Tolley fails to convince public at Taupo meeting

We were subjected to a soft presentation by the minister during which time she assured us that it was all about making a difference for the under-performing tail. We were told that it was a developmental process which would be closely monitored and reviewed and that it most certainly was not about league tables, performance pay, or failing students. We were assured that the standards were based on research and kept quoting PIRLS and PISA as the research that was used to inform the National Standards.

When it came time for questions, Upston tried unsuccessfully to gag teachers by stating that now they wanted to hear from parents because teachers had already been listened to! Of course the teachers were first off the rank and a principal questioned and disputed the Standards as a tool for improving achievement of students. She was followed by a raft of challenges from various teachers and parents all voicing similar concerns and backing up with personal anecdote. Tolley's responses were predictable and seemingly rational and along the lines of

"Of course we realise that the teachers are doing a great job, and of course the data will still show that Johnny has made good progress even though he continually falls under the 'normal' line." No one seemed to be taken in by this line and one teacher began to broach the subject of I will always look like a poor teacher, I was able to Question the minister, by asking her first to confirm that she believed that the standards were about raising student achievement, when she confirmed it I was able to then ask her why her own prime minister announced on national TV with her alongside that they were about "weeding out under performing teachers. The minister was momentarily speechless and then responded that those weren't her words. I was unable to respond further and challenge her, If I had I would have suggested that in fact he had said it because it was her governments policy, and that it was one of the real reasons behind National Standards. I was able at a later stage able to ask about moderation, and her reply clearly indicated that she really had no idea how this would work in reality other than the fact that teachers talk and ERO would be in monitoring it all.

The final clanger came when Tolley was justifying students continually falling under the graph line of National Standards by comparing it to the old Plunket graphs where by there was the "ideal" weight and growth line" The immediately brought back the angst that my wife Janeve and I felt due these stupid Plunket graphs as we had small babies who were breast fed and never made it to the "ideal" line. We were made to feel both guilty and failures. So Janeve took the opportunity to reflect on this to reinforce the flaw in the analogy. The Plunket graphs were just the same as the National Standards in that they set arbitrary and unrealistic targets for weight and growth and did not encourage parents to be relaxed with the fact that there children were happy and healthy so shouldn't be worried. In fact we know now that Truby King set these at a level to be reached by overweight bottle fed babies not healthy breast fed babies, and were of now use at all just like the Standards. Janeve than suggested that a trial would be good this caused Tolley to become agitated and animated and fiercely denying that it was necessary. One National party supporter suggested that a trial might impair his children's progress if they were not in one of the trial schools and that we owed it to all students to be able to benefit from the magic solutions that the introduction of National Standards are offering!

It was great to hear and witness challenges from parents who were afraid that there students were going to suffer under this regime and who were also receiving good levels of support and honest and regular reporting from their schools and teachers.

At no time was Tolley able to say how the Standards were going to change all the things that she said were wrong with our schools, she was not able to say how National Standards were going to lift achievement. To the contrary she admitted that many would remain under the standards although they would show progress from year to year.

All in all an interesting meeting which will not have converted any one I am sure. What is sad is that I think that Tolley actually believes that the standards are in place for the betterment of our students and is not aware of her own party's wider political agenda driven largely by the neo-liberalist agendas of those who support market forces and globalisaton.

Tolley continually insisted that she had consulted with and listened to NZEI throughout the development process and that the woking party which includes representatives of NZEI and NZPF were continuing to look at the implementation and iron out any roughness!