin College of Education complained
of condescending and even denigratory attitudes towards them among students
in primary as well as secondary teaching. Primary student-teachers denied that
they had such superior attitudes, but complained in their turn that university
students and college students enrolled for secondary teaching often look down
on them. If these beliefs about low prestige are true, there may be several
causes. Some may be extrinsic, such as the tendency for secondary teaching salaries
to be higher than those for teaching younger children, but it may also be that
early childhood teaching courses currently demand a comparatively modest level
of substantive knowledge.
There is a wide range of practice, especially in early childhood courses, among
teacher education institutions in respect of the balance between generic courses
in teaching methods which emphasise common components across the curriculum
and more specialised courses based on the methodology of different subjects
or disciplines. The Dunedin and Wellington Colleges of Education would seem
to be at the highly generic end of the continuum and the University of Waikato
at the other.
At the Wellington College of Education the Early Childhood Handbook compares
its integrated curriculum to a:
… flax rope with the learner at the centre. The rope uncoils in an endless
spiral. As it uncoils it touches on three areas: Personal growth as a member
of the community; Early Childhood curriculum; and Professional Development.
The strands of the rope are theory, practice and the curriculum. Interwoven
through the strands are the threads of issues: Bi-culturalism, Partnership with
Parents/Whanau, Mainstreaming, Gender Equality, and Assessment and Evaluation.
Analysis of this confusion of thought would take one to the heart of many of
the weaknesses in teacher education at present. It is small wonder that, as
Diti Hill of ACE puts it, many early childhood graduates have a struggle to
"manage to keep that identity as a teacher clear or they end up as something
vague - as carers, nurturers or supervisors".
The early childhood senior staff at the University of Waikato School of Education are confident that, since 1990, they have provided a "high-calibre" integrated programme, in which "intellectual skills" are given the same importance as "caring skills". They are confident, too, that their courses stand up well on "correlates of quality" they deem to have been reliably established by relevant research. However, the best way to demonstrate quality and to raise morale in early childhood education would be a sharp improvement in average levels in reading and arithmetic among children taught by newly qualified teachers.
The problem extends beyond possible inefficiencies in early childhood and primary courses. The basic obdurate fact is that it is extremely difficult for generalist teachers to achieve a high level of competence in every major subject in the curriculum, let alone in all other desirable non-core subjects. An important step towards higher standards in early childhood and primary education would be to abandon the ideal of one teacher who seeks to integrate the entire curriculum and, instead, to introduce a simple but powerful division of labour.
For example, a model for large primary schools and early childhood centres that might well be considered is for two teachers to share classes of about 60 students, with one teacher concentrating on mathematics and science, and the other on language and the social sciences, and with additional specialist provision being made for physical education, art and music. It is true that there can be no such specialisation in one-teacher and other very small schools, but it is wrong to oppose progress where it can be made on the grounds that it cannot be implemented universally. This division of labour was implemented on a limited scale in the former USSR with what seem to have been good results, although objective reporting was hard to come by there.
Many parents are keen to spend good money on giving their young children a really proficient piano, violin, cricket, tennis, dance or drama teacher, yet in our schools we usually fail to provide anything near the level of expertise which could be made available at little cost to the public purse. Even more important is that, irrespective of whether or not a National Curriculum is prescribed, major improvements needed in the core subjects are unlikely to be achieved unless teachers are more knowledgable. But it is difficult for them to become sufficiently knowledgable across the full range of the curriculum. It might be suggested that these arguments would be more appropriately addressed to the schools, boards of trustees or the Ministry for Education, rather than the teacher education institutions. Yet it is teacher education which has been the power-house for advocacy of integration and the 'seamless web of knowledge'.
This advice will be unwelcome to many in early childhood centres and primary schools, as well as in teacher education. For example, the principal of a primary school expressed the belief that even at present college lecturers are too concerned to promote their own areas of curriculum knowledge, but insufficiently concerned with how to integrate these into topic and project work. 'Breakfasts' was offered as an example of an integrated topic used in the school in which mathematical, language, social and scientific skills are all fostered through group-based inquiry and discovery methods.
At best that approach is a pleasing sight, as children appear to be engaged in a wide variety of individual and group activities, with the teacher acting as a facilitator who directs them when necessary to relevant sources of information for their inquiries and discoveries. Unfortunately, such methods usually fail to ensure that most students progress in the mastery of knowledge as rapidly and thoroughly as is realistically possible for them. In any case, effective interdisciplinary work in the classroom can only be organised by teachers with adequate knowledge of the relevant disciplines to be integrated, a condition that often is not met. One would not wish to prevent primary schools from following this approach, but it is a matter of legitimate concern if it is the only one advocated by teacher educators. The key point is to establish effective ways of comparing the educational outcomes of different approaches.
Because early childhood and primary teachers necessarily have limited knowledge in almost every area of their teaching, they are more vulnerable than secondary teachers to ideological bandwagons. Provided the message is wrapped up in warm and empathetic child-centred language, and the deliverer seems both authoritative and politically correct, many early childhood and primary teachers are easily persuaded of the virtue of innovations, such as open plan classrooms, whole-book reading, inclusiveness, and many more. This mindset cannot easily be changed, but more specialised knowledge would reduce vulnerability to ideological quackery, as well as give teachers a more realistic range within which to achieve a high level of competence.
The problems that arise from demanding an excessive range of expertise of early childhood and primary teachers have been compounded by 'mainstreaming', the transfer of children previously in special classes into ordinary classrooms. This policy is based on the belief that children with extreme disabilities are on balance advantaged by being taught by non-specialist teachers in mixed-ability classes, together with highly able children, rather than being taught by teachers who specialise in helping to remedy a particular type of disadvantage. Wholesale adoption of 'inclusion' in New Zealand preceded any significant longitudinal case studies from which reliable evidence might have emerged and was driven largely by teacher educators. In current teacher education it seems that student-teachers are often presented with a contestable hypothesis about mainstreaming as though it were an uncontestable truth. However, some senior primary staff at the Dunedin College of Education concede that mainstreaming entails many difficulties for teachers, especially beginners, since up to eight different kinds of special provider may appear in a primary classroom and the young teacher has to be able to establish an effective working relationship with all of them.
6.5 Educational theory
Many philosophers of education have made distinctions between, on the one hand, training or instruction and, on the other, education. Their objective has generally been to point out a difference between learning a technique or mastering a specific body of information and gaining wider understanding of how such a technique or body of knowledge fits into wider schemes. Such distinctions are eminently worth consideration by all, especially by those who intend to make education their profession. A cognate distinction, very important for this report, is that between being a trainer or instructor on the one hand and a teacher in a fuller sense on the other. As with the previous distinction, that between being a trainer and a teacher is not an absolute one: the boxing trainer and the instructor in how to reverse a car safely require some understanding of what might be proper and improper, as well as efficient and inefficient, ways of carrying out their duties. Yet, although there may be an infinity of positions along a continuum, the broad distinction is one of central importance in teacher education.
To be a teacher in the full sense intended here, it is first necessary, as already argued, to possess adequate substantive knowledge. A good mathematics teacher must be at least a competent mathematician, and so on. At the same time a good maths teacher, as distinct from a good instructor in how to calculate compound interest, needs to know what relationships exist between different mathematical ideas and processes, and also how mathematical understanding can best be fostered among students. At a more general level, the good mathematics teacher will be interested in how understanding of mathematics relates to other kinds of understanding: to scientific understanding, say, and even to the development of the human mind as a whole. The more general the role of the teacher, and the more 'integrated' or 'interdisciplinary' the curriculum, the greater the need to consider links between different aspects of a subject and the relationship between different sorts of knowledge. It is in this sense that it can be seriously argued that the preparation of early childhood and primary teachers is an even more demanding undertaking than that of specialist teachers in secondary schools.
Given limitations of time and the wide range of kinds of worthwhile study that are highly relevant to teaching, there are bound to be contests about what should be given priority in time allotted and on issues of sequence. What is certain is that most intending teachers will significantly benefit from considering some fundamental questions about teaching and learning before they settle into the classroom routines of a lifetime. One naturally hopes that an ongoing and constructive relationship between theory and practice can be achieved, rather than that they are compartmentalised, but the best way to achieve such a relationship is itself inevitably a central area of contest in teacher education.
In general, those who favour school-based initiation into teaching emphasise the importance of practical skills, with many expressing doubt about the value of much offered in teacher education as educational theory. On the other hand, advocates of tertiary-based teacher education usually stress the importance of theoretical understanding, and often express fears that 'apprenticeship' models will lead to 'unreflective' practice. Unfortunately, some educational theories which are most loudly claimed to promote reflectiveness are, as will be demonstrated below, so defective as to create a hostile reaction to educational theory as a whole. However, no educational activity is devoid of theoretical assumptions, and the desirable alternative to corrupt educational theory is better educational theory, not none at all.
Here is a brief outline of what might be the central core of educational theory in teacher education. In the simplest terms, its elements may be reduced to two: consideration of means and of ends. Learning theory of various sorts, together with the methodologies of different subjects or disciplines, deals with means. By and large, although significant improvements are possible, these aspects are at an acceptable level in New Zealand teacher education. It is when we come to more fundamental issues concerning educational ends that the general situation is very unsatisfactory, and worse than a generation ago.
Two key questions about ends are 'which values should receive our highest priority?' and 'what knowledge is of most worth?'. The short account of the contestability of educational theories given in Chapter 1 (section 1.1) provides a good idea of how such a study of conflicting priorities in educational values can begin. Without an elementary study of what knowledge is of most worth and whether truth and knowledge are entirely culturally-relative, the treatment of race, gender and class in numerous courses in many institutions can be to little purpose. Unless we have considered whether or not knowledge may have intrinsic value and, if so, what kinds of knowledge come into this category, it is impossible to make coherent judgments about whether or not a group is, or has been, educationally disadvantaged. If there is no valid distinction between belief and knowledge, then it may be that it would be well for, say, Maori to continue to believe what their ancestors believed around 1700, or, for that matter, for all New Zealanders to continue to believe all the traditional lore of their various cultures. If there really is such a thing as knowledge, not merely 'knowledge' in the sense of what is culturally accepted, and if some knowledge is more powerful than other sorts (for example, if differentiation and integration are more powerful, though no more true, than simple addition and subtraction), then we have an educational agenda which contains some significant objective elements.
Without a proper introduction into basic issues in the philosophy of education, it is all too easy for students and teachers to embrace policy conclusions without considering what might be their justification. A very real problem is that what may seem at first glance to be the simplest and most obvious questions about education are also often among the very most difficult to resolve. Furthermore, many courses which introduce student-teachers to these questions have been poorly taught in the past by lecturers who may not have given them sufficient attention themselves but were directed to teach them. As a result, consideration of fundamental questions about aims and ends in education has often been dismissed as unimportant and irrelevant to actual teaching in classrooms. Yet many introductory courses in educational ideas, whether of the 'great thinkers' type or based on the conceptual analysis of the R.S. Peters and P.H. Hirst school, did in the fairly recent past succeed in posing fundamental questions which all too often at present are ignored. Even the sociology of education of the 1970s and 1980s has been largely replaced by courses about sexism and racism, whilst there is rarely any significant history of education or comparative education in current programmes in initial teacher education.
By and large beginning teachers in New Zealand seem to be more restricted and parochial in their acquaintance with significant educational ideas than were their predecessors a generation ago, when the standard initial teaching courses lasted two years only. To understand why this should have happened, recourse must be made again to the five clusters of educational theory. Child-centred approaches, whatever their other merits, often adopt very limited ideas of what is relevant to the interests of the child. To be sure the best child-centred thinkers started with the individual child, but they went on to ask fundamental questions about concepts of natural growth and children's best interests. However, many child-centred teacher educators confine their attention largely to the actual experiences and interests of children, especially to media and peer group influences. Instrumentalist educators are prone to take as given certain 'needs' of society, to concentrate on ensuring that these supposed needs are met, and to neglect consideration of whether some social realities ought not to be challenged rather than regarded as educational imperatives. Use of Delphi techniques to discover user preferences and then to base courses on them is a classical example of what educators from other clusters of educational theories (see section 1.1) criticise in restricted versions of instrumentalism.
Reconstructionist approaches are by no means necessarily confined to the 'here and now'. Marx himself, and Marxists of different schools such as Gramsci and Bourdieu, placed contemporary political and ideological struggles within wide historical and global contexts. Unfortunately, as is expanded upon below in an examination of some current theories that claim to be 'critical' and 'reflective', the most fashionable versions of reconstructionism in teacher education concentrate on how to remedy supposed injustices relating to race, gender or class without trying to identify what the educational goods are which these factors may unjustly make inaccessible. Conclusions are presented before the key questions have been understood in their contexts of time and place. Transcendentalist approaches are frequently narrow in that they devote attention to their own religious traditions to the neglect of other beliefs and values, but at least they offer in contemporary New Zealand a significantly different set of perspectives from those to which student-teachers have become habituated. It has been liberal educational theories which more than others have considered the 'here and now' in the context of the 'then and there', but these approaches have been increasingly condemned in teacher education in recent decades as irrelevant to the practical needs of teaching.
Inside New Zealand teacher education today a significant division is that which is represented in recent years by the terms 'reflective teacher' and 'effective teacher'. In ordinary language usage there is no contradiction between being reflective and effective, although 'reflectiveness' as a goal might lead to particular emphasis on critical analysis of teaching, whereas effectiveness as a goal might lead to concentration on whether students actually learn whatever it is the teacher is trying to teach, but neither would exclude the other. However, in current educational discourse the difference in emphasis between the two approaches is often very wide. Journal literature and course outlines suggest that the most influential types of education theory in teacher education at present are those described by their adherents as 'critical' or 'reflective'. Reflectiveness is not an obvious attribute like colour, height or weight. Indeed, it is more elusive than effectiveness, which can generally be estimated on the basis of results or consequences in relationship to time, effort and other inputs. Furthermore, the terms 'reflective practitioner', 'critical theorist' and 'action researcher' now possess strong ideological undertones and should be examined with care.
'Critical' and 'reflective' theory are branches of the wider ideological phenomenon of post-modernism and deconstructionism. Although part of their attack has been directed against naive confidence in the adequacy of untheorised experience, the main thrust has been against the main corpus of Western thought concerning education. These intellectuals deny that there is intrinsic value in the thought of the past, which they analyse as the product of specific interests: radical feminists reject it as male, Black Power advocates as white, and neo-Marxists as emanating from ruling classes. In consequence much of the main tradition of educational thought in the West is rejected as a burden from which students need to be set free. On the other hand, 'indigenous' thought - whether Maori, Aboriginal, Native American or the like - is usually treated with some reverence, as is thinking specially associated with women or the 'working class'.
Modest definitions of reflective teaching offered during the 1980s included that of the American Donald Cruikshank for whom it is, in essence, the extended ability to analyse one's own teaching and to ensure it matches methods already proved effective by empirical research. Donald Schon in similar vein considered we already have a good idea of what constitutes effective teaching and drew attention to "competency and artistry already embedded in skilful practice". Schon's conception of reflection takes account of 'tacit knowledge' and 'knowledge-in-action'. It requires some reconstruction and analysis of experience, so as to make it relevant to new contexts, but assumes that some permanent lessons are available from everyday untheorised experience.
Radical advocates of reflection as critical inquiry now commonly dismiss such educators as Cruikshank and Schon as unreflective. Susan Adler considers their "views of reflection" are mere "extensions of the technical, instrumental approaches. The emphasis is on doing the job effectively." What is needed, Adler holds, are 'transformative intellectuals', as the American neo-Marxist Henry Giroux describes himself and his friends, who will "be able to transcend everyday experience, to imagine things as they ought to be, not simply accept things as they are; and thus will create a just and humane society." The just and humane societies they envisage usually turn out to be collectivist utopias.
Colin Gibbs of the Massey University College of Education concluded in research for his Ph.D., awarded in 1994, that many of the beliefs of student-teachers he considers critical for teacher effectiveness remained resistant to change during exposure to practicum. He found that changes in their attitudes were not necessarily in the direction of which he approves. Apparently, Dr Gibbs did not consider that student-teachers might have good reasons for their beliefs and actions. Instead he tried to devise superior "interventionist supervisory strategies" capable of overcoming the backwardness he ascribes to them.
Gibbs distinguishes between "technical-instrumental" supervision which "focuses on teaching techniques", "personal growth" supervision which "focuses on the development of the student teacher's goals", and the true path of "critical" supervision which "focuses on classroom and school change". Critical supervisors engage in "idea interpretation" and "present perceived injustices regarding power, influence, and humanity, and offer ways in which student teachers may counteract these." However, Gibbs did not give examples of the injustices New Zealand teachers and their classes presently endure and which ought to be counteracted though interventionist strategies.
A striking feature of many self-styled critical theorists, action researchers and reflective practitioners is an ability to combine formal adherence to doctrines of equity and democracy with immense arrogance and condescension towards the benighted masses untouched by the pure gnosis of their theories. Calderhead, for example, argued that observation of classrooms in the early stages of teacher education is of little use because student-teachers cannot make sense of it and are unclear what they are even looking for. Copeland described the typical first teaching practice as "a bewildering kaleidoscope of people, behaviours, events and interactions only dimly understood." Winitzky and Arends claim that "field experiences may be ineffective at best, miseducative at worst", unless interpreted in the light of reflective theory.
From this perspective, matters do not get better as young teachers become older. Gibbs noted that Ben-Peretz and Rumney "suggest that it is not uncommon for associate teachers to rely heavily on the wisdom they have gleaned from experience with teaching". Should they neglect that experience and rely instead on the interpretations offered of critical theory? In the United States Adler and Goodman found that teachers are "often focused on learning the 'best' way and become impatient with inquiry oriented activities." The usual solution proposed is that associate teachers and similar ignoramuses should enrol in in-service courses taught by reflective academics.
Some teacher educators whose emphasis is on effective, rather than reflective, practice argue that consideration of fundamental educational disagreements should come after beginning teachers have sufficient experience to understand the practical implications of different policy decisions. Even if educational aims are contestable, they suggest, their resolution is not a matter for the beginner, whose task is to find on the job the best way to implement ends determined by others. Theoretical support for this position has been given by, among others, Kolb and Jamieson. The claim that there can be, let alone should be, completely 'untheorised' teaching is anathema, of course, not only to 'critical' theorists but to liberal educators.
The most significant current movement in the direction of 'effective' as against 'reflective' models in teacher education in New Zealand is the Auckland College of Education's new three-year Bachelor of Teaching degree course. Lexie Grudnoff, Dean of Pre-Service Teacher Education, writes of "the emphasis on being an effective practitioner" in the new structure. Most of the non-professional elements in the former four-year degree structure, including liberal studies, have been rejected at ACE as largely irrelevant to effective practice.
In interviews for this report some ACE staff were dismissive of the value of
non-professional studies. One remarked he had at one time believed some university
claims about the value and relevance to future teachers in a 'liberal arts approach',
but that his subsequent experience led him to conclude that such claims were
'merely academic' and there was nothing in such studies which developed students'
minds any more than courses related directly to teaching. This approach is similar
to that of 'grounded-theory', which holds that practice itself will generate
the most important theoretical issues and reveal the most relevant and practicable
ways in which they might be resolved. ACE staff strenuously deny that the emphasis
on practice in the new B.Ed. is likely to reduce students' capacity for reflection.
Whether or not ACE has taken the best path remains to be seen, but the decisions
were taken after long and careful consideration, and it should clearly lie within
the capacity of each teacher education institution to take decisions of this
kind, rather than that a uniform pattern should be imposed on them.
6.6 Liberal knowledge
Many schools look for teachers who have wide-ranging intellectual and cultural
interests, as well as classroom proficiency. This may be because they suppose
such teachers will prove superior transmitters of their own disciplines and/or
because of a belief that students may catch from them a concern for cultivated
studies and the arts. Although in this report first priority in teacher education
is given to substantive knowledge related to curricular subjects teachers will
be required to teach, it fully acknowledges that this is best conveyed by teachers
of ample general culture.
Liberal educators have also commended, in addition to specialist subject knowledge
and the 'disciplines of education', a broad base in a range of intrinsically
worthwhile forms of knowledge. Some courses, often termed 'liberal arts', based
on this belief have been criticised for lack of intellectual challenge, especially
on the grounds that many of them omitted mathematics and science and 'hard'
disciplines. During the 1980s criticism was levelled against the Christchurch
and Wellington Colleges of Education for devoting too much attention to liberal
studies of marginal relevance to classroom teaching. The former Christchurch
Principal, Colin Knight, conceded:
… in the new competitive climate it was necessary to provide a curriculum
that developed the vital competencies required by high quality teachers. Non-essential
courses which had been added during the halcyon days of the 80s were removed.
Cycling, skiing and Italian cuisine were the type of courses scrutinised. A
curriculum that offered more courses in education outside the classroom than
in mathematics or Maori would not assure potential employers that students were
spending time in the college developing basic classroom competencies.
However, the courses which came under question were hardly those that most liberal
educators have considered of central value for the full development of the mind.
Given a three-year basic programme in current teacher education, it would seem feasible to combine sound technical efficiency with more than a mere smattering of a wider cultivation. But the rival claims of depth and breadth are not easy to reconcile, and it would be foolish to suggest that any solution will be final. What is possible, and necessary, is ongoing concern with the balance of courses, in the light of clear educational objectives determined by the institutions and of publicly accessible evidence, derived from objective assessment, of the level of success in attaining them.
6.7 Transmission of public information
There are often pressures on schools to transmit information to students which is perceived to be of wide public importance, such as education about drugs and AIDS. Sometimes such courses seem of doubtful value: what needs to be known about avoiding AIDS can easily be acquired in about 20 minutes at the outside. Drugs education often consists of activists assuring students that there is no difference in principle between different sorts of drugs, and that many should be legalised, except tobacco smoking, which should perhaps be banned.
There is a paucity of evidence to show that sex education reduces pregnancy or sexually transmitted disease rates, or that drugs education reduces drugs abuse, although schools may well be the best places to teach road safety, swimming and other useful knowledge and skills. What is a worry is the ease with which many teachers give up 'normal' time for many sorts of extra-curricular activity, despite frequent claims about lack of time to teach the basic curriculum. Teacher educators should be cautious about granting precious time to what may prove to be short-lived enthusiasms. What proves to be needful will probably not take long to acquire and is likely to be largely situation-specific, whereas prospective teachers have many things to learn of a more fundamental and enduring character which are not easily acquired 'on the job'.
6.8 Teachers-only university courses?
Should special substantive courses be offered for intending teachers? This question touches on relationships between university courses and teacher education and on the concurrent-consecutive alternatives.
A major argument for placing teacher education in the general context of higher education has been to provide student-teachers with wider access to the culture of universities. Liberal educators have generally favoured this line of argument, and fear that separate courses for student-teachers are likely to be less demanding, of lower prestige, and be taught by less qualified lecturers. On the other hand, it cannot be assumed that the content of a first university degree necessarily constitutes the most appropriate knowledge basis for secondary, let alone primary, teachers.
Many university departments do not even claim to offer broad-based courses, but organise courses largely on the basis of special research interests of academic staff. With university promotion and scholarly esteem dependent on research publications in often very narrow areas, there is a reluctance among some university academics to teach broad courses. As a result, although there may be some very valuable intrinsic content and considerable intellectual stimulation in such courses, they are unlikely to be optimal preparation for teaching, say, history or English in schools.
Science degree courses naturally concentrate almost exclusively on the concerns of a specific discipline, whereas the science teacher typically has to teach integrated or interdisciplinary courses in the first three years of secondary schools before teaching specialised physics, chemistry or biology courses in senior classes. Many graduate physicists lack basic information and concepts needed to teach the biology components of junior secondary science courses. Biology graduates are often deficient in relevant physics. Thus some university courses might well be specially directed towards future teachers, although these might also appeal to other undergraduates who do not intend to teach. The aim of these comments is not to encourage governments to press universities to shape their courses in one way or another, but rather to sensitise universities to problems that arise if too many courses are of too specialised a character. In general, in Britain, Australia and the United States as well as New Zealand, there has been little research or systematic thinking about the relationship between standard university courses and the substantive knowledge most desirable in secondary teaching in those same subjects.
6.9 Research in teacher education
During the 1990s teacher educators have become more engaged in forms of research than in the past. This is in part because mergers between colleges of education and university departments of education have put new pressures on staff from the former to show that they can compete in research with their new colleagues in the latter. However, the level of concern for research appeared uneven among the teacher education institutions visited during the preparation of this report.
At the highly enthusiastic end of the continuum are the University of Waikato School of Education and Victoria University of Wellington's Department of Teacher Education. Professor Noeline Alcorn at Waikato considers that being part of a university has had very beneficial effects on teacher education in Hamilton: academic rigour has been enhanced, and much larger numbers of staff are engaged in research at masters and doctoral levels. Staff attend many more conferences than in the past and are expected to present papers at those they attend. Professors Alcorn and Ramsay also hold that teaching practice is now much more 'informed' than in pre-university merger days, and they would repudiate any suggestion that their department's greater emphasis on research has been at the expense of its concern with teaching practice and relationships with schools. The School of Education at Waikato now has its own scholarly journal. This expansion of staff research may have led to higher expectations of student performance, but no research appears to have been undertaken to compare the performance and expectations of students taught by teacher educators who carry out serious educational research with the performance and expectations of those who are taught by others.
Some commentators erroneously believe that classroom-based 'action research' is intrinsically less likely to be ideologically motivated than is macro-sociological research about education. However, the American radical educationists Zeichner and Gore are frank in their admission that their aim in action research with pre-service teachers is to focus attention on 'social justice', the code name for the agenda of political correctness. They express disappointment in one study that they found that "these mostly white, middle class, female, unpoliticized teachers in unpoliticized schools failed to reflect on the moral and political implications of teaching." In other words those women teachers thought and voted the wrong way even after the courses.
Student-teachers at Victoria University of Wellington frequently have action
research commended to them. In course ED 352, if they are able to translate
its arcane discourse into everyday language, they may learn from W. Carr and
S. Kemmis that:
Action research rejects the positivist notions of rationality, objectivity,
and truth. For the action researcher, the end is the improvement of practice;
for the positivist researcher, the end is theoretical completeness and practical
application of findings. The action researcher sees the relationship between
theory and practice as dialectical, with both being developed in the historical
process of research and action; the positivist researcher treats theory and
practice ahistorically, as if correct theories and correct action could be defined
universally (p. 235).
The interests of action research are not in the development of abstract theoretical
languages communicating universal truths, nor in scepticism, proclaiming universal
uncertainty. Rather its interest is in developing a theoretical position grounded
in the real life of social practice on the one hand and a critical theory of
society on the other (p. 239).
This kind of action research may be described as 'emancipatory' because the
group itself takes responsibility for its own emancipation from the dictates
of irrational or unjust habits, customs, precedents, coercion, or bureaucratic
systemization ... it also has the aim of emancipation of participants in the
action from the dictates or compulsions of tradition, precedent, habit, coercion
or self-deception (p. 242).
Examples of traditions, precedents and habits from which 'action research' will
emancipate us, but in which other sorts of research will leave us immured, are
coyly avoided. However, we can be assured that they do not include dictates
or compulsions of tradition or precedent such as those associated with the Treaty
of Waitangi.
Several Massey staff, mainly former Palmerston North College of Education lecturers, are dubious about the goodness of fit between research and the rest of the work of teacher education. They consider some indifferent teacher educators are engaged in research with little if any direct and immediate relevance to their professional duties, whereas some good teacher educators carry out little or no significant original research. This observation raises a useful caution. It is a worthwhile attribute in teacher educators to be able to carry out independent research, whether quantitative, statistical and experimental, or 'qualitative' and 'action-based', but there is little reason to think that this will spill over into their being better supervisors of teaching practice or better lecturers. There are good grounds for supposing that a wider knowledge of educational thought might be more appropriate for teacher educators than immersion in narrowly focused empirical research. The gravest weakness in higher degree studies in teacher education is the narrow foundation on which many are built.
6.10 Recommendations
1 Although the content balance of courses is essentially contestable and should not be subject to governmental control, there is an overwhelming case for giving highest priority in teacher education to ensuring that future teachers have adequate substantive knowledge in the subjects to be taught. This is true not only for subject specialists in secondary schools but also for primary and early childhood teachers. Significant improvements could be made in teaching reading, mathematics, science, social sciences, and other curricular areas, if a large part of current ideological impedimenta were discarded and more time spent on substantive knowledge and how best to impart it.
2 The government and teacher education institutions should cooperate in encouraging greater teacher specialisation in primary schools, and to a lesser extent in early childhood centres. A better model for large primary schools than current practice could well be for a double class to be shared by two teachers, one specially qualified in language and the social sciences, and the other in mathematics and sciences, with further specialist support in music, art and physical education.
3 Secondary schools and teacher educators should provide more feedback as to whether they find typical university first-degree courses the best preparation for their needs. Although there are some sensible objections to the provision by universities of courses of a broader and more general character, with consequent deferment of narrow specialisation, many universities might well modify some courses to meet the needs of secondary schools better if they knew what these needs are.
4 Teachers should have sound knowledge of the main educational disciplines, namely the philosophy of education, the history of education, the sociology of education, educational psychology and learning theory, and comparative education. It will be an important challenge to school-based modes of teacher education that they find ways of cooperating with tertiary institutions to ensure that practical experience is illuminated by consideration of the fundamental educational questions to which current arrangements are but one of many possible responses.
5 New Zealand's teachers should themselves be liberally educated, with a broad knowledge basis. Given that in education at every level there is far more worth knowing than there is time to teach and learn, there must continue to be tensions between depth and breadth and contestation about the optimum balance of kinds of knowledge in teacher education courses. Such decisions should be made by teacher education institutions, not by the government. However, the prime importance of knowledge and the constraints of time should constantly be in the minds of teacher educators and should deter them from trivial pursuits.
6 Teacher educators should be encouraged to undertake research, but this should
not be mandatory. Teacher educators who undertake research should not be pressured
into restricted fields, such as 'action research' concerned with classroom interaction.
Teacher education also benefits from the participation of scholars who extend
the boundaries of their substantive disciplines and who concern themselves with
ways in which this can be speedily incorporated into school curricula.
CHAPTER 7
QUALITY CONTROL
7.1 The educational case for assessment
Most educational follies are based on half-truths or elevation of a single truth to the status of the only relevant truth. This has happened in assessment and evaluation.
It is true that some important sorts of understanding are not easily quantified or measured, and that refined judgments of quality can be made only by people with a depth of relevant knowledge. For example, it is easy to provide rules for writing a sonnet and to reject verse forms that do not meet the clear criteria for their production, but there is no mechanical or quantitative method whereby one can distinguish between Shakespeare's "Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?" and sheer banality. This is one fundamental problem with the approach adopted in the NZQA unit standards.
When education, like literature or the theatre in this respect, is in a healthy condition, interested outsiders are generally willing to accept the criteria adopted by apparently expert insiders, although they naturally want such criteria to be made as clear as possible. Sometimes, however, a field is taken over by groups whose criteria and/or methods of application seem bizarre and unconvincing to concerned outsiders. Sometimes it seems that no coherent criteria are being applied. Unfortunately, responses to highly unsatisfactory situations may themselves also be gravely flawed. The response by the NZQA to a void in educational assessment was to develop check lists which might detect and expose omissions.
The inability of mechanical or check-list systems to evaluate higher levels
of quality is used by root-and-branch opponents of educational assessment, such
as those considered below, to further their cause. However, the defect of the
NZQA unit standards is not that they are of no use whatsoever, but that they
cannot do what is most required in judgments of educational achievement. Simple
competency checks are, indeed, a necessary feature of quality control in education,
although not a sufficient one by any means. We need to develop a wider range
of evaluatory methods rather than discard some because they have only limited
effect. As the English philosopher Antony Flew put it:
No one can be sincerely trying to teach anything, except in so far as there
is some way of assessing whether the lessons have been learnt; and except in
so far as the teachers themselves are constantly concerned to monitor progress
in learning, and to react accordingly. To set out to teach something the mastery
of which is so impossible to detect that there are and can be no acceptable
tests of your teaching success or teaching failure is about as sensible as The
Hunting of the Snark.
Whether our concern is with the advancement of learning or with practical policies,
we have always to be ready to recognise our mistakes, and then to learn from
them. In Popper's terms, we should proceed by the method of conjectures and
refutations. Even if we are not forever actually testing and rechecking, rationality
requires that we are at least always ready, when occasion arises, to criticise
our conjectures and attend to criticisms from others. When and to the extent
that we are shown to have been mistaken we must, and the sooner the better,
make appropriate changes.
This report advocates choice and diversity in education, not uniformity imposed from the centre. But it is important to note that concern for freedom of choice is by no means incompatible with quality control. In fact, the reverse can be the case: central control can co-exist with absence of effective quality control. All teacher educators, whatever their convictions, need to be able to demonstrate to themselves and others how well their own students understand and can carry out their ideas and methods. Student-teachers, too, on practicums and subsequently on permanent appointment as teachers, must be able to demonstrate to themselves and others how much school students have learned from them.
In teacher education aims and priorities should be public knowledge. If, for example, teacher educators believe it does not matter much whether school students can spell accurately or understand grammatical forms, provided that they have a wide-ranging appreciation of literature, it is important this be known. There may well be prospective student-teachers and boards of trustees who share these ideas. Even so, it is incumbent on teacher educators with such a belief to provide evidence that school students who undergo the education they recommend do acquire a wide-ranging appreciation of literature, high self-esteem, or whatever their priority objectives may be.
Similarly, if teacher educators consider spelling and grammatical forms are important, but best picked up informally through project work and free writing, spelling and grammar still need to be assessed so as to put that belief to the test. Whatever receives educational priority, there are appropriate ways in which teachers and teacher educators may assess the extent to which their teaching has been successful. In every case, too, it is not only necessary to know that some progress is being made by students towards desired educational goals, but how it compares with progress made by similar students taught by different methods.
In recent years in Western societies many educators who regard themselves as radical and progressive have become hostile to formal testing and examinations, and to almost every conceivable form of educational assessment and evaluation. But, if we take a wider historical perspective, we find that this has not always been the case. Many radicals and revolutionaries in the past welcomed open public competition through examinations as a vast improvement on nepotism and other sorts of favouritism.
The Italian Antonio Gramsci, perhaps the most profound Marxist thinker about education of the twentieth century, was an enthusiastic advocate of public examinations. When his nephew took his first school examination in 1932, Gramsci wrote: '"The first exam is a very important thing in life. Franco can say now that he has made his entry into manly society and has become a citizen because he has made an effort to let other people see what he has got to show for his age." He wrote from a Fascist prison to his elder son: "Now you have marks given you every month, it will be easier to see how you are getting on in general." When in 1923 Mussolini's Minister of Education, Gentile, anticipated later radical-progressive practice by expanding the Italian examination system to assess creativity and character as well as factual knowledge, Gramsci opposed the measure on the grounds that the less objective the testing, the more the working class or peasant child would be at a disadvantage.
On routine and application in education, Gramsci wrote:
In education one is dealing with children in whom one has to inculcate certain
habits of diligence, precision, poise (even physical poise), ability to concentrate
upon specific subjects, which cannot be acquired without the mechanical repetition
of disciplined and methodical acts. … It is also true that it will always
be an effort to learn physical self-discipline and self-control; the pupil has
in effect to undergo a psycho-physical training. Many people have to be persuaded
that studying too is a job, and a very tiring one, with its own particular apprenticeship
- involving muscles and nerves as well as intellect. It is a process of adaptation,
a habit acquired with effort, tedium and even suffering. If one wishes to produce
scholars, one has to start at this point and apply pressure throughout the educational
system in order to succeed in creating those thousands or hundreds or even dozens
of scholars of the highest quality who are necessary to every great civilisation.
If one analyses the reasons for the collapse of the communist political order
in the former USSR and eastern Europe in the late 1980s, it cannot be alleged
that a weak educational system was among them. Despite deformations by ideological
propaganda in literature, history and the social sciences, the states of 'real
socialism' extended sound education over a broad curriculum to a wide range
of students, with a very traditional teacher-centred or subject-centred methodology.
The breakdown of centralist command planning in those states was not the result
of a deficient educational base. Rather it suggests that, even with well-educated
personnel, one cannot plan the future in detail from a bureaucratic centre.
The most distinguished neo-Marxist, Pierre Bourdieu, noted that in France traditional
methods of assessment "unsettled working class pupils less and attracted
the scorn of the élite precisely because it was more explicitly and technically
methodical." He added:
We have here two concepts of culture and of the techniques of transmitting it
which, in the form of corporate interests, are still visible in the clash between
teachers emerging from the elementary schools and those following the more traditional
route through the secondary system. We should also have to examine the role
played for teachers by the pious horror of cramming for examinations as opposed
to 'general education'. Cramming is not an absolute evil when it consists simply
of realising that pupils are being prepared for an examination and of making
them aware of this. … Those who have by right the necessary manner are
always likely to dismiss as laborious and laboriously acquired values which
are only of any worth when they are innate. … Thus, to take examinations
as an example, it is quite clear that the more vaguely what they ask for is
defined, whether it be a question of knowledge or of presentation, and the less
specific the criteria adopted by the examiners, the more they favour the privileged.
Pierre Bourdieu figures more prominently in New Zealand teacher education than most social or educational thinkers. For example, at the Christchurch College of Education in Paper 393: Curriculum Studies, for the National Diploma of Business Education, an essay set in 1995 was: "Relate Bourdieu's theory of cultural capital to educational performance in NZ". Bourdieu offers some valuable insights into relationships between societies and educational systems, but courses influenced by him seem to ignore what is most valuable in his work. On the other hand his unconvincing theory of cultural reproduction has become a Morton's Fork which enables radical intellectuals to find the ruling classes guilty of at least one great evil: either they exclude the masses from the culture they themselves possess and hold to be its highest form, in which case they are guilty of unfair discrimination, or they try to get the rest of society to adopt their culture, in which case they are guilty of indoctrination and cultural imperialism.
7.2 Antagonism to assessment
Despite the good sense provided by Gramsci and Bourdieu, many reconstructionist teacher educators in New Zealand have been prominent in campaigns over the last two decades against testing and assessment. A 1987 article in New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies by Professor Anthony H. McNaughton of the Education Department of the University of Auckland was entitled 'Are National Examinations at Secondary Schools Rotten to the Core?' His answer to his rhetorical question was resoundingly and unequivocally in the affirmative. Such an approach is essentially one of 'revolutionary defeatism', in which militant rhetoric is combined with an abject structural determinism and pessimism about the potentiality of the mass of children. A penetrating critique of this defeatism in Australia, but with international implications, is Alan Barcan's Sociological Theory and Educational Reality: Education and Society in Australia since 1949 (New South Wales University Press, 1993).
Whereas some earlier radicals believed that equality of educational opportunity
would itself reduce differentials in achievement between different groups, it
became obvious from the late 1960s onwards that comprehensive education, mixed-ability
classes, bussing of children between racially segregated neighbourhoods, early
intervention programmes and a host of other strategies were not significantly
lessening group disparities. Even within ethnically homogenous populations differences
in average educational achievement between different social groups remained
wide.
The most destructive ideological response to continued group disparities of
educational achievement has been to denounce as unfair and culturally biased
all tests and examinations which show some groups to be achieving better on
average than others. Instead of patiently seeking ways to improve the standards
of educationally under-achieving groups, the radical solution was to ban any
evidence that they were under-achieving. Instead, all students would only be
assessed against their 'own' standard. Even this, in its form of 'value-added'
evaluation which takes existing cultural factors into account, has been denounced
by the politically correct as unfair to low achievers.
By the late 1970s teachers at all levels in several Western countries had obtained greater autonomy than in the past in respect of what they taught and how they taught it. They also had the benefit of higher real expenditure per student, smaller classes and lengthier teacher education than ever before. Yet during the same years there was a significant reduction in public information about learning outcomes. Since ordinary observation did not suggest that school leavers were age-for-age better informed or more gifted in personal skills than in the past, many people across a wide range of political opinion became increasingly sceptical about educationists' rhetoric.
The reaction in Britain began before the election of the Thatcher Conservative government in 1979 with the doubts of her Labour predecessor James Callaghan as to whether his grandchildren were getting as good an education as his children had enjoyed. In Australia it was a Labour government in Canberra which refused to take seriously any longer school-based assessment devised by educationists. A left-wing trade unionist, Laurie Carmichael, headed one of the three influential reports (Mayer, Finn and Carmichael) which sought to replace school-based monitoring of student achievement with industrial systems used in apprenticeship.
In the face of similar widespread concern expressed in New Zealand, many in the education industry decided that some reassurances had to be provided to the public. Considerable efforts have been made to introduce the appearance of rigour into educational assessment, but without the reality. Teacher education has been in the forefront of such manoeuvres, although its centre and focus have been the NZQA. Little progress has been made so far, however, in re-establishing adequate assessment procedures for educational standards.
Deborah Willis of the Education Department of the Victoria University of Wellington claimed in 1994 that "although not widely supported by educationalists external examinations at the senior school level seem firmly entrenched in New Zealand." Schools in her view exhibit what radical academics cited by her describe as "a culture of testing", "an outmoded assessment culture" and "a technicist approach". 'Technicist' approaches are seen by Wills as very dangerous, since they lead students to concentrate on what at present they do not know as well as they ought and encourage teachers to think about ways of enabling students to know it better. What teachers should be doing, according to J. Blackmore of Australia's Deakin University, cited by Willis, is promoting "a dialogue between those actively participating in the learning environment." Such dialogues would be more fruitful if based on objective knowledge of student strengths and weaknesses.
It was apparent at a 1996 conference on assessment in Dunedin that 'norm-referencing' has become a synonym for educational fascism among many teacher educators. Some speakers held that norm referencing entails that a set percentage of students or candidates must fail any and every test or examination. However, teachers ought not to confine themselves to criterion-referenced tests. Sometimes the objective of testing is only to find out whether individual students have achieved a set of objectives in a clearly defined domain, and for this purpose criterion-referenced tests are appropriate and norm-referenced tests are not. At other times teachers legitimately want to be able to compare the average achievement of their own or some other particular group of students with that of an extensive peer group.
Beverley Bell and Bronwen Cowie of the Centre for Science, Mathematics and
Technology Education Research, University of Waikato, have been leading critics
of the possibility of objectivity in measures of student achievement. Cowie
and Bell claim that " … new learning theories have recognised that
knowledge cannot be transmitted, that each learner actively constructs their
(sic) own meaning and that intelligence is not innate, limited or fixed."
Yet knowledge does require transmitters, and meanings are not personal in a
strong epistemological sense, although learning can only be achieved by individuals,
not by a collective or group mind as is sometimes suggested in respect of Maori
and other 'indigenous learners'. Moreover, innate and genetic elements, as well
as environmental and experiential influences, do affect intellectual capacity.
The most direct way to oppose assessment of knowledge is to deny that knowledge
itself exists, or else always to replace knowledge by 'knowledge', truth by
'truth', facts by 'facts', data by 'data' and so forth. In these situations
we normally encounter some form of the 'Paradox of the Liar'. Post-modernists,
critical theorists and radical constructivists assert that there can be no objective
knowledge or certain truths, since supposedly factual judgments are inevitably
distorted by personal or group characteristics related to race, culture, gender
or class. Yet the same post-modernists, critical theorists and radical constructivists
seem convinced that their own claims are objective and true. If they can transcend
what they have earlier classified as universal limiting conditions on truth,
knowledge and objectivity, why cannot the rest of us?
Cowie and Bell assert that "appropriate formative assessment must support a social constructivist view of learning." They uphold the view of Gipps and William that "there is no equality of opportunity to set and achieve within an exam" and argue that results have to be consonant with "moral justice and social justice" and "fair and just for all groups" if equity is to be satisfied. They travel far from sensible concern as to why some individuals and groups, whether identified by gender, culture, temperament, social class, etc., do less well than others on various tests, to the nonsense that tests and assessments are invalid if they reveal significant disparities in group means.
Bell and Cowie regard formative as only a little less suspect than summative assessment. They reject as groundless the claim that "formative assessment is intended to enhance students' learning", since they hold that "any information on their understanding is unstable and of transitory accuracy and trustworthiness." The sensible conclusion would be that, precisely because children's understandings do change, we need to know at what rate and in response to what sorts of teaching and learning experiences they change. And we need to preserve and make productive use of our findings. In New Zealand, however, the Cowie and Bell view contributes to the deplorable unwillingness of many schools and teacher educators to obtain and retain evidence of student achievement, a reluctance which makes it difficult for them or anyone else to compare the effects of different teaching methods.
Radical constructivism, as advocated by Bell and Cowie, has gained widespread influence in New Zealand teacher education. One Dunedin student was vehement that it is more important to teach school students how to learn than to learn anything in particular. He did not want merely to "churn out students who were capable of solving problems in maths and science, but students who have a positive attitude towards maths and science."
7.3 Assessment of student-teachers
Assessment and evaluation of substantive knowledge, whether related to curricular subjects or educational theory, need in principle be no different from that in tertiary education as a whole. The full range of available assessment tools should be used: summative as well as formative testing, norm-referenced as well as criterion-referenced testing, essays and multiple choice questions, and so on.
Systems of academic audit are in place in each institution, but some seem to have little concern with actual content of courses or standards achieved in them. Sometimes a monitoring group identifies an apparent prima facie error in assessment. For example, Adrienne Alton-Lee was queried when at the University of Canterbury for giving all the students in one of her courses the 'A' distinction grade. Overall, however, it seems that most attention is on administrative minutiae rather than on fundamental issues of content. Some gnats are strained, but some camels are swallowed.
At Waikato, Professor Noeline Alcorn said during an interview that she believes there are sufficient quality controls in the guidelines for what students are expected to achieve. She argues that "because of changes in knowledge, it is difficult to compare what students are doing now with what they were doing ten years ago." Critics suspect that if teacher educators were fully convinced that improvements could be demonstrated, then very frequent comparisons would be made. In fact, implicit comparisons are common in claims of improvement on many fronts.
Some staff at Waikato argue that privacy legislation now makes it very difficult for institutions to keep students' work for comparison with future or past cohorts and revealed that at Waikato teaching practice records are destroyed after students complete their courses. Massey University regulations require that supervisors destroy their records on thesis students after six months. These seem further examples of refusing to make proper use of information and evidence on the grounds that improper use is possible. No students had apparently ever been asked for permission to allow their work to become part of a permanent archive. It seems unlikely that many would refuse, if asked.
Assessment was a frequent subject of complaint, not of too much but of too
little, in the Windows research undertaken by Renwick and Vize. In general students
became increasingly dissatisfied with assessment procedures as they progressed
through their courses. Only 11 of 74 third-year students made positive comments
about college assessment. Criticisms included claims that assessment did not
accurately reflect performance, that the colleges failed to enforce standards
and did not deal satisfactorily with inadequate students, and that the assessment
system failed to provide students with sufficient written documentation to help
them compete successfully for jobs. One second-year student at the Wellington
College of Education commented on assessment procedures:
It annoyed me personally, and I know other people, that you could be conscientious
and do all the work and attend every lecture and hand in your assignments on
time and get the same tick in the satisfactory column as somebody who you know
had only been there haphazardly and you knew they were late and got big extensions
and you were not given any extra credit for that, or they weren't given any
extra negative credit (sic) for that.
I tell you what, no student runs it (the course) down because after that evaluation
the lecturer has to put on their evaluation. The lecturer should give you their
evaluation of you … and then you should give your evaluation. This way
round, we are all human, and if I got a note from a student saying 'what a crappy
teacher you are and I wish you weren't here', I tell you it would be really
hard to write a positive comment about that student.
Clive McGee noted that at Waikato education students in 1994 called for an honours
strand to be built into the new B.Ed., "in order to recognise high achievement".
He added that this was "a far cry from the 1970s when student teachers
campaigned to remove a 'distinction' category from their qualification."
Several young teachers interviewed for this report who had trained at the Christchurch College of Education said that there was inadequate control by lecturers over standards of work, so that the better students felt little challenge. They also considered that too many lecturers were concerned to propagate their own personal views and idiosyncrasies. They complained of trivial assignments, most of which made far fewer demands than those posed in their non-education degrees. They became disillusioned early on in their courses. They made scornful references to students who gained the 'B' grade, not merely a bare pass, despite almost complete non-attendance in courses and, so far as could be ascertained, derisory effort on assignments.
There was heartfelt agonising among these former Christchurch students over inconsistency in the college. One student was refused leave of absence to take a music examination, even though it was part of a structure stretching over several years, yet other students were persistent absentees without any apparent adverse effects. Other young teachers who had graduated from the Auckland College of Education stated in interview that some lecturers boasted that no students failed their courses because they were such splendid teachers and their courses so effective. However, interviewees offered very different explanations for high pass rates.
7.4 NZQA and unit standards
The establishment of the NZQA was widely welcomed outside the education industry as a turning of the tide, after two decades in which assessment of educational attainment had been attenuated and information available to the interested public reduced. However, given the continued influence of anti-assessment ideologies within education, it should be no surprise that the NZQA has proved largely ineffective in defining educational standards or in helping to restore or improve them.
The unit standards are of a 'Janus' character, offering contrasting messages to people in different rooms. NZQA assures the public that the application of unit standards will reduce slackness in the educational system and help achieve defensible defined standards, yet assures teachers at the same time that whatever they have been doing in the past can readily be adjusted to the unit standards system and that no new teaching demands will be made upon them, apart from the time taken to fill in a larger number of forms than in the past. In Australia, 'key competencies' have played a similar role to unit standards in New Zealand.
Susan Hitchener notes that "there are no clear statements about the standards of instruction at institutions" to which NZQA is empowered to give or withhold accreditation. In fact, it would be dangerous and probably unproductive for NZQA to try to construct such 'clear statements', since it is far better for potential employers of teachers to decide about comparative quality of institutional preparation. Yet much of the rhetoric of NZQA implies that can it actually speak with authority about standards of instruction.
The Teacher Education Advisory Group (TEAG) of the NZQA initially proposed a teaching qualification of 140 unit standards. This was widely regarded as unmanageable and subsequent work culled the standards to some 20 or so. The core unit standards identified in teacher education provide a sensible enough overview of aspects of professional practice which can reasonably be expected of a beginning teacher, but in themselves they lack any capacity to validate standards. Professor Noeline Alcorn has noted very accurately that "it is the illusion of certainty about standards and quality that the Framework offers." Her colleagues at the University of Waikato, Alan Hall and Paul Keown, observe that, "Although the unit standards and performance criteria identified the student tasks, they said little about qualitative aspects of performance."
Alan Hall and Paul Keown note that the works of Irwin, Elley, Hall (Cedric), Hager, Peddie and Tuck, have questioned whether the unit standard system is "appropriate for programmes of professional preparation and liberal study where the competence to be tested involves the mastery, integration and application of sophisticated ideas which do not readily lend themselves to being reduced to a series of outcomes in the form required by the Authority". Hall and Keown emphasise the high costs in staff time if the teacher education unit standards are fully applied. They found the compliance costs high in secondary schools. However, in teacher education, unit standards frequently do not coincide with existing courses, or even with established distinctive academic domains. A student-teacher's competence on a unit standard might require mastery of performance criteria in more than one curriculum area, and it may therefore be unclear which lecturers would be held to have the relevant professional responsibility to make final decisions as to whether criteria were satisfied or not. For such reasons, they believe compliance costs would be far greater than in secondary schools if the system were applied in a serious way.
The concerns raised by Hall and Keown were underlined by Robyn Baker and Dugald Scott of the Wellington College of Education in their analysis of the core standard for teacher education, Facilitate Learning through Lessons and Lesson Sequences. This unit standard has six elements or learning outcomes:
1. Organise settings for lessons and lesson sequences.
2. Organise students for lessons and lesson sequences.
3. Implement actions to intuit and sustain motivation in students during lessons
and lesson sequences.
4. Implement instruction (direct/indirect) in lessons and lesson sequences.
5. Interact with students in lessons and lesson sequences.
6. Evaluate lessons and lesson sequences.
All these outcomes are important, but Baker and Scott pertinently ask what evidence would be required to determine whether they have been achieved. They illustrate the problem by looking at element 5, "Interact with students in lessons and lesson sequences." This has three performance criteria or standards that must be achieved to demonstrate the required learning outcome:
5.1 Interactions with students in lessons and lesson sequences are implemented
according to written plans.
5.2 Interactions with students in lessons and lesson sequences are monitored
and appraised critically in terms of utility. Range: 'utility' relates to relevance
for learning outcomes, instructional and organisational efficiency, interest
value.
5.3 Interactions with students in lessons and lesson sequences are modified
consistent with 5.2.
Baker and Scott comment:
In order to make a decision about the attainment of the required standard, someone
acting as the 'assessor' would need to watch a sequence of lessons. This 'assessor'
could either be a lecturer or an associate teacher (but logistics and cost probably
militate against this being a lecturer). The student would need to demonstrate
that s/he could interact with the pupils as planned, make appropriate modifications
in terms of the learning outcomes initially described, class management issues,
and the interest in the lesson sequences required from the students in the class.
Evidence of all these parts would be required to allow a judgement that the
specified standard had been attained. Given that this assessment event is just
one small part of one unit standard, the manageability of the process is clearly
in some doubt.
This is true, but an even more fundamental problem than that of time and logistics
is that the unit standards give no indication of the level or quality of activity,
performance or explanation by the teacher that would satisfy its requirements.
Michael Scriven drew a similar conclusion from a comparable set of standards issued in the United States by the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium. One item there is: "The teacher plans instruction based on knowledge of subject matter, students, the community, and curriculum goals". Scriven observed that all teachers are almost bound to meet this standard as stated at least minimally, since all know something of the subject matter, the students, the community, and, given an hour in the staffroom library, the curriculum goals.
It is hard to see how a general description of an activity in which every teacher is bound to engage, whether well or badly, could act as any guarantee of educational standards. The proper use of unit standards is to provide a framework or matrix within which are identified dimensions of a subject which require distinctive attention. Their misuse is to suggest that unit standards themselves are capable of evaluating quality of thought or performance. However, the NZQA was right when establishing its unit standards system to give priority to the content of skill, knowledge and understanding. This is an admirable intention, even if the NZQA has adopted a flawed and inadequate strategy for its execution.
Mixed views about the unit standards for teacher education were expressed during interviews for this review. Some teacher educators helped to devise the unit standards and have almost a proprietary interest in them. Those lecturers, but others among their colleagues as well, are gratified that many teachers in the schools find it helpful that current college students have gained in their courses a closer knowledge of the unit standards than they have and can thus be of great help in some situations.
Dennis McGrath, who played a leading part in their development, argues that the unit standards merely provide a matrix, which will act as a guide to be supplemented by 'flesh and bones' during curriculum development and moderation procedures. He considers the work on unit standards has been useful in a number of ways in developing institutional qualifications. At the Auckland College of Education 17 professional dimensions were the basis of a new qualification, the B.Ed. (Teaching) degree. ACE is the first teacher education institution consciously to build a new degree on unit standard requirements. However, McGrath claims that the basic structure and sequence of the course were not dictated by unit standards which were instead used as a quality control to monitor what ACE had decided on independent grounds to be the best courses.
The Massey University College of Education, when still the Palmerston North College of Education, had the main contract from the NZQA for the development of unit standards in teacher education, but contracted part of it out to the Auckland College of Education. Several Massey staff, including the Head of Mathematics Education, Barry Brocas, believe that the NZQA unit standards in teacher education incorporate many of the learning outcomes already contained in the Palmerston North College of Education courses. However, the Chief Executive at the Massey college, Brian Hennessey, is somewhat equivocal on the rival merits of university and NZQA quality controls. He is pleased that Massey teacher education is not subject to the unit standards but to university accreditation procedures. On the other hand the Massey college has decided voluntarily to submit its future plans for inspection by the New Zealand Council for Teacher Education which has responsibility for teacher education in the colleges, even though the council has no powers of veto or direct control over Massey's operations. Massey intends to demonstrate that it meets the unit standards requirements even if not compelled to do so. Hennessey wonders whether two completely different types of accreditation will co-exist for very long, especially since there is no longer a clear difference between tertiary institutions able to confer degrees and those not so entitled.
Some early childhood educators are fearful that unit standards may constrain autonomous development and spontaneity, although this does not seem a realistic threat. Two Wellington primary teachers said in an interview that they believe the application of the NZQA unit standards will ensure that far more New Zealand students in future will be taught grammar adequately. They would support such an outcome, although they deny that in general primary school language teaching has been as unstructured as is sometimes claimed. It is not certain, however, that more attention will be given to language as a result of the unit standards.
One member of the Dunedin College of Education has been involved at each national stage in the development of unit standards for teacher education, but holds that too narrow a range of people has been involved overall. He has found that once someone becomes known, that person is constantly used on committees and working parties. A Dunedin lecturer in disability complained that new unit standards in that area seemed to have been drawn up after little if any consultation with teacher educators in the field of special education.
Professor Alton-Lee and her senior colleagues at Victoria's Department of Teacher Education expressed concern that the minimum standards evident in the then current drafts of the teacher education unit standards were lower than those that should be required of a university programme, i.e. they did not display the characteristics specified in section 162(4)(a) of the Education Act 1989. They noted that a stalemate has more or less been reached in discussions between the NZQA and the universities about any further extension of unit standards, and did not think the universities would let themselves be "dragged in".
Professor David Mitchell of the University of Waikato considers the unit standards and the whole NZQA initiative will eventually fail, not because of their intrinsic weaknesses, but because the nation state will become an increasingly anachronistic unit for educational planning. In future some matters of educational significance will be international or global, and others local or personal, with fewer being resolved at the national level. In Professor Mitchell's view, knowledge will become increasingly customised, creating greater autonomy in learning. Institutional controls will increasingly be avoided. He thus has some reservations about the NZQA's National Qualifications Framework, since only a residual core of required knowledge is likely to remain the subject of detailed specification in the future. This argument is interesting, but far from convincing. It might be wise, at least for the foreseeable future, to try to solve as many problems as possible within the framework of New Zealand as a nation state.
7.5 Assessment of teacher educators
All teacher education institutions have elaborate procedures for obtaining student feedback about their courses. Often, as at the University of Waikato, these evaluation procedures are administered by a teaching and learning development unit, centre for professional development, or the like. Many staff members feel anxious about what student responses to their courses will be like. Many express scepticism about the value of students' subjective appraisals and fear that demanding courses and strict assessment procedures often evince hostile student reports, whereas courses in which considerable time is spent by students talking about their views on life and experiences, personal as well as professional, prove misguidedly popular. It would be much more valuable to have a wider range of objective data about students' understanding and performance, rather than increased sophistication in establishing just which lecturers they like or dislike.
Much time and effort are invested in staff appraisal procedures. Some institutions, like the Dunedin College of Education, favour line management systems of quality control; some, like the Wellington College of Education, prefer team appraisal systems; and others, like the Christchurch College of Education, have brought in management consultants such as Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu.
Often the control systems do work well. Sensible vigilance was exerted by the Christchurch College of Education Board of Studies in June 1996 when complaints raised by students in a year 3 course were relayed to the upper hierarchy. One complaint was that a male lecturer "is always late (often up to half an hour) and that he often pops in and out of class. They [students] are also concerned that he does the work for them and that they are allowed to try very little for themselves." Severe complaints were raised by another year 3 group about a lecturer whose course was considered "uninteresting and simplistic" and the assignments both difficult to understand and difficult to fit into the time frame. It is not surprising that in large institutions there are some idle and/or incompetent people. The key test is whether there is genuine vigilance and whether effective action is taken. Christchurch may or may not have finally sorted out those particular problems, but it is to the credit of its board of studies that such matters were exposed rather than concealed.
Yet Susan Hitchiner places under the heading of 'Ineffectiveness of the Accountability
Regime for Institutions' the statutory requirements on teacher education institutions,
namely to:
- have a written charter containing goals and purposes appropriate to the type
of institution;
- submit its Statement of Objectives and a list of performance indicators to
the Secretary for Education … ; and
- present a copy of its audited annual report to the Minister.
In many cases what were admitted later to have been major problems remained
undetected by the supposed quality controllers, or, if detected, little or no
remedial action was taken. For example, the serious faults considered earlier
in the Wellington College of Education-Victoria University of Wellington and
Auckland College of Education-University of Auckland relationships appear not
to have identified for a lengthy period by the committees and boards responsible
for quality control, or, if they were, no information about them was made public
at the time they arose.
If and when staff members are found wanting, tenure often prevents action being taken other than to provide support for their 'development'. Even if they are found to lack qualities and qualifications they should have possessed on initial appointment, according to the institution's own guidelines, academic staff will in most cases retain their positions. When ideological capture takes place, there is little likelihood that checks will operate effectively: again the gnats are strained but the camels are swallowed.
Hitchiner's overall assessment of government monitoring of the performance
of teacher education institutions is:
There is no Government body with a quality assurance role over all providers,
in terms of course delivery and student attainment. Quality assurance in the
pre-service education system relies on the ex ante mechanisms of the approval
of courses and the accreditation of providers by NZQA or its agent.
Hitchener holds that "some form of ex post external mechanism for reviewing
the quality of provision is desirable." This is very true. Two most urgent
matters for attention are ideological capture of courses on essentially contestable
matters and the effects of student-teachers on their classes in schools.
Overall, the gap between rhetoric and reality is unacceptably wide. This is largely because the supposed quality controllers often confine themselves to financial and material inputs but neglect to examine what is taught and what is learned. Existing checks should not be discarded. The case for greater information is never diminished because it may be misused, and if only partial information is available that is certainly better than none at all. Yet the solution does not lie in adding further layers to formal control systems which are already elaborate in structure. It lies in the willingness of teacher educators to activate procedures already at their disposal. The greatest pressures on them to do so would arise from increased objectivity of assessment and wider availability of relevant information.
7.6 Recommendations
1 One of the gravest weakness in current teacher education in New Zealand is the hostility of many teacher educators to the very concept that educational achievement can be fairly and objectively assessed. Thus a key recommendation must be to seek at every level of the system more adequate and thorough assessment of educational achievement. The large number of persons serving on various committees purporting to monitor the quality of education in their own or in other institutions should not confine themselves to financial and material inputs but concentrate instead on what is taught and what is learned.
2 Although at least one established institution, the Auckland College of Education, and at least one new provider, the New Zealand Graduate School of Education in Christchurch, developed courses during 1996 which seek specifically to meet the requirements of the NZQA unit standards for teacher education, this should not generally be required of teacher education institutions. In general the unit standards provide useful check lists but cannot be used to assess quality of work.
3 In principle there is no reason why student performance in many components of teacher education should be evaluated differently from performance in other tertiary courses. The full range of assessment methods should be put to use.
4 There are adequate formal checks on staff performance, but these are honoured
as much in the breach as in the observance. It is far better that institutions
reform themselves and end abuses rather than that there be more external intervention
or more elaborate systems of quality control. Vigilance within institutions
is most likely when their procedures are transparent and based on objective
criteria.
CHAPTER 8
IDEOLOGICAL CAPTURE
8.1 Overview
In an open society such as that of New Zealand one expects to find, and does find, that all five clusters of educational theory identified in Chapter 1 (section 1.2) are well represented among the public. However, examination of works by New Zealand teacher educators and the courses they teach reveals that two clusters are very highly represented, but two much rarer. The two 'over-represented', to use a term made familiar in 'equity' debates, are the reconstructionist and child-centred. The two 'under-represented' are the liberal and transcendentalist. Instrumentalism is the driving theory in courses which claim to provide management, organisational and leadership skills in education, but these and other forms of instrumentalism are attacked in numerous education courses as 'New Right' ploys aimed at undermining equity and social justice.
The high representation of their own standpoints appears to undermine the claim frequently advanced by reconstructionists that the state is in essence an arm of ruling capitalists who manipulate its power in education to ensure that capitalist ideology is instilled into the nation's young. This argument was refined by the French Marxist Louis Althusser as the Ideological State Apparatus (ISA) theory. This is almost the direct opposite of the truth, since, however we may define New Zealand's ruling classes, the ideas they hold are much more weakly represented in state education, especially tertiary education, than in society as a whole.
New Zealand's reconstructionists have for many years denounced capitalism and looked to education to free us from its bonds. John Freeman-Moir of the Education Department of the University of Canterbury and Alan Scott of the Christchurch College of Education praised Literacy, Schooling and Revolution by Colin Lankshear and Marie Lawler (Falmer Press, 1987) because it celebrates, inter alia, 'the pedagogy of liberation' and 'revolutionary struggle in Nicaragua'. This book, in the view of Freeman-Moir and Scott, "lays bare the massively miseducative nature of reading and writing in the educational endeavours of capitalist society". By this Freeman-Moir and Scott were not referring to matters such as the neglect of phonetic elements in reading schemes in New Zealand primary education, but to what they perceive to be structured inequalities in capitalistic society.
Freeman-Moir and Scott explain in another article that:
The problem faced by working people in New Zealand is not the neo-liberal ideology
of the treasury but how to advance a movement which can oppose the policies
of the State, and finally put state power into the hands of the great majority.
This is a strange view of a country which has open democratic elections, unlike
formerly state-controlled countries admired earlier by these writers, and in
which state policies are now at least partly influenced by elected governments.
There is little likelihood that the majority of working people in New Zealand, or of the adult community in general, will ever vote for the policies advocated by Freeman-Moir and Scott. However, reconstructionist academics like themselves manage to deliver such doctrines almost unchallenged from one year to the next, whilst always asserting that the 'capitalist state' manipulates higher education for 'ruling class purposes'. Dimly aware perhaps of this last contradiction, Scott and Freeman-Moir refer to "the limits of tolerance permitted by the liberal state". This echoes Herbert Marcuse's concept of 'repressive tolerance', which supposedly disarms militant intellectuals by making them professors and letting them say and write whatever they want at public expense.
It should be noted that the type of reconstructionist theory that became prominent
in western Europe and North America in the early 1970s, but not highly influential
in New Zealand until the end of that decade, is of a different character from
earlier Marxist orthodoxy. The new wave of neo-Marxism had as its first main
educational expression 'the New Sociology of Education'. By the late 1980s this
type of thinking was in rapid decline in Britain and the United States, its
falling influence accelerated by the collapse of communism in eastern Europe,
but educational journals in New Zealand show its continuing prestige here.
Professor Noeline Alcorn, Dean of the School of Education of the University
of Waikato, claims that in the 1990s "right wing policy makers in New Zealand,
Australia, and Britain" were able "to impose greater control over
the purposes and control of education through charters, mission statements,
quality assurance, accountability, measurement of outcomes and curriculum guidelines."
She added that "the assumption of the New Right appears to be that teachers
are mere technicians delivering a received curriculum." Yet the 'right-wing'
regime in Canberra she denounced was that of the Australian Labour Party first
under Bob Hawke and then Paul Keating. In the United Kingdom major disquiet
with state education was expressed in 1978 by Jim Callaghan, just before his
Labour government lost office. In New Zealand itself the policies she lampooned
were inaugurated by Labour governments of the 1980s. Her comments support the
hypothesis that New Zealand teacher educators are several notches to the 'left'
of the general public and regard as 'right-wing' a range of parties which regularly
obtain a substantial majority of the vote in most contemporary liberal-democracies.
Hugh Lauder and David Hughes of the University of Canterbury asserted in 1991:
In New Zealand the two dominant parties are both right of centre … it is
within this bleak context that the promises held out for educational change
should be judged.
Hugh Lauder made the same point in 1987 in an article entitled 'The New Right
and Educational Policy in New Zealand' and targeted the Labour party rather
than the National party. Lauder claimed that under the Labour administration
"many of the ideas central to the dogma of the New Right have held sway",
such ideas including "a voucher system, user-pays, loans". Both the
New Zealand Labour party and the National party are often portrayed by teacher
educators as 'right of centre'. New Zealand First is, presumably, also 'right
of centre', 'New Right', etc. in the judgment of some teacher educators. From
this perspective, the dividing line or 'centre' of New Zealand politics would
appear to be somewhere between Labour and the Alliance.
There is, of course, no good reason to expect that each trade or profession will reflect national opinion as a whole, or to wish it should do so. Be that as it may, an open society ought to be able to expect that, irrespective of their personal convictions, teachers and a fortiori teacher educators should use fairly and impartially the influence they can exert over the thinking of the young and inexperienced. In highly controversial fields it is never easy for people with strong beliefs to resist the temptation to seek the conversion of captive audiences, but the hallmark of academic integrity, and one of the key justifications for academic freedom, is that teachers and academics should succeed in that resistance. This is especially true for publicly provided institutions, since governments of whatever complexion ought to strive for political neutrality in them. Unfortunately, this is by no means the case in all teacher education courses in New Zealand today.
In reconstructionist ideology the menace of the 'New Right' stalks and threatens to devour all that is noble and worthy in New Zealand education. As in Orwell's 1984, the enemy are sometimes dismissed as pitifully few and regarded with contempt, yet at other times are descried everywhere and held to constitute a threat requiring ceaseless vigilance. Reading lists and course outlines in teacher education courses in New Zealand contain numerous references to the wicked ways of the 'New Right' or 'neo-Liberals', but rarely are students, even at higher degree level, exposed directly to their pernicious but perhaps seductive arguments.
Members of the New Zealand Business Roundtable and the Education Forum are habitually portrayed as narrowly instrumentalist and committed to highly vocational curricula in secondary schools. No academic who has actually read the speeches and articles of members of these organisations or those who work for them could honestly believe this to be so. Such 'neo-Liberals' argue for a broad general or liberal education in primary and secondary schools, and point out that most employers are ready to provide specific vocational training themselves. Many business people seek school-leavers who are well grounded in literature, history and the arts, as well as possessed of high standards of literacy, numeracy and scientific understanding.
One senior academic noted during an interview that some good classroom practitioners
largely confine themselves to what is happening inside classrooms, rather than
outside in the wider society. The academic went on to suggest, sensibly enough,
that broader vision would make them even better teachers, and warned against
"demoralising" teachers so that they finish up "feeling the system
is rigged whatever they do". This is good advice, but what seems to be
ignored is the possibility that some student-teachers become demoralised because
their lecturers constantly present them with a distorted view of New Zealand
education, in which powerful entrenched political forces, such as the elected
government and the country's employers, are alleged to 'rig' the system and
to victimise the poor, the sick and the teachers.
Some academic educationists have, however, recognised the composite nature of
the reform movements of the late 1980s. Peter Ramsay of the University of Waikato
noted in 1993 that "challenges to the system came not only from the so-called
New Right as represented by the Treasury and the Business Roundtable, but the
near hegemonic conditions were being contested by women and Maori groups."
Roger Dale, Professor of Education at the University of Auckland, and his colleague
Jenny Ozga wrote, in the same volume of essays: "It is essential to recognise
that the term New Right not only covers a range of views, but it also contains
sets of ideas (for example, neo-liberalism and conservatism) in some ways mutually
contradictory".
Some lessons have been learned by most reconstructionist thinkers from the unpleasant histories of the former Soviet Union and other lands of 'real socialism'. References to the liberating role of the proletariat and the importance of state ownership of means of production, distribution and exchange have died away. Favoured denunciations of capitalism are channelled though environmentalism, radical feminism (sometimes supplemented by gay and lesbian causes) and admiration for the 'third' and 'fourth' worlds, this last taking the form in New Zealand of what is termed in this report 'Waitangism'. 'Waitangism' is considered in Chapter 11 and feminism below.
8.2 Gender issues
Teacher educators often claim that they are short of time, yet massive coverage is given to gender issues. Every programme in teacher education institutions relating to gender seems to be taught by people who describe themselves as feminists. In the University of Otago EDUC 318 course: Gender Issues in Education, "the emphasis will be on issues concerning women from a feminist perspective". Christchurch College of Education ED366: Women in Society and Education states, "The course takes a feminist perspective", and so on.
It is important that one understands what is meant in this context by feminism. It is useful to distinguish 'soft', 'moderate' or 'First Wave' feminism from 'hard', 'radical' or 'Second Wave' feminism. The first form holds that all people should be treated equally, unless there are specific grounds for treating them unequally and that few, if any, grounds exist at present for differentiating between males and females in education or employment. That males and females should be treated in a gender-blind way was the position held by most suffragettes in the late nineteenth century and dominated feminism until the 1970s. Co-education is generally favoured by 'soft' feminists.
'Strong' or 'radical' feminism holds what earlier feminists generally denied: that males and females perceive the world differently. 'Second Wave' feminists hold that 'knowledge', usually placed in quotation marks to indicate that it is merely a social, particularly a patriarchal, construction, has been constructed mainly by males in a way that advantages them and disadvantages females. On this view females require distinctive own-sex role models and to be free of male influence. Single-sex education is generally favoured by 'strong' feminists.
It is radical or hard feminism that dominates teacher education in New Zealand, and it seeks to ensure that no alternative voice is heard. This exclusiveness seems to increase, if anything, with claims to be 'inclusive' and to be promoting 'critical' and 'reflective' attitudes. Jane Strachan of the Department of Professional Studies of the University of Waikato in an article claiming to "explore the impact of the New Right education context on equity and women's leadership", typically fails to cite any article by anyone identified by her as 'New Right'.
A 1995 Report of the Equal Opportunities Coordinator at the Christchurch College of Education, Isabel Murray, states, "Working with staff has involved meetings of women staff to discuss issues of concern, dealing with complaints relating to selection procedures … positive steps to encourage women to apply for the position of Principal; encouraging women staff to apply for middle-management positions in the college". Isabel Murray has been actively involved in a major research project which resulted in the publication of the book Invincible Women, designed "To recognise the employment and educational needs of women". Yet there are no equitable grounds for pushing the career prospects and educational needs of all women more than those of every man, irrespective of merit or individual characteristics.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Policy Statement at the Christchurch College of Education alleges that "Indirect discrimination occurs where the outcome of rules, practices and decisions which treat people equally, in fact reduce significantly the chances of a particular group of people from obtaining a benefit or opportunity." Yet many such forms of 'indirect discrimination' should be welcomed, since they consist in applying relevant criteria to selection. It is true that if, for example, higher degrees, publication in internationally refereed journals, etc., are used as criteria for appointments, they will favour some over others. This will sometimes result in some groups being better represented than others proportionally in promotion posts, since all groups do not spend equal time or spend it equally effectively on relevant professional and academic tasks.
It is entirely proper that the best qualified applicants should be appointed, irrespective of what may be the overall pattern of group representation. Radical feminists accept this proposition entirely when it refers to women-dominated spheres, such as early childhood education, where attempts to provide appropriate male role models for young boys are conspicuously absent. Women dominate staff and, even more, student numbers, in primary and especially in early childhood education, but the scarcity of men is rarely raised as an educational concern. Only at the Dunedin College of Education did any women lecturers express, during interviews for this report, any concern that life there might be difficult for a male who finds his way into early childhood education.
The Christchurch College of Education is fairly typical in its treatment of gender issues. Apart from requirements within virtually every course outline to consider the special needs, interests, insights and perspectives of females, the college offers ED366: Women in Society and Education, ED398: Gender Issues in Education, EN358: Women in Literature, and HL396: Sexuality Education as main courses. ED366 states, "The initial course focus is on issues related to women's changing role in society. Schooling issues from early childhood to tertiary are the focus of the second half with particular emphasis on gender and secondary schooling. The course takes a feminist perspective." ED398 "explores the construction of gender and its influence on the experience of schooling for girls in particular."
Sexuality and sexual orientation, as distinct from gender roles, seem to feature in teacher education courses in Wellington more than elsewhere in New Zealand. The Wellington College of Education's Health Education 1 and Sexuality Education courses hold that "The concept of health includes the belief that all persons have the potential to choose and develop a healthy lifestyle, irrespective of personality, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, age or specific disabilities." Specific reference to a supposed need to have greater understanding of "differing sexual orientation" is also made in the Introduction to Language, Children's Literature, Social Studies (Advanced), Teaching and Learning, Social Science Curriculum Studies and Performing Arts Education courses. In Sexuality Education course content includes: "the effects of homophobia on gay, lesbian and bisexual people", and "extended knowledge of the myths and issues surrounding sexually transmitted diseases … ." Required reading includes 'Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual People - Information on Sexual Orientation' in Affirming Diversity, Liggings, S. et al., 1993, and 'Shapes and Sizes' in Real Gorgeous, Cooke, K., 1994.
However, for real depth into these matters the leader is course EDUC 352: Theory
Into Practice in Victoria University of Wellington. One reading by staff member
Stephen Town contains over 30 closely typed A4 pages of argumentation such as:
I suggest that we need to find new spaces in our heads that allow us to reconceptualise
sexuality as fluid and provide the physical venues in which the implications
of new ways of thinking about sexual and gendered identities can be safely explored.
… Ultimately, schools need to take on board their responsibilities to all
youth (heterosexual, gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered) and create contexts,
discourses and venues where the deconstruction of sexuality and gender can occur.
… My experiences as an 'out' gay male teacher which have guided my approach
to the research questions, design and implementation, and the process by which
I identified and set up the interviews with the young men are described. …
Social constructionist and post structural writing suggests that identity is
a matter of choice rather than of destiny. … Foucault also stresses that
there is no such thing as a sexual essence, in terms of desire, behaviour or
identity. … there is no biological essence concerning sexuality of gender
… masculinity and femininity are socially prescribed behaviours …
Queer theory has as its core an activist approach to creating change. Organisations
such as Act Up in Britain, Queer Nation and Queer Planet in the United States,
Glee in Aotearoa/New Zealand create political structures which facilitate the
empowerment and politicisation of lesbians, gays and bisexuals.
Supporting Town is an account of 'Schooling Masculinities' by Christian Haywood
and Mairten Mac an Ghaill. They are interested in how "schooling processes
can be seen to form gendered identities, marking out 'correct' or 'appropriate'
styles of being." In the past schools confirmed these identities, because
they have "the power to define what is normal and 'ordinary' male behaviour",
but the end is nigh for these processes. Haywood and Mac an Ghaill want to overthrow
male stereotypes of being "powerful and authoritative" and to disrupt
"male group networks" which are "one of the most oppressive arenas
for the production and regulation of masculinities."
Gender balance is provided by Deborah P. Britzman, who offers a detailed answer to her own question, "what might the fields of Gay and Lesbian studies offer to the education of educators?" Britzman is concerned that "the last twenty-five years of educational research have been oddly silent about the polymorphous practices of sexualised youth." This seems true enough: students may then have read Romeo and Juliet or Women in Love in school, and may have had sound knowledge about reproduction in many species, including their own, but until very recently they did not spend much time in class discussing polymorphous practices. Today, Victoria University of Wellington seems determined to change that situation.
For teacher education to survive for a further generation, there must be children
in schools, so some heterosexual coupling must be permitted. To radical feminists
that brute fact makes it all the more vital in the interests of equity that
those who actually bear children should enjoy no special 'privilege' in their
nurture and upbringing. Anne B. Smith of the University of Otago provides a
reading seemingly designed to put mothers into their place. Smith holds that:
Developmental psychologists can be viewed as embedded in a patriarchal society
which oppressively constructs women's normal role as predominantly concerned
with full time mothering at home.
As so often, there is disjunction here between feminism and Waitangism, since
women in traditional Maori society were predominantly concerned with full-time
mothering at home and on some occasions this has to be given at least limited
acceptance, even by hard feminists.
The 'rainbow coalition' is completed by a reading on the special significance of AIDS and those who suffer from it. An American academic, J. Silin, asserts that "we are allowed to initiate discussion about transplants, diabetes, jaundice, even having a baby, but not about AIDS", although 'AIDS education' already plays a much more prominent role in most secondary school curricula than transplants, diabetes or jaundice.
This report does not urge that the views adumbrated above should be excluded from teacher education. The point is that, if such views are allowed to dominate, the courses become one-sided and indoctrinative, not balanced and educative.
8.3 Case studies of courses
Several courses pose prima facie concerns about ideological capture. Only a few can be considered even briefly here, but one course is analysed in greater detail.
The University of Canterbury
The University of Canterbury Education Department's Sociology of Education course, EDUC 202, sets out to "examine the relationships between education and society from two theoretical perspectives: Social Democracy/Socialism and Neoliberalism". One misgiving here is the reduction of contestability to two such constructs, and another is whether each of the two is fairly represented. The reading list for EDUC 202 in 1996 was not available and it may be fairly representative, but from their published works the four lecturers do not seem evenly balanced between 'Social Democracy/Socialism' and 'Neoliberalism'.
Christchurch College of Education
One strange feature of the course listing in the Calendar of the Christchurch College of Education is the addition of a theorist's name in brackets behind some courses, e.g. EN303: Structuring of Meaning (Fowler), ED314: Counselling Psychology 1 (Rogers), ED316: Moral/Ethical Development (Kohlberg) and ED361: Classroom Management (Freire). It is uncertain which Fowler is in mind for course EN303, but if it is the English grammarian H.W. Fowler then his work, although recently updated, would be an excellent source for elucidating finer meanings in English. However, it seems unduly limiting to base a counselling course only on Carl Rogers, or an ethics course entirely on Lawrence Kohlberg. Is Paolo Freire really considered an authority on classroom management in New Zealand?
University of Otago
In the University of Otago's course EDUC 101 there are five elements, two of
which are linked: Models of Education A and B. Four thinkers are the chief subject
of study in Models of Education: Steiner, Montessori, Neill and Dewey, three
of whom represent different thrusts within the child-centred cluster of educational
thought, with Dewey a sympathetic eclectic. The second element is 'New Zealand
Education Today' which contains nine sections, three of which are general. There
are six more specific sections:
describe and account for the rise of 'New Right' thinking and the influence
of market forces on education in New Zealand today;
assess the role of interest groups in the formation and implementation of current
national policy;
identify and compare neo-liberal and welfare liberal assumptions about human
nature;
demonstrate an understanding of how those assumptions inform neo-liberal and
welfare liberal beliefs about fairness in education;
demonstrate an awareness of the main assumptions of the notion of educational
choice; and
explain Pierre Bourdieu's theory of cultural reproduction.
The third element is 'Culture and Education' in which two countries are compared:
China, ancient and modern, and New Zealand, pre-contact Maori and contemporary
Maori. The fourth element, not surprisingly, is 'Gender Issues in Education'.
Courses at the 300 level include EDUC 334: Society and Power: "The course
focuses on selected cultural forms, processes and institutions drawing upon
contemporary explanations from the sociology of knowledge, neo-Marxism, post-structuralism
and post-modernism." In EDUC 334 the writers listed for consideration are
Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, Max Weber, Antonio Gramsci, Louis Althusser, Pierre
Bourdieu, Anthony Giddens, Raymond Williams, Nancy Chodorow, Carole Pateman,
Jean-Francois Lyotard, Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida and Jean Baudrilliard.
Dr Mark Olssen, the lecturer in charge, may be complimented on ensuring that
Otago students have access to some significant thinkers, but this list is hardly
a representative one.
Victoria University of Wellington and the Wellington College of Education
Course EDUC 151 was compulsory in 1996 in the Common First Year Course in the
Primary Strand offered jointly by Victoria University of Wellington and the
Wellington College of Education. The following brief excepts from the course
outline written by Philippa Smith set the scene:
… identify issues of diversity and equity in schooling in terms of gender,
ethnicity, socio-economic status and disability and explain how inequalities
in educational opportunity come about … understand the Treaty of Waitangi
and its implications for education … respect for the Treaty of Waitangi
and its significance for Tangata Whenua and Tangata Tiriti in Aotearoa/New Zealand.
The content is divided below between content or treatment which seems prima
facie indoctrinative and that which seems essentially informative and non-ideological
in character. The title of each lecture is given, together with a short summary
of its content provided by the lecturer.
Material which seems, prima facie, to be of an indoctrinative nature
Lectures 1 and 2: Professor Helen May: A case study of concern for foundlings: " … the relationship of education, childhood and society, in the context of 18th century liberalism. The case study of foundling children is used to explore the implications for education and children at the new 'Age of Enlightenment' and the pedagogical and political context of Rousseau's ideas on education. It then looks at the Wollstonecraft critique of Rousseau's ideas on the education of girls." The only reading given is by the lecturer and was 'in press' when the reading list was issued.
Lecture 3: Dr Cathy Wylie, New Zealand Council for Educational Research: Barriers to learning: equal opportunities in NZ schools?: "This lecture will explore the concepts of equal opportunity, of equality, equity and fairness as they related to schools and NZ society." The required reading is the lecturer's own 'Fair Enough' in set, 19.
Lecture 4: Kath Irwin: Critically reflective teacher: The lecture "develops the idea of teachers as 'organic intellectuals' (Freire), as people who think critically, teach skilfully and inclusively in a way that promotes democracy and serves all groups of students equitably' (Shor, 1992). Required readings are Coxon E. et al. (1994), The Politics of Learning and Teaching, pp. 11-19, and Shor, I. (1992), Education is Politics: An Agenda for Empowerment.
Lecture 5: Roslyn Noonan, New Zealand Educational Institute: The political contexts of education: "In the 1980s radical new government policies and practices, driven by 'new' political contexts and economic pressures, were introduced across all of the public sector including education. The emphasis of these policies has been on 'consumer choice, devolution and competition'. Similar trends and policies have been experienced in other countries such as USA, UK and Australia." Required readings are Coxon et al., 1994, pp. 19-24; Hubbard, A. (1995), 'Lessons in Survival' in Listener, 1 April.
Lecture 8: Philippa Smith: Gender and Education: "Although in principle that (sic) education system in New Zealand is committed to equality for girls and boys, in practice there is much to be done. The learning environment of schools and society has historically not been gender neutral or inclusive, leading to bias in many forms, and hence barriers to learning, even in the 1990s." Required reading is Alton-Lee, A. and Densem, P. (1992) in Middleton S, and Jones, A., Women and Education in Aotearoa, and Department of Education (1987), 'Sexism and the Curriculum' in Curriculum Review, pp. 31-33.
Lecture 9: Mandy Coulston: A gendered experience of schooling: Required reading is Middleton, S. (1988), 'A short adventure between school and marriage' in Middleton, S., Women and Education in Aotearoa.
Lecture 10: Marie Bell: Challenging the system: "this lecture will explore the realisation that teachers can effect change as well as be influenced by it. In fact teachers can be change agents." Required reading: the lecturer's Liberating Learning.
Lectures 11 and 12: Ken Wilson: The Treaty and Education: "An examination of the structures present in the education system of New Zealand/Aotearoa and of possible alternative structures which more accurately model the intention of the Treaties." Required reading is Durie, M. (1994), Beyond 1852: Maori, the State and New Zealand Constitution, and Martin, K. (1995), Biculturalism in New Zealand.
Lecture 13: Kathie Irwin: Equality and diversity: "Any studies of education and schooling in Aotearoa need to be cognisant of these parallel education systems [government and non-government], their points of contact, similarity, tension, conflict and difference." Required readings are both by the lecturer: Irwin, K.G, What Happens to Maori Girls at School, and Becoming an Academic: Contradictions of a Maori Feminist.
Lecture 14: Wally Penetito: Maori Education in the 21st century: "Maaori education in the 21st century will clearly distinguish between three separate but interlinked options for studying Maaori in all curriculum areas: taha Maaori, Maaori medium and kaupapa Maaori. These options will be matched to the ideas expressed in Freire's model of cultural changes to assess the likelihood of achieving the Maaori education goals for the 21st century." Required reading is Smith, Graham H. (1991), Tomorrow's schools and the development of Maaori Education.
Lecture 15: Lex McDonald: Disability and Education: "This lecture will be concerned with a psychological, social and cultural consideration of disability (with particular reference to special and inclusive education)." Required reading is Ballard, K. (1993), 'A Socio-political Perspective on Disability' in New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 28 (2).
Lecture 16: Pauline Boyles: A 'disability' experience of education: "The aim of this lecture is to provide students with the tools to enter into critical analysis of the concept of disability and their (sic) role in creating a disabling or enabling environment … It is important that students explore their own personal knowledge of disability from the stated theoretical perspective, in order to gain greater empathy with the experience of others." Required reading is Stainback, W. and Stainback, S. (1990), Support Networks for Inclusive Schooling, Brookes, Baltimore.
Lecture 17: Allie Cotter: Kids come in all languages: "Teachers need to know more about the social and political nature of language use, language learning, and language instruction." Required reading is Chamot, A. U. and O'Malley, K.M. (1994), in Kids Come in All Languages: Reading Instruction for ESL Students.
Lecture 18: Charles Waldegrave: The Poverty Gap: "This lecture explores the findings of the NZ Poverty Measurement Project's on-going research into poverty levels and characteristics. The extent of poverty and the groups of people at poverty levels are described, with single parent families (largely headed by mothers) being found to be by far the largest group living in poverty." Required reading is the lecturer's own More Recent Findings in the New Zealand Poverty Measurement Project, and Wilson, C. and Dupuis, A. (1992), 'Poverty and Performance' in set (1).
Lecture 20: Ken Wilson: Curriculum Development: Global insights or political compromise?: "Issues of 'who chooses the curriculum?', 'whose knowledge is valued?' and 'how does this impact on minority groups in society?' will be explored." Required readings are Ministry of Education (1993), The New Zealand Curriculum Framework, and Simon, J. (1992), 'Social Studies: The Cultivation of Social Amnesia' in McCulloch, G. The School Curriculum in New Zealand.
Lecture 23: Mandy Coulston: Futures in education: "This lecture will explore the trends in teachers' conditions and pay and make comparisons between pay rates in various sections of education. It will then look at the issue of pay equity/parity as it relates to teachers and discuss the implications of a unified pay system for all teachers in the future." Required reading is Watson, H. (1988), 'The impact of the second wave of the Women's Movement on policies and practices in schools' in Middleton, S. and Jones, A. (1992), Women and Education in Aotearoa.
No overt politically correct linkage
Lecture 6: Dr Anne Meade, New Zealand Council for Educational Research: Education to be More - The Meade Report: "Against the odds the early childhood sector achieved increased state involvement and funding in the late 1980s. A description of what was achieved, and how, will be presented." The required reading is by the lecturer, a keynote address entitled Before Five - 5 Years On.
Lecture 7: Teremoana Maua Hodges: Milk and honey flow freely in Aotearoa: "The lecture will use the experiences of a Cook Island family to highlight the trauma of facing the challenge of living in an environment that was culturally different from what they were used to, and explore Pacific Island education initiatives that are operating successfully in the community." Required readings are Petelo, N. (1990), in Jansen, A., I have in my arms both ways; and Ongati'o Lesieli (1996), 'Developments in Pacific Islands Education' in Many Voices.
Lecture 19: Robyn Baker: Developing Curriculum in the 1990s: "The National Education Guidelines, The New Zealand Curriculum Framework and the curriculum statements are all components of the New Zealand Curriculum … This lecture will background the development of the New Zealand curriculum and the structure of its component parts." Required readings are Aikin, S. (1994), 'Primary Problems and the New Zealand Curriculum Framework' in New Zealand Annual Review of Education, 4:1994, and Begg, A. (1994), 'The Mathematics Curriculum' in Neyland, I. Mathematics Education: A Handbook for Teachers, vol. 1.
Lecture 21: Marjorie Renwick: Implementing new curriculum in the 1990s: "A recent research project into the process of implementing new curricula in primary schools will be described and key findings presented." Required reading is Ministry of Education (1993), The New Zealand Curriculum Framework.
Lecture 22: Jack Shallcrass: Welcome to the 21st century: "How information technology is changing schooling and learning." Required readings are Ministry of Education, (1995), Case Studies: Porirua School, Oxford Area School, Upper Atiamuri School, and Todd, R.J. (1995), Beyond 2000: Integrating information skills and information technology.
In some lectures classified in this report as prima facie of an ideological rather than an educational character, alternative perspectives may be fairly presented. An outsider can only go by whether the suggested readings seem representative or tendentious. The readings provided create legitimate fears of slanted or one-sided presentation. Rousseau's vile treatment of his illegitimate children may be presented as typical of men of the Enlightenment or ignored altogether by adherents of his views (lectures 1 and 2); unequal outcomes of education may be presented as sufficient evidence of social inequity (lecture 3); the ideas of radical gurus such as Freire and Shor may be presented uncritically (lecture 4); the 'New Right', 'neo-liberalism' or similar theoretical constructs may be attacked without students having access to writings of any of their advocates (lecture 5); systematic discrimination against females may, without evidence, be alleged to characterise New Zealand education (lectures 8, 9 and 10); a limited range of interpretations of the Treaty of Waitangi and issues of group identity may be presented as though they were held by all thoughtful New Zealanders (lectures 11, 12, 13 and 14); the ending of special education facilities and the adoption of 'inclusiveness' may be presented as indisputable educational advances (lectures 15 and 16); the 'social and political use' of language may be illustrated very selectively (lecture 17); policies may uncritically be advocated which actually increase the number of people in poverty (lecture 18); the New Zealand school curriculum may be described as currently subject to ruling class hegemony (lecture 20); and uniformity and pay parity may be advocated as the best way forward financially for the teaching profession (lecture 23). On none of these can one have any confidence that any voice other than that of the radical left was available to enrolled students. Often there is severe restriction even within radical positions, since several lecturers seemed reluctant to recommend texts other than their own.
Ideological indoctrination of a reconstructionist character, with a special focus on feminist and Treaty of Waitangi issues, is not merely a danger but a living reality in many teacher education institutions. This report does not suggest proscription of such opinions by the government or any 'witch hunt' of those who use their academic status to inflict one-sided doctrines on students on matters which are essentially contestable. However, it is clear that the wide extent of ideological capture makes a mockery of claims that effective quality control has been in place in New Zealand teacher education in recent years.
Provided that it were well known to prospective student-teachers that they will get there a sustained ideological dose of doctrines appropriate to a Marxist-feminist summer school, that prospective employers are aware of the content of the courses, and, most of all, that there alternatives among government-provided institutions as well as outside them, there is every reason to believe that the most highly indoctrinative teacher education institutions would soon be short of students and their staffs face redundancy. Full information and a free market are the best antidotes to ideological indoctrination. One essential step towards supplying fuller information would be for lecturers or course co-ordinators to outline at the beginning of course descriptions what is the range of contestation in the subject among reputable scholars and what representation different perspectives enjoy in their reading lists and references.
8.4 Recommendations
1 Ideological capture of teacher education in New Zealand is a matter of great concern, but it should not be countered by bans and proscriptions or any other forms of counter-indoctrination.
2 Information about the nature and content of publicly funded programmes, including course requirements and reading lists, should be made readily available so that courses which are loaded and one-sided can be exposed.
3 Providers should ensure that in courses concerned with issues of intrinsic contestability students are presented with a fair introduction to the range of contested judgments and analyses which are held by reputable scholars.
4 Those responsible for internal audit and for the academic accreditation of teacher education providers should check whether course information and reading lists are readily available and whether course requirements, including reading lists, are representative of reputable scholarship in the relevant areas.
5 Ending the quasi-monopoly held by established teacher education institutions
by enabling new providers to offer teacher education on equal terms, including
equal subsidy levels (recommendation 1 in Chapter 5), will lead to a widening
of the range of providers and also the range of courses and perspectives on
offer, thus weakening the possibility of any one approach dominating teacher
education.
CHAPTER 9
THE PRACTICUM
9.1 Introduction
Most students in all countries for which research evidence is available regard practicums as the most important part of teacher education. The Windows research by Renwick and Vize found, for example, that most second-year students at the Auckland College of Education regarded their teaching practice as the most valuable part of the course and would like more of it. About three quarters of all students (and nearly 90 percent of Christchurch students) nominated practical teaching as the most useful part of their training. Most teachers looking back on their teacher education also consider the practicum was the most valuable part of it. In the Windows research, associate teachers were frequently seen as the most important influence on students' teaching styles. Renwick and Vize suggested that, although an oversimplification, it was broadly true in all the colleges that for lecturers, teaching experience interrupts the lecture programme, whereas, for students, the lecture programme interrupts teaching experience.
In New Zealand each teacher education institution invests considerable effort to get its practicum as effective as possible. At the University of Waikato, courses in 'Professional Practice' are compulsory in each year of the four-year concurrent programme, with the aim of reducing perceived gaps between educational theory and school experience. The Massey University College of Education tries to achieve this end by placing each student in its graduate primary programme in a school for one day a week throughout the year when block practice is not in progress. In their different ways, all the providers, established and new, are anxious to develop close relationships with their practice schools. However, closer acquaintance does not invariably increase mutual respect and admiration. Deeper reciprocal knowledge may well be a necessary condition for better teacher education, but it is by no means a sufficient one.
The basic system is that student-teachers carry out practice teaching in blocks, and sometimes on one or two days a week as well for part of the year. In addition Normal Schools may offer regular experience of specific subject teaching throughout the year, as well as the standard practicum. College principals and staff and the staff of schools have ongoing relationships that include the provision of feedback on student-teachers and their preparation for their practicums. A coordinator of teaching practice allocates lecturers to supervise the practicums and student-teachers to the schools. Sometimes there are liaison lecturers to oversee a group of schools or, as at the University of Waikato, a liaison team. At the school end there are associate teachers, one for each student-teacher normally in primary schools but with variation for subject specialism in secondary schools, and a liaison teacher responsible to the principal for the work of all the student-teachers in the school.
Despite the central importance of practicums to teacher education, their organisation
has often been subject to severe criticism. Some New Zealand teacher educators
admit that at times in the past analysis of different types of practicum has
been insufficient. McGee, Oliver and Carstensen wrote in 1994 of "the scant
research attention to this issue in this country". They tried, as part
of coordinated Waikato research, to remedy this deficiency. They focused on
student-teachers' perspectives on their final third-year practicum and found
that most students invested it with great importance and approached it with
apprehension, expressing sentiments such as:
I have mixed feelings about this section knowing it's the last one and that
this is the one that counts.
The huge emphasis put upon this 'final' teaching practice makes me very nervous,
especially since it is a lucky dip as to whether I will get on with my associate.
Research at Waikato had already provided examples of failings and inefficiencies.
David Battersby and Peter Ramsay reported in 1990, after they had carried out
commissioned research, that in many cases:
College lecturers were critical of trainees and of Associate and Normal School
teachers. Teachers were critical of trainees and teachers' college staff. Trainees
were critical of teachers' college staff and associate teachers.
Teacher educators were frequently described as out of touch with classroom realities,
whilst they responded by depicting many teachers as ignorant of contemporary
ideas in education. Many teacher educators and teachers claimed that often student-teachers
lacked commitment and application. Many student-teachers criticised their associate
teachers as out-of-date, but even more considered their teacher educators to
be unrealistic and held much of their courses to be irrelevant to the demands
of the classroom. Teachers often criticised college lecturers in front of the
student-teachers. Renwick and Vize noted that "some associates told students
that what they were learning in college was a waste of time and would not fit
them for the real world of the classroom."
Deborah Fraser of the Department of Professional Studies of the University
of Waikato found:
The triad of teacher, student teacher and lecturer has not always been a mutually
beneficial liaison. Lecturers have expressed frustration with the constraints
of schools and classroom programmes to incorporate approaches they wish to develop
with students; teachers have expressed annoyance at the 'child banking' nature
of some interactions with lecturers and students. Some teachers have felt that
their own valuable craft knowledge and skilful teaching practice has been ignored
or is seldom acknowledged (sic); students have often been left in the awkward
position of having to learn from, and collaborate with two powerful but sometimes
opposing mentors.
This conclusion followed a special study of relationships between teacher educators
and teachers in Normal Schools. If the relationships of teacher educators with
Normal Schools are unsatisfactory, then a fortiori those with other schools
are likely to be worse, since contacts between them are far fewer.
Battersby and Ramsay found that too many teacher educators were perceived by teachers as employing a 'banking concept' of teaching practice, which reduced the status of schools to mere parking places for students to experience practice. Teacher educators, in the opinion of many teachers, thought they possessed a monopoly of theoretical knowledge. This attitude was not found by Fraser in her Normal School teachers, but these may not be representative in this respect, because of their exceptionally close ties to teacher education. Teachers appointed to Normal Schools expect student-teachers to be more frequently in their classrooms than in other schools and that they themselves will be expected to cooperate closely with a teacher education institution and perhaps to act as a role model who embodies qualities that institutions seek to foster.
Three relationships are of particular importance: between student-teacher and lecturer/supervisor, between student-teacher and associate teacher, and between lecturer/supervisor and associate teacher. The phenomenon of student-teachers being caught between two fires is, of course, a familiar one. It may arise when teacher educators are in general more conservative than the schools, but also when they are more radical. Arguments about the distribution of power and authority in teacher education have considerable historical complexity in terms of ideological divides.
9.2 Selection of lecturers for supervision of practicum
Many teacher educators complain that demands of supervising teaching practice prevent them from carrying out as much research or producing as many publications as their colleagues in other university departments. On the other hand they are usually reluctant to see the responsibility pass into other hands. In most teacher education institutions, such as the Christchurch College of Education, virtually every member of staff has some responsibility for practicum at some stage of the year, although new staff without much school experience may first have to undergo some induction training. One argument for including all staff is that school experience will help all lecturers in their own teaching, even if their academic concern is not with teaching and classroom interaction, but in specialist fields such as the law of education, relations between society and education, assessment and evaluation practices, and so on.
All staff at the Dunedin College of Education are expected to take a significant
role in practicum supervision, and the capacity to undertake such duties successfully
is a basic requisite for appointment. However, there is a core of ex-teachers
who are highly experienced in practicum and act as key tutors during the third-year
practicums on a one to ten basis with students. In general, restriction of practicum
supervision to lecturers whose experience and qualifications lie in the field
to be supervised seems more common in early childhood education than in any
subject discipline in primary and secondary schools. At Dunedin, for example,
only staff with early childhood experience supervise in that field. This seems
strange in terms of curriculum content, which is less specialised in early childhood
education than elsewhere, but perhaps indicates that early childhood educators
regard their field as too different from primary and secondary teaching for
colleagues from those fields to appreciate adequately what is going on.
Some Waikato staff were frank when talking to their own researchers about fitness
for supervision of students. Comments included:
I must say I felt for the first couple of years that I was always going to make
some sort of a huge faux pas that suggested that I didn't know how primary schools
worked … .
… [asked a] question about the maths programme and I would show my utter
ignorance. I've managed to disguise that.
Such sentiments led to suggestions such as:
We should insist that visiting lecturers have had substantial primary experience.
… I think they should know and understand primary programmes and what it's
like to go in the door in the morning and have 35 little bodies all day, every
day and in every curriculum area.
It's probably a good idea to have a specialist team doing it.
Some Waikato staff noted major inconsistencies among their colleagues and between
departments:
Every curriculum subject expects different things. … I would like to see
coordinated expectations at briefing meetings, and that planning be coordinated
to be consistent.
If I had to give a five minute exposition on, say, the Music Department's view
of teaching and learning and what their objectives are, and how they would advise
people to structure plans and units, I couldn't really do it. There needs to
be consistency.
There is a very important thing that new staff have to learn. They have come
from a level of competence in teaching quite often that is excellent. It's been
arrived at through 6-12 years of successful teaching experience to get to understand
what it's like to be a third year student and not to expect this person to perform
at a sixth or seventh year teacher level is difficult for new staff.
The soundest conclusion to be drawn from this evidence is that teacher education
institutions should concentrate much more on supplying expert supervision to
the schools and leave general supervision to the associate teachers.
9.3 Appointment of associate and liaison teachers
School teachers have to apply for positions as associate teachers for the Dunedin College of Education practicums, after having first obtained the endorsement of their principals. On the other hand, there is no formal induction course at Dunedin of the type developed at the Christchurch College of Education where Helen Blake and Janine Koster organised an Associate Teacher Course of 12 hours in 1996, which is probably about optimal in time provision to accomplish what is needed.
Judith McGee of the Department of Social, Physical and Health Education at the University of Waikato inquired into how liaison teachers were appointed and how they operated in the six Normal Schools linked to her institution. These liaison teachers have the responsibility of coordinating at the school end the teaching practice of several student-teachers, sometimes from more than one teacher education establishment. Only one had made an appointment in which being a liaison teacher was part of the job specifications, the others having the role added to existing responsibilities. None of them ever received formal training or guidance, but gained advice from other teachers and/or the liaison teacher educators and the institution's handbooks.
Judith McGee noted:
Whereas student teacher contact with the normal schools in the 1960s and 1970s
had required demonstration-type lessons, the demand in the 1980s was for a more
hands-on approach.
McGee also said "the demonstration lesson became less favoured". This
is very true. It is surely to be deplored that since the 1980s primary teachers
should less and less often give lessons to the whole class of a 'demonstration'
type, and that group and individualised activities have largely replaced whole
class teaching instead of being a supplement to it.
9.4 Student-teachers and lecturer-supervisors
When Barry Brocas first came to the Palmerston North College of Education he was the only maths teacher educator with a background in primary teaching. Now six out of the seven maths educators there have that background and experience. He advised, during an interview for this report, that it is difficult to find primary school teachers with good qualifications in mathematics, and they have had to be actively sought out and recruited.
Brocas said that some students find themselves unable to apply the methods advocated in their courses. This may be because the school is operating a particular type of mathematics programme. In consequence, they may conclude that the teachings in their courses are not in harmony with current school practices. Others note that in some classrooms the curriculum change embodied in the new mathematics curriculum hasn't really occurred. Consequently some students (probably a small minority) do find that the mathematics they are expected to teach is boring to the children. He believes in being honest with the students, whilst at the same time getting them to recognise that even associate teachers who are not strong in mathematics are likely to have some good things in their mathematics programme.
Research at the University of Waikato revealed that lecturers there frequently
found inadequacies in their own students. Six out of 20 lecturers considered
student lecture plans were inadequate, for such reasons as "activities
not matching the aims and objectives, lack of purpose, vagueness and total disorder!"
Comments on third-year students on final practicum included:
She seemed unable to have thought about what she was doing; to give clear instructions,
and to set reasonable expectations of the kids;
There were management problems occurring … it was a direct result of her
inadequate instruction.
Ian Calder and his research colleagues found at Waikato a 'halo' effect in students'
accounts of their practicums on their return to college or university, but that
this soon wore off. At first those who did not feel they had received full support
or achieved as well as they might have wished "either kept quiet or pretended
that they too had a marvellously successful experience. To say they had not
might advertise personal 'failure', and not many wanted to risk this."
Openly expressed, however, was "considerable dissatisfaction with the method
of evaluating their performance by college staff."
One example of student-teaching admired by a supervising lecturer and subsequently
by Calder, Faire and Schon may cause concern:
She did the most superb lesson. She'd collected some writing in. She had analysed
it all, and then she had two mini lessons planned to teach with small groups
while the other children worked independently.
Such an effort might be made on a special occasion for a supervisor's visit,
but it is unreasonable that primary teachers, beginning or experienced, should
be expected throughout the school day to teach 'mini lessons' to two small groups
whilst providing the rest of the class with equally suitable activities.
Students generally acknowledge that they find many of the teaching resources
built up over the years by the college valuable in their teaching practice,
just as they value lecturers who are informative, interesting and well-prepared.
However, many find problems in complying with lecturers' demands and made comments
such as:
Music and P.E. are getting done but not to the criteria of the Little Red Book
[Teaching Practice Handbook]. It's really hard meeting needs of associate and
School of Education. (5th week)
As we get more into teaching for the school's requirements it gets harder and
harder to fit in the silly School of Education assignments. They are becoming
an irritation and mechanical rather than helpful and relevant. It is taking
me away from the focus on unit planning and full control. (2nd week)
There was too much School of Education work; sometimes I was too concerned with
getting that finished and lost sight of the teaching and children's needs. (8th
week)
Most students reported satisfactory relationships with supervisors, but dissonant
views included:
[Regarding contact with visiting lecturer] Quite hopeless. Lecturer gave me
little feedback. Suggested that he probably wouldn't be back for a last visit
but didn't really know what he is doing. Did not talk to me at all about what
I have been doing on section. Wasn't really interested in looking through my
folder - but thought he had better. Didn't talk to me after his visit - even
though it was lunchtime … . Felt quite deflated after he had gone after
doing all this work and not even getting acknowledged or him showing some interest
about it. (6th week).
I don't think they can get a good picture of what you are doing and how you
set things up, and how you work with the kids in an hour. They come in for about
an hour, write a report and it's that report that gives you a job. My lesson
went well but I can see if someone bummed out in a lesson and they weren't getting
on with their associate then that could be it for them.
A group of young teachers interviewed for this report who had recently studied
at a college of education were very critical of some lecturers and associate
teachers they had worked under, even though they all thought the practicum the
best part of their time at college. Whilst on section and looking back at some
college courses, they decided they had 'learned what not to do', but not in
the sense intended by their lecturers. One young teacher found on section a
"total mismatch with what you learned in college". They considered
many lecturers out-of-date with courses based on conditions which no longer
exist. They were insistent that new circumstances presented teachers with new
challenges, which could not be met in traditional ways and considered student-teachers
should be provided with theories relating to immediate, not former, experience.
Some of their lecturers seemed threatened whenever they were asked to relate
what they had said to the students' direct experience. These young teachers
supported regular returns to schools and classrooms for teacher educators. On
this point, the Education Review Office has noted that:
One of the recurring themes in pre-service teacher training reform proposals
overseas is the need for teacher trainers to have experience of the current
classroom and school environment.
Past personal relationships seem to be important in school-college contacts.
One lecturer at a college was poorly regarded by a principal on whose staff
she had once served, and this seemed to lead to the principal condemning whatever
teaching the lecturer's students proposed to do with the children. One informant
considered she would have been penalised if she had praised her associate teacher
to her college supervisor. When she said to her college supervisor, "Gee,
we must try something like that ourselves", she met with a frigid response.
All held that they would never treat 'the poor students' as they had been treated.
They used the familiar 'meat in the sandwich' metaphor to describe how they
had often felt.
A lecturer at another college was described as very authoritarian and overbearing
as a practicum supervisor by a recent graduate of the college. This was particularly
annoying because the lecturer exuded child-centred language: 'Do as we say,
not as we do' should be the college motto, maintained these young teachers.
Yet, in its Year One Protocols for Visiting Students on Teaching Practice, the
college in question advises lecturers to "leave the student feeling reassured
that they are working to the best of their ability at this time". Apart
from the peculiar grammar arising from trying to avoid 'sexist' language, this
is absurd advice since not all students always work to the best of their ability.
Two teachers who recently completed studies at a college of education, one after
a period of absence from teaching, found acute difficulties in reconciling the
demands of practicum with university lectures. They held that more teaching
practice and less university input was the best way forward. They also found
significant differences in the approaches typically taken by college and university
staff in teacher education. In general, however, both teachers considered they
had benefited from their experiences at the college of education, especially
from their teaching sections.
A small number of interviews does not prove significant differences between institutions and may not give a representative picture of any one of them. However, what the worst cases do establish is that the much-vaunted 'quality controls' are not as yet very effective in getting rid of, or even significantly improving, poor courses or inadequate staff in teacher education, even though vast amounts of time have been invested in defining and refining these controls.
9.5 Lecturer-supervisors and associate teachers
Teachers volunteer to be associate teachers, but most teacher education institutions require that they have the backing of the principal both on grounds of personal suitability and to ensure it will not interfere with other duties. In 1996 the additional payment to an associate teacher in a primary school or early childhood centre was just under $50 for each week a student was with them in the classroom. It cannot be claimed there was much financial remuneration for being either an associate or liaison teacher, but in Normal Schools at least some teachers believe the experience and responsibility may have career benefits.
At the Dunedin College of Education it is claimed that confrontations and serious disagreements between lecturers and associate teachers are rare. However, there is sometimes lengthy and valuable discussion about 'hard cases'. At Dunedin strenuous efforts are made to involve experienced school staff, many of whom act as associate teachers in professional studies courses, and it is claimed there is little danger of the college losing touch with school realities.
Complaints from liaison teachers about teacher educators noted by Judith McGee at Waikato included charges that a few of them "did not appear to have much working knowledge of school 'culture' and that they could be unrealistically demanding in their expectations and ignorant of school etiquette. Although most lecturers were considered very reasonable there was an assumption that 'you are here to provide and you should provide.' " Teachers were equivocal as to whether they felt in partnership with the teacher educators, and "The question drew 'yes but' or 'yes and no' answers". They would in one sense like to meet other liaison teachers and have some involvement in teacher education itself, but these did not seem high priorities in their thinking. Naturally enough, these issues worry teacher educators more than teachers.
Deborah Fraser found at Waikato that 90 percent of Normal School teachers "felt adequately briefed by lecturers for student-teachers' in-school practice" for at least some courses and subjects, but 29 percent held they were not adequately briefed for at least one course or subject. Teacher annoyance with lecturers concerned failure to brief them or involve them in cooperative planning (16 percent), lack of support for student-teachers (16 percent), lecturers' disorganisation (13 percent), failure to check students' preparedness to teach (11 percent), and failure to observe school protocols (6 percent) or to 'acknowledge' the teacher (10 percent). Their failings, although regrettable, seem to be marginal rather than typical.
More worrying in 'partnership' terms is that 32 percent of the teachers thought
they and the lecturers were distant from each other educationally, not 'on the
same wavelength'. Frequently teachers did not know what the lecturers really
expected, did not understand their 'jargon' and considered some lecturers failed
to give students adequate feedback and did not understand classroom realities.
Among qualities Fraser found to be particularly sought by teachers in teacher
educators were that they:
are friendly, relaxed and work together with me for the benefit of the student;
make damn sure the students are present and prepared;
brief the staff and present notes;
appreciate our input;
do not suddenly decide they want written evaluations; and
have realistic expectations of which both parties are aware.
Both teachers and teacher educators want student-teachers to be 'professional',
but they invest very different meanings in that concept. Teachers generally
emphasise good attendance, politeness, punctuality, good speech and grammar,
willingness to accommodate easily to the particular culture of their school,
and clean and smart appearance. Gum chewing among students was disliked by many
teachers.
However, teacher educators generally stress the value of 'critical' and 'reflective'
attitudes, including a questioning of the culture of the school. Fraser seemed
dismayed that teachers did not include among 'professionalism' traits favoured
by lecturers, such as critical thinking, informed decision-making, confidentiality,
healthy scepticism or debate of contemporary educational issues. If Fraser had
asked the teachers, she may well have found they did not consider all the lecturers
to be models of critical, informed and open thinking, or confidentiality. Fraser
found that only 8 percent of her Normal School teachers preferred student-teachers
who were 'innovative'. This struck her as "a paucity of regard for innovation",
but many experienced teachers have had considerable mopping-up to do in the
past after student and teacher educator innovations.
Calder, Faire and Schon quote a Waikato lecturer who recalled of one school
visit:
I felt quite alien, the student didn't introduce me to the class or teacher,
and the associate didn't even look up when I came in.
Another lecturer was worried about the type of comments and feedback she should
provide for student-teachers:
What do I say to the student? How do I say it? How do I tell a student that
she's failing? … Those sort of things. Just knowing how to … what
I'm meant to write. How to approach the student and associate teacher; what
was expected of me … did I introduce myself in front of all the kids?'
(gaps as in Calder et al.).
Lecturers frequently reported that associate teachers were inadequate in important
areas of responsibility:
Well the one thing that I see very rarely is associate teachers sitting down
and writing regular critiques on what the student is doing. I do find a few,
but generally I didn't, and this one … I couldn't find any critiques that
had been written. I would assume verbal critiques had been given, instead. I
would hope so.
The associate teacher is always very protective of her class, and she was always
worried that they wouldn't make the progress that they should be making, or
they would be held back. Younger associate teachers are more threatened that
the students would be more successful with the children, or on the ball enough
and she would have to pick them up afterwards … This was this associate
teacher's problem; she was scared that they wouldn't progress enough and she
would have to do a lot of work or lose the discipline … so the student
was all confused.
Calder et al. found that their colleagues identified as areas in which associate
teachers needed professional development almost every facet of the role, including:
knowledge of School of Education expectations;
knowledge of what to expect from year one, two and three students
the ability to give quality feedback to students;
procedures to enable associate teachers to take a more significant supervisory
role;
provision of a model of teaching and learning which is consistent with student
learning at the School of Education; and
to gain understanding about how much autonomy to allow students at various levels.
At the same time some Waikato lecturers acknowledged that the associate teachers
had genuine grievances. One lecturer saw the solution in changing the balance
of control:
We need to give associate teachers more power in the supervision of their students
because I don't think we do have the time to do the job well, and I think if
we did put more time into training our associate teachers and we gave them more
of the responsibility for the supervision of students while they're out on section,
it would be much better.
Some Auckland College of Education staff sympathise with the reluctance of teachers
to be used as 'child-banks' and to be treated as though they themselves are
devoid of theoretical knowledge. Some also note that there are some problems
inherent in the concept of the mentor teacher, especially that of reconciling
attempts to promote open-mindedness in the student-teacher with apprentice-like
acceptance of a mentor. Should it be: 'When in Rome do as the Romans do' or
'To thyself be true'?
Conflicts between teachers, especially those in early childhood and primary education, and teacher educators about different priorities seem more likely to arise in respect of university rather than college-based teacher education. Dr Kirkwood and Professor Alton-Lee of the Department of Teacher Education at Victoria University of Wellington referred, in an interview for this report, to the teacher upgrading programme provided at Victoria to enable non-graduate teachers access to the knowledge and qualification available for the pre-service teachers. They argued that, with the average age of the primary teaching profession at 43, the amount of access most teachers have to recent research on learning and teaching is a concern. Professor Alton-Lee reported the difficulties for both associate teachers and pre-service teachers when the associates did not have access to the theoretical frameworks and knowledge underpinning the student assignments. She gave the example of the Vygotskian notion of scaffolding and recent research on a range of pedagogical strategies that promote metacognition and higher achievement in learners.
Harvey McQueen receives conflicting reports on relationships between teacher educators and teachers in the schools. He would like to see more systematic support for associate teachers to become better at helping student-teachers. Equally, however, he considers that teacher education institutions could make better use of the expertise of classroom teachers. He appreciates that it is easier to call for collegiality than to achieve it. He notes that teachers are tenacious about their own territory and naturally resent outsiders criticising their work, especially if they are not given the opportunity to explain why they have chosen particular methods. Many teacher educators seek to promote change rather than help maintain the status quo in classrooms and can be regarded as a threat. He thinks a panel system might be helpful in situations when teachers and teacher educators disagree on whether a student-teacher is satisfactory or not, although he is conscious that panels and committees take up time, and teachers are already under severe time constraints.
9.6 Student-teachers and associate teachers
Judith McGee found that the liaison teachers kept some records, if only because former student-teachers often sought references for job applications, but some were apprehensive about the amount and type of information they should keep or disclose. In addition, McGee found that "Most teachers felt they were inadequately resourced for the equipment needed to support the curriculum and professional practice programmes. Not only were resources insufficient, there were major problems with space allocation and a lack of withdrawal areas for the work of student-teachers and children."
Calder et al. found a tendency among students to comply with the ways of their associate teachers in order to have a successful practicum, irrespective of whether or not they approved of their approaches. Students in several institutions raised in interviews similar fundamental and perhaps intractable problems. Some of the best students wish to be innovators, but associate teachers normally want their own methods to be used, so that the school students have maximum continuity.
Calder et al. identified many other problems that have constantly bedevilled
practicums in every country. Examples cited of difficulties between associate
teachers and student-teachers included:
[The student] often felt that the wrong things were being critiqued; like when
something went really well it wasn't written about …
This was what the student was getting upset about, because her associate had
signed the lessons, approved of them and then kept interfering as she was teaching
them.
The student was frustrated in that she was expected to follow the associate
teacher's routines and methods to the letter.
Although many Waikato students found no major difficulties in this respect,
the problem of compliance with the ideas of associate teachers loomed large
for others. One "felt she was locked into a situation where, if she was
to emerge as competent and successful, she would need to comply ... . To 'give
them [associate teacher and visiting lecturer] what they wanted' she felt she
became the 'mimicking clone' of her associate teacher." Other such comments
included:
Given up hope of setting my own programmes. Do that in my first year of teaching.
(5th week).
This seems really bad but I seem to be enjoying my teaching less and less. I
am hoping this is because of the expectations of my associate to teach more
and more like her. I really am beginning to feel very uncomfortable, almost
robotic in my teaching and interaction. (4th week)
Just doing the A.T.'s dirty work. I feel more like a teacher aid just now. (2nd
week)
Feel like I yell too much, but it's what my associate does to get attention,
and so it works with these children.
Had finished my language programme only to be told I couldn't use it as my associate
wanted the children for language. I have found it frustrating when I have done
the work and it hasn't even been acknowledged.
Most student-teachers found a welcoming atmosphere in their practicum schools,
but some commented adversely:
You basically have to find out things for yourself around here. It's a bit hard
when people expect you to know how the school runs and they pin you down when
you do something wrong. (2nd week)
Well so much for a friendly supportive staff. Even by Friday we have not been
introduced to any staff. Not even the Principal. Unless of course we have gone
out of our way to do so ourselves. (1st week).
Many students worry about control over their classes. One commented:
Because I wasn't familiar with the rules and structure I just went along as
best I could which in some cases wasn't good enough because some children really
tried me. Building up to full control, they still looked upon me (and actually
said to me) as only being a student teacher not a real one. This made me feel
very uncomfortable.
This problem is greatly reduced in school-based teacher education in which the
trainee is seen by children much more as a regular member of the teaching staff.
An insight on the extra pressure that ill-conceived educational policies have
placed on teachers, albeit with their own consent and often on their own initiative,
came from a student who observed:
It is not possible to fulfil curriculum requirements as there is not enough
time in the day. This may be possible in a single cell class but not in open
plan as you need to be organised and coordinated. Can only do one hour per week
of my chosen curriculum subjects. (2nd week)
Some associate teachers were considered by Auckland- and Christchurch-trained
teachers interviewed for this report to be limited and inadequate. They felt
there was a shortage of people able to carry out the associate teacher role
really well, so that there seemed to be virtually no screening. The criticisms
related mostly to alleged lack of direct help or even indirect feedback. Some
were seen as a threat rather than a support: 'how much do you have to defer
to your placement supervisor?', wondered one of them. These young teachers did
not believe there had once been a 'Golden Age' of education, certainly not of
early childhood education. They thought some older principals, who 'had been
there for ages', were out-of-date and unwilling or unable to rethink their ideas
and positions.
9.7 Length of practicum
Broadly speaking, student-teachers spend between one quarter and one third of total programme time on direct block teaching, say between 20 and 25 weeks in all. This is often supplemented by additional visits, particularly to Normal Schools associated with the colleges, in conjunction with curriculum studies. In general, the new providers give a greater proportion of course time than do established providers to practicum. For secondary trainees, UNITEC Institute of Technology and Bethlehem Teachers College require 14 weeks of practicum. The Auckland Institute of Technology allots half of its entire secondary programme to practicum. The only institution exceeding this proportion is the New Zealand Graduate School of Education.
Lester Taylor, Principal of the Dunedin College of Education, holds that the actual length of practicum is less important than its quality and that few people who call for it to be lengthened offer convincing reasons for doing so. Many other teacher educators interviewed also held this view, although several of Taylor's own staff favour longer practicum, as do most of the student-teachers interviewed. Several lecturers and student-teachers consider that different time allocations of practicum are optimal for different age groups. Some Massey staff were, during interviews, unsure about the financial effects of more or less practicum, but they are cost-conscious and would welcome better briefing on such matters.
It is only in the final practicum in the third year that Dunedin early childhood and primary students take full control of a class for a three-week period. The leap from final year in college to the actual job may be greater than it need be. Dunedin would be censured by Martin Haberman, who asserts that American teacher education fails to prepare student-teachers adequately for tough challenges after appointment to schools. Yet one also understands that student-teachers must learn to 'walk before they can run'.
In sharp contrast to the Dunedin situation is that which prevailed at the University of Waikato School of Education until recently. One fourth-year student complained in an interview that by the end of his fourth year it would be about 18 months since he had completed his final teaching practice. He considered the bulk of the theoretical work should have preceded the practicums, not come after them. He may be right, but in a sense everything would be better if it came after everything else. Theory would be better understood after practice, and practice better understood after theory. It would be an unwise government which sought to impose uniformity in these matters on the providers of teacher education.
Lester Taylor is surely right in holding that there are now typically greater demands on teachers and student-teachers than a decade ago, even though classes may be somewhat smaller, and comparatively small in global terms. Principals of primary schools are often able to give less support to young teachers, since they are teaching more themselves. Handicapped children are now in normal classrooms and the average teacher has to cope with their special needs, which were previously met by specialist teachers. Even though some of these extra burdens came about as a result of pressures within education, not from outside it, that does not reduce them. Dunedin might well ponder whether it is right in giving student-teachers so gradual an initiation into full responsibilities of teaching, but it is far better that this sort of decision should be made by each provider, not established by bureaucratic writ.
McGee et al. found Waikato student opinions were mixed about the length of the final practicum, with 60 percent thinking it about right beforehand and 58 percent afterwards, but the number considering it to be too short moved up from 19 percent beforehand to 29 percent afterwards. One student recommended the Wellington College of Education policy of a day a week in school before the block practicum, a system easier to employ in a large city than in country areas. Some Waikato senior primary staff give qualified support for a longer academic year in colleges of education and university departments of education, with some extra time going on practicum.
Several Waikato students remarked during interviews that they feel under pressure during their teaching practice because of conflicting demands of school and ongoing university courses. These university courses started late enough in the day for the students to be able to attend them after school in 'normal' circumstances. However, they often found there were school functions or activities they would have liked to attend, or in which they were even expected by the school to take part, but which clashed with their university courses. They found it was just feasible, but also a real strain, to meet the two sets of requirements. It seems to be the best and most committed students who are most under pressure and most burdened by the feeling that they are trying to serve two masters.
Over half of a group of Waikato student-teachers surveyed by McGee et al. considered
their workload during practicum as heavy, and none rated it as light. One wonders
about the student-teacher there who wrote:
As usual the School of Education has loaded us with work. I find myself staying
up until all hours of the night to get the job done and plan for the next day's
work at school. I do have a weekend job at home (Rotorua) and don't usually
get much done in terms of School of Education work. (1st week).
Did it ever occur to her that being full-time in teacher education might mean
full-time?
Young teachers who had recently graduated from the Christchurch College of Education and interviewed for this report thought the practicums were about the right length. They found them very tiring, so that any longer at that stage in their development might have been too exhausting. In contrast, one young Auckland secondary teacher of English held that a fairly long experience in one school was more valuable, since it was only once you had been with a class for a month that you and they could tell how good you were and how your teaching methods were working out. She very much valued her experiences on section. On the other hand, she was irritated by clashes between demands of university courses and those of the practicum, especially when she had to prepare classes for exam revision on set books taught during the year by the regular teachers and not by her.
The Teacher Registration Board has developed a set of requirements for practicums,
including their number, length and assessment procedures, but, as is pointed
out by Susan Hitchiner, "There are no clear expectations to guide supervising
teachers and principals in schools in assessing and attesting to the performance
of teacher trainees during the practical experience periods." It is difficult
to see what 'clear expectations' could be provided by the Teacher Registration
Board over and above those that arise from the cooperation of individual teachers
and specific teacher education institutions. All that could usefully be provided,
and this would indeed be most valuable, would be guidelines to help schools
to ascertain what progress school students had made whilst being taught by a
particular student-teacher. It is precisely this type of information, unfortunately,
that schools themselves often fear, since it might indicate that existing standards
of pupil achievement are lower than had been vaunted.
9.8 Practicum profiles
Most teacher educators in New Zealand prefer pass/fail assessment on practicum backed up by practicum profiles to graduated levels of pass with credits and distinctions. Tim McMahon and Catherine McMechan at the Ministry of Education argue that challenges faced by student-teachers vary too much from school to school for fair judgments to be made about excellence. Lester Taylor considers that a graduated pass is unlikely to increase motivation, which is already high in a typical practicum. However, many overseas school systems with comparable diversity of schools now have categories of 'master teacher', designed partly to prevent the movement out of teaching of the most able teachers into administration or teacher education, because this seems the only avenue of promotion. The very concept of master teacher implies that some forms of excellence in teaching can be identified, even though school contexts differ hugely. If this can be done in respect of experienced teachers, why not with beginners? It had been done, after all, for several generations in New Zealand. As with the concept of 'value-added' teaching, it is surely possible to make some valid judgments about the level of difficulty various schools present to teachers, experienced or beginning. Care should be taken that a tenable case about different levels of challenge does not descend into scepticism about our ability to identify good teaching at all. If this were the case, it would clearly be absurd to concern ourselves with any quality controls.
Associate teachers generally determine what student-teachers teach in practicum, but teacher educators decide whether they pass or fail. Since the accreditation and credential is that of the tertiary institution, this seems unexceptionable. At Dunedin and Christchurch, and probably across the field, debriefing is carried out systematically and portfolios of students are presented to a professional studies tutor before profiles are written. Disagreements in Dunedin are referred to the Academic Progress Committee, while personal interviews, sometimes a second one, are provided for students at risk. A big effort is being made in Christchurch to improve evaluation of teaching practice. There the professional studies tutor has the final say on pass/fail, but close cooperation is claimed with teaching practice coordinators and associate teachers.
Most Massey staff interviewed for this report think the present overall failure/drop-out rate of about 20 percent is evidence of vigilance about standards. Harvey McQueen hopes that teachers and teacher educators are not too lenient on student-teachers and are tenacious in protecting professional standards. He estimates the current failure/drop-out rate at about 10 percent of teacher education students, but considers that this figure indicates adequate quality control.
Waikato lecturers wrote in the McGee et al. survey:
Writing the final report isn't easy - you have to negotiate with the student,
agree on a draft and when you have several to do it is very time consuming.
Because reports can be used for C.V.s you have to be truthful without being
too negative.
It is difficult putting on paper real concerns; teachers are good at saying
nice things but not good at saying the really critical ones.
This last comment is very true: 'willing to wound but yet afraid to strike'
is common among associate teachers, but also among teacher educators.
Other Waikato lecturers expressed doubts about the accuracy of associates'
reports:
The Associate Teacher's report did not reflect the concerns she had about her
students.
I have a concern that the reports, from the lecturer or the Associate Teacher
- what she told me verbally - didn't really figure up in the report.
Some comments of Waikato students also strengthen scepticism about quality control
of the practicum. One wrote "Haven't really met too many of the School
of Education requirements. A lot of bluffing will be necessary."
Concerns also arise in respect of student claims about lack of uniformity in lecturers' requirements. One commented: "It is amazing when talking to other students to find the different expectations placed on us by visiting lecturers. They vary so much it's incredible!" One student reported that visiting lecturers "didn't really want to look at any of my planning or evaluations, whereas at the opposite end of the spectrum others reported that their visiting lecturers placed a 'huge' emphasis on planning and evaluation."
The most worrying concern is the gap between realities and the confident rhetoric
of official publications. Institutions are willing enough to admit to past faults,
but not present ones, but in that recent past, in which faults are now admitted,
claims to quality control were equally bold and unequivocal. If one looks at
criticisms offered by recent graduates of some of the institutions, confidence
in the efficacy of elaborated quality programmes plummets.
This situation in far from unique internationally, but that is little comfort.
In an international review, Guyton and McIntyre note that "The issue of
validity in student teaching evaluation has two components: the establishment
of criteria for evaluation that are related to effective teaching and to programme
goals, and the determination that what is stated to be measured is actually
measured." Guyton and McIntyre found "neither reliability nor validity
in student teaching evaluation" in the practicum, and judged that assessments
"tend to have a limited range in the upper levels of rating scales and
do not make adequate discriminations among more effective and less effective
student-teachers, regardless of criteria used." It is very likely they
would make similar judgments of New Zealand teacher education. Here prodigious
amounts of time and effort are spent on drawing up criteria and in carrying
out the routines of practicum supervision, but determination that what is stated
to be measured is actually measured could be much more robust.
It is difficult to anticipate whether problems concerning practicum would increase or decrease if the balance of control of the practicum became invested in schools rather than teacher education institutions, but a relevant consideration is that in such systems schools only accommodate beginning teachers when they are confident they can afford them resources and if likely gains outweigh likely losses for the school.
9.9 Fundamental theoretical considerations
Assessment of teaching ability is a different matter from that of assessing what is known or understood and deserves very careful attention. There are at least three distinct levels to consider. The first is that of understanding aims and objectives, in an informed theoretical context. These matters were adumbrated in Chapter 6 and will not be considered further here, other than to note that teachers should be able to justify what it is they seek to achieve, as well as explain why they have chosen particular methods to achieve their aims and objectives.
The second level concerns understanding of what has been found in general to work best, given that certain instructional aims have been chosen. There has been extensive research into ways in which pupil achievement is influenced by teaching styles, time on task, regular routine and students' cognitive processes. Many of the findings of such research are of considerable practical value to all teachers, and knowledge of them should be regarded as an essential part of teacher education. One thinks of the work during the 1980s in the United States of James S. Coleman and his associates, who found six distinguishing features of schools which showed above average student performance after all background factors (income, class, etc.) were allowed for. These were:
1 They set high standards of personal conduct.
2 They maintained strong and consistent discipline.
3 They assigned regular homework and ensured that it was marked regularly.
4 They demanded regular school attendance.
5 They offered a rigorous and demanding curriculum.
6 They were staffed by dedicated teachers.
Similar findings worth careful examination were made in the United Kingdom by Rutter and his colleagues (1979) in the Fifteen Thousand Hours survey, which sought to explain why among a dozen London state comprehensive secondary schools of a similar socio-economic and cultural composition some achieved much better academic results and much lower visibility in the magistrates' courts than others.
In its handbook for inspectors, the United Kingdom's Office for Standards in
Education (Ofsted) followed Coleman and Rutter when it set out a number of key
questions about quality of teaching:
Is the teaching purposeful?
Does the teaching create and sustain interest and motivation?
Does the teaching cater for the abilities and needs of all pupils, and are the
teacher's expectations appropriate for all pupils?
Are the lessons managed in ways that ensure an efficient and orderly approach
to teaching and learning?
Is there effective interaction between teacher and pupils?
Is evaluation of pupils' progress used to support and encourage them and to
extend and challenge them appropriately?
The third level is that of the achievement of individual teachers, essentially
in respect of what their students actually learn from them. Although it is vital
to ascertain which teaching methods generally work best, it is equally, perhaps
even more, important to find out whether a particular teacher, or student-teacher,
is effective or not. Of course, it is necessary to take into account all contextual
conditions that affect students' learning, many of which are completely outside
the control of teachers. Taking the context into consideration is by no means
easy, although less difficult than evaluating whether students are happier or
have greater self-esteem as a result of various approaches to teaching.
A further problem in generalising about teaching methods is their intrinsic complexity. In England, Neville Bennett found early on in his major attempt to relate teacher strategies to students' achievements that many teachers declined to be classified as, on the one hand, 'traditional', 'subject-centred' or 'authoritarian', or, on the other hand, as 'progressive' or 'child-centred'. Instead, they claimed to combine traditional and progressive beliefs. Bennett, therefore, eschewed polarisation and instead divided teachers into seven groups with different combinations of child-centred and teacher-centred characteristics, but then he found it very difficult to establish clear conceptual boundaries between the groups.
Going in the opposite direction, an OECD group under the general direction
of Dr Alan Wagner of the Centre for Educational Research and Innovation first
spent a lot of time identifying individual traits they thought correlated highly
with successful teaching, but found the task of regression analysis on a multiplicity
of such traits too difficult to manage. Their solution was that:
Teacher quality should be regarded as a holistic gestalt, i.e. as behaviours,
to be developed independently of each other. The integration of competencies
across these dimensions is thought to mark the outstanding teacher.
Yet it proved virtually impossible to represent any such holistic gestalt without
detailed reference to a range of specific characteristics the holistic approach
was supposed to supplant.
Even when differing contexts are taken into account, many teachers and would-be teachers diverge sharply from expectations based on general correlations between teaching methods and student progress. Although it is true that, all other things being equal, the diligent and punctual teacher is generally more effective than the lazy and unpunctual one, and so on, some diligent and punctual teachers are not very effective and some lazy and unpunctual teachers are very effective once they are in the classroom and putting their minds to the job. Effectiveness as a teacher and characteristics such as conscientiousness are sufficiently related for us to seek to foster conscientiousness on instrumental as well as moral grounds. Yet one must ascertain the actual effectiveness of individual student-teachers, not only establish whether or not they display traits or use methods that generally work well. As in life as a whole, we have to balance concern with general indicators of outcomes with interest in particular cases.
Peter Ramsay and Debbie Oliver of the University of Waikato suggest there is a necessary link between success as a teacher and particular traits and beliefs. They claim to have identified four key capacities needed to become a reflective teacher, all apparently possessed by five female teachers considered to be of highest quality in their region. These women were all "able to think clearly and rationally at a high order level", had high tertiary qualifications, and displayed "warmth and compassion", "determination" and "sense of humour". In each case "issues relating to class, race and gender were well to the fore of their essential concerns, and were reflected in their social and community actions". Of course, "their approach was child-centred". In addition, "all of the teachers were aware of and understood the text of the Treaty of Waitangi". These five women are no doubt very good teachers, but it does not necessarily follow that there is a correlation between their ideological convictions and success as a teacher. Martin Haberman's description of traits characterising successful male teachers in difficult high schools in the United States are totally different from those postulated by Ramsay and Olivier. Even in New Zealand some admirable people whose views on gender and the Treaty of Waitangi are impeccable do not prove to be outstanding teachers, whereas some politically very incorrect teachers seem to achieve very good results with their classes.
Valuable aid in bridging the gap between justifiable generalisations and the variability of individuals is provided by the comprehensive inventories of tasks teachers have to undertake constructed by Michael Scriven, currently Professor of Education in the University of North Carolina. Scriven's depiction of the 'tradecraft' skills teachers require in order to be capable of achieving defined educational ends is well worth close study in New Zealand teacher education.
Some advocates of 'critical' and 'reflective' theory have been hostile to modes of assessment concerned with teacher competency, claiming that these can only be minimalist and must ignore more subtle learning outcomes. This is not so, and in any case closer attention to minimum competency would not go amiss. In several American states in which minimum competency tests have been applied to teachers, large numbers of graduates of schools of education have failed them. It is unlikely that graduates who cannot satisfy low standards could satisfy higher ones. The aim should be to combine in various ways evaluation of teachers' theoretical understanding of their teaching and learning with task- and outcomes-assessments of their practice.
Scriven argues that even modest standardised paper-and-pencil tests of reading, writing and arithmetic have considerable diagnostic value, but he is also concerned about more advanced professional skills, including those "involved in controlling a classroom, conveying clear instructions, being able to construct and interpret valid tests, and even communicating valuable knowledge and skills." He recommends that teacher educators should make informed choices between serious competency methods and outcomes-based approaches, such as those in the recent American Tennessee and Dallas models. There must logically be some convergence, Scriven suggests, between competency and outcomes approaches, in that the outcomes sought will relate to the possession of certain competencies, or perhaps to some personal characteristics of teachers above and beyond competencies. The better outcomes models seek to estimate a teacher's contribution to student learning, conduct and overall progress in a school year, or some other finite period, after factoring out as many external factors as possible. This is the 'value-added' approach.
Scriven notes that both the Tennessee and Dallas models are large-scale and expensive to mount and do not have direct application to teacher education, since the student-teacher does not 'own' a classroom or a class of students in the same way a regular teacher does. However, the same techniques can be applied informally as the basis for partial assessment of student-teachers and, since he considers that learning outcomes are or should be the most important consideration in judging whether teacher education or teaching is effective, he urges that more attention be focused on oral exchanges in class, students' classwork, homework, test papers and all other kinds of evidence about students' actual progress.
It is true, of course, that many influences teachers have on their students take time to show, whilst there can also be 'Hawthorn' effects that rely only on novelty and soon fade away. These limitations have especially to be considered in respect of student-teachers who spend only shortish periods with classes. Yet if we were quite unable to detect what influence teachers had on their students, there would be no point in discussing quality controls of any sort, or of teachers asking for smaller classes and better facilities, since no evidence could ever be garnered to demonstrate the results these might have.
9.10 Recommendations
1 There should be no requirement by the government about the length of practicums in any type of teacher education, except that all publicly funded teacher education institutions should provide clear information about the length and structure of their own practicums.
2 As long as teacher education institutions are responsible for awarding an approved diploma of teaching, they must have ultimate control of the conditions on which it is awarded. However, the institutions would be well advised to use their own staff as specialist supervisors in their areas of expertise, leaving general supervision to associate teachers.
3 Irrespective of the balance between schools and teacher education institutions, the latter should consider restoring marks of distinction for practicum. Although student-teachers face very different levels of challenge on practicum, it is possible to make adequate allowance for such different levels of challenge and for different contexts of teaching. Improving 'value-added' methods of evaluating teaching effectiveness would be a major contribution to in-service education of experienced teachers, as well to pre-service teacher education.
4 Although it is important to ascertain that student-teachers understand the
theoretical basis of teaching techniques they may employ, it is at least equally
vital that they demonstrate their success as teachers in terms of the learning
achieved by their students in schools. Sometimes very adverse circumstances
make it difficult for teachers, not only beginners but experienced ones as well,
to teach. However, 'value-added' methods can be applied to take account of the
base of student understanding from which beginning teachers start and to assess
their own contribution to student learning. Government and teacher education
institutions would be well advised to commission a leading scholar in the field
of 'value-added' teaching to make a detailed study of the current New Zealand
approaches to evaluating teacher effectiveness.
CHAPTER 10
SCHOOL-BASED
TEACHER EDUCATION
10.1 The case against school-based teacher education
Other things being equal, many types of knowledge and skill important for beginning teachers would seem best obtained in a tertiary institution. Subjects such as the history, philosophy, psychology and sociology of education, usually considered to be significant parts of teachers' knowledge, are much more likely to be gained from experts in a university or college than acquired in schools. For early childhood and primary teaching, higher levels of substantive knowledge in curriculum subjects than secondary school leavers normally possess are more readily acquired in tertiary institutions than 'on the job' in schools.
Many teacher educators in New Zealand are former teachers of above average quality in the classroom who undertook higher studies with success. Their visits to a large number of schools give them a clearer picture of the whole educational scene than the typical teacher confined to one school can obtain. Some lecturers provide international as well as national perspectives.
Many lecturers are ahead of schools in understanding key aspects of the curriculum
after the introduction of unit standards with the result that their student-teachers
are often in advance of the associate teachers supervising their practicums.
Lecturers in many colleges argue that college-based experience is vital to enable
students to deal with the demands of the National Curriculum, especially because
it is rapidly changing. Others contend that a tertiary education is essential
to enable student-teachers to be innovative and to transcend national guidelines.
A candid 'Windows on Schools' report might find that proportionally at least
as many teachers are defective in their duties as are education lecturers. Margery
Renwick has noted that "students with prior teaching experience may have
had less than satisfactory teachers as role models" and as a result may
require more rather than less time to meet the requirements of teacher education
courses. Placement of student-teachers in schools often leads to reinforcement
of existing practices. Ashton and Goodlad are among American thinkers who have
argued that no better method has been devised for preventing change in a social
institution than to apprentice novices to their elders.
10.2 Arguments for school-based teacher education
There are thus important arguments in favour of retaining tertiary institution-based teacher education in New Zealand. If fact many teacher educators here cannot even conceive that teacher preparation could be significantly different from its present form. In Britain too it was assumed 15 years ago by the staff of tertiary institutions that their dominance, indeed monopoly, of teacher education was too strong to be challenged. Yet widespread dissatisfaction with English schools soon spread to teacher education and has already led to a significant erosion of that earlier dominance. David Hargreaves summarises the post-1980 changes as "a growing synthesis between a more sophisticated conception of professional development and a strong commitment to institutional development."
In the past the typical teacher in Britain, especially the primary teacher, could be almost completely an individualist with almost complete control of his or her 'own' class. But now there is much more emphasis on curriculum continuity and development. This has led schools to engage institutionally in curriculum study and development much more than in the past and has reduced the school-tertiary gap. Yet, at the same time, notes Hargreaves, "primary teachers' relative lack of knowledge about, and expertise in, teaching subjects such as physical science, history and geography have been ruthlessly exposed by the National Curriculum and this is openly acknowledged." This led Her Majesty's Inspectorate (HMI) and others to express increasing doubts about the past effectiveness of teacher education and to call for a major increase in specialist subject teaching.
Growing demands on schools to engage in cooperative curriculum development, combined with demonstrated deficiencies in teachers' knowledge, led to the introduction in England and Wales of schemes for 'licensed' and 'articled' beginning teachers which by-pass established teacher education institutions. Apart from these innovations, the time student-teachers must spend in schools during conventional teacher education has been sharply increased in England and Wales: at least two-thirds of the 36 week post-graduate course for secondary teachers must be spent in a school. These new developments have put pressure on teachers to combine their efforts with student-teachers as never in the past. Under the old system the equivalents of the associate teacher in New Zealand worked largely on a one-to-one basis with student-teachers, with a limited commitment in that the final responsibility for whether they passed or failed the practicum lay with the teacher educators. Once the onus was on the schools, the role of the school mentor took on much more significance.
In England and Wales there have been significant financial transfers from teacher education to schools so that school staffs could cope with these new and wider responsibilities. Mentors work collaboratively with student-teachers and Hargreaves reports the belief in many schools that this has provided "a much higher quality of support and guidance for the trainee on teaching practice" and that "it also helps to provide far better support to new teachers during their first few years in the profession." The 1993 pilot scheme for school-centred teacher training, in which schools are directly funded by the Department of Education and Science for their training role, seems to have been successful and is likely to be retained by the new Labour government.
Some British critics of school-based schemes for 'licensed' and 'articled'
beginning teachers claim such schemes represent a reversion to 'sitting next
to Nellie', or the 'pre-technocratic model' of teacher education, as David Hargreaves
called it. Hargreaves, however, suggests these schemes may constitute a 'post-technocratic
model', in which a better balance of theory and practice is generally gained
than hitherto. Hargreaves is confident that the trend is clearly for practising
teachers to:
contribute more to the design and planning of courses;
be trained for their role, which requires the trainers to share their skills
with the mentors;
share in, or even take primary responsibility for, the formal assessment of
trainees during the practicum; and
in some cases take the primary or even total responsibility for the initial
training of teachers.
If groups of schools organise themselves to bring in expert support for their own particular purposes, versions of Hargreaves' 'post-technocratic' model may become very attractive to many schools in New Zealand.
In Australia between 1987 and 1993, the Australian Labor Party (ALP) Commonwealth government sponsored seven reports or discussion papers on teacher education. These identified three main weaknesses: the inadequate practical experience of many teacher educators; insufficient time devoted to practicum; and mediocre quality of students entering courses. The main recommendations included frequent refresher courses in schools for teacher educators, schemes of internship, more time spent in practicum under school control rather than that of teacher educators, and changes of course balance towards 'practice' and away from 'theory'. Such proposals alarmed many teacher educators and university administrators. To placate what it saw as an important constituency, the Federal Australian Labor Party rejected most of the proposed changes and limited itself to supporting the creation of a national teaching council which, it was hoped, might establish competency standards without frightening the teachers. Fearful of more radical changes, especially with the prospect of a conservative government in office in Canberra, many teacher institutions opted to give more time to practicum and less to lecture courses.
Some interesting developments have also taken place in the United States. Martin
Haberman has been a leading critic of American university-based teacher education,
which he claims "occurs in contexts which are divorced from the real world".
In his analysis less than one in 100 university education department dissertation
topics would affect the work of classroom teachers. He found that:
The typical pattern is for an ambitious individual who is good at 'graduate
school' to endure a very few years of classroom teaching - which may have been
good or bad teaching - go through a doctoral program comprised of courses and
requirements which are irrelevant to the practice of teachers in classrooms,
complete a dissertation irrelevant to practice, and then become an Assistant
Professor of Education training future teachers.
Haberman proposes five principles of excellence which should define the expertise
of faculty in programmes of teacher education:
ž the majority of teacher education faculty should be experienced, currently
practising classroom teachers who have been identified as effective;
ž teacher educators are practitioners whose scholarship derives primarily
from an experiential knowledge base of what works in classrooms in the real
world;
ž teacher educators are expert teachers of low-income, minority and culturally
diverse constituencies in need of the best teachers;
ž teacher educators are capable of coaching candidates' actual teaching
behaviours and of modelling best practices for them; and
ž teacher educators can prepare candidates for the non-teaching school-wide
and community responsibilities of teachers in the real world.
Not very many teacher educators in the United States meet Haberman's requirements,
and not many do in New Zealand. He considers the basic proof of the inadequacy
of teacher education in the United States is that a very low proportion of education
graduates go to teach in schools of greatest need and not many stay long if
they do. He threw out the challenge:
The university-based teacher educators of America can prove me wrong quite readily.
All they have to do is start preparing effective teachers who will stay for
longer than a year or two in the schools where they are needed. It is a quite
straightforward solution.
Haberman does not expect tertiary teacher educators to try to prove him wrong.
Instead his expectation is that
… the development of school-based teacher education will become so common
that shrinking state budgets and public scrutiny will make many states consider
certification voluntary for college graduates in districts which choose to hire
them, and leave to those school districts the total responsibility for preparing
their own teachers.
Haberman claims that "there is substantial evidence from students [in university
education programmes], recent graduates and experienced teachers of lack of
substance and irrelevance" in their coursework. He lists five principles
of excellence which should shape teacher education courses:
ž teacher education occurs on-site in a functioning school;
ž teachers-to-be learn to teach by functioning in the role of teacher and
being held responsible for the full range of tasks and duties required of other
practising teachers;
ž teaching is taught best by a process of coaching when the coaches are
practising teachers released from classrooms to coach a few beginners on a full-time
basis;
ž teacher education programs are enhanced and supplemented by workshops
offered to meet beginning teachers' particular needs; and
ž traditional university courses may be of some use to teachers after they
have had a few years of teaching practice and have developed the experiential
knowledge base for evaluating what is being offered (emphasis as in original).
For several years school boards in tough American city areas have had to resort
to school-based training for unqualified or underqualified teachers, because
not enough of the large annual output of college and university graduates in
education will teach in those schools. As a result many of the boards have taken
similar initiatives to those in Britain to organise and legitimise this alternative
method of entering teaching. Starting with South Auckland, it may well be that
a similar process will soon begin here.
In both primary and secondary practicums, several institutions use their lecturers as general supervisors, but there is little reason to suppose that, say, a mathematics lecturer can judge a secondary school geography lesson better than the school's geography staff, or judge most of the work of a typical primary classroom better than the regular class teacher. Graham Parsons, senior lecturer in music at the Massey University School of Education, believes there is some value for people like him to be engaged part of the time in general supervision of practicum if only as a reminder that primary students are generalists, with a wide range of knowledge and skills to teach, and that all teaching subjects rely on the understanding and application of some general principles of teaching. Yet he and many other gifted specialists might be better employed in providing deeper insights into what they know best, especially since they understand already how wide the range is of other demands.
Calder et al. at Waikato discussed the issue of lecturer credibility. They
pondered whether staff whose own experience had been in secondary schools should
visit primary classrooms, whether specialists should observe and judge subjects
of which they have little knowledge, and whether lecturers many years out of
classrooms should still be regarded as competent to assess today's classrooms.
Most lecturers in the study gave a qualified 'Yes' to these questions. Calder
et al. observe:
Indeed, the criteria in the Teaching Practice Handbook focus almost entirely
on global aspects of teaching skills (planning and preparation, general teaching
abilities, communications with children, classroom management and keeping of
records).
Other Waikato staff quoted by Calder et al. held that a "lecturer's own
experience should match the level and curriculum area in which the student is
teaching", but Calder et al. dismiss this as "an ideal". They
also reject the view that "a small team of specialists do all teaching
practice supervision" urging that a "moment's reflection convinces
that it is impossible logistically". Instead, Calder et al. look to staff
development to enable the music specialist to assess maths teaching and the
maths specialist to assess reading lessons, and so on.
Calder et al. may be right that it would be impossible logistically for current Waikato practicum supervision schedules to be carried out by staff who have appropriate subject knowledge. But why should such arrangements be regarded as sacrosanct? Far better that people who are genuinely expert in teaching a subject and in helping others to teach it should carry out supervision. There is no reason to suppose that all teacher educators are superior in general assessment of classroom management than are most principals or senior staff in primary schools, and certainly not so superior that the former should travel great distances at great cost in time to undertake general supervision. One important reform would be to transfer general supervision of practicum to schools and to enable those who are genuinely expert in an area of knowledge and skill to concentrate their efforts on teaching in those areas.
It seems strange that teacher educators should pay such extensive attention to teaching skills that are mainly acquired through school experience, whereas fundamental understandings of content that are very difficult to acquire on the job are comparatively neglected. Unfortunately the belief that generic skills are more important than substantive knowledge in judging specialised subject teaching is shared by many associate teachers and student-teachers. Although it may be heartening to the self-esteem of all these parties to believe that being a good teacher has more to do with establishing good relationships with and between children than with possessing and being able to impart substantive knowledge, it is nonetheless a cardinal error.
In early childhood centres and primary schools there is often no clear demarcation
between subjects, so that it is readily believed that activities may be assessed,
if at all, by people without particular specialist knowledge. However, if this
is true the case for tertiary-based supervision is almost non-existent, and
the general case for tertiary-based courses seriously weakened as well.
Some teacher educators hold that current teacher shortages make life particularly
difficult for them, but this is an unconvincing argument. It is when there are
large teacher surpluses and consequential cuts in enrolments in teacher education
institutions that life becomes hard for their staffs. At the Ministry of Education
Tim McMahon considers that teacher shortages strengthen the case for teacher
education to be based in tertiary education, but the opposite inference seems
more true: that a time of shortage would be the best time to put would-be teachers
directly into schools. Three- and four-year teacher training programmes result
in a long 'lead time' in the number of trained teachers being produced, so that
in general the Ministry of Education and the Education Review Office favour
short end-on courses. Teacher shortages were actually one of the reasons adduced
in Britain by the Major government for school-based teacher education for graduates.
McMahon's colleague, Catherine McMechan, notes the present shortage of teachers suitable to be associate teachers. However, there is likely to be greater enthusiasm for taking on the role of mentor of a junior colleague than that of supervisor of a student-teacher when both are under the tutelage of a tertiary institution. Some tertiary institutions urge that it would be impossible to place directly in schools all the students currently in teacher education. This is true, but since no one is proposing the complete replacement of tertiary-based by school-based teacher education, the point is irrelevant.
The opening up of a whole series of different forms of cooperation between schools and specialist providers of teacher education should be welcomed. There is no inherent reason why schools should not call upon tertiary institutions, large or small, to support school-based models, just as at present teacher education institutions call upon schools to provide the practicums. There is no reason why a group of schools should always use the same tertiary support, any more than that a tertiary institution should always use the same schools or associate teachers in them for practicums.
There are grounds for confidence in the talents and resources of New Zealand's educators and hence to believe that a rich range of positive initiatives would follow a further weakening of the dominance of the established providers, given some encouragement to schools, individually and in groups, as well as to new tertiary providers. Many of the best of these new modes of cooperation could well be spearheaded by teacher educators whose talents are currently under-used in established institutions. But a significant proviso must be made.
If school-based education is to be of long-term value, it must ensure that student-teachers, and 'licensed' or 'articled' teachers, are provided with the theoretical support needed if they and their schools are to make the best use of their practical experience. The most powerful charge against school-based initial teacher education is that schools must in general be inferior to colleges or universities in providing adequate initiation into structured thinking about fundamental educational issues. There are legitimate fears that school-based teacher education may simply reduce teaching to a trade, that qualifications obtained will lack professional status and be virtually valueless overseas, and that some schools shirk their responsibilities to interns. These concerns must be taken seriously, but they can be satisfied if individual schools or groups of schools establish forms of cooperation with tertiary institutions which ensure that responses to immediate teaching problems are considered in a broad educational context and not merely in terms of improving classroom routines.
The proof of the pudding must be in the eating. If school-based systems display the narrow limitations anticipated by some critics, they are unlikely to last long, provided that intending teachers have a choice between school-based and tertiary-based teacher preparation, and if employers of teachers can choose from products of both. Transparency and wide availability of relevant evidence about the adequacy of teachers prepared under school-based systems are vital, but this is equally true of tertiary-based initial teacher education. Under the schemes in England and Wales for 'articled' and 'licensed' teachers, large numbers of the beginners go on to become permanent members of staff. Those schools have to live with the consequences of their own teacher education endeavours and, given appropriate financial arrangements, have every incentive to seek support from colleges and universities.
Greater variety of provision of teacher education, including school-based modes, combined with more coherent ways of assessing teachers' substantive knowledge and professional ability, might well lead to significant educational improvement in New Zealand. Much of what the established institutions do would continue, and they might well thrive more than at present if they become engaged in a range of relationships, some more tertiary-based and some more school-based, with individual schools and groups of schools. The conclusion of this report is that, overall, the balance of educational advantage may prove to be with tertiary-based, rather than school-based, entry into teaching, but that adequate and fair financial arrangements should be put in place so that potential teachers and schools who wish to go along the school-based path should, as with new providers at the tertiary level, be able to do so, perhaps on similar lines to those recently developed in England and Wales. The case for tertiary institutions, established and new, to monopolise entry into teaching is very weak indeed.
10.3 Recommendations
1 The government should allow school-based schemes to be developed such as those for 'licensed' and 'articled' teachers in England and Wales which bypass direct enrolment in teacher education institutions. A pilot scheme could be directed at university graduates.
2 Under such school-based arrangements, schools might form themselves into groups and seek outside support from established and/or new providers of teacher education for aspects of teacher education difficult to provide effectively within the resources of the schools themselves. There would still be a partnership between schools and teacher education institutions, but the needs of the schools would become paramount.
3 All those responsible for school-based teacher education should ensure that
the practical experience of student-teachers, and of 'licensed' or 'articled'
teachers, is supported and informed by an adequate theoretical framework.
CHAPTER 11
MAORI TEACHER EDUCATION
11.1 'Waitangism'
What may be called 'Waitangism' is the doctrine that places the Treaty of Waitangi as a critical reference point in all teacher education courses as in many other aspects of public life in New Zealand.
Ethnocentrism is almost universal, but from the eighteenth century onwards many western European thinkers made sociological comparisons based on objective principles between their own and other societies. For all the faults of Western societies, they are today by far the most open in the world. One of their distinctive features is that, instead of concentrating on praising their own past and denigrating others, they contain groups which specialise in denigration of their own civilisation. 'Waitangism' is a typical expression of admiration for features of an 'indigenous' society that counter-culturalists denounce in their own society.
The extent to which teacher educators have embraced such double standards was
demonstrated at the 1996 Conference of the New Zealand Council for Teacher Education
held in Dunedin. The first plenary speaker was Stuart Middleton, principal of
Aorere College but currently on leave from that position and acting as director
of secondary teacher education at the Auckland College of Education. One quip
received especially well by his audience was:
When asked what he thought about Western Civilisation, Ghandi (sic) replied
that he thought it would be a good idea.
Had Middleton substituted 'Maori' for 'Western' what a reaction that would have
received! Instead of roars of appreciative laughter, there would have been angry
cries about racism, followed perhaps by demands for his dismissal. Middleton's
own depth in western civilisation was indicated by his reference to one 'G K
Chesterman'.
The courses at the Wellington and Christchurch Colleges of Education are considered
here, although they may well not be representative of the other colleges. At
Wellington in 1994 the issues most exercising members of the review panel related
to Maori and Pacific Islander education. This may be partly because two of the
five panellists were Mr Geoffrey Pohatu, Head of the Department of Maori Studies
at the University of Otago, and Associate Professor Konai Thaman of the University
of the South Pacific. There seem to have been few reasons for special concern,
since Maori enrolments in education courses were higher than in most other university
courses, and research in the area of Maori education was thriving. But some
alleged problems were unearthed, and one was that Maori staff were under extreme
pressure if they engaged in research as well as teaching, even though this combination
is common among non-Maori.
Every Wellington college education course now has its Treaty of Waitangi and
equity statements. Here are a few Waitangi ones:
Health Education 1 and Sexuality Education: The Department of Health and Physical
Education embraces the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi through emphasising
the importance of the Wairua (spiritual), Whanau (family), Hinengaro (mental)
and tinana (physical) aspects of Maori health. From th