Erica Stanford: Education Minister on the proposed qualification system to replace NCEA

The Education Minister says balance of choice is a priority under its new qualification system.  

The Government is proposing to throw out NCEA for two certificates in Years 12 and 13.  

Level 1 will be replaced with a foundation test in numeracy and literacy.  

Erica Stanford told Mike Hosking that after Year 11, students are free to choose the subjects which engage them. 

She says the key difference will be when students study English, math, or physics, it will be against a world-leading benchmarked curriculum, and children in Invercargill will be learning the exact same thing as those in Auckland.  

The Education Minister’s also looking at trimming down the variety of subjects available to students. 

Stanford told Hosking they’re taking a look at the number of subjects and the amount of students taking each one.  

But she still wants the option for children to take classes which excite them, like dance and drama. 

LISTEN ABOVE 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
So just a reminder of where we're going educationally as
of yesterday. So level one is going, we will have
a new Foundational Skills Award recognizing literacy and numeracy. Then
comes the new Zealand Certificate of Education and Advanced Certificate,
and as we mentioned earlier, we are begon the vacational
training at long last. Erica Stamford is of course the
Education Minister anders back. Will they say very good morning
to you? I was saying on the show earlier on

(00:20):
it seems, broadly speaking, for such a large announcement yesterday
to have been pretty well received.

Speaker 2 (00:27):
Look, it has been. I think parents intuitively knew that
there was something that wasn't quite right about NCA, and
they've had the space to be able to say over
the last couple of weeks, actually it hasn't been working
in these ways for our children, and now they get
to have their say with the new plan that's out
for consultation today.

Speaker 1 (00:44):
Did you look at Cambridge Bacalaureate anything that was already
in play, simply replace it or not.

Speaker 2 (00:50):
I had a group of about twenty great principles who
formed an advisory group for me, and they looked at
every jurisdiction across the world and looked what worked, what
didn't work, and pulled together the plan that you see
in front of you. There are certain things about Cambridge
that are great, there are certain things that aren't quite right,
and so we've looked at what we can do to

(01:11):
be world leading.

Speaker 1 (01:12):
Okay, so this would be something that the rest of
the world will look at in time and go we
will do that too.

Speaker 2 (01:19):
Well, that is a plan. With all of my education reforms,
I want us to be world leading. We've already had
accolades about our primary maths and English curriculum. We've had
accolades about moving to structure. Let you see, the first
country in the world to do so, all of the
resources we're pumping in, I've got other countries now coming
to us looking at our teachers and what they're doing
on the ground and saying we want to replicate this,

(01:40):
and that's a great place for us to do you have.

Speaker 1 (01:42):
Any sense or did you reach out? Do you have
any sense of the bipartisanship required here? What's to stop
them flipping it?

Speaker 2 (01:49):
It's really important. This is our national qualification. And I
made the point very early on in this process that
we have to be aligned on this. We cannot be
flip flopping. And of course I reached out and I've
been a very dogmatic about that.

Speaker 1 (02:02):
And are they on board.

Speaker 2 (02:03):
Well, you'll have to ask them about that.

Speaker 1 (02:05):
While I was watching them yesterday, they don't seem committed
to it. Does it worry you? I mean, you've just
thrown out twenty years of something that apparently we were
living with perfectly happily. What's to stop them throwing out?

Speaker 2 (02:16):
Well, I'm sure I don't think we were living with
it perfectly happily because I don't think kids were reaching
their full potential and we weren't ambitious enough. And we
are ambitious.

Speaker 1 (02:23):
So my only problem with what was announced yesterday is
that if you've got kids, and having had five of them,
there's some experience for you. But if you've got kids
who are on a pathway and know what they're doing,
choice is a good thing. And it may be that
English isn't what they need in year twelve or thirteen
or eleven or whatever. You know, they may be going
somewhere else whereas this takes that away from them.

Speaker 2 (02:43):
No, not really. We are trying to get that balance right,
the perfect balance of flexibility with consistency, taking away some
of the complexity for more simplicity. But there will be choice.
We are saying you have to do foundationals, English and
maths when you're in year eleven. Most schools do that already,
some don't, so we're making that compulsory. After that, fil
your boots. Choose the subjects that engage you, that lead

(03:06):
to career pathways that you want. But the key difference
will be when you study English or maths or physics,
it will be against a world leading benchmarked curriculum and
you will learn the same thing as a child and
invercargo compared to walk trure.

Speaker 1 (03:20):
So here's part of the problem. Part of the problem
will be is you're going to need to limit subjects,
aren't you from what we've currently got. Once you've limited subjects,
I'm looking at these subjects I don't really want to
be at school. It's a bit boring. So I used
to do dance and drama or whatever it may be.
Now I've got to take something serious and I may
well fail. And when I fail, then what happens.

Speaker 2 (03:38):
I'm not sure where everyone's getting this view that we're
going to be limiting all these subjects. We are taking
a look at the subject list. This is a separate
stream of work, separate to the qualification. We are looking
at the amount of subjects we have and saying, look,
how many children did them last year? How many children
just did one stand in and going do we still
need to be doing that? But that happens all the time.
We still want to have choice. My children should still

(03:59):
be doing darce and drama and the things that excite
them and lead them maybe into the theater or whatever.
So those things will still be available. Of course, what.

Speaker 1 (04:07):
About the trade side of the equation? How limited will
that be depending on where you are in the country geographically,
in the size of your school.

Speaker 2 (04:15):
That is a challenge and I've said publicly I want
the VET pathways to be strong and industry aligned and
relevant and tertiary aligned. The challenge of courses that schools
aren't always able to have an automotive electrician or engineer
in their school. We have to partner with the polytechs
and also the private training organizations to make this work.
And this is I'm not going to pretend this is

(04:37):
going to be an easy piece of work. It's going
to be tough, but we're going to do it. We're
going to make sure that no matter which school you're in,
you have access to these pathways, and we will work
with the industry standards boards to make sure the standards
are relevant.

Speaker 1 (04:47):
The answer will come in the exam results, I'm assuming,
But when will we know this works? So if it
starts in twenty seven, twenty eight, so twenty eight, when
do we know it works?

Speaker 2 (04:55):
Well, we will already know from next year because the
English and Maths curriculum are gazetted for next year for
our third forms or year ninees, so they will start
to use the new curriculum and then the other subjects
will roll through as well. So we will start to
already see the results of the new curriculum through the
other assessment tools that we use and teach a feedback
and score feedback before we get there.

Speaker 1 (05:16):
Okay, put your immigration hat on just quickly, Golden Beza's
are they still continuing to bring people in with money?

Speaker 2 (05:23):
They are. It has a tape it off slightly, but
it's a huge amount stronger than I thought it would be.
I said two hundred in the first year. I think
we were at two hundred in the first six weeks
or ten weeks, so it's still very strong, although I
would say that if you know they have the ability
to be able to buy a house, that will supercharge
it again.

Speaker 1 (05:41):
You know, Erica, you have the power to do that.
Funnily enough, because you're in government.

Speaker 2 (05:46):
Here are some things so slightly ahead of my paypack
at that in the country. Well, I've had my say
and I've said publicly and I've said to other people
in my party and the government, if you're going to
ask people to come in and invest at least five
if not ten, mate, potentially we want more out of them.
Of course, then saying to them but you can't buy
a house is not ideal. And like I think everyone

(06:07):
in government is pretty pragmatic about that, and there are
conversations that have been had and I expect that there
will most likely be some changes. But look, as I've said, ahead,
it's above my pay grade and that's sort of leader
to leader as it should be.

Speaker 1 (06:18):
All right, good stuff. Nice to see erin Stampord, education
and immigration ministers. For more from the my CA Asking
Breakfast listen live to news talks that'd be from six
am weekdays, or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio,