Latest news with #TeachersUnions
Wall Street Journal
a day ago
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
Wyoming's School Choice Court Battle
School choice continues to notch victories in state legislatures, but the teachers unions are doing their worst to block new programs in court. A legal attack on Wyoming's voucher program is the latest example of a union chasing education dollars at families' expense. Wyoming lawmakers created the state's first K-12 education savings account (ESA) program in 2024, effective in the coming school year. This spring they expanded eligibility to families of any income. The $7,000 accounts can be used for private-school tuition, tutors, homeschooling, or other education expenses. Nearly 4,000 students applied for them this fall.
RNZ News
05-08-2025
- Business
- RNZ News
Watch: AI will aid with NCEA replacement, Education Minister says
Education Minister Erica Stanford has fronted media from her old high school after the government proposed to replace all levels of NCEA . Under the proposal, NCEA level 1 would be replaced with foundation literacy and numeracy tests . Levels 2 and 3 would be replaced with a New Zealand Certificate of Education and an Advanced Certificate. Students would be required to take five subjects and pass at least four to get each certificate. Marking would be out of 100 and grades would and range from A to E. Teachers' unions are cautiously optimistic the changes will work, provided they are implemented and resourced well. Stanford fielded questions at Auckland's Rangitoto College, a school she attended, and her children now go to. Education Minister Erica Stanford visits Rangitoto College, Auckland, 5 August 2025. Photo: RNZ / Calvin Samuel Stanford said the cost of the changes had mostly been budgeted already through previous Budget announcements. She said there is already a reform process in place, which the government is using and shifting across. "There will likely be future budgets when we're looking at the feed pathways, the vocational pathways, we know there will be a little bit there," she said. "But we're gearing up for that right now for next year's Budget." Education Minister Erica Stanford visits Rangitoto College, Auckland, 5 August 2025. Photo: RNZ / Calvin Samuel Stanford said New Zealand will continue to use AI as a marking tool, as it already been used for literacy and numeracy corequisite exams. "We're extraordinarily advanced in terms of the rest of the world," she said. "Many other countries can't even dream of where we're at the moment - digital exams, AI marking." AI marking was as good, if not better than human marking, she said. Stanford said the tool would be crucial to moving away from NCEA Level 1. "You've got to remember we are dropping Level 1 so there is a whole year of internal and external assessments that will go all together," she said. "If we didn't have AI, this is something that probably wouldn't be possible without a massive injection for NZQA. "But we do have AI, it is coming, and it is getting better and better every year ... and I'm confident that will help (teachers) mark quicker." Education Minister Erica Stanford visits Rangitoto College, Auckland, 5 August 2025. Photo: RNZ / Calvin Samuel Stanford hoped the changes would make it easier for students, but also parents to understand the grading of an assessment. "There's a couple ways we're using the word 'standard'. Essentially, the way we want to be using it now is the standard is the curriculum," she said. "Teachers will be very used to marking an assessment, or an essay for example as a mark out of 100 ... it does give a lot more clarity to students on how they can improve, and also to parents really importantly." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
05-08-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
Watch live: Erica Stanford faces questions over plan to replace NCEA
Education Minister Erica Stanford is set to face questions after the government proposed to replace all levels of NCEA . Standford will be speaking shortly and will be livestreamed at the top of this page. Under the proposal, NCEA level 1 would be replaced with foundation literacy and numeracy tests . Levels 2 and 3 would be replaced with a New Zealand Certificate of Education and an Advanced Certificate. Students would be required to take five subjects and pass at least four to get each certificate. Marking would be out of 100 and grades would and range from A to E. Teachers' unions are cautiously optimistic the changes will work, provided they are implemented and resourced well. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
04-08-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
NCEA overhaul sparks optimism and concern
The opposition is concerned the "complete overhaul" goes too far. Photo: Getty Images Teachers' unions are cautiously optimistic changes to the country's secondary school qualifications framework will work, provided they are implemented and resourced well. But the opposition is concerned the "complete overhaul" goes too far. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Education Minister Erica Stanford on Monday said NCEA Level 1 would be replaced with foundation literacy and numeracy tests. Levels 2 and 3 would be replaced with a New Zealand Certificate of Education and an Advanced Certificate. Students would be required to take five subjects and pass at least four to get each certificate. Marking would be out of 100, and grades range from A to E. Stanford said as a parent, she did not understand how NCEA (National Certificate of Educational Achievement) worked. "I thought that if you're sitting English, everyone's sitting the same English - but that's not the case… There is too much credit counting and bringing together of sometimes quite ad hoc standards because we moved to the standards-based assessment that are not setting students up for success." But the new system is not a return to the days of single three-hour exams measuring a students' learning for the year, nor will it be graded, forcing a certain percentage of students to fail. "I think it's really important to know that this is still standards-based assessment," Post Primary Teachers' Association president Chris Abercrombie told Nine to Noon . "So the real heart of NCEA, that standards base, is still there, which is really good to see because we know that helps students show their knowledge and understanding in various forms, so that's really good to see that that still exists… "Because it's all standards-based assessment… the 'bell curve' is not going to be put into the marking. So it's not gonna change that aspect fundamentally, which is really good." The new system is expected to be implemented one year at a time, so students will not be doing a mix of NCEA and and the new qualifications. Abercrombie said implementing it in a planned, robust and well-resourced way would be key to its success. "There's a significant concern about this because we know because of the poor implementation plan of Level 1, it did create a lot of stress on schools and teachers and principals to do that. "So, as I say, implementation is going to be absolutely key. We cannot repeat the mistakes made during the implementation of the new Level 1, and the co-requisites literacy and numeracy." Secondary Principals Association president Louise Anaru said the government must give teachers the training, resources and time they needed to introduce the overhaul. "The staging and sequencing of the changes are really important, and I can see that there is a timeline in place. Our schools will need to be resourced sufficiently, and they also need adequate time to implement all of the changes." Anaru said the overhaul retained the best parts of NCEA. Abercrombie noted that so far, principals had been consulted on the changes - but not teachers. "We need to make sure the sector really is listened to in this and so, hopefully the consultation period will allow that to happen." He also noted teachers "asked to do a lot of work for a 1 percent" pay increase, so "some more movement on the negotiation table" would be expected from the government. Consultation closes on 1 September. Students who will miss out on the new qualifications should not be worried, Abercrombie said. "[NCEA] will still be recognised at universities. We have students using their NCEA grads to attend universities all around the world. We've had 20 years of people being lawyers and doctors and builders and plumbers and nurses and everything in between, based on their NCEA results… "It's a very valid assessment, and they'll be able to reach their goals whatever they want to with that." Education Minister Erica Stanford and Prime Minister Christopher Luxon announce changes to NCEA. Photo: RNZ / Nick Monro Stanford agreed, saying her kids were doing NCEA - even her son, who had a choice between that and the alternative International Baccalaureate programme. "It is a good qualification. Children still get into universities around the world with this qualification. We can make it so much better. There is a lack of consistency, but my message to parents who are still going through NCEA like me, you can still rely on NCEA. It's a good qualification, but we need to look to the future and be more ambitious for our kids, and that's what I'm doing." Claire Amos, president of the Auckland Secondary Principals' Association and principal of Albany Senior High School, told Midday Report aside from replacing Level 1, the changes felt "a little bit like window dressing". She feared there would be a narrowing of the current 67 subjects schools could choose to offer. "It does look like it will be less flexible, with a focus on whole subjects rather than at present, we could actually put together a whole lot of achievement standards and unit standards to make up a total of 60 credits for students - and in some schools, that may not be just made up of four or five subjects." She said rather than being dismissed as a "patchwork" qualification, NCEA Levels 1 and 2 should be seen as a "diverse definitions of success". Amos was also concerned with the discussion document's mention of possibly raising the school leaving age from 16 to 17. "On paper, that sounds great. But if you've got young people who don't see themselves in the qualification framework that's on offer, we're actually going to be managing these disengaged learners." Opposition parties warned the overhauled risked throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Photo: RNZ / Angus Dreaver Labour education spokesperson Willow-Jean Prime said NCEA was not perfect, but changes must be based on evidence and proper sector consultation. "People are reading the consultation document and asking questions like, what will this mean for the subjects? What subjects are going to be offered? How will they be weighted? "There's those questions that are unanswered and families are looking for and needing certainty for their children. What we don't want to see is these rushed overhauls and a generation of children being used as guinea pigs for things that have failed in the past, like national standards ." Green Party education spokesperson Lawrence Xu-Nan said the proposals risked turning back the clock on decades of progress, with a return to a one-size-fits-alls rigid approach. "NCEA definitely has its strengths. It's a well-designed, inclusive and flexible qualification and it is an internationally recognised qualification. Chucking it all out isn't going to address the real problems, which are policy instability and under-resourcing of education." He said there was a lot of "engineered fear" that the NCEA system could be gamed. "By and large if you're talking to students and teachers, that doesn't happen as commonly as people think it does. There are areas of NCEA that need to be rejigged, but not to the extent of what we are seeing in the announcement today, which is a complete overhaul." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Yahoo
13-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
J.D. Tuccille: U.S. Department of Education should be abolished
The United States Department of Education was born as a political payoff by then-president Jimmy Carter to reward teachers' unions for supporting his candidacy. While it doesn't operate any schools or educate any children, the funding and rules administered by this meddlesome federal bureaucracy allow federal politicians to limit educational experimentation and variety at the state and local level. That, in turn, has spurred an exodus from American public schools. President Donald Trump has promised to kill the department and it's a promise he needs to keep. It's not at all clear that the U.S. needs a federal Department of Education. While there are some federally operated schools — on military bases, for example — those are run independently of the Education Department. The agency itself admits that, 'Education is primarily a state and local responsibility in the United States,' and that, 'At the elementary and secondary level … about 92 per cent of the funds will come from non-federal sources.' Most public schools are operated by local governments or, in the case of charter schools, by private groups and businesses with state and local funding. State governments exercise varying degrees of control, as you'd expect in a federal system, with California and Texas centralizing the purchasing of textbooks (a 2020 New York Times report found otherwise identical texts given a liberal spin for California buyers and a conservative one for Texas purchasers). Importantly, the U.S. Constitution details the powers of the federal government and nowhere does it mention schools or education. In March, Thomas A. Berry, director of the Cato Institute's Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies, noted that, 'The vast majority of functions carried out by the Department of Education are not authorized by the Constitution. That is because the Constitution grants the federal government only limited, enumerated powers, none of which encompass education policy.' So why does the federal government have a Department of Education that runs no schools? Because once upon a time a politician owed favours. After Carter died in December, journalist Mark Walsh summarized part of his legacy for EducationWeek. 'As a presidential candidate in 1976, Carter promised the National Education Association that he would push for a separate education department,' he wrote. 'In return, the nation's largest teachers' union made the first presidential endorsement in its then-117-year history.' Thus, the U.S. ended up with a cabinet-level department devoted to education that operates no schools, employs (or used to) roughly 4,000 people and spends about four per cent of the federal budget. What does the department do? It enforces rules — such as anti-discrimination laws — compiles statistics, sets goals and funnels money to local public schools that accept federal conditions (which most do). This gives educational bureaucrats outsized influence over institutions they don't actually operate. In 2017, an article in the Harvard Graduate School of Education's Ed. magazine noted that, 'The federal government uses a complex system of funding mechanisms, policy directives and the soft but considerable power of the presidential bully pulpit to shape what, how and where students learn.' In fact, state and local educators, largely linked by the culture and ideology that permeates teachers' unions and the federal Department of Education, are usually more than happy to have their arms twisted into accepting the latest trends favoured by Washington. The result is less variety and experimentation among schools that are locally operated but don't want to offend the feds. Maybe that would be tolerable if such standardization produced well-educated kids, but it doesn't. In January, the Department of Education announced the results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) — often called 'the nation's report card' — by admitting they 'reveal a heartbreaking reality for American students and confirm our worst fears: not only did most students not recover from pandemic-related learning loss, but those students who were the most behind and needed the most support have fallen even further behind.' Inefficient and unresponsive public schools aren't a new thing — Americans have complained about them for decades. But they're now doing more than complaining — they're heading for the exits in favour of alternatives, such as private schools, publicly funded but privately run charter schools, co-operative learning pods, micro-schools and various forms of homeschooling. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, while traditional public schools saw enrolment decline by over a million students, private schools, which educate nine per cent of combined public and private students, picked up enrolment, many paying tuition with the help of tax credits and education savings accounts explicitly established to support school choice. At the same time, charter schools increased enrolment by 400,000 and now educate roughly seven per cent of all students. Homeschooling is harder to measure since not all states track those who choose DIY education, but the Johns Hopkins University Homeschool Hub estimates that six per cent of students are educated through various homeschooling approaches and that, 'The number of home-schooled students is going up as the total number of U.S. students in going down.' Culture wars and battles over politicized classrooms — exemplified in those competing California and Texas textbooks — only serve to accelerate the exodus. If the U.S. Department of Education is doing anything, it's presiding over a decline in public education that Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Cara Fitzpatrick dramatically overstates in her 2023 book, 'The Death of Public Schools.' The public schools aren't dead, but they're mortally wounded and shedding support after having been rendered repulsive by their own advocates. In March, President Trump ordered Education Secretary Linda McMahon to 'take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return authority over education to the states and local communities.' He's since laid off almost half the department's workforce — a move boosted this week when the U.S. Supreme Court eased the way for mass firings of federal workers. But President Carter's payoff to the teachers' unions required an act of Congress to create. It's long past time that lawmakers act once again to put the Department of Education out of our misery. National Post J.D. Tuccille: Americans flee Big Government schools for better, private options J.D. Tuccille: DEI is in retreat
