The government has unveiled what it is calling a radical plan to overhaul reading, writing and maths teaching after two decades of sliding literacy rates.
File photo.
Photo: 123RF
However, there is skepticism among some in the sector.
The advocacy group Lifting Literacy Aotearoa, which has been pushing for an end to so-called “balanced literacy” teaching methods, warned there was a danger the new model could be captured by entrenched vested interests.
Associate Education Minister Jan Tinetti said the standard teaching model – the first of its kind – would be based on the best evidence about the way children learn.
Each school would still have its “own flavour” but the common model would set out the core values.
Tinetti said the sector had been “grasping at straws” for years to arrest sliding literacy rates, and the lack of consistency was a huge frustration for teachers.
Developing the model was expected to take the next 18 months.
Lifting Literacy Aotearoa chair Alice Wilson said the government was moving in the right direction – but it was moving too slowly.
“At this stage, with the research we’ve had around so many years now, they’re still dragging their feet and they’re not being brave enough.”
Research going back decades showed children learned to read best through “structured literacy”, which gave them skills to decode letter sounds, she said.
Advocates of structured literacy blame so-called “balanced literacy” for encouraging children to use “cues” from pictures and context to help guess words.
The Education Ministry continued to invest millions each year in outdated programmes that encouraged cueing, Wilson said.
“When they come out and say the cueing system is damaging to many children and shouldn’t be taught in schools, then we will know they’re on the right track.
“Until they do that, I’m very suspicious. There’s been strategy after strategy after strategy.”
There was a risk the government would try to keep a foot in both camps to placate all sides, she said.
However, Tinetti said the government would have no qualms about scrapping teaching methods that were not supported by the evidence.
“Even if … it’s something we’ve been really invested in over the years, we want to say ‘Is it backed up by the research? Is it backed up by the evidence?’ If it’s not, we have to be big enough to say ‘Let’s go with the research, let’s go with the evidence’, because our young people are too important.”
Tinetti, a former teacher and principal herself, said she had been hugely impressed by the “incredible” results coming out of Canterbury University’s Better Start Literacy programme, which is based on structured literacy methods.
“The first time I saw results from my old school I had tears in my eyes when I saw the results these young people were achieving. So I think we’ve already indicated the direction we’re heading in.”
But the biggest union for teachers has said some of its members could be nervous about the proposed curriculum changes.
Educational Institute president Liam Rutherfood said the changes would only work if teachers’ needs were also looked after.
“The reality is, we still have class sizes as if teaching and learning still means one teacher standing up in front of 30 children and that’s just not the case.
The union wanted to see not only an improved curriculum but professional development opportunities, Rutherford said.
Discussion about this post