Seek The Truth
Principal’s Office
Matipo Primary – Point of Difference
Jun 3rd
I attended a Retailers Association seminar and noted the answer to a question on what is the most important thing in marketing. While quality of service, value for money etc were important, the most important thing was the retailer’s “point of difference” – what made them special or made them stand out. At a recent seminar in Wellington on Authentic Learning at which I played a small part, I was asked a question as to what was the point of difference of our school. I thought it was a very good question and feel I answered it reasonably well but have since thought about it more and have expanded my thinking on what is the point of difference of Matipo School. For simplicity, I have tabulated my response.
- Our first point of difference is that we are an innovative and progressive school. Our school van slogan puts it succinctly – ‘school on the move’. We are committed to continuous improvement and regular reviews/audits of all aspects of the school. We were an early adopter of inquiry based learning, prime time learning concept, genuine child centred school, media production, a strong arts strand and purpose built specialist facilities, eg Arts Suite, Media Suite, playground canopy.
- We have an emphasis on a number of philosophical ‘pou’ which are firmly driven foundations of the school; inclusive practice, reflective practice, structure formality and routine, expectations, consequences, proactive identification and intervention, fostering traditions and offering broad value added options.
- In addition to our culture of innovation, we promote a culture of excellence in all that we do. We try and cultivate excellence at all levels and in all areas of the school – achievement, behaviour, campus, sport, arts etc.
- Our school is research driven and we have a strong emphasis on whole school, longitudinal professional development (again, adopted long before it became fashionable). We grow staff and expect all to be self responsible for on-going learning and to become life time learners.
- A major point of difference for us is in the strong Arts Strand. One day a week each syndicate is involved in Arts, P.E., and I.T. We are really seeing tremendous growth in dance across the school and in performance music. The 2009 production of “Bugsy Malone” was an amazing success. A number of our teachers are involved in performing arts themselves. In 2010 we are trying to raise the quality and profile of drama.
- The work of Sir Ken Robinson has inspired us to try to be a more creative school and to help grow more balanced children. We have made a major investment in I.T. and its use in contributing to 21st century learners is well embedded across the school. It is integral (rather than ancillary) to all classroom learning.
- Additionally, we have a strong Media Strand with all classes actively involved in film making and television production. Each class take weekly blocks to produce an mTV broadcast (Matipo TV) presented across the school computer network and uploaded to YouTube for wider dissemination.
- As a school we celebrate the cultures of our children with a week long Samoan Language Week and also celebrate Matariki Week as a cultural immersion. We are a 10 year Gold Partner with the Auckland Philharmonia, Trees for Survival Project since 1992 and a member of the University of Auckland Post Graduate Diploma in Teaching Consortium.
The amalgam of all these points of difference contributes to a very special school culture. At most times of the day there is not a lot of noise to be heard – kid are quietly engaged in purposely learning environments. They are happy, secure and confident. Student voice is encouraged. We have lots of value added options and opportunities for specialist groups, especially in media and the arts.
Our point of difference is actually what makes a difference.
National Standards Predicated By a Lie!
May 24th
The rational for the introduction of National Standards was the then National Party’s education policy to raise standards and introduce plain language reporting to parents (the latter stolen from Australian Prime Minister Rudd). It’s well documented that New Zealand has a long tail of underachievement – approximately 20%. The National government’s solution was to introduce the concept of National Standards to follow Labour’s analysis of variance reporting and in the 90’s, achievement statements. Because National Standards is so fundamentally flawed and so poorly introduced, given a couple of years it will fade into oblivion. Most university academics, the teacher unions and the principals groups together with many leading educational commentators are opposed to the introduction of National Standards. The government and the media clearly support their introduction.
What was the lie on which National Standards were based? In 2007 the Education Review Office produced a report on assessment in schools. Various excerpts were selectively used to imply that schools were not doing enough to raise the achievement of children and were making poor use of assessment data to inform their teaching. The report quotes;
In about half the schools (52%) the teachers used assessment information to inform their teaching and learning programme. Less than half (44%) used worthwhile information.
This extract is the basis of the National government’s national standards and is widely quoted as their rational.
Unfortunately (as quoted by Kelvin Smythe) neither the government nor Ministry used the very next sentence in the ERO report;
“Figure 5 shows that 90% of primary schools were able to demonstrate their student’s achievements in the curriculum areas of English and Maths…….”
“Figure 6 shows 88% of primary schools were effective at demonstrating progress in English and 82% in maths”
“almost all primary schools had made literacy and numeracy key learning priorities….in most schools the teachers had built a shared understanding of how, when and why to measure student achievement in these areas”
Why then was the original selective quote so out of kilter with the original 52% figure – because it was based on the average figures for all curriculum activity like health, social studies, P.E., music etc which schools do not assess so vigorously and for which teachers produce qualitative rather than quantitative information (Kelvin Smythe).
This is the deliberate lie or distortion on which National Standards has been predicated and the facts deliberately ignored by the Ministry and their apologists. The reality is, according to ERO, that schools were assessing well and using the information to inform their teaching and to raise the achievement of the 20% tail.
A number of principals and schools were adamantly opposed to National Standards, some were in favour, but the vast majority resigned to trying to implement them but, very sensibly, asking for a year’s delay in order to implement the new initiative in an ordered, informed way. ‘No’ was the emphatic answer of the Minister and the Prime Minister.
What is the result? – A complete botch up with confusing and changing information, a lack of resources, muddled and under-resourced inservice leading to ‘non aligned’ principals walking away in despair. If National Standards is implemented at all it will be because of the good will and effort of principals and staff. The promised in-service is poorly delivered with anecdotal comments from facilitators saying “they were making up in the morning what they would say in the afternoon”. There is no money for relievers so schools have to pay $250 per day per teacher for staff who attend the courses. For some schools this may potentially cost $5000-$10,000. No teacher-only-days are authorized unlike for the introduction of NCEA and the NZ Curriculum.
Interestingly, not one person at the Ministry of Education is willing to put their hand up as authors or project directors of this ill conceived, hurried, muddled piece of party politics being transformed into political policy. It is a complete and utter farce and based on a lie, a deliberate piece of distortion.
Social Networking Websites
May 12th
Sites such as Bebo, Facebook , Hi5, etc are useful social networking and collaborative sites for adults. However, there are real dangers involved. Most have an age restriction – usually R14 years but this is easily got around.
Almost every week there is a news item or T.V. show highlighting the dangers of predatory people – usually older men, grooming young girls for wrongful intent. They create their own online personas to lure girls into eventually meeting up with them.
The Sunday Star Times of 9th May carried a two page article about an older man who lured 15 young Indian girls by a false identity on the Internet, got them to send him candid photos of themselves, then blackmailed them with exposure to their parents. He was convicted of raping 15 of them but it is believed there were probably twice this number. (One of the girls attempted suicide).
I urge all parents to use their common sense, don’t let young children have Facebook accounts and monitor their computer usage.
Special Newsletter – National Standards
Feb 8th
As you will be aware from the media and soon from a letter and pamphlet from the Prime Minister, there is much debate about the introduction of National Standards to primary schools. Because of this, I feel it necessary to state this school’s position.
We will be implementing the National Standards. I am really confident of the achievement of children at this school and know that if we are compared with other schools, we would really hold our own. If an area of weakness is found however, then it is up to us to do something about it.
Our reading results are well above the national average, our numeracy in the average band, but our spelling is down. This year, we are putting a special emphasis on spelling in order to improve it.
Schools also need to report to parents in plain language as to whether your child is achieving well above, above, at, or below the national standards.
What principals, schools, the Teachers’ Union and many leading academics from universities are saying is that the government’s examples are hasty and poor. They were written by Ministry bureaucrats, with no input from schools or actual people at the chalk face. What the schools and unions are asking for is that the introduction of national standards be delayed a year to do more work on them so that there is a better outcome and also that they be trialled to see how they work.
In summary, we’re not afraid of National Standards and will be introducing them along with the new reporting system. However, I totally agree that they should be delayed a year, re-written and trialled and believe the government has stuffed up but is too “pig headed” to admit it.
International Confederation of Principals Conference
Jul 31st
I was able to attend this conference thanks to a professional development grant from the Matipo Primary Board of Trustees and from Project Koru. These grants were used to pay for travel, accommodation and registration. All other costs were borne by myself. My sincere thanks for both these grants but particularly to the Board for their continuing confidence in me. The conference was attended by 1500 delegates from 40 countries, with 650 from overseas.
The opening ceremony was attended by the President of Singapore while Prime Minister Lee gave an outstanding keynote address; outlining the recent history of Singapore education and the fact that it should be free of political changes.
Notable throughout the conference was the quality of the music and dance of the school performing groups – hugely superior to anything in New Zealand but reinforcing our school efforts to deliver a strong arts strand and showing us the way. The lesson however, is that its not enough to just do it, we need to do it with quality.
The theme of the Conference was “Charting the New Education Landscape” – meeting the future.
The only thing we know with certainty about the future is that change is inevitable. Our children live in an international world and an increasingly interconnected world. The term educator has taken on a far wider meaning and ‘teachers’ are not the only teachers.
Disney is more influential than Duke (university)
Spielberg outweighs Stamford
MTV outscore MIT (Benjamin Barber)
The future means that teachers must change, students must change and parents must change. Our school strategic of the last 6 years of changing our school from a place of teaching to a place of learning is more simply put in Singapore – “teach less, learn more”.
Once again, this conference re-affirmed to me that our school, while not perfect, is well ahead of most in leading the future and is right up there! – Strong basics, management, leadership, innovation, arts, media, I.T., value added options, engagement, commitment and a pedagogical emphasis on personalized learning and inquiry learning.
The educational lesson of Singapore is extremely interesting. It only spends 3.8% of GDP on education compared to the OEDCD average of 5.4% yet its standards are amongst the highest in the world.
Why? Singapore is a motivated society where education is valued. Classes are streamed. Schools of around 12 are clustered with a superintendent or lead principal to guide, share and encourage. There is a culture of collaborative learning between teachers and schools. There is a system of performance bonuses.
Sir Dexter Hutt is a leading British educationist. He presented a list of leadership skills/criteria;
- Having and sharing a vision
- Establishing a culture of mutual respect
- By ensuring there is a behavioral platform from which teaching/learning is possible
- By giving staff a sense of pride in the school
- By holding staff to account and having difficult conversations if necessary
- By demonstrating concern for staff when they need help
- By being perceived as having children’s interests at heart
- By publically and privately giving praise for good performance
- By having high expectations of staff
- By being optimistic and innovative
- Quite simply, by leading!
None of this is completely new but what was useful was his theory of Sigmoid Curves – essentially everything rises and falls and what used to work, doesn’t keep working. This is related to the paradigm of change. You need to keep re-inventing yourself. If you don’t change, you fail.
- “School on the move”
- “Committed to continuous improvement”
The trick is knowing when to introduce change. The increased pace of change also means each new strategy will have a shorter life
School leaders need to create an understanding of the need for change. A learning example is the difference and priority of knowledge v skills. Traditionally taxi drivers memorized street names and were tested on it. Now they don’t need that knowledge just the skill of operating a Satnav or GPS.
Andy Hargreaves from Boston College is a frequent conference speaker. He feels strongly that future scenarios for education need to be balanced by a strong social responsibility ethos – equity, inclusiveness, human rights, social justice etc. He believes also that we should utilize the best of the past as a foundation for the future and that teachers and schools need to work more collaboratively together in peer interactions, professional learning groups, clusters and other connections to form learning communities.
He also makes a very valid point about assessment. Assessment to inform teaching needs data on all children but assessment for accountability reasons just needs sampling.
Another interesting reflection is that the NZ Curriculum stands up well as a document well founded on international best practice with its contents encouraging innovation, social responsibility through values and thinking skills, inquiry learning etc through the key competencies. It is reasonably non prescriptive and lays good foundations for 21st century learning.
The last day produced the two most influential speakers for me.
Prof. Kishore Mahbubani is from the University of Singapore. His contention is that we are moving from a mono-civilization world order to a multi-civilization world order where the predominant globally dominant western civilization will change to a world order where Chinese, Indian and Islamic cultures will become more important and influential. How will our education systems adapt? What cultural toolboxes will we need?
Prof. David Perkins is from the Harvard Graduate School. His topic was ‘Education for the Unknown’ and was arguably the most provocative. His recurring question was “what’s worth learning?” From various surveys and forums he gets a constant response that conventional disciplines don’t really rate – what’s worth learning well comes from beyond the conventional subjects.
What’s worth Learning in the future
My list:
- communication skills.
- to know how to learn.
- to be open minded.
- to be e-literate.
- social responsibility.
- to get on with people of all cultures.
Perkins’ list:
- understandings of wide scope from the disciplines.
- ways of knowing and the knowledge arts.
- ethical understandings.
- personal & societal understandings.
- Horizon themes
* digital horizons
* artistic horizons
* civic horizons
(His list has a number of relationships with the NZC Key Competencies and relates also to Mark Treadwell’s suggestion of re-designing school curriculums around the Key Competencies).
To take Perkins ideas forward requires a lot of work – the broad stroke framework is very general, there would be entrenched interests and conventions to overcome, political controls and a great amount of courage.
Principal’s Forum – Library Content
Jul 2nd
What sort of books or periodicals does your child like to read which would be suitable to buy for the school library?
What’s Worth Learning?
Jul 1st
This is an incredibly powerful and important question as more and more people ponder education in the 21st century and try and imagine what it will look like. The only thing we know with certainty about the future is that change is inevitable.
We know that children entering our schools now as Year Ones, will work in jobs and use tools, that haven’t yet been invented. We know that knowledge is increasing incrementally at an incredible rate. Engineering and technology knowledge is becoming obsolete within 5 years (Kevin Richardson).
Peter Serge from M.I.T. School of Business believes schools as the finite organizations that we know, will not exist within 50 years. We not only live in a world and a future of change, but the pace of change is also increasing.
David Perkins is from the Harvard Graduate School and was formerly Director of Project Zero within that institution. He asks a recurring question at all forums – with his students, at conferences and within schools; “what’s worth learning?” He talks about ‘education for the unknown’ and what pupils might need to learn in the changing future. Others ask a similar question and also wonder what forms education may take or what ‘schools’ might look like in the future.
Just a couple of years ago, we talked in terms of;
• Technology changes
• Creation of life long learners
• A thinking skills curriculum
• The importance of languages
• Globalization
• Networking as an educational and employment tool.
Some generalities about future learning are of interest. Our children live in an international world and an increasingly interconnected world. The term ‘educator’ has taken on a far wider meaning and ‘teachers’ are not the only teachers.
Disney is more influential than Duke
Spielberg outweighs Stamford
MTV outscores MIT (Benjamin Barber)
Future learning will be I.T. dominant and delivered. Teachers will be less obvious and intrusive. More learning will be 1:1 in nature, might be about negotiated topics, will be within a real life and authentic context and within a parameter of teaching one child at a time (in a NZ context, personalized learning).
Already there are some very innovative projects in action in the United States. One is the Met School in Providence and grown to 54 other Met Schools.
Substantive funding came from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The philosophy of the Met Schools is based around the question of ‘what’s good for kids?’ It involves smaller schools, personalized learning, real life contexts with the support of parents and mentors. Students are actively involved in their learning and its design. The philosophy of Met Schools is encompassed in their slogan “one child at a time”. (see also Big Picture Learning).
The second innovation is the Microsoft School of the Future in Philadelphia which as you would expect is highly geared towards digitally dominant learning. Their definition of 21st century learning includes reading, writing and maths along with problem solving, effective communications and critical thinking.
A focus of the school is collaboration, integrated technology, continuous learning access anytime/anywhere, real life contexts and student centered learning.
This gives us a bit of a clue about how education in the future is evolving
• Greater use and delivery digitally
• More personalized learning
• Authentic real-life learning contexts
• Life long learning
• Focus on critical thinking skills
Another U.S. innovative development is the Florida Virtual School. This is a distance education provider with all courses delivered electronically. It is compulsory for all students in Florida to enroll in at least one distance course, in the period of their schooling.
Clearly, on-line learning will very much be a feature of future school and will contribute to both personalized learning and life-long learning.
However, these are all trends and don’t answer the question; what’s worth learning? If we return to David Perkins, from his questioning of ‘what’s worth learning?’ the constant response is that conventional disciplines don’t really rate in terms of responses (although most people might regard the ability to read, write and enumerate as a given). His list of what’s worth learning in the future is;
• Understandings of wide scope - the ability to apply or use
from the disciplines conventional subjects
Peter Serge from M.I.T. School of Business believes schools as the finite organizations that we know, will not exist within 50 years. We not only live in a world and a future of change, but the pace of change is also increasing.
David Perkins is from the Harvard Graduate School and was formerly Director of Project Zero within that institution. He asks a recurring question at all forums – with his students, at conferences and within schools; “what’s worth learning?” He talks about ‘education for the unknown’ and what pupils might need to learn in the changing future. Others ask a similar question and also wonder what forms education may take or what ‘schools’ might look like in the future.
Just a couple of years ago, we talked in terms of;
• Technology changes
• Creation of life long learners
• A thinking skills curriculum
• The importance of languages
• Globalization
• Networking as an educational and employment tool.
Some generalities about future learning are of interest. Our children live in an international world and an increasingly interconnected world. The term ‘educator’ has taken on a far wider meaning and ‘teachers’ are not the only teachers.
Disney is more influential than Duke
Spielberg outweighs Stamford
MTV outscores MIT (Benjamin Barber)
Future learning will be I.T. dominant and delivered. Teachers will be less obvious and intrusive. More learning will be 1:1 in nature, might be about negotiated topics, will be within a real life and authentic context and within a parameter of teaching one child at a time (in a NZ context, personalized learning).
Already there are some very innovative projects in action in the United States. One is the Met School in Providence and grown to 54 other Met Schools.
Substantive funding came from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The philosophy of the Met Schools is based around the question of ‘what’s good for kids?’ It involves smaller schools, personalized learning, real life contexts with the support of parents and mentors. Students are actively involved in their learning and its design. The philosophy of Met Schools is encompassed in their slogan “one child at a time”. (see also Big Picture Learning).
The second innovation is the Microsoft School of the Future in Philadelphia which as you would expect is highly geared towards digitally dominant learning. Their definition of 21st century learning includes reading, writing and maths along with problem solving, effective communications and critical thinking.
A focus of the school is collaboration, integrated technology, continuous learning access anytime/anywhere, real life contexts and student centered learning.
This gives us a bit of a clue about how education in the future is evolving
• Greater use and delivery digitally
• More personalized learning
• Authentic real-life learning contexts
• Life long learning
• Focus on critical thinking skills
Another U.S. innovative development is the Florida Virtual School. This is a distance education provider with all courses delivered electronically. It is compulsory for all students in Florida to enroll in at least one distance course, in the period of their schooling.
Clearly, on-line learning will very much be a feature of future school and will contribute to both personalized learning and life-long learning.
However, these are all trends and don’t answer the question; what’s worth learning? If we return to David Perkins, from his questioning of ‘what’s worth learning?’ the constant response is that conventional disciplines don’t really rate in terms of responses (although most people might regard the ability to read, write and enumerate as a given). His list of what’s worth learning in the future is;
• Understandings of wide scope - the ability to apply or use
from the disciplines conventional subjects
• Ways of knowing and the knowledge - knowing how to learn & thinking
arts skills
• Ethical understandings - personal values and behaviours
• Personal & societal understandings - social responsibilities
• Horizon themes – digital horizons
- artistic horizons
- civic horizons
Wrapped within the contexts of both personalized and authentic learning.
This is going to require a change in the way we teach and learn. The increased digital presence, more personalized learning, more negotiated and authentic learning, changing the teaching focus from achievement objectives to key competencies including thinking skills and the creation of lifelong learners is already quite far down the track for many schools. We need to do more in teaching children how to learn and incorporating personal, societal and ethical understandings into their learning. The revised NZ Curriculum and the Key Competencies of Thinking, Participating & Contributing, Relating to Others, Managing Self & Using Language Symbols and Texts present an obvious vehicle to incorporate these areas into our teaching and learning.
In considering the future and deciding what’s worth learning, schools need to be thinking of the pathway ahead, their strategic journey. A very pertinent quote would be;
“ if you don’t know where you are going,
you are certain to end up somewhere else”
These are challenging and exciting times ahead for education and change should be embraced as an opportunity to do better.
NEW: Principal’s Forum – Breakfast Programme
Jun 11th
This is the first run of our new Principal’s Forum feature, where Mr Bainbridge will pose a question for parents and caregivers to comment on.
Today’s question is: The provision of the breakfast programme on Tuesday mornings – should we do it, should we extend it, any other feedback?
An Open Letter to Parents and Caregivers
Jun 11th
I write to you to tell you of my pride in being Principal of Matipo Primary School. This is a very good school with very good standards. We are very well resourced and have excellent facilities. We have a strong staff and have particular strengths in the arts, literacy, numeracy, IT and inquiry learning. Our staff include a dance tutor, a viola player, two children’s authors, a singer, an astronomer and several very enthusiastic band members.
In 2008, 92% of children right across the school were reading at or above their chronological age. (The national average is 74-80%). We were delighted with this achievement. I am really proud of our children. They are collectively really nice kids. They get on well together and they work well. There are strong, positive relationships with teachers. On trips internationally, locally and to sports exchanges, they have never let me down. The children are confident and by and large, socially mature. As parents, you too should be proud of them.
Our school puts an emphasis on formality and routine, structure and expectation and plenty of proactive intervention. We are a strongly child centered school. We have approximately 15 intervention programmes for children who have learning issues plus a behavior intervention programme, a support worker and a Resource Teacher of Learning & Behaviour.
Children can learn violin, guitar, drums, keyboard and brass instruments. We have coached sports at lunchtimes plus about seven lunchtime clubs. Additionally, senior and middle classes get taught Spanish language and we offer a school wide Samoan language class.
In 2009 we are trying very hard to minimize financial demands on parents so are offering no costly trips and are trying hard to attract free performances at school. We have also created a trip subsidy fund to subsidize the cost of out-of-school trips.
I believe we offer really great opportunities to all our children and have created a very positive learning environment.
We are proud to exceed your expectations of a primary school and look forward to continuing to meet and grow the educational, sporting and cultural aspirations of your children.
Kia toa
Kia manawanui
Kia kaha
Kind regards
Wayne Bainbridge
Will Asia become the new Rome?
Apr 1st
A Sigmoid curve illustrates the principle that everything rises and everything falls. We are now seeing a decline of the might of the United States, just as in recent history we have seen the decline of the British, French and German Empires, and further back some 2000 years ago, the Roman Empire. Will Asia become the new Rome as we witness not just the shattered economy of the United States, but the shattered economic philosophy of unregulated market forces.
Asia has certainly been a late starter with many nation-states only achieving independence within the last 50 years. Infrastructure and self-government (often in a vacuum) have been the main early priorities but early warning signs of the powerful potential of Asian economies were evidenced by the economic success stories of Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Hong Kong. Now the economic might and increasing global influence of India and China are sounding a major challenge to the West and to the United States in particular.
Asian politics are going through an increasingly settled period of maturity (in the main). Corruption and grossly uneven distribution of wealth are major issues to address along with human rights and environmental considerations but market strength, work ethic, non-union conditions and manufacturing efficiency are powerful counter balances. China’s contribution to the world GDP has grown from 20% to 33% and India from 6% to 16% over the last 6 years. China, India and Japan are senior figures in all international trade and economic forums with increasing talk now of a “G2” – China and the United States.
With the increasing demise of the United States financially and perhaps morally, and bogged down in crippling Middle Eastern military campaigns, Asian nations have an opportunity to assume some of the mantle, but need to do so politically as well as economically. Regional issues in Myanmar and North Korea need Asian leadership and an Asian solution. Addressing human rights, environmental issues and raising the living standards of the poor throughout the region need to become strategic goals. In July 2009, the Asian Development Bank announced US$1.7 billion in loans for Asian countries – Vietnam, Philippines and Indonesia in particular – to develop green energy alternatives, The bank also announced that by 2020, 40% of its lending would be to address environmental issues.
The enormous economic growth and strength of the Chinese and Indian economies together with the ‘smart’ modelling of countries like Singapore, Japan and South Korea gives Asia the potential to become the ‘new Rome’. The potential for the New Zealand economy to leverage off the Asian juggernaut is enormous. Despite the potential of recent free trade agreements within the region, including China, New Zealand seems oblivious to the trading opportunities presented by the large, well education, English speaking middle classes in Malaysia, South Korea, and India. If Asia is the new Rome, will New Zealand sit at its court?
