Cuts compromise best investment

Senior lecturer Lynn Tozer passes some cake to Emily Peng and Chris Gracey as Dr Tom Ryan prepares to address the crowd at a protest against proposed job cuts at the University of Otago University College of Education in June. Photo by Linda Robertson.

Think of a number.

Take something away from that number.

Tell me, have you got the same number that you started with?

Logic and basic mathematics would suggest to me that you probably ended up with something less.

Think of an education programme.

Remove at least a quarter of it and tell me that nothing has changed.

I won't believe you.

Someone who tells you "less is more" may well have an employment history in a long-gone investment company.

Or someone who even tells you that less is still the same, the quality won't change, is someone who knows about spin and hopes that you don't.

Think of a teacher training, remembering that a teacher's job is to teach the curriculum and to bring it to life for his or her students.

Remove at least a quarter of the time spent in practical classes learning essential teaching skills and curriculum knowledge in science, maths, the arts, English, health, languages and physical education and tell me that the quality of the graduating teacher will be the same.

Tell me that the graduate will be fully able to plan and teach reading, writing, maths and each of the other equally important curriculum areas.

I simply won't believe you.

It doesn't add up.

The equation is flawed.

Sound educational research will tell you, albeit in much more complex language, "I hear and I forget, I see and I remember, I do and I understand."

So, too, with teacher trainees.

They need to do in curriculum classes; to explore, create, problem-solve, participate, manipulate equipment, discuss, in order to understand and plan.

Research, no matter how eloquently written, and regardless of the pedigree evident in the bibliography, or how much "best evidence" is gathered and presented, will also tell you that relationships between teachers and their students matter.

No, I don't mean warm-fuzzy niceness.

I mean that a student responds best when they know the teacher is genuinely interested in them as a person, believes they can succeed, has high expectations of them and does their utmost to see that they achieve.

Students and pupils, whether in schools or universities, know good teachers when they work with them because they feel the difference.

It is curious then, given the common sense and the research, that all of our main universities into which teacher education has been "absorbed" are continuing to make severe cuts to curriculum classes and are reducing student/lecturer time.

Across the country, educational theory may be in abundance, but the curriculum know-how is being squeezed by moving to a more impersonal lecture delivery mode and by the reduction of workshop class time.

It is full of irony that these education decisions, which must impact on the quality of our future teachers and therefore on schooling in this country, are being made by leaders in education.

It is a further irony that the research time which will increase, at the expense of teaching time, will create research which is likely to highlight the efficacy of what has been lost.

So why is this happening? Two reasons are immediately obvious.

Firstly, the government-funding model for our universities has been changed, and secondly, universities are, in the first instance, places of research.

Budget cuts bite and research imperatives drive.

Managers do their best to manage and their task is unenviable, and researchers clamour desperately for funding for their worthy projects.

At the same time, we are reminded by our political leaders that we are emerging from a recession and belt-tightening will be needed for some time yet.

The University of Otago College of Education has, until recently, been the envy of other universities because it has provided more curriculum time and smaller classes than its competitors.

Sadly, as economic pressures prevail and research priorities overtake teaching, this competitive edge and proud tradition may be compromised.

Some regions in the country are already criticised for the lack of curriculum teaching knowledge of their graduates.

Ironically, socially and economically, it is a cliché, but education is our best investment in New Zealand.

To achieve this we must produce the best teachers possible.

To do this they must experience the best teacher training possible, and to do this the universities must be funded appropriately.

But in all of this have we considered the children in our classrooms? No, they tend to be overlooked or simply forgotten in this big tertiary education subtraction equation.

For many, their lives are like big jigsaw puzzles.

The pieces are all over the place and some are missing, as families are fragmented, as stretching household incomes creates stress, and as the children's world becomes increasingly complex, competitive and challenging.

For most children, school is a safe, stimulating place of discovery of the world and of their own potential within it.

Our schools will always need well-qualified teachers with a commitment to their students and to the profession.

They must have a sound understanding of educational theory and a thorough knowledge of the curriculum.

Educational theory plus curriculum expertise plus quality professional and practicum support equals excellent professional teacher graduates plus a strong educational future for New Zealand.

However, basic algebra tells us that if you keep subtracting from one side of the equation you must do the same to the other side.

It is time we asked ourselves what is important and what is worth fighting for.

Throughout the country we should be raising our voices, demanding continuing quality training for our teachers and demanding appropriate funding from the Government to ensure that we can achieve this.

Cuts in teacher training now must impact on the education of children in the future.

It does matter.

This is important.

It should not be a trivial issue that we simply discard when this becomes yesterday's newspaper.

In Dunedin, medical colleagues, with strong public support, are fighting for the life of our neurosurgery and for our medical school's pre-eminence.

As a profession, teaching colleagues, supported by parents with children in our schools, should be fighting for funding to retain quality teacher education and the pre-eminence of our college.

To compromise teacher education is also, to borrow the current phrase, a no-brainer.

Do the maths yourself.

Lynn Tozer is a senior lecturer in curriculum mathematics at the University of Otago College of Education