Cathy Wylie
Self-managing schools should not have to stand alone,
argues Dr Cathy Wylie, from the New Zealand Council for
Educational Research.
The time has come for a comprehensive reshaping of the
Tomorrow's School model. It's a matter of priority, because
we can do so much better for learners. I'm also convinced we
can get much better value for our education dollar. As a
researcher, I've tracked Tomorrow's Schools from the
beginning. As the 2011 J.D. Stout fellow at Victoria
University's Stout Research Centre, I had an opportunity to
carry out in-depth research into the legacy of the past two
decades and more of schools' self management. My verdict is
that the model is fundamentally flawed. There is no way our
current schooling structure can deliver on the expectations
we now have of schools.
The Tomorrow's Schools reforms of 1989 ushered in boards of
trustees and a school self-management model that was, and
remains, unique internationally. No other country has
followed our example. In New Zealand we took the
self-managing idea literally. Schools would be stand-alone
islands, with their boards appointing the principal and no
structural connections with each other. Under the thinking of
the time, the government agencies would deal with schools at
a distance, regulating and monitoring but not working
alongside. It is now clear we need much more than that.
The tensions in our system that prompted Tomorrow's Schools
remain with us. I've had the opportunity to read widely and
talk with people who've been part of the policy and school
changes since 1989 to identify why our system struggles to
make more progress. I've examined international models and
research and looked at patterns of New Zealand student
achievement over the Tomorrow's Schools era. My analysis
reveals flawed assumptions, lost opportunities and hidden
costs.
Not only that, we know more now than we did in 1989 about
what really makes an impact on teaching and learning, and
what schools need to make that impact. Rather than schools
that stand alone and often compete, we need a national and
local education infrastructure that enables the building and
sharing of knowledge to use in teaching and learning, and
which has more connection and coherence between each layer of
the education system. It's in the programmes and pockets
where this has occurred in New Zealand that we see real
progress.
Tomorrow's Schools did give schools more initiative and a
greater sense of their own community. Some schools thrived,
others did not - too much was left up to chance. Every year
the Education Review Office identifies 16%-20% of schools who
are clearly struggling with their responsibilities. There
have been education gains for some learners, particularly
once the new qualifications system was introduced at the
secondary level, but those gains have been uneven, and not
always sustained. Education gains have often come when
schools could draw on robust external professional
development and support, and learn how to harness their own
strengths better.
How might we do things better based on these lessons and the
more sophisticated knowledge we now have about effective
teaching? Schools should remain self-managing but they need
to sit within a collective system, one that supports them,
connects them to each other where they face common issues,
and challenges them. My suggestion is for a national network
of around 20 education authorities, responsible to a national
director who is part of the senior leadership team in the
Ministry of Education. Each authority would have ultimate
responsibility for the quality of the schools in their area,
working with their principals both collectively and
individually. The authority would also ensure that schools
and teachers in the area were connected to learn from each
other, supported by national networks of ongoing development
in specific aspects.
Authority staff would be experienced, proven and credible
educators and also include human resource, finance and
property expertise. The authorities would appoint school
principals, a function currently carried out at school level
by boards of trustees. Boards of trustees would be involved
in the process but not be the employer. They would continue
to work with school leaders to set school goals and review
performance against these goals, and provide schools with
parent and community links. Principals would have regular
discussions with their education authority on the school's
performance. It would be much harder for schools to struggle
and get into difficulty as a result.
The establishment of the education authorities would have
implications not only for the role of boards of trustees but
also for the education agencies: the Ministry of Education,
the Education Review Office and the New Zealand
Qualifications Authority. I think there should be a single
government education agency at the national level, with its
core being a focus on much more coherent evidence-based
development and sustaining of capacity and capability,
ensuring that schools have the infrastructure they need. This
includes bringing together curriculum and qualifications, and
anchoring national networks to keep building and sharing the
knowledge we need.
It includes ongoing review of progress, goals and purpose in
ways that bring the different layers of the system together.
We have the experience and knowledge now to create the more
dynamic schooling system that our students need. It is time
to think afresh. It is time to give all our self-managing
schools the vital connections, support and challenge they
need to succeed.
Dr Cathy Wylie is a chief researcher at NZCER.
A name, residential address, and (preferably residential) telephone number is required from readers who comment on ODT Online. These details will not be visible to site visitors.