Practising teachers left out of NCEA advisory group

Posted By TEU on Feb 1, 2018 | 2 comments

Practising teachers have been left out of a new Ministerial Advisory Group that will advise Minister for Education Chris Hipkins on the review of the National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA).

The group met for the first time this week and has been tasked with developing a discussion document on NCEA that will form the basis of a wider, public consultation that is due to commence in April 2018.

Hipkins said he wanted the group to provide him with “disruptive views” that would challenge the government. This would have been more likely had the group included practising teachers at both the secondary and tertiary level.

Teachers will of course be vital to implementing any changes to NCEA and their inclusion on the advisory group would have given the Minister an opportunity to hear directly about what is like working under the current system and where improvements could be made.

The Tertiary Education Union urges the Minister to come forward with details of how teachers can input to him directly as part of the preparatory work for a review of NCEA.

Print Friendly


  1. The advisory group needs an advisory group. Crazy that there is no representation from current in-classroom practitioners! Even principal’s nominees??? Kura representation??? Kura Kaupapa Māori representation??? I’d like to see the rationale for leaving out practitioner voice, maybe then there would be better clarity. Or does the statement about wanting to hear ‘disruptive views’ have a double meaning – such as practitioners don’t know how to think outside of status quo? Really? I have a suspicion that those on the advisory group are of a very clear community, which will perpetuate a certain type of status quo. In my lifetime teachers have always had a reputation of being positively “disruptive” particularly about social injustices and agitating for justice. Either the Minister is saying that teachers have become too domesticated, or he doesn’t want their brand of disruption, or …?

    Post a Reply
  2. Why would you want to hear from those who administer, teach for and advise students on this examination? Perhaps because those practitioner insights just might get in the way of agenda that has already been approved?

    Post a Reply

What are your thoughts?