Education Minister Hekia Parata has taken a U turn in the teacher-student funding ratios, following widespread protest from teachers, parents and students over her earlier decision that could have affected the future of education.
She was greeted with anger in front of Parliament and other places that she visited over the past two weeks.
Her announcement that the classrooms would be larger with a reduction in the teacher-student ratios incurred the wrath of the public, forcing her to back down.
The National Party took a dip in an opinion poll, partly influenced by the unpopular move by the Education Minister.
Opposition Leader (and Leader of the Labour Party) David Shearer scored a point (which showed in the poll) when asked Prime Minister John Key to direct Ms Parata to cancel the plan to increase class sizes.
“He must also front up to New Zealanders with a list of the schools that will supposedly be better off as a result of the policy. Not one school I have spoken to since the policy was announced believes they’ll get an increase in teaching staff.
“The Prime Minister cannot continue to take a hands-off approach. He must have known the impact the policy would have on our children’s learning. He leads the team of Cabinet Ministers who approved it. If he did not know, he is clearly been asleep at the wheel.
“Either way he must take responsibility for the botched policy and ditch it now. He says he hasn’t spoken to his Minister in recent days. We are urging him to pick up the phone and get the issue sorted out,” he had said.
Mr Key had apparently spoken to his Minister, for, in less than a week, Ms Parata issued a statement saying that she had heard the concerns of parents and hence was reversing a part of her Government’s Education Plan.
“We are firmly focused on raising student achievement and getting five out of five of our children succeeding and we continue to believe that investing in quality teaching and professional leadership is the best way to do this. We had thought that some modest changes to teacher-student funding ratios in Budget 2012 would help us fund this investment but it has become apparent that these minor adjustments have caused a disproportionate amount of anxiety for parents, and that was never our intention,” she said.
But she said the reversal would mean that the Government would not be able to accrue the envisaged saving of $174 million over the next four years.
“We had planned to invest $60 million of the savings in improving teaching quality and professional leadership. The Government will no longer be able to make that investment at this time,” she said.
When parents look for a school for their child, those that offer small classes appeal. Close supervision might stop a child from being distracted from his or her work by another child’s clownish antics, the thinking goes, or allow the teacher to identify a student’s true ability.
On the other side of the argument, few academic studies have found that class size makes difference to how well children perform in exams. Indeed, international comparisons suggest that most countries could benefit from having much larger classes.
Ever since 2000, when the OECD first rated how well 15-year-olds in different countries were able to use what they had learned at school. Britain for instance, has been sliding down the rankings. The problem is not that its teenagers are doing much worse than in the past, rather that their rivals are doing better.
While Britain’s performance stagnates, East Asian schoolchildren surge ahead. In 2000 the gap between British and South Korean teenagers was negligible; by 2009, it was yawning.
Pouring more money into the system has failed to perk up youngsters: spending per pupil has taken a huge leap over the years in New Zealand, unmatched by academic performance.
Countries that have overtaken Britain and New Zealand have spent less money per pupil but invested it better, ensuring that students received high-quality teaching even if their classrooms were crowded.
