Education Ministry says new curriculums are much clearer
Photo:
123RF
The Education Ministry says its staff have a clear understanding of what the term 'knowledge-rich' means.
A ministry document from March warned its work on the
new school curriculum was suffering
because it did not have a clear definition of the term, which was central to the entire project.
But the ministry's acting curriculum centre hautu (leader) Pauline Cleaver told RNZ's
Midday Report
it was not a problem.
"It's fully understood by our team and our PLD [professional learning and development], alongside the curriculum that we've already produced is working really well and our response from teachers about the English curriculum for Year 1 to 8 and the maths is going really well. People are really seeing what a knowledge-rich curriculum looks like," she said.
Cleaver said the already-published curriculums were examples of knowledge-rich.
"It's really well structured, it's got clear content. The things that we want young people to know and the things that we want them to know how to do, they're sequenced in a year-by-year way so that the knowledge builds over time and they get a nice coherent learning pathway. That the learning is managed and taught in nice structured ways, such as you see through our structured literacy programmes and their teachers have real clarity on what needs to be taught and what students should be learning at any particular point on the pathway."
She said the new curriculums were much clearer about what needed to be taught each year.
But Principals Federation president Leanne Otene told RNZ the curriculum changes were chaotic and imploding.
She said the government was changing too much, too fast and the training for teachers and principals was insufficient.
"We've had multiple announcements, and they're disconnected initiatives and they are creating chaos," she said.
Otene said primary schools were teaching new English and maths curriculums without sufficient training and without assessment tools to test children's achievement against the new curriculums.
She said the key ideas underpinning the curriculum change, science of learning and knowledge rich were "mentioned everywhere, defined nowhere"
PPTA vice-president Kieran Gainsford said at a recent meeting of subject association leaders, many were worried that the government had not provided a clear explanation of what it meant by terms like "science of learning" and "knowledge-rich curriculum".
"It leaves schools and teachers in almost a hopeless position. If we're supposed to implement a new curriculum, we want to do a good job. We want to do the best for the young people in front of us. But if we're given such unclear guidance, that leaves us in a very difficult position to be able to do that," he said.
Meanwhile, Cleaver told RNZ the ministry was using AI to help with background work on the curriculum.
"We have used AI to help us synthesise a range of research, what other countries are doing, how we're comparing with the content we're choosing to make sure we're doing the best job possible. It's not a replacement for our writers. It's information that our writers can use to be more effective at making sure we get this right," she said.
"It's not writing the curriculum now. We have real teachers, real educators writing the content."
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


Scoop
6 hours ago
- Scoop
Minister To Visit Saudi Arabia & United States For Trade Talks
Agriculture, Trade and Investment Minister Todd McClay will travel to Saudi Arabia and then to the United States (US) next week to meet with his trade and agriculture counterparts. In Riyadh, Mr McClay will meet with Minister of Commerce, HE Dr Majid bin Abdullah Al-Kassabi, and Minister of Environment, Water and Agriculture, HE Eng Abdulrahman Abdulmohsen Al-Fadley, to advance bilateral trade and investment opportunities, including in food and agritech cooperation. The visit will also be an opportunity discuss how best to leverage the New Zealand-Gulf Cooperation Council Free Trade Agreement, for which negotiations concluded last year. Mr McClay will then travel on to Washington D.C. at the invitation of United States Trade Representative (USTR) Jamieson Greer. He will also meet with U.S. industry representatives, think tanks, and his agriculture counterpart, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins. 'Following the United States' 1 August decision to apply a 15 per cent, or more, tariff to ever country with a trade surplus, this visit will be an opportunity to discuss the impact of that decision and better understand the factors that may influence future U.S. tariffs,' Mr McClay says. 'New Zealand and the United States have a long-standing, well-balanced trading relationship, with periods where the US has enjoyed a surplus and times, like now, when New Zealand has a modest one. Overall, our trade is complementary and reflects the strength of a long-standing partnership. 'I will be seeking to understand the effect of any change in trade flows for example, if New Zealand's current surplus shifted to a deficit, and what that might mean for our exporters,' Mr McClay says. 'The US currently faces an average tariff of just 0.3 per cent when exporting to New Zealand, far lower than what we face into their market. 'It's important that we raise these concerns constructively, while reaffirming our commitment to the strong, cooperative relationship we have with the United States,' Mr McClay says. Meetings in Washington will cover wider bilateral trade, investment and agricultural priorities.

RNZ News
6 hours ago
- RNZ News
Protesters confront Resources Minister Shane Jones in Whangārei over fast-track projects
The protesters confront Resources Minister Shane Jones. Photo: RNZ / Peter de Graaf Up to 100 protesters have confronted Resources Minister Shane Jones in Whangārei in a show of opposition to two fast-track projects they say will cause long-term harm to the environment. The at times raucous protest took place in driving rain on Saturday afternoon, as party faithful were arriving for a New Zealand First meeting at McKay Stadium. Some protesters had travelled from the Bay of Islands to oppose a planned 250-berth marina at isolated Waipiro Bay, near Russell; while others came from Bream Bay to highlight their concerns about a large-scale, offshore sand-mining proposal. Both projects are currently making their way through the government's fast-tracked consenting process. Four-year-old Tahuhu-nui-o-rangi Wakefield-Bigelow at the protest. Photo: RNZ / Peter de Graaf The Waipiro Bay Marina, if it goes ahead, will involve significant dredging and reclamation, loss of public access, and the construction of up to 250 berths - including 14 for 50-metre superyachts - as well as shops, parking and a boat ramp. Kohu Hakaraia, of Te Rāwhiti hapū Ngāti Kuta and Patukeha, said the fast-track process silenced community voices. "We're deeply concerned that nine hectares or more will be gifted to a private developer for their own profit," she said. "This has been a kai gathering spot for our whānau for generations. Our rangatira Te Wharerahi lived on the pā there. It's got a lot of cultural and environmental significance for our whole community, Māori and Pākehā." Protesters voice their feelings over two controversial fast-track projects. Photo: RNZ / Peter de Graaf Hakaraia said the fast-track system was unfair because developers had money to commission reports and hire any number of experts. All the hapū could do, with limited funds, was try to rebut their claims. "We're really marginalised and disadvantaged because we don't have the same resources as they do. It's David and Goliath," she said. Jones was unapologetic when he came out to address the protesters. He told the crowd his bottom line was that he was pro industry, and pro economic growth. Resources Minister Shane Jones addresses the protesters. Photo: RNZ / Peter de Graaf "Politics is a contest of ideas and I accept the ideas you represent are not consistent with what I stand for, but that's what democracy is about. You have the right to protest, and I have the right to run my narrative on behalf of my leader and the party we belong we to," he said, his voice drowned out at times by chants of "Shame on Shane". If a project was rejected under the fast-track process, it should be for reasons of science, Jones said. "Let it not be on hyperbole or hysteria. Let it be on studies to do with the ocean, while also taking account of economic development. Trust in the process that's been set up. That's not unreasonable to ask," he said. Meanwhile, Bream Bay Guardians spokesman Malcolm Morrison said his community was deeply concerned by McCallum Brothers' proposal to mine roughly 9 million cubic metres of sand over 35 years. "The problems with sand mining in Bream Bay is that it's a closed sand system. Once you've taken sand out, it's not replaced by sand from the ocean, its just gone. And once that happens the beaches will start degrading." Morrison said the process of "sucking up sand with a giant vacuum cleaner" would kill or maim vast numbers of scallops. Bream Bay Guardians spokesman Malcolm Morrison of Langs Beach. Photo: RNZ / Peter de Graaf He was hoping Jones would cancel the project's fast-track process before it even reached the expert panel stage. If that didn't happen, the group had a fighting fund ready, he said. "We will be fighting tooth and nail with our experts against anything that anyone else puts up ... and it that fails we'll be monitoring them until they want to go home." Jay Howell, who lived near the proposed Waipiro Bay development, said both Russell Boating Club and Opua Cruising Club were strongly opposed. While jobs were badly needed in Northland, the marina would not provide substantial numbers of jobs as claimed by the developers, Azuma Property and Hopper Developments, or by Minister Chris Bishop, he said. Protesters against the Waipiro Bay Marina proposal march on Western Hills Drive in Whangārei. Photo: RNZ / Peter de Graaf "The fast-track process takes away Northland's voice to determine how Northland should be developed, and we do need development. We just need sensible development that the community is involved in. This is being imposed on us and it's being developed for the wealthy." The number of jobs cited in the marina's fast-track application had been "grossly over-exaggerated" by adding long-term jobs and short-term construction roles together, and claiming the total was valid for a 30-year period, Howell said. Kororāreka Marae chairwoman Deb Rewiri. Photo: RNZ / Peter de Graaf Kororāreka Marae chairwoman Deb Rewiri, of Russell, said her concern was with the process. "It doesn't actually give an opportunity for whānau, hapū and iwi in that whole consultation process. It's not okay, not in a democracy," she said. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.


NZ Herald
11 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Cabinet minister Goldsmith involved in Seymour's UN letter controversy
On July 1, two days before the letter went to the UN, one of Seymour's advisers sent a draft to Goldsmith's office. 'Attached is the Minister for Regulation's proposed response... He mentioned that we had agreed to run it past your minister before we sent it off,' the email read. Act leader David Seymour sent a blunt letter to the UN after consulting Paul Goldsmith. Photo / Mark Mitchell 'It is a little more direct than what MFAT [Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade] might draft. Please let me know if your minister is happy.' Goldsmith's office responded the next day, asking for a phone call. By the morning of July 3, Seymour's adviser emailed him: 'Goldie is happy for us to send it. He is going to send his own mild MFAT holding letter on behalf of himself and [Māori Development Minister Tama] Potaka.' Seymour replied: 'Okay, great.' His letter was sent to the UN that afternoon. In a statement provided to RNZ on Saturday, Goldsmith said: 'When asked, I did not object to [Seymour] sending the letter, but when commenting on UN matters, it is the Foreign Minister's views that are relevant, not mine.' A spokesperson for Seymour said he had nothing further to add. Emails between Seymour's staff in June canvassed the options for responding to the UN and noted MFAT's preferred approach was a joint reply from 'relevant ministers' Seymour, Goldsmith and Potaka, in line with previous UN communications in 2024. Instead, Peters ultimately issued a Government-wide letter on August 11, striking a softer tone and expressing regret for the 'breakdown in protocol'. The UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, Albert K. Barume, had raised concerns on June 12 about Seymour's Regulatory Standards Bill, suggesting it failed to recognise Māori traditions or uphold Treaty principles. Seymour's reply branded the critique 'presumptive, condescending and wholly misplaced' and 'an affront to New Zealand's sovereignty'. After news of Seymour's letter broke in July, Luxon told media he agreed with its content but Seymour was wrong to have sent it: 'I expect Winston Peters to be the person that engages with the UN'. – RNZ