14Mar04_sdei

Please find below a brief description of the New Zealand education administrative system. Compared with the USA, New Zealand possesses many more freedoms. Schools, although funded by the government, are run as a cooperative venture between parents and teachers with the Ministry of Education issuing guidelines. Even so, a recent survey of parents concluded that 76 percent of parents think schools should be permitted to specialize in particular subject areas or sport if they choose to do so and 84 percent of parents believe that individual schools should be allowed to teach their individual community's positive ideas. Only 30 percent of parents believe the Ministry of Education should decide what their children learn in school. TEI believes that USA/California parents would prefer similar freedoms. However,unfortunately the present system removes such freedoms entirely from parents and teachers. TEI believes that parents and teachers know what is best for their children and the consequences of denying them the freedoms that exist in countries such as New Zealand will seriously affect the output and wellbeing of future generations.

New Zealand Administrative Structure

The Picot Commission was set up by the New Zealand government in 1987. At that time schools came under different school districts based on different local authority areas something akin to the USA system,. The Picot Commission recommended doing away with this structure. Each school was to be community based and have its own charter. It was to be run by a Board of Trustees (usually five) each of which had to be a parent of a child attending that particular school together with the Principal and a trustee elected by the school staff. The Board could co-opt other persons to the Board on a temporary basis if they required certain expertise. The Board establishes a Charter, a type of contract where the Board undertakes to the Minister to take all reasonable steps to administer the school in accordance with the purposes contained in the charter. Boards are required to update their charters annually and also to provide annual reports on how well they have achieved against their charter goals and to account for their spending of public money.

Teachers' salaries would still be paid on a national basis through the Ministry of Education. Educational Review Officers (EROs) were established (something akin to Her Majesty's Inspector of Schools in the UK) to oversee the whole system. Numerous layers of administration became superfluous including about half the Ministry of Education! The funds were given to school directly and they could hire (together with other schools if this was appropriate) whatever consultants they needed on a needs basis. New Zealand Ministry of Education issues a set of national administration guidelines that provide a framework within which school boards need to operate. It also has a national qualifications system and it was agreed that a national examination structure should still exist for students reaching the end of high school.

Even today when most of the developed world is obsessed with testing students of all ages the New Zealand Ministry of Education fully appreciates that learning patterns can be different, "Successful outcomes for all students require a range of learning pathways. One size does not fit all. Children arrive at school with different early childhood experiences and different levels of development. How students learn, the pace at which they learn and their interests vary between individuals. These differences are recognized, to an extent, through the current system. This gives teachers and schools responsibility for organizational and teaching decisions and through provision for immersion learning and designated character schools. However, the current system needs to continually look for ways to provide flexible pathways, especially for learners with diverse needs." from Ministry of Education, Statement of Intent, 2003-2008, Building Learning Pathways.
www.tki.org.nz/r/assessment/index_e.php