B.29[12g]

Education for Māori: Context for our proposed audit work until 2017

Parliamentary paper

Presented to the House of Representatives under section 20 of the Public Audit Act 2001

August 2012

ISBN 978-0-478-38379-9 (print)

ISBN 978-0-478-38380-5 (online)

Foreword

Rurea taitea, kia toitū, ko tai kākā anake.

Strip away the sapwood and get to the heart of the matter.

E ai ki te rangahau, ko te wheako wairua kawa o te iwi taketake huri noa i te ao ki roto i ngā kura he taero a Kupe mō te anga whakamua. E arotahi pū ana tēnei kaupapa rangahau ki te ahuatanga me tōna hāngai ki te iwi Māori.

I whakawhiti kōrero mō te whakawhanaketanga o te akoranga Māori mai i ngā rautau o mua tae noa ki tēnei wā tonu. Mai rāno, kāore anō te nuinga o te iwi Māori kia eke ki tōna taumata nā te pēhitanga kia noho teina tonu ai ōna ake hiahia ki ngā kura. Nā reira he mea nui kia āta wherawhera ai i ngā rangahau me ngā āhuatanga ako ki te rapu he rongoā kia whakatika ai i aua hē.

I whakaae katoa mātou, he kura pounamu ngā momo āhuatanga katoa o te ao mātauranga. Heoi anō, kei tawhiti te ekenga panuku, te ekenga tangaroa mō te iwi Māori kei ngā kura.

Ki a mātou he hiahia anō tō te Kāwana kia whakarite ai i ngā rautaki me ngā kaupapa hei whakatika i ngā raru kia tū ai mō te roanga o te wā, i runga anō i te whakaae o ngā tāngata katoa. I kōrero hoki mō te rautaki mātauranga, arā, ko Ka Hikitia. Me raweke tonu kia hāngai tōna wairua ki tō te hiahia o ngā kaiako, kia puta ai i tōna ihi me tōna wehi hei ārahi, hei whakaawe i te tukunga.

E tika ana tēnei whakataukī hei ārahi, hei arataki i te Kāhui Rangahau.

He taumaha te mānuka kua takotohia. Ki te whakapono ngā kaiako o Aotearoa nei ki te whakaaro rangatira, ki te riro i ngā ākonga Māori he akoranga me tōna kounga tika, kia ārahi ai i a ia ki te eke ki tōna taumata, me timata i nāiatonunei.

Tēnei te maioha nā te Kahui Rangahau ki te Tumuaki o Te Mana Arotake me ona kaimahi nei mō tōna whakarite i te wāhi kōrero hei whakahihiko i te wairua. Ko te tumanako kia ngātahi ai tātou mō ngā tau e rima e heke mai ana.

Research shows that peoples of indigenous cultures are more likely to experience the enduring effect of educational under-achievement as a barrier to progress in life. The concern of this project is specifically to address this issue as it relates to Māori.

We discussed the evolution of Māori education through the decades and into the present. From years ago to the present, many Māori continue to be deprived of educational opportunities that directly affect their future prospects and quality of life because of inequalities and inequities in our schools. It was important, therefore, to examine the research and practices that have tried to “put matters to right”.

We reached the consensus that education in all its forms is highly valued by Māori. Yet Māori experiencing success at school has been, for too many and for too long, an elusive imperative.

Our understanding of the current public sector mood is that the problem needs to be urgently addressed, with policies and practices put in place to ensure resolution that is durable and acceptable to constituent parties. We discussed whether the Ministry of Education’s Strategy, Ka Hikitia, should be styled in such a way that it resonates more effectively with the sector, to make it a more influential part of that process.

We thought the whakataukī above is an encapsulation of how the Project Group ought to proceed in this matter.

The challenges are tough. If New Zealand’s educators truly believe that every Māori student must be given, and deserves to be given, a high-quality education that matches their potential, then there is no time to lose.

The Māori Advisory Group would like to thank the Auditor-General for providing a forum that was motivating and engaging. We look forward to working with the Project Group during the next five years.

Mere Berryman
Lorraine Kerr
Angus Hikairo Macfarlane
Wally Penetito
Graham Hingangaroa Smith

Contents

Auditor-General’s overview

Part 1 – Introduction

Why we are focusing on the educational achievement of Māori

Advisory group for our programme of audit work

Methodology and scope of this report

Structure of the report

Part 2 – Roles of public entities in education for Māori

Ministry of Education

Other public entities

Part – Historical and current context for Māori education

Māori educational policy and developments since 1816

What leading research says about barriers to, and opportunities for, Māori educational achievement

What the research shows to be effective for Māori students

Part 4 – Our work on Māori educational achievement during the next five years

Overall focus for our five-year programme of audit work

Framework guiding our programme of audit work

Our first audit topic: Implementation of Ka Hikitia

Potential audit topics for subsequent years

Appendix 1 – About Ka Hikitia

Appendix 2 – Main evidence used to inform this report

Appendix 3 – Important initiatives or projects relevant to Māori education

Appendix 4 – About Māori-medium education

Figures

1 – Dates and events related to Māori education policy and developments, 1816-2012

2 – Percentage of school leavers who have attained few or no formal qualifications, 1993-2007

3 – OECD’s figures on percentage of school leavers with NCEA Level 2 or higher, 1993-2007

4 – Ministry of Education’s figures on percentage of school leavers with NCEA Level 2 or higher, 2003-10

5 – Tracking achievements of students who enrolled for NCEA Level 1 in 2009, as at end of 2011

6 – Estimated percentage of students staying on at school, by age and ethnic group, 2002-08

7 – Distribution of 90,000 students’ assessed achievement in mathematics, by ethnicity, 2001-04

8 – Distribution of 90,000 students’ assessed achievement in reading, by ethnicity, 2001-04

9 – Framework guiding our five-year programme of audit work on Māori educational achievement

Auditor-General’s overview

Every child in New Zealand deserves to thrive physically, academically, socially, and culturally. Achieving their potential is important for them and for every New Zealander, because our future prosperity depends on an educated workforce. Therefore, it is important that the education system serves all students well.

Improving the education of our Māori children is vital. By 2030, about 30% of our students, and therefore our future workforce, will be Māori.

Some trends in educational achievement seem to be improving, and many Māori students do very well at school. However, overall, our English-medium schools do not support Māori students to achieve as highly as other students; nor do they retain Māori students for as long as other students. This affects the qualifications that Māori students leave school with, and could adversely affect the contribution they might otherwise have wanted to make to society and the economy.

Serving New Zealand’s future needs means we have to make sure that the education system performs well for Māori and that the needs of Māori children in education are met.

This report describes the history of education policy and developments for Māori, sets out some leading research and statistics, and describes the role of the various government agencies involved in education. Under the Ministry of Education’s Ka Hikitia – Managing for Success strategy, there are many initiatives and programmes to lift Māori participation, engagement, and achievement. It is important that these initiatives and programmes are well designed, are implemented effectively, and achieve the intended results.

Without doubt, improving the education system to support Māori students to achieve their full potential is a big and complex challenge. For most of us, it is too big to know where to start. During our scoping work for this report, we decided on some questions that we consider make this challenge more digestible. Those questions helped us prepare a framework to guide our selection of audit activity under one overarching and important question:

How well does the education system currently support Māori students to achieve their full potential and contribute to the future prosperity of New Zealand?

This question is so important that I propose to perform audits on this topic for each of my remaining years as Auditor-General. For 2012/13, the audit focus will be:

Ka Hikitia is the educational strategy for supporting young Māori to thrive academically, socially, and culturally for New Zealand’s future: Are there proper processes and practices in schools and other educational agencies to support that strategy?

I encourage people reading this report to think about our list of other possible audits in education for Māori and share your thoughts about those you think would be of most value. My Office’s contact details and more information are on our website www.oag.govt.nz.

In shaping and performing our audit work, we will take account of:

• the need to achieve value for money from public funds and the scarcity of those funds;

• wider developments as we move into a post-Treaty settlement environment;

• the importance of the students and their whānau as well as government agencies/schools; and

• the importance of looking at all aspects of the system to take a rounded view of how well it is working.

I have established an Advisory Group of esteemed Māori with respected education credentials to work alongside us for the next five years. I would like to sincerely thank that group – Dr Mere Berryman, Lorraine Kerr, Professor Angus Hikairo Macfarlane, Professor Wally Penetito, and Distinguished Professor Graham Hingangaroa Smith. Their insights and wisdom are invaluable, and I am grateful they have agreed to continue to be involved as I report on further aspects of the education system for Māori.

Lyn Provost
Controller and Auditor-General

6 August 2012

Part 1

Introduction

1.1
During the next five years, the Auditor-General proposes to carry out a series of performance audits focusing on the responsiveness of the education system to Māori and the educational achievement of Māori students.

1.2
This report discusses some of the historical and current information we have considered and sets out a framework for our proposed programme of audit work.

Why we are focusing on the educational achievement of Māori

1.3
Statistical forecasts for the make-up of our population show that, by 2030, the proportion of school-aged children who are Māori is likely to increase to around 30%.¹ Current statistics for achievement suggest that, although differences in achievement are narrowing, the education system is still failing a disproportionate number of Māori students.

1.4
Achievement data and other indicators clearly show that, if effective action is not taken, then increasing numbers of Māori children will finish school without achieving their full potential. This could adversely affect their quality of life and prevent them from fully contributing to the nation’s future prosperity.

Moving ahead, towards new levels of achievement, new technologies, new alliances and new economies, will require more than simply a message of good hope or good intention. It will be necessary to read the signs of changes and to know how changes can be managed and manipulated to deliver the best results for the most people. Taking charge of the future rather than charging into the future.

Professor Sir Mason Durie

1.5
New Zealand’s future prosperity is inextricably linked with the achievement of these students. In our view, it is important that the education system enables and supports all children, so they achieve as highly as they can. It is in the interests of all New Zealanders that young Māori thrive academically, socially, and culturally.

1.6
In 2008, the Government, recognising the need to improve the achievement outcomes for Māori students, introduced a strategy for Māori education called Ka Hikitia – Managing for Success (Ka Hikitia).² The Ministry of Education (the Ministry) notes that the “overarching strategic intent” of Ka Hikitia is “Māori achieving educational success as Māori”.³

1.7
We recognise that raising achievement outcomes for Māori is neither quick nor easy. It is for this and the other reasons outlined above that we intend to carry out a five-year audit programme focused on Māori educational achievement.

1.8
As part of our programme of audit work, we will examine whether Ka Hikitia is being effectively implemented to deliver the desired outcomes. In 2011, the State Services Commission said that the planning for Ka Hikitia had not been clear enough about the actions required or who was responsible for them.⁴

1.9
It is important that the Ministry, sector agencies, and education providers build on the positive changes noted in some areas and use the good practices that have already been identified to improve outcomes. This, too, is likely to be part of our programme of audit work.

1.10
We note that many of the publicly available data sets and figures are limited and relatively dated. Looking at the availability, reliability, and meaningfulness of data used to measure Māori educational achievement is also likely to be part of our programme of audit work (see Part 4).

1.11
There is debate in the education sector about what educational success means and how it can or should be measured. Even with a more narrow focus on the grades achieved, some people argue that the education system has been successful only if a child can achieve high grades without having to set aside their culture during their time at school. There are also views about measuring success in ways that reflect the aspirations and expectations of Māori and whānau. These are matters that our programme of audit work will also need to examine.

Advisory group for our programme of audit work

1.12
We invited respected people in the field of Māori education to be on an advisory group for the duration of this programme of work. The Advisory Group’s role is to enhance our understanding and help to ensure that our work will be appropriate and useful.

1.13
The Advisory Group members are:

• Dr Mere Berryman, of Ngāi Tūhoe and Ngāti Awa (Waikato University);

• Lorraine Kerr, of Ngāti Awa and Tūwharetoa (President of the Schools Trustees Association);

• Professor Angus Hikairo Macfarlane, of Te Arawa (Canterbury University);

• Professor Wally Penetito, of Tainui – Ngāti Haua, Ngāti Raukawa, and Ngāti Tamaterā (Victoria University of Wellington); and

• Distinguished Professor Graham Hingangaroa Smith, of Ngāti Porou, Kai Tahu, Ngāti Apa, and Ngāti Kahungunu (Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiārangi).

Methodology and scope of this report

1.14
To enable us to prepare the framework for our audit programme, we:

• interviewed Ministry officials, the Education Review Office (ERO), the New Zealand Council for Educational Research, Careers New Zealand, and two school principals;

• reviewed a wide range of published material, some internal Ministry documents, and other material provided to us by people we interviewed; and

• considered the advice of the Advisory Group.

1.15
Appendix 2 lists the main documents we reviewed.

1.16
To ensure that our focus remained on Māori educational achievement, we did not consider the Ministry’s Pasifika education planning and initiatives, except where these coincide with planning and initiatives for Māori educational achievement.

1.17
To determine the scope of our work, we focused mainly on education for Māori from early childhood through to the transition from secondary school to tertiary education, training, and first employment. We also noted examples of programmes to support Māori in some tertiary institutions and may consider some audit work in tertiary education in the future. Because the Government’s policy is being delivered through Ka Hikitia, we will link much of our work to how this strategy is being implemented.

1.18
We reviewed material about Māori-medium education. However, we focused on how achievement can be supported in the mainstream (English-medium) system because most Māori students attend English-medium educational institutions.⁵

1.19
We considered the activities and role of a range of public entities and other organisations, including the Ministry, other education sector agencies, schools, early childhood education (ECE) providers, and other agencies and organisations involved in lifting Māori student achievement.

1.20
In shaping and carrying out this programme of work, we will take into account:

• the need to achieve value for money from public funds, and the scarcity of those funds;

• wider developments as we move into a post-Treaty settlement environment;

• the importance of the students and their whānau as well as the government agencies/schools; and

• the importance of looking at all aspects of the system to take a rounded view of how well it is working.

1.21
We will also take into account the Auditor-General’s theme for 2012/13 – Our future needs – is the public sector ready? – and its four underlying themes of prioritisation, capability, technology, and effectiveness and efficiency.

Structure of the report

1.22
Part 2 describes the roles of various public entities and their contribution to education for Māori.

1.23
Part 3 sets out the context for this report – historical information, data on the current status of Māori educational achievement, and what leading research says about supporting Māori educational achievement.

1.24
Part 4 sets out the framework for our audit programme and our proposed audit topics.

1.25
There are four appendices to this report:

• Appendix 1 sets out the four focus areas of Ka Hikitia;

• Appendix 2 lists some of the main documents we reviewed for this report;

• Appendix 3 explains some of the organisations and initiatives we mention in the report; and

• Appendix 4 briefly describes Māori-medium education.

1 In 2005, Professor Sir Mason Durie estimated the number of school students identifying as Māori would grow to 33% by 2031. In 2009, Goren estimated this number would be 29% by 2026. See Durie, M (2005), “Te Tai Tini Transformations 2025”, CIGAD Working Paper Series 5/2005, Massey University, Wellington, page 1; Goren, P (2009), How Policy Travels: Making sense of Ka Hikitia – Managing for Success: The Māori Education Strategy 2008-2012, Fulbright New Zealand, Wellington, page 16. See also Statistics New Zealand (2010), National Ethnic Population Projections: 2006 (base)–2026 update, Wellington, pages 1, 4, and 7.

2 Ministry of Education (2008), Ka Hikitia – Managing for Success: The Māori Education Strategy 2008-2012, Wellington.

3 Ministry of Education (2008), Ka Hikitia – Managing for Success Summary, Wellington, page 1.

4 State Services Commission (2011), Performance Improvement Framework: Formal Review of the Ministry of Education, page 39.

5 When we refer to “education” or “schools”, we mean English-medium education and schools, except where otherwise specified.

Part 2

Roles of public entities in education for Māori

2.1
In this Part, we outline the work of people and public entities involved in education for Māori.

2.2
The main educational agencies are:

• the Ministry;

• ERO;

• the New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA);

• the Tertiary Education Commission; and

• ECE providers, schools, and tertiary institutions (including universities and independent training organisations).

2.3
Others with a critical role in education are:

• professional learning and development providers;

• the New Zealand Teachers Council, in its role of setting standards for initial teacher training and for in-service practice;

• Careers New Zealand, in assisting school students to identify their career pathways;

• actual and prospective employers; and

• parents and caregivers, whānau, communities, local iwi organisations, and students.

2.4
It is and will remain crucial that these people and organisations continue to work collaboratively to improve Māori educational achievement.

Ministry of Education

2.5
The Ministry is the lead agency for the education sector. The Ministry set out in its statement of intent for 2012-2017 (SOI) its two main priorities for the next five years. These are:

Improving education outcomes: for Māori learners, Pasifika learners, learners with special education needs and learners from low socio-economic backgrounds.

Maximising the contribution of education to the New Zealand economy.⁶

2.6
In the SOI Foreword, the Minister of Education noted that there would be “an unrelenting focus on lifting achievement especially for our priority groups”.⁷

Ka Hikitia – Managing for Success

2.7
The Ministry introduced Ka Hikitia in 2008. From what our Advisory Group has told us, it appears soundly based and respected. In producing this strategy, the Ministry drew on research evidence to identify issues with Māori students’ educational achievement and how to address those issues.⁸ This research included the Programme for International Student Assessment/Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) reports⁹ and other information indicating poor educational outcomes for Māori students.

2.8
Ka Hikitia identified that, to improve Māori students’ achievement, a widespread shift in attitudes and practice is required throughout the education sector. There are now many initiatives and programmes to lift Māori participation, engagement, and achievement under Ka Hikitia and elsewhere in the education sector (see Appendix 3 for more information).

2.9
The Ministry’s interim evaluation report to Cabinet in 2011 noted that implementing Ka Hikitia had been slower than intended. Where Ka Hikitia has been given effect, there have been statistically significant gains for Māori students. The State Services Commission’s Performance Information Framework report in 2011 noted that the Ministry needed to apply greater effort to ensure that the intended outcomes of Ka Hikitia were met.¹⁰

2.10
The Ministry noted in its SOI that it intends to “refresh” Ka Hikitia with revised targets for participation, retention, and achievement for Māori students.¹¹

2.11
The Ministry has also invested in a number of other projects and programmes that aim to lift achievement for Māori (and others). These include:

• implementing Tau Mai e – the Māori Language in Education Strategy;

• Te Kotahitanga (professional development for cultural responsiveness in the classroom);

• the Student Achievement Function (for literacy and numeracy);

• He Kākano (for professional development of school leaders and teachers towards disseminating and embedding Māori cultural pedagogical practices); and

• Youth Guarantee programmes (providing alternative pathways between school and tertiary education or employment).

Other public entities

Education Review Office

2.12
ERO’s role is to evaluate and report on the performance of schools and ECE providers, including performance in supporting Māori achievement. The frequency with which ERO reviews schools and ECE providers depends on whether ERO considers that the school’s or provider’s performance warrants it.

2.13
ERO’s Framework for School Reviews includes an explicit focus on the performance of schools and ECE providers in raising the achievement of their Māori students.¹² ERO staff told us that they will not consider reviewing a school less frequently unless the school measures and reports on the achievement of its Māori students.

2.14
ERO also provides guidance and best practice examples of management and teaching practice to help engage Māori students and support them to achieve better.

New Zealand Qualifications Authority

2.15
NZQA’s Māori strategic plan Te Rautaki Māori a te Mana Tohu Mātauranga o Aotearoa 2012-2017 was approved by the NZQA Board in 2011 after consultation with iwi and Māori educationalists, and published in July 2012. It has two main goals:

• accelerated Māori learner success; and

• advanced use of mātauranga Māori (the knowledge systems, values, concepts, and world views of Māori).¹³

2.16
These two goals are intended to support Ka Hikitia’s objective of “Māori achieving education success as Māori” and to:

Strengthen NZQA responsiveness to Māori learners, whānau, hapū, and iwi aspirations for educational success and recognition of Mātauranga Māori.¹⁴

2.17
The implementation plan emphasises collaboration, both between agencies and with iwi, to align the system with education sector priorities for Māori and to provide relevant qualification pathways for Māori students.

Te Kura (Te Aho o Te Kura Pounamu, The Correspondence School)

2.18
Te Kura is the largest provider of distance education in the early childhood and compulsory sector (up to Year 13). Te Kura identifies that engaging, developing, and supporting Māori learners to succeed as Māori is critical to helping Te Kura to achieve its goals and priorities.

2.19
Te Kura’s annual report for 2011 notes that Te Kura is increasingly providing education to those for whom “a face-to-face school is currently not the best option”. About 61% of Te Kura’s roll is made up of students in this category, rather than students living in isolated, itinerant, or overseas circumstances.

Tertiary Education Commission

2.20
The Tertiary Education Commission is working to implement the Government’s Tertiary Education Strategy. This strategy has four priorities, including that of increasing the number of Māori tertiary students achieving at higher levels.¹⁵

2.21
In its statement of intent for 2012/13 to 2014/15, the Tertiary Education Commission lists “doing better for Māori and Pasifika” as an outcome it will be working to achieve. It states:

Participation rates for both Māori and Pasifika have increased recently ... but outcomes from that increased participation hasn’t [sic] followed. Both Māori and Pasifika are less likely to succeed and they realise significantly lower financial returns from tertiary education.¹⁶

2.22
The Tertiary Education Commission also expects providers of tertiary education to strengthen their engagement with iwi and Māori communities.

New Zealand Teachers Council

2.23
The New Zealand Teachers Council approves programmes for initial teacher education and sets the professional standards for the teaching profession. Several professional standards for graduating teachers are relevant to the “imperative” of cultural competency, to ensure that new teachers are culturally responsive to their Māori students.¹⁷

Careers New Zealand

2.24
Careers New Zealand is the government agency responsible for leading the career development of all New Zealanders. On its website, it notes that one of its four high-level outcomes is “More Māori, Pasifika, and other target groups make successful transitions into work and learning.” It has put in place a staff development programme, Te Ataahia, to equip its staff to function comfortably and competently in any cultural setting.

6 Ministry of Education, Statement of Intent 2012-2017, Wellington, pages 12 and 14.

7 Ministry of Education, Statement of Intent 2012-2017, Wellington, page 2.

8 Ministry of Education (2008), Key evidence and how we must use it to improve the system performance for Māori, Wellington.

9 Programme for International Student Assessment, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2010), Review on Evaluation and Assessment Frameworks for Improving School Outcomes – New Zealand Country Background Report 2010.

10 State Services Commission (2011), Performance Improvement Framework: Formal Review of the Ministry of Education, page 39.

11 Ministry of Education, Statement of Intent 2012-2017, Wellington, page 13.

12 Education Review Office (2011), Framework for School Reviews, Wellington, page 11.

13 New Zealand Qualifications Authority (2012), Te Rautaki Māori a te Mana Tohu Mātauranga o Aotearoa 2012-2017, Wellington, page 4.

14 New Zealand Qualifications Authority (2012), Te Rautaki Māori a te Mana Tohu Mātauranga o Aotearoa 2012-2017, Wellington, pages 3-4.

15 Tertiary Education Commission (2012), Statement of Intent 2012/13-2014/15, Wellington, page 14.

16 Tertiary Education Commission (2012), Statement of Intent 2012/13-2014/15, Wellington, page 18.

17 New Zealand Teachers Council (2009), “Appendix 2, Graduating Teacher Standards”, Approval, Review and Monitoring Processes and Requirements for Initial Teacher Education Programmes, Wellington.

Part 3

Historical and current context for Māori education

3.1
In this Part, we set out some historical information about the education system’s approach to Māori, and data on the current status of Māori educational achievement. We then describe what some of the leading research shows about the effectiveness of, barriers to, and opportunities in educational achievement for Māori.

Māori educational policy and developments since 1816

3.2
Figure 1 shows a timeline of major policy decisions and developments in the history of education for Māori, from 1816 to 2012.

3.3
Commentators have noted that the policies described in Figure 1 disadvantaged many Māori within the state education system. For example, the Waitangi Tribunal noted in The Wānanga Capital Establishment Report:

It would not be difficult to argue that the seeds of Māori underachievement
in the modern education system were sown by some of the past education policies ...¹⁸

Deficit thinking

3.4
As Figure 1 shows, there have been several changes in policy and approach to Māori education during the past 30 years.

3.5
In the late 1980s and 1990s, government policy reflected the attitude that socio-economic and not ethnic factors were the root cause of underachievement (not just for Māori). This resulted in educators focusing on social backgrounds, parenting, and other societal influences. This has been described by the Ministry and other commentators as “deficit thinking” – thinking about Māori students in terms of what they lack. Researchers have noted that this can lead to educators thinking that problems lie with the student, not the teacher or the system.

What is clear from data over many years is that the education system has consistently failed whānau, hapū, and iwi for many generations, and this has led to low expectations by all of education system performance for Māori and of Māori achievement.

Ministry of Education

3.6
Since 2002, there has been a shift in policy to reject “deficit thinking”. Policy initiatives intended to improve services to Māori, such as “Ka Awatea” (1991) and “Closing the Gaps” (1999), were reconsidered because they were seen to reflect deficit thinking.¹⁹

Figure 1
Dates and events related to Māori education policy and developments, 1816-2012

1816 | First mission school opens in the Bay of Islands. Missionaries teach in te reo.
1840 | Signing of the Treaty of Waitangi.
1847 | George Grey introduces the Education Ordinance Act (an assimilation policy).
1862 | Government expectations of Māori are not high. School inspector reports to the House of Representatives that “a refined education or high mental culture” would be inappropriate for Māori because “they are better calculated by nature to get their living by manual than by mental labour”.

1867

Native Schools Act is passed, setting up a system where Māori provide the land and the Government provides the buildings and teachers. (The Act prefers English as the only language used in the education of Māori children, but this was not enforced rigorously until 1900.) Schools for Māori focus more on manual instruction than academic subjects.

1880 | Inspector of Schools releases a Native School Code. Te Aute College produces first Māori graduates in the 1880s, but the College comes under pressure to abandon the academic curriculum and teach agriculture instead.
1903 | Nationwide policy to impose a ban on (or discourage) te reo being spoken in the playground. A wide range of punishments used against children who speak te reo at school (including corporal punishment).

1915

Department of Education has an assimilation policy for Māori and low expectations of Māori students. Annual report includes statement from the Inspector of Native Schools that “So far as the Department is concerned, there is no encouragement given to [Māori] boys who wish to enter the learned professions. The aim is to turn, if possible, their attention to the branches of industry for which the Māori seems best suited.”

1930/31

Attempt by the New Zealand Federation of Teachers to have te reo introduced into the curriculum is blocked by the Director of Education. In his view, “the natural abandonment of the native tongue involves no loss to the Māori”. Director of Education states that education “should lead the Māori lad to be a good farmer and the Māori girl to be a good farmer’s wife”.

1950 | Western influences begin to affect Māori families, who start to raise their children as predominantly English speakers.
1960 | Hunn Report draws attention to the educational disparity between Māori and Pākehā, and rejects the assimilation policy in favour of “integration”. (Between 1900 and 1960, the proportion of Māori fluent in te reo decreases from 95% to 25%.)
1963 | Currie Report emphasises the need to centralise the notion of Māori educational underachievement and initiates a range of compensatory education programmes.
1970 | Ngā Tamatoa and the Te Reo Māori Society lobby for the introduction of te reo in schools.
1971 | Report of the National Advisory Committee on Māori Education advances the concept of bicultural education.
1973 | All seven Teachers Colleges have courses in Māori Studies. Presentation of Māori language petition to Parliament by Ngā Tamatoa and the Te Reo Māori Society.
1981 | Hui Whakatauira of Māori leaders proposes and establishes the first kōhanga reo as a response to impending loss of te reo.
1985 | First kura kaupapa Māori established at Hoani Waititi Marae, West Auckland.
1986 | Report of the Waitangi Tribunal on the Te Reo Māori Claim (WAI 11) asserts that te reo is a taonga guaranteed protection under Article II of the Treaty of Waitangi.
1987 | Māori Language Act recognises te reo as an official language. Māori Language Commission (Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori) is established.
1989 | Education Act formally recognises kura kaupapa Māori as educational institutions.
1990 | Education Act is amended to recognise wānanga as educational institutions and allow the Minister of Education to designate a state school as a kura kaupapa Māori.
1997 | Strong push from Māori involved in initiatives to increase the numbers of speakers of te reo. There are 675 kōhanga reo (catering for 13,505 children), 54 kura kaupapa Māori, three wānanga, more than 32,000 students receiving Māori-medium education, and 55,399 students learning te reo.
1998 | Te Puni Kōkiri report identifies education system’s underachievement for Māori. First Māori education strategy developed by Ministry of Education and Te Puni Kōkiri.
1999 | Education Act is amended to make it mandatory for kura kaupapa Māori to adhere to Te Aho Matua principles.
2001-05 | Series of Hui Taumata initiated by Minister and Associate Minister of Education and Ngāti Tūwharetoa to debate issues, barriers, and future directions. Redevelopment of Māori education strategy, drawing on Te Puni Kōkiri’s “Māori Potential Approach” policy.
2008 | Launch of strategy for improving the performance of the education system for Māori, Ka Hikitia – Managing for Success.
2012 | Range of initiatives, programmes, and activities to implement more self-determined approach to Māori education. (Includes iwi partnerships, ECE participation projects, and professional learning and development programmes.)

Sources include: Ka’ai, T (2004), “Te mana o te reo me ngā tikanga Power and politics of the language”, in Ka’ai, T et al., Ki Te Whaiao – An Introduction to Māori Culture and Society, Pearson, Auckland, pages 202-204, and Waitangi Tribunal (1999), The Wānanga Capital Establishment Report, chapter 2, pages 6-7. Williams, D (2001), Crown Policy Affecting Maori Knowledge Systems and Cultural Practices, Report to the Waitangi Tribunal, chapter 3, pages 150-151.

3.7
Originating with the Māori Potential Approach from Te Puni Kōkiri, government policy moved towards considering Māori achievement in terms of opportunity. Research published by the Ministry in 2007 found that students participating in kura kaupapa Māori (where the school culture and teaching practices reflect Māori values and concepts) achieved more highly than Māori students in English-medium schools.²⁰

Current context of Māori educational achievement

3.8
Figures 2 to 8 set out the most recent publicly available data we could find on educational achievement and retention rates. Although there have been improvements, the figures show that the education system is not serving Māori students as well as it serves other students.

Figure 2
Percentage of school leavers who have attained few or no formal qualifications, 1993-2007

Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2010), Review on Evaluation and Assessment Frameworks for Improving School Outcomes – New Zealand Country Background Report 2010.

Figure 3
OECD’s figures on percentage of school leavers with NCEA Level 2 or higher,
1993-2007

Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2010), Review on Evaluation and Assessment Frameworks for Improving School Outcomes – New Zealand Country Background Report 2010.
Note: The gap in the lines on this graph between 2002 and 2003 is deliberate and indicates the change in the qualification measure used at Year 12. From 2003, the qualification measure used is NCEA Level 2.

Figure 4
Ministry of Education’s figures on percentage of school leavers with NCEA Level 2 or higher, 2003-10

Source: Ministry of Education. The Ministry’s target is to increase the percentage of Māori school leavers with NCEA Level 2 or above from 36.7% in 2006 to 55% in 2012.

3.9
Figures 2 to 4 show that the gap between school leavers without qualifications and school leavers with NCEA Level 2 or above narrowed between 2002 and 2008.21 However, Figure 5 shows that a lower proportion of Māori students achieve NCEA qualifications than other ethnic groups, and Figure 6 shows that Māori students are still far more likely to leave school earlier than their non-Māori peers. As a result, Māori students leave school with fewer qualifications than other students.

Figure 5
Tracking achievements of students who enrolled for NCEA Level 1 in 2009, as at end of 2011

Ethnicity | Attained Level 1 by end of Year 13 | Attained Level 2 by end of Year 13 | Attained Level 3 by end of Year 13 | No. of candidates in cohort
NZ European | 86.0% | 74.1% | 47.0% | 34,292
NZ Māori | 68.3% | 52.6% | 22.7% | 12,249
Pasifika peoples | 75.3% | 63.9% | 26.7% | 5,678
Asian | 84.5% | 78.1% | 54.3% | 6,292

Source: NZQA. The percentages are calculated based on the number of candidates in Year 11 in 2009, even though some candidates might have left school before Years 12 and 13.

Figure 6
Estimated percentage of students staying on at school, by age and ethnic group, 2002-08

Year | Age=16.5 | Age=17.5
| Māori % | Total % | Māori % | Total %
2002 | 62.4 | 80.5 | 36.8 | 57.6
2003 | 63.5 | 82.6 | 37.3 | 58.7
2004 | 64.4 | 82.0 | 40.3 | 61.4
2005 | 64.0 | 81.8 | 40.3 | 61.1
2006 | 61.5 | 81.2 | 39.7 | 61.3
2007 | 62.6 | 81.4 | 39.5 | 61.4
2008 | 65.8 | 82.4 | 40.4 | 62.3

Source: Ministry of Education.

3.10
The Ministry’s report on Māori education, Ngā Haeata Mātauranga, noted that in 2008, 43% of all male students and 34% of all female students who left school in year 10 were Māori. Of those who left in year 11, Māori students made up 32.8%.²²

3.11
In 2006, nearly half of all Māori students who left school had gained no qualifications at any level.²³ The Ministry estimated that 32% of all Māori students in 2011 will leave school without gaining qualifications at any level.

3.12
Figures 7 and 8 show Māori students’ achievement in mathematics and reading, compared to students in other ethnic groups, based on data from 2001 to 2004. The distribution of achievement is the same for Māori students as it is for other ethnicities, but the position of the bell curves show that most Māori (and Pasifika) students sit lower in the range than others.

Figure 7
Distribution of 90,000 students’ assessed achievement in mathematics, by ethnicity, 2001-04

Source: Hattie, J (2008), “Narrow the Gap, Fix the Tail, or Close the Curves: The Power of Words”, in Rubie-Davies, C M, and Rawlinson, C, Challenging Thinking about Teaching And Learning, Nova Science Publishers, New York, page 22.

Figure 8
Distribution of 90,000 students’ assessed achievement in reading, by ethnicity, 2001-04

Source: Hattie, J (2008), “Narrow the Gap, Fix the Tail, or Close the Curves: The Power of Words”, in Rubie-Davies, C M, and Rawlinson, C, Challenging Thinking about Teaching And Learning, Nova Science Publishers, New York, page 21.

What leading research says about barriers to, and opportunities for, Māori educational achievement

3.13
To help us further focus our work, we considered leading research into Māori educational achievement. The following section outlines what the research says and builds on the history, policy direction, and achievement statistics detailed in the previous sections.

There is unwillingness to change the cultural traditions of everything related to schooling, such as curriculum, assessment, accountability, school climate, organisation of the school day, relationships with the community, etc.

Professor Wally Penetito

3.14
The research clearly indicates some of the barriers to, and opportunities for, success that our audit activity could test during the next five years.

Research into reasons for “Māori underachievement”

3.15
“Māori underachievement” has been the subject of much research. Recent research conducted by the Ministry and independent researchers among whānau, students, and education providers indicates what some of the barriers for Māori are.

3.16
Some barriers are more generic and might be common to many students, regardless of their cultural background. Parents and whānau interviewed about participation in ECE noted that factors limiting their participation included physical and economic access to ECE, differing views about the value of ECE, degree of trust in the teacher, and perceived lack of responsiveness by services to cultural needs.

3.17
Research also shows that students can find transitioning from primary to secondary school difficult. This is especially so for students with low achievement levels, of lower socio-economic status, from kura kaupapa Māori, and from diverse cultural backgrounds. However, the Ministry’s companion document to Ka Hikitia, Key evidence and how we must use it to improve the system performance for Māori (the Key Evidence document),²⁴ cites research indicating that these difficulties are more accentuated for Māori. These findings are consistent with research that emphasises the importance of relationships for Māori students.

3.18
Research shows that effective leadership to improve student achievement and well-being, positive teacher-student relationships, easy transitions from ECE to primary school and from primary school to secondary school, and access to ECE are all important.

Lower expectations of Māori students and lack of cultural responsiveness

3.19
Some barriers may be more specific to Māori. The Key Evidence document cites evidence from research indicating lower teacher expectations of Māori students at all levels – and that this has a direct, negative result on those students’ achievement. In particular, researchers have found that some teachers’ low expectations of students who move from Māori-medium to English-medium schools and a lack of cultural responsiveness in English-medium schools are significant barriers to educational achievement.

The product of long-term power imbalances needs to be examined by educators at all levels, including their own cultural assumptions and a consideration of how they themselves might be participants in the systematic marginalisation of students in their classrooms, schools, and the wider system.

Bishop, O’Sullivan, and Berryman

3.20
A further barrier identified by research is variable levels of commitment and understanding from the Ministry and other education sector agencies, and in school leadership and teaching practices. Sometimes this can reflect a lack of willingness to change the “cultural tradition” of teaching.²⁵ This can result in a “one size fits all” approach to teaching, which does not suit all Māori students.

3.21
The Key Evidence document notes that recent research has linked improved student achievement to how well a student’s culture is reflected in the school’s values and teaching practices.²⁶ However, there are difficulties in:

• acknowledging the issues facing Māori students while avoiding deficit thinking; and

• challenging the education system to support culturally responsive education.

3.22
A major challenge noted by the Ministry and other sources is how to measure Māori achievement when that requires determining who the Māori students are and what their needs are without focusing on them in deficit-thinking terms. Also, Ministry staff, ERO, and others noted that many teachers and school leaders express discomfort with what they view as “singling out” their Māori students, believing that all students should be “treated the same”.²⁷

3.23
It is clear from the research noted in this section that the barriers to Māori educational achievement are varied and complex. Below, we outline what the leading research indicates is effective in education for Māori.

What the research shows to be effective for Māori students

3.24
It is clear from our research review that there are successes in Māori educational achievement. It is also worth noting that honest and open dialogue is needed for that achievement to improve. The Advisory Group suggested that “courageous conversations” are needed to help to name the issues – such as whether beliefs about treating all students the same are used to justify a refusal to move to culturally responsive teaching – and make progress towards addressing them. The Advisory Group noted that the challenge for the education sector is to create environments and opportunities for these “courageous conversations” to take place.

The elements for success are good teaching, self-identity and self-efficacy, parental influence, and the “three bes”: be there, behave, be learning.

Advisory Group

Cultural responsiveness

3.25
During the last two decades, many researchers have investigated what works for Māori, independently and on behalf of the Ministry. Examples of good practice that result in Māori students’ educational achievement indicate what works for Māori and indeed for many students.

3.26
Research emphasises the importance of cultural responsiveness in all aspects of education. Cultural responsiveness could also contribute to achievement for all students. Professor Sir Mason Durie notes:

… success for Māori students will be more likely where whānau and school can share positive attitudes, aspirations, and expectations.²⁸

3.27
One way of providing culturally responsive education is through Māori-medium schools. (We describe Māori-medium education and its underlying concepts in Appendix 4.) There may be some useful lessons for the wider education system in the approach taken by Māori-medium schools.

Concepts of teaching practices

3.28
According to research, the important aspects of Māori pedagogy (theory and practices of teaching) underpinning teaching practices in Māori-medium schools and kōhanga reo/ECE environments include:

• ako – co-operation of learner and teacher, resulting in fluidity of roles (see paragraph 3.29);

• student-directed learning, resulting in student control over the sequence and pace of learning;

• use of Māori concepts and contexts as a basis for learning; and

• close involvement of whānau and encouragement of whānau participation in classrooms.²⁹

3.29
The research notes that these aspects of pedagogy differ from traditional teaching practices and that they are likely to present a challenge to English-medium teachers who are used to delivering set lesson content in a traditional classroom setting.³⁰ (We note that the trend in general education in recent years, supported by the ECE curriculum Te Whāriki and the New Zealand Curriculum, has been to encourage independent learning by placing greater emphasis on student-directed learning or an inquiry approach.)

3.30
The importance of ako, and of relationships in the classroom, is a strong theme in the research we reviewed. Ako is two-way and collaborative (group) learning in a culturally responsive setting. This requires the teacher to be a learner as well, and allows the student to be a teacher to classmates and the class teacher.

3.31
Manaakitanga (in this context, caring and kindness) is noted by researchers and in Ka Hikitia as fundamental for helping Māori students to achieve. Whānaungatanga (in this context, building supportive relationships) provides positive results for lifting Māori students’ achievement.

3.32
In its Best Evidence Synthesis 2009 report on school leadership, the Ministry identified leadership as critical to improving student outcomes in both Māori- and English-medium schools.³¹

Teacher quality and capability – the pivotal role in communication with whānau

3.33
The research we reviewed emphasises the quality of teaching as a crucial element of educational achievement for Māori students. The Advisory Group noted that teachers are in an important position to promote links to their community and whānau, and need to consider what they do that draws students into school. The challenge for the teacher, as the face of the ECE provider or the school, is how to reach out to whānau/parents and caregivers to gain their support for their children’s participation and learning.

18 Waitangi Tribunal (1999), The Wānanga Capital Establishment Report, Wellington, chapter 2.

19 Comer, L (2008), Closing the Gaps – Lessons from New Zealand (presentation to Ministerial Council for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs), Te Puni Kōkiri, Wellington, pages 2, 3, 9, 13.

20 Wang, H and Harkness, C (2007), Senior Secondary Students’ Achievement at Maori-Medium Schools 2004 – 2006 Fact Sheet, Ministry of Education, Wellington, in particular, pages 1-2.

21 The Ministry told us that estimates for 2011 show a slight improvement, but the overall picture remains the same.

22 Ministry of Education (2010), “Young People Engaged in Education”, Ngā Haeata Mātauranga – The Annual Report on Māori Education, 2008/09, Wellington, page 27.

23 Ministry of Education (2008), Key evidence and how we must use it to improve the system performance for Māori, Wellington, page 27.

24 Ministry of Education (2008), Key evidence and how we must use it to improve the system performance for Māori, Wellington.

25 Graham Nuthall, cited in Ministry of Education (2008), Key evidence and how we must use it to improve the system performance for Māori, Wellington.

26 Ministry of Education (2008), Key evidence and how we must use it to improve system performance for Māori, Wellington, page 33.

27 Education Review Office (2012), Partnerships with Whānau Māori in Early Childhood Services, Wellington, page 12.

28 Durie, M (2011), Ngā Tini Whetū – Navigating Māori Futures, Huia Publishers, Wellington, page 5.

29 Ka’ai, T (2004) “Te mana o te reo me ngā tikanga Power and politics of the language”, in Ka’ai T et al., Ki Te Whaiao – An Introduction to Māori Culture and Society, Pearson, Auckland, pages 202-204, 208.

30 Rangahau Matauranga Māori, Te Kotahitanga: The experiences of Year 9 and 10 Māori students in mainstream classrooms, pages 7-10.

31 Robinson, V, Hōhepa, M, and Lloyd, C (2009), School Leadership and Student Outcomes: Identifying What Works and Why – Best Evidence Synthesis Iteration, Wellington, page 35.

Part 4

Our work on Māori educational achievement during the next five years

4.1
In this report, we have brought together a picture of the history of Māori educational policy and of recent Māori educational achievement using statistics, research, and advice from our Advisory Group. From this information, we have framed some questions that seem important and prepared a simple framework to identify the focus of our audit work during the next five years.

One hundred and thirty years plus of formal schooling under the shadow of colonialism has left a legacy that cannot be reversed overnight.

Professor Wally Penetito

4.2
We have decided on the topic for the first year of our programme of audit work on this subject (see paragraphs 4.7 and 4.8). To determine and shape the next four years of the programme, we will work with Parliament, the relevant public entities, our Advisory Group, and other interested parties.

Overall focus for our five-year programme of audit work

4.3
The overarching question that our programme of audit work will focus on during the next five years is:

How well does the education system currently support Māori students to achieve their full potential and contribute to the future prosperity of New Zealand?

4.4
We intend to concentrate on English-medium primary and secondary schools, because they are where most Māori students receive their education. We have not ruled out looking at kura kaupapa Māori later in our programme of audit work. We may also consider audit work on aspects of tertiary education and the transition from secondary to tertiary education, training, or first employment.

4.5
We will ask several supplementary questions to help answer the overarching question. These questions include:

• Is the strategy for raising Māori educational achievement (Ka Hikitia) being effectively implemented in schools?

– How effectively is the strategy communicated to schools and other stakeholders?

– Is there an understanding of and co-ordinated approach to implementing the strategy?

– Are qualitative and quantifiable benefits being delivered as a result of Ka Hikitia?

– What has been the difference in the experience of Māori students?

– Are the changes being made likely to be sustainable?

– Is good practice being shared throughout the schools sector?

• Is educational achievement appropriately monitored and acted on?

– Is the data meaningful and reliable?

– How is data used to focus resources, share learning, and influence decision-making?

– What does the data indicate about success?

– Is good practice being shared and, if so, what is the effect?

• Are resources (funding and other) delivering effective results and providing value for money?

– What funding is committed to this area, including specifically targeted funds?

– What is the total cost to the taxpayer?

– How are schools and other agencies using the funding?

– Is there effective evaluation of results and success factors?

– Has the investment provided a tangible return in either raising achievement or providing a platform for further achievement?

– What would be the potential cost to New Zealand of not delivering successful outcomes?

– Is good practice being shared throughout the sector?

• Are effective partnerships used to enhance Māori students’ achievement?

– Are education agencies, including schools, working effectively and collaboratively?

– Do schools actively seek out involvement from whānau, and are whānau actively engaged and involved in their children’s learning?

– Is there effective collaboration between schools, iwi, and other community stakeholders?

– Has collaboration resulted in greater understanding between education agencies, schools, iwi, whānau, and other community stakeholders, and contributed to raising achievement?

– Is good practice being shared throughout the sector?

• What has been the effect of specific initiatives in improving Māori educational achievement?

– Te Kotahitanga (see Appendix 3);

– Student Achievement Function (see Appendix 3);

– Youth Guarantee programmes (see Appendix 3);

– He Kākano (professional learning and development, see Appendix 3); and

– initiatives in tertiary education institutions.

Framework guiding our programme of audit work

4.6
We have used five aspects of the education system that relate to these questions to form a framework to guide our work. This framework is explained in Figure 9 and covers:

• implementation;

• resources;

• partnerships;

• good practices; and

• results.

Figure 9
Framework guiding our five-year programme of audit work on Māori educational achievement

Aspect of system | Explanation

Implementation

The current policy/strategic basis is Ka Hikitia. Implementing Ka Hikitia is the joint responsibility of the central educational agencies and schools. We expect a framework and plan for implementation to flow from the Ministry to schools and that appropriate strategies, processes, and practices are in all schools. Specific programmes and initiatives should be effective in improving outcomes for Māori.

Resources

To implement Ka Hikitia, the funding and capability needs to be well targeted and applied efficiently. Rather than focusing on new funding and new initiatives, we will focus any work in this area on the total funding that central educational agencies and schools apply to education. We also know from the research to date that teacher-student relationships and teachers’ ability to be culturally responsive is important. Any future work in this area will need to consider the assessment of teacher capability.

Partnerships | Ka Hikitia is underpinned by the partnership between Māori and the Crown. This aspect is particularly important in enriching the cultural awareness of, and capability in, the sector. Partnerships between teachers, schools, whānau, iwi, and the community are important.
Good practices | There are about 2500 state and state-integrated schools, each with their own ideas and practices. It makes good sense to share ideas and practices that work.
Results | In any system, results need to be meaningful, reliable, monitored, and – most importantly – acted on. We will look at whether results are effectively and reliably reported and whether student achievement is being raised.

Our first audit topic: Implementation of Ka Hikitia

4.7
Our first audit, which we will complete in 2012/13, focuses on the implementation of Ka Hikitia:

Ka Hikitia is the educational strategy for supporting young Māori to thrive academically, socially, and culturally for New Zealand’s future: Are there proper processes and practices in schools and other educational agencies to support that strategy?

4.8
This audit will address parts of the first question we posed in paragraph 4.5 – Is the strategy for raising Māori educational achievement (Ka Hikitia) being effectively implemented in schools? We expect to consider:

• the level of awareness of Ka Hikitia in schools;

• how effectively schools are implementing processes and practices to support Ka Hikitia (and with what outcomes);

• the Ministry’s effectiveness in leading and facilitating the successful implementation of Ka Hikitia; and

• the role of other educational agencies.

Potential audit topics for subsequent years

4.9
Potential topics for the rest of our five-year programme of audit work may include:

• Implementation:

– Do the relevant public entities and educators understand and address the identified potential barriers to Māori students achieving their potential?

– Do the relevant public entities and educators understand and make the most of existing opportunities?

– Has “refreshing” Ka Hikitia resulted in its wider and more effective implementation?

– What is the effect of truancy, and suspending and expelling students?

• Resources:

– Is the funding committed to education well targeted and successfully applied?

– Is the funding sustainable, and is it sustained long enough to deliver the intended results?

• Good practices:

– What systemic changes make a difference to student achievement, and are they sustainable?

• Partnerships:

– Do effective partnerships with iwi enhance student achievement?

– Is the sector co-ordinating its efforts to achieve results?

– Are the systems for supporting students to make successful transitions into work and learning adequate?

• Results:

– Is reporting effective?

– Do results show that student achievement is being raised?

4.10
We plan to work with various interested parties to make sure that we focus this programme of audit work to best effect. We will provide information about how to engage with us on this subject on our website at www.oag.govt.nz.

Appendix 1

About Ka Hikitia

The Ministry of Education’s four focus areas for Ka Hikitia, and priorities for action in each focus area, are set out in the following table.

Focus area | The “priorities for action” in this focus area are:

Foundation years

• participation in high-quality early childhood education

• effective transitions to school

• strong early literacy and numeracy foundations

• effective home-school partnerships focused on learning.

Young people engaged in learning

• effective teaching and learning for Māori students in years 9 and 10

• effective professional development and accountable leadership

• increased student involvement in and responsibility for decision-making about future education pathways

• improved whānau-school partnerships focused on presence, engagement, and achievement.

Māori language in education

• strong establishment processes for Māori-medium schools

• effective teaching and learning of, and through, te reo Māori

• strengthening the supply of quality teachers

• building the evidence base for mātauranga Māori.

Organisational success

• strong leadership in Māori education across the Ministry of Education and the education sector

• more confident Ministry people working closely with Māori

• increased Ministry accountability for outcomes

• use of evidence of what makes the greatest difference for, and with, Māori.

Source: Ka Hikitia – Managing for Success, Ministry of Education.

The Ministry has noted that “levers” for achieving these changes are:

• increasing the professional learning and capability of teachers;

• focusing on responsive and accountable professional leadership;

• setting and resourcing priorities in te reo;

• increasing whānau and iwi authority and involvement in education; and

• strengthening inter-agency collaboration.

Appendix 2

Main evidence used to inform this report

We reviewed a wide range of published material, and material provided to us by people we interviewed and the Advisory Group. In particular, the following documents informed this report:

Official documents

• Education Review Office (2010), Promoting Success for Māori students: Schools’ Progress, Wellington.

• Education Review Office (2012), Partnership with Whānau Māori in Early Childhood Services, Wellington.

• Ministry of Education (2008), Ka Hikitia – Managing for Success: The Māori Education Strategy 2008-2012, Wellington.

• Ministry of Education (2008), Key evidence and how we must use it to improve the system performance for Māori, Wellington.

• Ministry of Education (2010), Ngā Haeata Mātauranga 2008/09, Wellington.

• Ministry of Education (2011), Statement of Intent 2011/12- 2016/17, Wellington.

• Ministry of Education (2011), Ka Hikitia – Mid term Review of progress in implementation Education Report – Key official documents, internal document.

• Ministry of Education (2012), Statement of Intent 2012-2017, Wellington.

• New Zealand Qualifications Authority (2012), Te Rautaki Māori a te Mana Tohu Mātauranga o Aotearoa 2012-2017, Wellington.

• Waitangi Tribunal, (2011), Ko Aotearoa Tēnei: a report into claims concerning New Zealand law and policy affecting Māori culture and identity, Legislation Direct, Wellington.

Research

• Articles in set: Research Information for Teachers, set Reprints 2012, New Zealand Council for Educational Research, Wellington.

• Bishop, R (2011), Freeing Ourselves, Sense Publishers, Rotterdam.

• Bishop, R and Glynn, T (1999), Culture Counts: Changing Power Relations in Education, Dunmore Press, Palmerston North.

• Bishop, R, O’Sullivan, D, and Berryman, M (2010), Scaling Up Education Reform: Addressing the Politics of Disparity, NZCER Press, Wellington.

• Durie, M (2005), “Te Tai Tini Transformations 2025”, CIGAD Working Paper Series 5/2005, Massey University, Wellington.

• Durie, M (2011), Ngā Tini Whetū – Navigating Māori Futures, Huia Publishers, Wellington.

• Goren, P (2009), How Policy Travels: Making sense of Ka Hikitia – Managing for Success: The Māori Education Strategy 2008-2012, Fulbright New Zealand, Wellington.

• Hattie, J (2008), “Narrow the Gap, Fix the Tail, or Close the Curves: The Power of Words”, in Rubie-Davies, C M, and Rawlinson, C, Challenging Thinking about Teaching And Learning, Nova Science Publishers, New York.

• Macfarlane, A H (2007), Discipline, Democracy and Diversity: Working with Students with Behaviour Difficulties, NZCER Press, Wellington.

• New Zealand House of Representatives (2008), Inquiry into making the schooling system work for every child – Report of the Education and Science Committee, Wellington.

• New Zealand School Trustees Association (2012), Submission to Māori Affairs Select Committee – Inquiry into the determinants of wellbeing for Māori and Pacific Children, Wellington.

• Robinson, V, Hōhepa, M, and Lloyd, C (2009), School Leadership and Student Outcomes: Identifying What Works and Why – Best Evidence Synthesis Iteration, Ministry of Education, Wellington.

• Smith, G H (1995), “Whakaoho Whānau: New Formations of Whānau as an Innovative Intervention into Māori Cultural and Educational Crises”, He Pukenga Korero Vol. 1 No. 1, pages 18-36, Massey University School of Māori Studies.

Appendix 3

Important initiatives or projects relevant to Māori education

The Ministry of Education (the Ministry) states that all of its programmes and initiatives are designed to attend effectively to Māori learners. The programmes on the following list are highlighted as having special relevance.³²

Ka Hikitia – Managing for Success: The Ministry’s approach to improving the performance of the education system for and with Māori. Ka Hikitia says this is a key aspect of having a quality education system where all students are succeeding and achieving.

Te Whāriki: The Ministry produced the bicultural early childhood curriculum, Te Whāriki, in 1996. Te Whāriki is closely aligned to the concepts of ako and whānaungatanga. ECE providers are expected by regulation to provide a curriculum consistent with the “curriculum standard: general” in the Education Act 1989.

He Kākano: The Ministry, in partnership with Waikato University and Te Wānanga o Awanuiārangi, set up He Kākano in October 2010 with funding of $7 million for two years. He Kākano is a direct response to the priorities in Ka Hikitia. It is a strategic school-based professional development programme with an explicit focus on improving culturally responsive leadership and teacher practices to ensure that Māori learners enjoy educational success as Māori. The strategic intent of the project is to improve the emotional, social, cultural, and academic outcomes of Māori children. He Kākano offers a practical approach to address these changes.

Student Achievement Function: The Student Achievement Function was originally established to lift numeracy and literacy for students in the Ministry’s three priority groups by improving teachers’ and schools’ practice. Through the Student Achievement Function, the Ministry employs expert practitioners to work in identified schools to promote cultural changes to help to raise achievement.

Positive Behaviour for Learning: The Positive Behaviour for Learning programmes include parenting programmes in collaboration with Māori non-governmental organisations. The programmes contribute to the work carried out by the Ministries of Education, Health, Justice, and Social Development as part of the Addressing Drivers of Crime initiative.

Te Kotahitanga: This project was initiated by researchers but has been supported by the Ministry in subsequent years. Te Kotahitanga has been carried out in five phases since 2002 and is now in about 50 schools. The experience of Māori students informed the development of the Effective Teaching Profile, which teachers then implemented in the classroom. The Effective Teaching Profile

embraces the concepts of ako, manaakitanga, and whānaungatanga. The model relies on feedback from participants to inform subsequent teaching. Achievement gains for Māori and other students have been increasingly significant during the five phases.

ECE participation projects: These are community-led participation projects for ECE in selected areas. The Ministry’s Targeted Assistance for Participation programme is targeted to “areas identified as having the greatest need and where we stand to make the biggest impact in ECE participation”.³³ The programme funds several Māori bilingual ECE providers.

Youth Guarantee programmes: Secondary and tertiary education agencies are responsible for Youth Guarantee programmes, which aim to improve the educational achievements of targeted 16- and 17-year-olds through a range of free vocational courses. The concept has been piloted in Manukau, and the Government has committed $84 million over four years to Youth Guarantee programmes.

Tau Mai e – the Māori Language in Education Strategy: The Ministry’s strategy identifies “priorities, logic and investment plans” and explains how the Ministry will know whether its investment in te reo in education is making a positive difference.

Targeted Student Engagement and Attendance Programme: This flagship programme aims to ensure that secondary school students are enrolled in and attend school, including Māori students (who are over-represented in truancy rates).

32 Noted in correspondence from the Chief Executive of the Ministry to the Auditor-General, dated 22 July 2012.

33 Ministry of Education (2011), “The Participation programme creates 455 ECE child spaces”, The New Zealand Education Gazette, 4 July 2011.

Appendix 4

About Māori-medium education

Māori-medium providers are kōhanga reo, kura kaupapa Māori, and wānanga. The primary purpose of kōhanga reo is to pass on Māori language and cultural values to young children through total immersion in te reo and a concurrent emphasis on whānau, hapū, and iwi development. The Ministry supports this model of education,³⁴ noting that “Key elements of success for the movement have been that kohanga reo are designed, managed, and administered by whānau.”

Kura kaupapa Māori operate on the principles of Te Aho Matua o Ngā Kura Kaupapa Māori (Te Aho Matua), written as the foundation document for kura kaupapa Māori and legislated for in 1999.35 The foundation document is written in Māori. Translated, it says that Te Aho Matua provides:

• a philosophical base for the teaching and learning of children and provides policy guidelines for parents, teachers, and Boards of Trustees in their respective roles and responsibilities; and

• a basis from which curriculum planning and design can evolve, allowing for diversity while maintaining an integral unity.

Te Aho Matua is presented in six parts. Each part has a special focus on what, from a Māori point of view, is crucial in the education of children.

The six parts are Te Ira Tangata (the human essence), Te Reo (the language), Ngā Iwi (the people), Te Ao (the world), Āhuatanga Ako (circumstances of learning), and Ngā Tino Uaratanga (essential values).³⁶

Kōhanga reo and kura kaupapa Māori are characterised by this focus on Māori culture and language as the purpose and the means of educational, personal, and eventually societal success.

34 Ministry of Education (2001), Report to the Ministers of Education and Māori Affairs of the Crown/Kohanga Reo National Trust Joint Working Group to review the relationship between the Crown and Te Kohanga Reo National Trust, Wellington, page 5.

35 Section 155A of the Education Act 1989, as inserted by the Education (Te Aho Matua) Amendment Act 1999.

36 New Zealand Gazette, Issue No. 32, 22 February 2008, page 740.