Education professor pans 'simplistic' school reforms

A professor who advised the Education Ministry on education research and evidence for 10 years has panned the government's school reforms as simplistic.

"Unfortunately some of our recent policies and practices suffer from simplism by markedly simplifying the complexity of teaching, learning and education," University of Auckland education professor Stuart McNaughton said in an article in the New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies.

He said the problem posed "significant risks" for excellence and equity.

Education Minister Erica Stanford rejected the criticism, however, telling RNZ the government's approach was evidence-based.

McNaughton's article said simplism was "exaggerated or naive oversimplification of complexity associated with misleading or inadequate understanding".

His article cited four examples:

the shift to structured literacy as the basis for teaching reading and writing in all primary schools

buying maths textbooks for schools

using online tests as a benchmark for teens' literacy and numeracy

replacing the NCEA with a qualification requiring students to sit more externally-assessed exams.

On each of those, his article said:

years of experimental studies found focusing on decoding words in the first years of primary school could raise decoding levels "but has limited (if any) impact by itself on medium to long term comprehension"

textbooks would have little overall effect on maths achievement as they were accompanied by only two days of training for teachers

literacy and numeracy tests disadvantaged Māori and Pacific students

the emphasis on exams for secondary students was likely to narrow the curriculum at the expense of skills like problem-solving and creativity.

The article said the consequences of the government's policies would range from increasing inequitable outcomes for Māori and Pacific students, reducing excellence by limiting what was learned, and deprofessionalising teachers to the role of technical experts.

McNaughton told RNZ he wrote the article because he wanted people to consider all the evidence and make better policy decisions.

"I wanted to point out we would avoid risks associated with simplifying if we were to consider what actually is complex," he said.

He said the push for structured literacy and maths was was based on a model that was developed over 40 years ago.

"The science has moved considerably beyond that to add considerations of such things as self-regulation, critical thinking and motivation importantly in the foundational years," he said.

He said that didn't mean abandoning the government's reforms altogether, but merely tweaking them slightly would not be enough.

For example, the adoption of structured literacy failed to recognise research that showed schools also needed to develop motivation and critical thinking in young readers.

"Clearly you need a form of structured literacy in place in order to teach some of the basics.

"What I'm worried about is focusing only on those relatively simple components, the phonics components, and ignoring or at least not supporting an emphasis on the more complicated things like the role of self-regulation in early reading and writing and maths, or, like in the case of reading, enjoying reading.

"These things are needed together. So no, I don't want to overturn a move and a development in embedding ways of thinking about the nature phonics and decoding, I want to add to that and I want to add because reading is more complicated than just being able to decipher words."

McNaughton said the government's decision to bankroll expansion of the Enrich oral language programme for under-fives in early childhood education was a good example of evidence-based policy that recognised the complexity of the problem it sought to address.

"That programme is not just about a small component of reading or language, it's about literacy, it's about language, it's about social-emotional development, it's even including self-regulation so the complexity of what children need to learn even before they get to school is being considered," he said.

McNaughton was the ministry's chief scientific advisor for 10 years - a part-time role that he said involved providing even-handed, evidence-based advice.

Education Minister rejects criticism

Stanford said she did not accept McNaughton's characterisation of the government's reforms, which she said were based on data, science and evidence.

"Years of New Zealand research has demonstrated that structured literacy and a tiered approach to intervention significantly improves literacy outcomes and help close the equity gap, particularly for children who have historically been the least well-served by our education system," she told RNZ in a statement.

"I am confident in the evidence-based approach this government is taking, and the early results we are seeing tell us we made the right decision."

Stanford said McNaughton was influential during a period when literacy achievement declined and gaps between high and low achievers remained stubbornly wide.

She said structured literacy gave children the strongest possible foundation in reading so that they could unlock important skills like comprehension.

"Once children can read, write and spell confidently, they are free to engage with literature, poetry, science, history, the arts and everything else a rich education has to offer," she said.

"Teachers will always exercise professional judgement. Professional judgement is strengthened by evidence, not replaced by it. Like every profession, teaching should continue to evolve as our understanding grows.

"These reforms back teachers with clearer expectations, better resources and stronger professional learning so they can help more children succeed."