Government shuts the door on open-plan classrooms
Photo:
RNZ / Mark Papalii
The government has called a halt to building open-plan classrooms, even though most teachers who actually use the structures believe their students benefit from them.
The buildings - known variously as modern, flexible, or innovative learning environments - have attracted consistent criticism, with some schools spending their own funds remodelling the rooms to create separate classrooms.
But surveys by the Council for Educational Research showed most teachers who worked in the structures liked them and believed their students benefited from learning in that kind of environment.
At Wellington's Newlands Intermediate School today, Education Minister Erica Stanford said she had been thinking about the issue for a long time.
"This government is calling time on open-plan classrooms. We will no longer be building those barn-yard-style open classrooms without any doors that separate classrooms," she said.
Stanford said successive governments had been flip-flopping between open plan and single-cell classrooms for years.
She said the big open spaces were too noisy and distracting for many children, and they would learn better in individual classrooms.
"My message to parents is that your children will be learning in single-cell classrooms that are modular so there will be open-and-close sliding doors that will allow for those classrooms to become bigger for when events require," she said.
"But when they are learning using explicit teaching, the new curriculum, the new maths books they will be learning in single-cell classrooms."
Newlands Intermediate School principal Chris Els said modern learning environments had their place - but they had drawbacks too.
"For neuro-diverse kids, kids that are struggling - really hard. Then you have your kids who know how to hide within the nooks and crannies of open learning spaces, so a lot relied on teachers to know their learner but you'd have the same in a single-cell. Personal preference, I like the idea of a flexible, open-up-close-when-you-can. It gives options," he said.
Stanford visited the school to announced that it would get 10 new classrooms.
Els said he did not know how often his teachers might want to open the glass doors the minister mentioned and turn their single-cell classrooms into a big open room.
"You basically are trying to create an environment that best suits both student and teacher. So if it needs to open and they can work together, so be it," he said.
"It depends on what the curriculum area is. If it needs quiet, the door gets closed and if that's the case those kids work within the single-cell."
While Stanford said the overwhelming feedback from schools was that they did not like open plan rooms, NZ Council for Educational Research (NZCER) surveys showed the opposite.
The council's 2019 survey of primary teachers found most of those who worked in modern learning environments enjoyed it and thought their teaching had improved, though most agreed some children find the rooms overwhelming.
"Sixty-two percent of those who taught in an innovative learning environment enjoyed teaching in such an environment, and 55 percent thought their teaching had changed for the better," the survey report said.
"Just over half thought they could cater for all students, and 45 percent thought that students were more engaged in the flexible learning environment than traditional classrooms, and 30 percent were neutral about this. But 78 percent of the teachers thought that some students find innovative learning environments overwhelming."
The council's 2022 survey of secondary teachers found 49 percent enjoyed their innovative learning environment, 27 percent were neutral, and 24 percent did not enjoy it.
Similar proportions agreed that their students enjoyed learning in the space and that it allowed them to teach in ways that benefited their students' learning.
But they were less likely to agree that their space was well-designed for teaching and learning with 40 percent agreeing, 30 percent neutral and 30 percent disagreeing.
Two-thirds percent agreed that some students found learning in an innovative learning environment overwhelming and 27 percent were neutral.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Te Pāti Māori, Greens outraged at 'marginalising' passport changes
Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii Te Pāti Māori says the government's changes to passports are an attempt to whitewash the national identity. The government confirmed on Friday New Zealand's passport is being redesigned to place the English words above the te reo Māori text. The new look won't start being rolled out until the end of 2027. Since 2021, passports have had "Uruwhenua Aotearoa" printed in silver directly above New Zealand Passport. Internal Affairs Minister Brooke van Velden said the positioning of text on passports will change to reflect the government's commitment to using English first. She said the redesign - which would be unveiled later this year - was being done as part of a scheduled security upgrade, ensuring no additional cost to passport-holders. Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer said the change diminishes the visibility of tangata whenua. "Our passport is not just a travel document, it's a statement of who we are as a nation. So, the stripping down of te reo Māori, or marginalising our indigenous identity, reflects this government's sad obsession with erasing Te Tiriti o Waitangi and dragging us back to a monocultural past," she said. Ngarewa-Packer said the move undermined Aotearoa's reputation as a leading nation in recognising indigenous rights. "Restoring our reo took a long time. I mean imagine doing this in Ireland, imagine doing this to the Welsh. This was hard fought for. It's not re-ordering of words, the reformatting is deliberately done to undermine the mana [and] to sideline us tangata whenua." Benjamin Doyle Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone Green Party MP Benjamin Doyle said the move is not what New Zealanders need from the government. "We are seeing day by day, the rights and dignities of minority communities being stripped away while they leave the majority of New Zealanders suffering under the government's current decisions," Doyle said. "This is not a positive vision for Aotearoa, this is not a positive step towards unifying kotahitanga and it's not benefiting anyone. Really, its just dog-whistling politics. It's the tail wagging the dog." The ACT Party celebrated van Velden's move on social media, saying the change would "restore English before te reo Māori - without costing taxpayers". The change comes as part of a deliberate push by the coalition to give English primacy over te reo Māori in official communications. New Zealand First's coalition agreement with National stipulates that public service departments have their primary name in English and be required to communicate "primarily in English" except for entities specifically related to Māori. It also includes an as-yet-unfulfilled commitment to make English an official language of New Zealand.
NZ Herald
a day ago
- NZ Herald
Letters: Political interference in commodity prices is never a good look
Trump-like economic interventions such as tariffs will eventually end badly for domestic consumers. Bruce Eliott, St Heliers. NCEA concerns The recent Government briefing highlighting significant concerns about the credibility of NCEA is yet another damning indictment of our education system. However, just as disturbing is Erica Stanford's comment about the confusion among parents about how NCEA works and that 'parents struggle to guide their children on the right pathways'. Taking a quick look at some of the subjects' explanatory notes on the NCEA website, one is confronted with what amounts to a word salad that would confound a lawyer. No wonder parents are confused. This should not be the case. Students and parents should be able to understand what is going on with their children's education. This would ensure parents have consistent lines of communication with teachers and are aware of their child's progress, challenges and needs. Parents and teachers need to work together to achieve this. A strong partnership between both parties benefits everyone but this will not be achieved if parents don't know what is going on. Bernard Walker, Mt Maunganui. Auckland's troubles Your correspondent Gary Hollis (letters, July 24) sees a glimmer of hope from Chris Luxon and Simeon Brown as Auckland MPs, regarding the preservation of what's left of Auckland's once-pristine suburbs. Unfortunately, the destruction of these suburbs is being driven by their colleague Chris Bishop (from Lower Hutt), and Luxon and Brown, together with the Government's other Auckland MPs, have been noticeably silent about it. Perhaps it is time they stood up for Auckland and restrained him? John Burns, Mt Eden. Transgender sport How very sensible that the Government has told Sport NZ to abandon its transgender guidelines even for community sport. Where males identifying as females competed in female sports, this not only compromised fair competition, but was at times very dangerous. Fair and equal competition in New Zealand must always be the accepted benchmark. Dr Hylton Le Grice, Remuera.
RNZ News
a day ago
- RNZ News
The value of Youth MPs put under a question mark
Photo: VNP/Louis Collins A former politician says change is needed to the Youth Parliament system if it's to stay relevant. MP-turned political commentator Peter Dunne says the scheme isn't just "a rag-tag collection of young people coming together for a couple of days to play at being MPs", but if the event is going to be taken seriously, more consistency is required around its processes. That's not the case at the moment, in everything from how the teens are selected to the quality of the mentorship they're getting. The tri-annual event usually passes under the media radar, but this year's event was overshadowed by what a handful of Youth MPs said was censorship of their speeches . Dunne says he could understand the intention behind the message from the Ministry of Youth Development, which asked some students to remove parts of their speeches where they lacked political neutrality, but the issue could have been handled better. In the end, none of the students were stopped from making their speeches, even if they didn't make the changes. Youth Parliament has been held every three years for the past three decades and is described by the government as, "a unique opportunity for young New Zealanders to learn first-hand about our democracy, influence government decision-making, and have their voices heard". In many ways it's like the real thing, with MPs selecting teens to represent them for a couple of days in Parliament where they debate, give speeches and discuss fictional legislation. Dunne says often the young adults outshine the older MPs. "The contrast has usually been between the impeccable behaviour of the youth MPs and the somewhat unruly behaviour of their adult counterparts," he says. The first Youth Parliament was held in 1995 and initially was just a couple of days. Now the programme has expanded, running from April to August and Dunne questions how much teens take out of those extra two months and 29 days. "And more importantly, what weight is attached to that? They've got no formal status in the community, so what role can they play?" he asks. Dunne says much of what the young aspiring politicians learn and do is dependent on the MP they are mentored by. "In some cases they won't do very much, in some cases the MP will work actively with them and assign them a particular project," Dunne says. There also aren't any rules around how MPs select their mentee. Some get applicants to write essays, this year David Seymour held an election, and Dunne says a couple just shoulder tap the kids of a mate. "The time is right to have a proper review into its function and purpose, including the role of the Youth MPs, how they're selected and what are reasonable expectations of them. "Because I think that with a much clearer focus the youth parliament can play a much greater role than it has done to date," Dunne says. Oscar Duffy, representing List MP Melissa Lee became interested in politics last year when his nan was in hospital. "She's a Māori lady and she didn't have the best experience ... so that was a pretty key driver in me being interested in what's going on. "Obviously there's so much tension between Māori and the Crown ... and that affects my family really directly," he says. Duffy agrees that the degree of mentorship varies. He spent substantial time working on projects in his community and in Lee's Mount Albert office but says others didn't have the same experience. "[Ministers] have no time right? Ministers are so busy, I roomed with Simeon Brown's Youth MP and he didn't really see Simeon a lot, if at all," he says. Duffy sees youth parliament as an opportunity for those interested in politics to get an insight into the system. He says everyone attending this year had a keen interest in advocacy and change-making, but he admits that at times some see their role as more important than it is. "There's just a lot of politically charged people in one room. "Putting them all in the same room is great and it gets everyone talking to each other and firing off really good initiatives ... but yeah I guess some of them do think they are a bit more important than they are which is a shame because they probably should be more important and have more of a say," he says. But if he could change one thing Duffy would raise the age bracket because he thinks 16 is too young. "Even just move it up one year, 17-19, so there's more first year uni students who have been through high school, who have seen the whole system," he says. Check out how to listen to and follow The Detail here . You can also stay up-to-date by liking us on Facebook or following us on Twitter .
