Maybe Listening to Experts Would be a Good Idea?
I’ve written a few times about politicians and Ministry of Education officials who ignore educational experts – like teachers and principals – in favour of ideology over evidence. The neoliberal disaster of 1989, dressed up as “Tomorrow’s Schools,” started it all. Hello. that was 36 years ago, and we’re still waiting for the promised miracles.
A core neoliberal obsession was avoiding “professional/ideological capture,” where those with vested interests supposedly hijack organisations. While that can be a problem, the neoliberal approach often meant sidelining people with actual expertise from “managerial” decisions.
After all, who wants ideological decisions to be challenged by people who know what they are talking about?
Look at the mess in the medical system over the past few decades for a prime example.
Education was no exception to this, as I’ve pointed out in previous articles. Nothing has changed. Recently Erica Stanford, Minister of Education, made a grand announcement that open plan classrooms were to be scrapped, citing feedback from schools.
Government scraps open-plan classrooms
Strange, these classrooms, labeled as Modern Learning Environments, were a hobby horse of Hekia Parata, a previous National Minister of Education back in 2011. We oldies, who remembered a previous time back in the 1970s when open plan classrooms were promoted as the best thing since sliced bread (to use a cliche), protested loudly at the time that this was a big mistake. We’d been there, done that, it didn’t work, for the same reasons that the Minister has now stated.
“Overwhelming feedback I’ve received from schools across New Zealand is open-plan classrooms aren’t meeting the needs of students. While open-plan designs were originally intended to foster collaboration, they have often created challenges for schools, particularly around noise and managing student behaviour,” she said.
But back in 2011, Hekia Parata and her compatriots in the Ministry of Education knew better,, and there were stories at the time of her unpleasant attitude towards schools that expressed concern about being forced to remodel their classrooms. Christchurch schools, in particular, facing major rebuilds due to the earthquake, were not given any option but to accept rebuilding as open plan classrooms. The refrain from Christchurch schools now seems to be ‘we told you so’ and Christchurch schools have been forced to spend their own resources to rectify the problems.
Adding to this, Shirley Boys’ High School spent $800,000 on building walls to convert their open plan classrooms, and Avonside Girls’ High School spent $60,000 on screens and acoustic panel dividers because a full wall replacement was too expensive.
As an aside, have you noticed that many of the policy decisions of the current government are aimed at undoing many of the policies of the previous National led government? What gives? You can make ideological reasons for undoing Labour led government policies (although these seem to be very petty at times) but undoing previous National led government programmes? What’s going on?
So now the decision has been made to scrap open plan classrooms. It doesn’t seem any additional government money will be made available for this, as, according to the Minister, schools are funded for projects like this. Yeah, right, as the saying goes. Sure schools are funded, but money for classroom renovation has to come out of the same pot as funding for teachers aides, regular school maintenance, office staff, technology equipment, classroom supplies and so on. There’s never enough and I suspect under the current government the financial situation is even tighter than usual.
But to stay with the theme of not listening to professionals, the announcement to scrap open plan classrooms hasn’t taken into account that some schools have used their creativity to make them work and don’t want to go back to regular classrooms. Fair enough, good on them. So in a reverse of 2011 it seems that some schools are now going to have to make their cases to the Ministry of Education to keep their open plan classrooms.
Back in 2018 esteemed educational adviser Bruce Hammonds, in his acclaimed Leading and Learning blog, wrote an article entitled:
Teaching in a Modern Learning Environment – with a twist!
Bruce explained how modern learning environments could be used to enhance teaching and learning.
“Students will be able to feel part of larger more complex and initially exciting units and this will apply to the teachers as well but for the teachers in particular will be the feeling of being in a team. This will allow teachers to share their problems and successes – and most importantly will enable a variety of organisational arrangements to be made imposable in self-contained classrooms.
These gains in themselves for both teachers and students are considerable but if the teaching methods are only an extension of ‘traditional ‘ subject centred teaching then the advantages are minimal.
New classroom design asks for a more imaginative approach.”
While he published this article in 2018, in fact he wrote the original in the 1970s, to try to assist schools back then to make the most of the new teaching environments. The whole article is well worth reading.
However as Bruce subsequently noted in 2018,
“Most of the open plan schools eventually rebuilt or closed off their walls and their success, or lack of it, provides valuable learning for teachers involved in today’s Modern Learning Environments.”
So as usual, round and round we go, polices made without consultation and research, and then casually contradicted a decade or so later with grand pronouncements.
Maybe listening to the professionals isn’t such a bad idea after all?
P.S. I’ve just seen in today’s news that the government is establishing a new school property management agency due to the existing process being a shambles. Anyone care to guess which government was responsible for messing up a system that had worked well until the late 1990s?
At that time all property management was devolved to school Boards of Trustees, which in practice usually meant principals had to add this to their already busy jobs.
(And, is this a preparation for privatisation down the track?)
Experts, like consultants, like $cience, are prone to the mullah, just like politicians.
Remember, consultants are they people who come down from the hills after the war is over to shoot the dead
For every manager, politician, and leader there is somebody in the community who has more understanding and knows more.
The problem of expert capture is seen in Treasury where ideological economists has captured control
Not one person in this govt. appears to have any expertise at anything.
Stanford has children, wow, so do many other people. It doesn’t automatically give her any more insight than anyone else.
Seymour, as associate minister, has no children and is vastly underqualified for the job.
Their arrogance at NOT accepting or listening to advice is tantamount to deliberate destruction of our education system which has struggled with chopping and changing ideas for decades.
The American public is deliberately kept ignorant so as to be easy to control (fool) and we are being taken in the same direction.
Stanford wouldn’t know ‘a good case’ for continuing with the open plan system if it hit her on the head. Why should professionals waste their time trying to explain their reasoning to her, she won’t understand. If they want to continue with their programme and their results point to it being successful, who is she to say yay or nay.
Those who wish to go to single cell classrooms now need the funding to enable this to be done. They shouldn’t have to make do with cheap and nasty temporary walls to block noise and distraction.
Two completely incompetent ministers should not be able to demand anything and expect it to be done. Teachers doing the work are the ones to be listened to. However, experts make these two nitwits feel stupid. No wonder they don’t want to talk to knowledgeable people.
You are completely right. We have been told that everything they introduce or get rid of will deliver terrific results and here we are, still waiting. This lot is no better, worse in fact and their ‘solutions’ will be just as lacklustre as everything else has been. Children have been experimented on for long enough.
There is nothing so far that hasn’t been tried before and likely to make a difference. Give it a rest, Erica.
Stanford will not be told both her and Seymour make a dangerous pair for education “ it’s ideology stupid “.
It is she who must be obeyed not interrupted,must not be questioned. The more I see of her the worse she becomes. “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing”
Have you noticed all of the programs the last government had in place and largely funded have now been revived and claimed by this bunch of clowns .This is because they have no policy of their own and have to use up the already allocated funds before Willis miss apropriates them for her failed management .Then the dopy minister stands there and says look at what I am doing for you its all my idea .None of the latest round of new builds are her idea and are a repeat of what she shouted about a couple of months ago .And the cut price builds will not last the 100 years of the previous plans build quality .
Well said Martyn.
Charter Schools are another example. Odd the Charter Schools Association has told schools not to reveal their enrolment numbers. Funny that.
They seem to have neglected to consider that if they won’t disclose enrollment numbers, reporters will just have to go and conspicuously stand outside schools with binoculars to count students to get the information. That should assist in making charter schools popular!
An official information request is available but I suspect journalists can’t spell it.
The OIA requests were denied, retard (on spurious grounds).
Who are you Khan to call me a retard? You are objectionable, impertinent and non-convivial.
who cares who Khan is. He is correct.
“The OIA requests were denied”
You should have stuck with debating the above fact. It seems you couldn’t.
There’s a tendency in NZ education to adopt ‘one size fits all’ but educators well know that diversity is real and that what works for some students doesn’t work for others. Likewise teachers. Open plan and studio-type learning environments work very well in the well-disciplined (and well resourced) classrooms of private schools – as theories of collaborative learning and tactile engagement would suggest. But probably better for some subjects than others. I can understand how in some classrooms discipline is an issue. A friend has just shifted from a private school to the public system and really sees a difference – and its a high decile public school so socio-economic status is no measure of kids behavior or indeed school policies. In classrooms where discipline is a problem it all becomes a bit messy, despite the promise of alternative learning spaces. Persist? After all, not all kids are a handful – albeit those who are unfortunately create havoc for others. And, isn’t learning in alternative spaces just so much more fun! More retentive? Well, many kids would agree. But one size doesn’t fit all.
I sympathize with educators. Their feedback suggests they just want to get through the day without too much stress. If single-cell classrooms help then so-be-it. But unlikely to suit everyone.
The trick is to find the right expert to listen to. There’s a goodly selection to choose from. . . .
But it’s better to take expert advice rather than guessing like Stanford’s doing.
That’s pretty dismissive to say experts don’ exist. Oh, I know, we”re all experts now. Experts are people who know alot about something – and often bugger all about other things – not like us muppets who know a little about everything. Put it another way, they know their shit. Granted, a lot of expert knowledge is theoretical, not necessarily grounded. But joining the two is the goal and when theory is grounded in practice (or is it that practice is grounded in theory) it’s a powerful combination.
Yep, expert knowledge is often contestable and they end up being guns for hire, a bit like a sportsperson endorsing air conditioning. Gives a sense of trustworthiness.
Bozo, that’s my point. You can always find one to agree with you. With open plan, just listening to the majority of teachers would have been enough.
If you pay an “expert” enough, they’ll tell you exactly what you want to hear. And if they don’t, there’s plenty of other experts who will.
Which still doesn’t qualify the minister to not take advice or listen. She’s inexperienced and knows it.
She falls back on things that have been tried before and tries to tell us it’s all better. That’s nonsense.
Read Bozo’s comment. One size doesn’t fit all and if you seriously want to improve educational outcomes, you will cater for the differences.
If she won’t do that, it’s obvious she’s all talk and no do.
And Luxon wants 100000 Indians to come here to be educated as part of his free trade deal .We cant yet educate our kids how the hell are we going to educate 100k adults that are deemed to be not good enough to be educated in their own country .My daughter was told that by a young Indian fella who works with her in the corrections prison .She asked him why he came here to work in the prison system ,his reply was he had to leave because he was not good enough to go onto further education so he had to come here but is not doing any study .
The Indians don’t need a higher education to know how to advantage themselves or to introduce systems that favor who they choose.
Took part in a ‘read a book to your mokapuna’ day at the local school. Astoundingly the kids in the open plan class room were active in the way kids are when hyped up on sugar at a kids birthday party. Teachers appeared to have no control of their environment.
Do you mean the same experts who screamed men could become women and vica versa? Or the same experts who said nothing could be done to close the US border? Or the experts who insisted big- bix classrooms were beneficial for all? The expert class is thouroughly discredited. Corruped by a combination of naked self interest, fear, and ideological capture.
The people doing the job are the experts.
This raises an interesting proposition. In this view, experts are those with their feet on the ground, they best know the nuances, what works and what doesnt work, with whom and in what contexts. Many folk are dismissive of this kind of expertise – arguably, in the case of teachers, they’re far too busy to read the ‘theory’ and their training didnt really engage them with it. Of course, they’ve heard of Skinner, Piaget and Vygotsky but they’ll tell you that theory doesnt really play out in the classroom. They have a point. A good many folk confuse ‘expertise’ with the theoretical knowledge of experts.
Yes, Joy, experts are not necessarily those residing in ivory towers – nor ministry consultants, whoever they might be. They might have the theoretical knowledge but often lack what many would see as grounded knowledge.
Did you read the article? I thought that it provides enough information to cover your questions.
Experts don’t exist
How are you qualified to make such a statement?
If this is addressed to me it’s because the more I know, the more I realise I know very little. Sure I know more than a university student, but that’s hardly a standard to be happy about.
So next time you visit your GP you don’t mind if she isn’t an expert?
Allan, General Practitioner means non-expert. It doesn’t mean they are clueless though.
You surely are jesting??? My niece is a GP and I saw how hard she had to work to gain GP creditation.
No, Ennius believes he is the expert on experts Alan, yet is the master of none.
How many angels on the thick end of a pin? FGS Ennius is just stating the facts. A general practitioner knows a lot about everything, also when to send a patient to an expert in ‘where-is-the-pain’ and ‘it seems you have blood in your urine’ sort of thing. Don’t start sniping at each other while the hospital (or ED doctor/nurse) is leaning like the Tower of Pizza! There’s a good target to correct me on. Getting pissy with each other is a waste of time.
Nice interpretation Greywarbler although Ennius is just stating the facts is a bit of a stretch, whose facts or are they just alternative facts?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/531405/world-leading-dunedin-study-tracking-people-through-life-gets-renewed-funding
If we have done so much how come that we aren’t listening to these experts. It is one thing to have good and deep knowledge at a university in a country, and another for their information and guidance to be welcomed and followed for the good results that should follow. Obviously NZ hasn’t the mental level at the top of our banana tree to listen, learn and implement in a satisfactory way for our children and parents’ assistance. This is pure science that should be used in our still frontier society.
…The Dunedin Study, which has followed the lives of 1037 people since their births in Dunedin between 1 April 1972 and 31 March 1973, was considered the world’s most detailed study of human health and development…
The Christchurch study followed the health, education and life progress of 1265 babies born in the Christchurch
urban region in mid-1977…
“The information that our studies provide is important for national and international policy and practice. Findings can then be used to inform a lifecourse approach to social investment that improves the lives of people in Aotearoa. Importantly, we are now focused on gathering data on a national and global priority, the ageing population.”..
Good on them and yoiks? to all the lawyers and BBA business administration types whose main interest is in the fascination and synchronisation of systems. Remember that humans are at the base of it all, and are the most fascinating and trying subject to learn about and deal with. No more Lake Alices or Mama Hooch’s and lower jail numbers when we are truly knowledgable I believe. Let’s try to get on the road to learning now, time is limited, in between climate events etc.