by Rebecca Thomas
I've tried to remain thoughtful and encourage readers to critically assess the data and the pace of new initiatives in education. However, Christopher Luxon's latest statement gives me pause for concern - today the gloves are off!
In an interview on Newstalk ZB's Mike Hosking Breakfast, Luxon stated,
"Unions can complain about the Government all they want, but the Government is worried about parents and children."
This comment implies that teachers and unions are somehow at odds with the welfare of students and parents, a narrative that is both worrying and misleading.
Both unions and parents share the common goal of ensuring that students receive a high-quality education. Framing the situation as a conflict between union interests and student welfare ignores the shared objectives that unite these groups. This kind of narrative can be divisive and detracts from the collective effort needed to support our education system.
Effective education reform requires input and co-operation from all stakeholders, including unions, parents, and policymakers. When a false dichotomy is presented, suggesting that unions are not aligned with the best interests of students and parents, it hinders the collaboration necessary for meaningful and lasting change. Education is not a zero-sum game; it's a complex, interconnected system where collaboration is key. Educational policy and outcomes don't have to be viewed as a situation where one party's gain necessarily results in another's loss.
One might wonder about the wisdom of the government's approach to implementing such sweeping changes. To assume they can effectively roll out the plethora of reforms while alienating the very professionals tasked with implementing them in classrooms and schools across the country seems, shall we say...optimistic. Perhaps there's a hidden reservoir of eager educators just waiting to leap into our increasingly demoralised education system? Perhaps these hypothetical teachers also come equipped with signed first editions of Moby Dick - a fitting companion for this whale of a policy challenge.
In the same breath of this wild outburst at unions, there was also mention of putting 'the arts' on hold in favour of boosting maths and reading achievement. This approach is highly concerning. How on earth did he get the idea that art and music don't contribute to reading or maths skills? How on earth did he overlook the broad benefits of a well-rounded education? Isn't the arts also 'drama'? Didn't Rata's team insist on Shakespeare? Don't they know that engaging with the arts fosters creativity, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills/abilities that are just as crucial in maths and reading as they are in life and no doubt in also 'building a 'four-lane highway to Whangārei' ?
Further fuelling my concern/rant (if that wasn't enough to already get excited about) is the statement made by Erica Stanford the day before, who said,
"Unions can have their heads in the sand, but I am going to move on and implement our new plan."
This remark suggests a dismissal of educators' expertise and a preference for unilateral decision-making. It implies that those on the front lines - our teachers - are out of touch, when in reality, they are deeply aware of the challenges and needs of their students.
This approach indicates a reluctance to engage in proper consultation, instead opting to push policies through quickly. Such a strategy risks demotivating educators who are already struggling with the complexities of a constantly evolving education landscape.
The dismissive rhetoric from politicians can have a real-world impact. Educators, already feeling the strain of rapid changes and increasing pressure, may feel further demoralised by these public statements. I've personally heard from a principal and five members of staff this week who are contemplating early retirement, feeling overwhelmed by the current and impending challenges.
And finally, in the increasing blaze of accountability measures, the report of ERO being overhauled too. The overhaul of the ERO signals a significant shift in how education will be monitored and managed, with implications for accountability, curriculum focus, and the balance of control between schools and the government.
Where does that leave all of us?
Where does that leave our unions?
Most importantly, where does that leave our students?
Comments