Claire Amos: Auckland school Principal opposes government's planned NCEA changes

Consultation on the Government's proposed overhaul of the main secondary school qualification's open to mid-September. 

It includes axing level one, and replacing levels two and three with certificates, that aim to be internationally comparable. 

Auckland Principal Claire Amos doesn't want the system scrapped, and told Heather du Plessis-Allan that we need a system that has wraparound support. 

She says we need more structure and support around teaching and learning. 

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Now, about one in five high school principles have signed
that open letter calling on the government to stop its
plans to scribe NZA. Erica Stanford's plan to replace NCAA
is currently out for consultation, but these principles are warning
that we might be creating a quote lost generation. They
argue the new standards would disadvantage less academic kids and
Erica Stanford is manufacturing a crisis, they say, just to

(00:20):
justify the changes. Auckland principal Claire Amos signed the open
letter and is with us. Hello Claire Curia, what is
your concern I think.

Speaker 2 (00:30):
My concent I've got a number of concerns. I've got
concerns about what is being proposed, but I've also got
concerns about the process under which consultation is happening. Firstly,
I think NCAA is not perfect. I don't think anyone
in that letter is pretending that there isn't things we
can improve and tighten and work on with nca I

(00:51):
think we worry about what we lose if we were
to move away from NCAA. We've got twenty years of
graduates who have that as their qualification. We've got at
least three more years of graduates who will continue to
have NCAA as their qualification. I don't want it to
be dismissed as a result of this. I also believe
there's real concerns that where we're going, if we do

(01:15):
do what is proposed, it's going to have a real impact.
It's actually says in the documentation they're expecting a decline
in outcomes for MALDI students, specificaus students, disabled students, and
students who are ex experiencing health issues. And I think
we need to make sure that whatever we do is

(01:36):
actually going to look after all of our young people
within the system.

Speaker 1 (01:40):
Now, why do you think it's going to have a
great impact on all of the groups that you just named.

Speaker 2 (01:45):
One of the things that points out it actually talks
about this in a recently produced cabinet paper about the proposal.
It recognizes that by narrowing the curriculum and reducing the
flexibility and forcing studenttudents to have to do whole subjects
and have to do a combination of internal and external assessments,

(02:09):
that this will potentially reduce the chance of those at
risk students to succeed.

Speaker 1 (02:15):
We actually know that, but because.

Speaker 2 (02:19):
Nca currently has a level of flexibility.

Speaker 1 (02:22):
And so I'm making it harder. See as we're making
it harder, we are lifting the standard and some of
those kids will simply not be able to lift up
to it. Isn't that the truth?

Speaker 2 (02:32):
I think we need to be really careful about how
we define making it harder. I've got no problem with
diverse definitions of success. I do think we need to
lift up those students cannot we need. I'm an English teacher.
I think we need to be working on raising literacy
and nu mescy.

Speaker 1 (02:49):
And yet you and your profession are not.

Speaker 2 (02:53):
No, absolutely not, I disagree with you. How are you? Guys?

Speaker 1 (02:56):
It's okay with what is happening at the minute, which
is when we introduce the corectus it kids are failing
at these extraordinary rates. Like we are talking and I
can't remember which it is, but in some cases you've
got like thirty percent to sixty percent of kids in
this particular breakdown, this particular thing is subject failing. How
did that happen? How are we okay with that?

Speaker 2 (03:16):
I can actually explain a number of reasons why that happened.
We ended up doing a jump in our testing before
we had actually lift the curriculum and the teaching and
learning program. We need to actually structure and support students
with increase teaching and learning and then they are ready
to be assessed at that level.

Speaker 1 (03:34):
But I know that what you're admitting there is that
you and look, I'm not I don't please. It's quite confrontational,
but I don't want you to feel as if I
am like laying being horrible to you. But these kids
were not learning the stuff right, so we need to
teach them this stuff. And I frankly don't care about
anything else. If the kids fail, but at least they
can read and write, is that not the more important

(03:55):
thing than passing them like we are right now?

Speaker 2 (03:57):
But the contry what happens when they fail all they
leave the system. I don't know if you recall what
the results were like prior to NCAA, Maori and Pacifica
are incredibly overrepresented in the groups that left at the
end of fifth form with no qualification.

Speaker 1 (04:12):
What's the point the system? What's the point in having
them in the system If they come out of year
thirteen but they can't read and write properly?

Speaker 2 (04:21):
I think we absolutely need to be looking looking at
the literacy and numeracy. We've got far greater chance of
supporting them if they remain in the system and wrap
around them and support them. I'm not arguing about lowering
at the bar. I'm saying we raise it, but we
ensure that we give time for the teaching and learning
and the curriculum to be embedded first, having change it.

Speaker 1 (04:41):
You're asking for when you talk about time, you are
asking for cohorts of students who do not get the
learning right. That's what time means every year that we
pass by.

Speaker 2 (04:52):
But you're in turn, you'd rather have cohorts of students
that actually get closed out of the education system altogether.

Speaker 1 (04:57):
Listen, if they get closed out, but they can read
and write, what's more important.

Speaker 2 (05:01):
No, but we'll see what happens is they fail at
year eleven and they leave the system without qualifications. I
would much rather have a system that wraps around them
and keeps them in school and supports them. I am
not arguing for a dumbing down. I'm asking for wrap
around and support, and it's focus on the curriculum and
teaching and learning first. When we've embedded that, absolutely we

(05:24):
start shifting how we assess them. But we need to
do the groundwork first. We need to take care of
these young people and keep them in the education system
as long as possible.

Speaker 1 (05:34):
Claire, I really appreciate you being so frank with I.
Thank you so much, appreciate it. That's Claire amos Auckland
High School principle. For more from Heather Duplessy Allen Drive,
listen live to news talks. It'd be from four pm weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.