Miss Led by Our Min-is-ter

Minimum. Is. Terrifying.

by Rebecca Thomas

As a nation we've truly lowered the bar for the people leading the country.

Quite frankly, it's embarrassing.

There was a time when we expected better, better judgement, better process. Somewhere along the way, we let those expectations slip for the people at the very top.

A curriculum is the blueprint of our next generation. It tells a nation what it values. It decides what knowledge deserves to be passed on. Whose stories matter. What skills our children will need. What kind of citizens we hope they become. It is one of the most important public documents our country will ever produce.

It should be treated that way.

This week we've learnt even more about how New Zealand's curriculum was written. More questions. More concerns. More people speaking publicly about the process behind it.

However, it's the public response that fascinates me the most.

Or more accurately the lack of one.

Imagine discovering that engineers responsible for designing a bridge had been removed before the final plans were signed off. Imagine learning that key decisions had been rushed because there simply wasn't time. Imagine finding out parts of the process had been bent in the name of urgency.

Would we shrug?

Would we simply say, "Well... people need to drive over the bridge."

Would you be keen to drive over the bridge with your loved ones in the car?

Of course we wouldn't.

The more important something is, the more carefully it should be built.

Yet when the blueprint for the education of an entire generation appears to have been produced under extraordinary haste, we seem remarkably willing to accept, "It had to be done quickly." The Minister has repeatedly defended the pace by pointing out that around 60,000 children start school every year.

She's right, they do. Which is precisely why we should have taken the time to get it right.

Children starting school every year isn't an argument for rushing, it is something that has happened time over time for thousands of years. A known point, a fixed moment. And no, education wasn’t broken either; standards were not as shocking as you are led to believe.

Instead this 'argument' is actually an argument for care. For making absolutely certain the foundations are solid before asking every teacher in New Zealand to build upon them.

When did process become something we only expect teachers to follow?

Teachers are held to extraordinarily high standards. We justify our assessments. We record our decisions. We collect evidence and moderate our judgements. We explain ourselves to school leaders and to parents. To ERO and to the Teaching Council. Every day our professional judgement is open to scrutiny.

If we fail to follow process, there are consequences.

If we repeatedly make poor professional decisions, there are consequences.

If we fail to meet the standards expected of our profession, there are consequences.

As there should be.

Who holds the people writing the blueprint to the same standard? Who says, "Slow down." "Show us your working." "Take the time." "Get it right." Or have we quietly accepted that accountability is something expected of teachers but optional for politicians and Ministries?

This isn't really about the Minister. Ministers come and go. Governments come and go. Curriculums change.

This is about something much bigger. It's about the standard we now seem willing to accept from the people entrusted with making decisions on behalf of all of us. Because every time we excuse haste, and every time we dismiss concerns about process and every time we tell ourselves, "At least something got done..."

...we lower the bar.

We teach children all of the time that if something important isn't ready, taking more time isn't failure, it's actually responsibility.

What kind of country have we become if minimum is now the standard we are prepared to accept from the people writing the blueprint for our children's future?

Minimum.

Is.

Terrifying.

Min-is-ter!