NZEI TE RIU ROA ANNUAL

MEETING

26 September – 29 September 2010 Rotorua Energy Events Centre, Rotorua

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

SUNDAY, 26 SEPTEMBER 2010 First Session POWHIRI The 127th Annual Meeting of NZEI Te Riu Roa was opened on Sunday, 26 September 2010 with a powhiri conducted under the mana of Te Ati Awa, Ngāti Toa Rangatira, Ngāti Raukawa and the Hunuku o NZEI Te Riu Roa. Held in the foyer of the Energy Centre Arena Complex, Tangata Whenua mai Te Arawa including members of the Aronui Tōmua o Rotorua were assembled in front of the huge carved double doors leading into the auditorium space that was allocated to NZEI Te Riu Roa for Annual Meeting. Manuhiri were assembled in the parking lot when the warrior went out with the Wero from the tangata whenua which is a form of reconnoitre to ascertain whether the manuhiri come in peace or have ulterior motives. The rakau was collected by the National Secretary and the approach of the manuhiri was seen as being one of peace.

Near to 400 members, whanau and staff were seated for this occasion when the exchange of kōrero commenced accompanied by waiata provided in the main by tamariki. While introducing the majority to the geographic spread of the Te Arawa rohe and the whakapapa connections of Te Arawa, the kaikorero went to great lengths to ensure that the provision of welcome was understood and endorsed by Te Arawa whānui and not just the numbers gathered at this time. The kaumatua who honoured us with his presence extolled the virtues of education for all and in particular, tamariki Māori. As is customary the replies from manuhiri kaikorero in the first place introduced the iwi present and then went on to thank Te Arawa profusely for their invitation to meet in the rohe of Te Arawa and for the riches of Te Arawa to be laid open for access by the manuhiri. Te Hau Kainga were invited to remain at the hui of NZEI Te Riu Roa to observe and participate in the in the general workings of Annual Meeting 2010. The formal process of the powhiri was concluded with karakia, hongi and manaakitanga. Following the Powhiri – Kaumatua Toma Waihirere opened the session with karakia at 2.45pm; followed by waiata. The National President called the meeting to order.

Representatives and Observers In Branch Order

National Executive President Frances Nelson FNZEI Primary Teaching Sector Immediate Past President Irene Cooper FNZEI Primary Teaching Sector Vice President Judith Nowotarski ANZEI Early Childhood Sector Other Members Tiri Bailey-Nowell ANZEI Te Reo Areare Clint Green ANZEI Primary Teaching Sector Louise Green ANZEI Primary Teaching Sector Frances Guy ANZEI Primary Teaching Sector Te Aroha Hiko ANZEI Te Reo Areare Ann Hoglund Support Staff David Kennedy Primary Teaching Sector

Diane Lawrence ANZEI Early Childhood Sector Ian Leckie ANZEI Primary Teaching Sector Diane Leggett ANZEI Primary Teaching Sector Donna Mason SSANZEI Support Staff Fiona Matapo ANZEI Primary Teaching Sector Niki Mayo Primary Teaching Sector Winnifred Morris Primary Teaching Sector Meg Moss Early Childhood Sector Gaye Parlane Support Staff Rikki Sheterline ANZEI Primary Teaching Sector Sophie Short Te Reo Areare Karl Vasau Primary Teaching Sector Hayley Whitaker Early Childhood Sector Nigel Wilson FNZEI Primary Teaching Sector

Te Reo Areare Alex Waihirere Kaumatua Meri August Mataatua Tiri Bailey-Nowell Parininihi ki Taipake Katarina Bennett Wairau ki Waitaha me Whakatu Hilda Foster Tauranga Moana Tania Gallop Te Waipounamu (ECE)

Adrian Hales Whanganui/Manawatu Te Aroha Hiko Kahungunu Serena Lewis, Te Upoko o te Ika Raiha Manahi Rotorua Hahona Paraki Murihiku/Otepoti Ahi Pere, Tamaki Whānui Manu Pohatu Ngā Tātaha ā Māui (ECE) Isabella Pomare Taitokerau Arthur Rhind Mangai Maori o Waikato Te Araroa Robinson Te Ngaio Tu (ECE) Hokimate Short Kaiawhina Tautoko/Support Staff Merearihi Whatuira, Tai Rawhiti Aronui Tomua Representatives and Observers A T Awakairangi Putiputi Temara Observer Hinehou Broughton A T Hikurangi Ki Te Tairawhiti Kaua Tuhura Observer Donna Williams A T Hokianga ki Taumarere Cherie George Observer Hannah Rihari A T Kahungunu Ki Te Wairoa Dianne Couper Observer Wayne Goodley A T Kahuranaki Judith Karaitiana Observer Canea Konia A T ki Ruapehu Colleen Hansen Observer Korty Wilson A T Manaakitia o Potiki Paeone Shaw Observer Kararaina Dobie A T Manaia ki Tutamoe Naphelia Brown Observer Evelyn Henare A T Manukau Whanui, Hariata Samuels Observer Nan Vaike Unofficial Observer Reremoana Taipeti A T Manawatu Richard Bishara Observer Frances Arapere A T o Mataatua, Joy Heremia Observer Mere Nuku Unofficial Observer O’Sonia Hotereni A T o Otepoti Tui Qauqau A T o Te Rohe Potae Hirere Moana Observer Aroha Atutahi Unofficial Observer Hera Vesseur A T Parininihi Ki Taipake Hone Niwa ANZEI Observer Joy Rangi A T Rotorua Colleen Mohi Observer Airini Twist Unofficial Observers Freda Amopiu, Puti Hammond, Hariata Tapiata, Rosie Waiapu A T Tamaki Makaurau Hinewai Smith

Observer Potiki Smith A T Tauranga Moana Paora McGruer Observer Max Thompson A T Te Ropu Manawatahi o Murihiku, Joanne Noanoa Observer Leonie McEwan A T Te Mangai Maori Waikato Ngaromo Beazley A T Te Whanau A Apanui, Tangi Callaghan Observer Ani McDonald A T Te Whanganui A Tara Karepa Wall Observer Naere Sio A T Tokoroa Takarihi Temarama Observer Sandra Rangikataua A T Turanga June Renata Observer Ihipera Walker A T Wairau Lisa Willis Observer Helen Joseph A T Waitaha Lara Askin Observer Kala Brown A T Whakatu Louisa Paul A T Whanganui Bernadine Menehira Observer Emily Bayly A T Whanganui A Orotu Whakaata Stewart Observer Nicola Sturm

Branch Representatives and Observers Ashley Heather McLachlan, Sandra Morris, Tania Reid Auckland Sandra Bennett, Sian Brown, Jill Dawson, Colin Didier’Serre, Jean Dolheguy FNZEI, Deryck Freeland, Drina Gray, Louis Guy ANZEI , Kamrul Jalil, Brian Laing FNZEI, Kini Longi, Shauna McGovern-Vale, Amavi Mey, Shannon Oswald, Judith Reid, Tony Ross, Chris Stuart ANZEI, Lynda Stuart ANZEI, Dale Tifflin, Olivia Tinkler, Ana Tonga, Kathy Welch SSANZEI Buller Cath O’Loughlin Observer Barry Townrow Cambridge Jackie Nicholl Observer Joanne Beldham Central Hawkes Bay Phil Bourke Observer Lorraine Nuku Central King Country Sharon Shaw Observer Lesley Blackford Central Otago Katrina Heyneman, Jeremy Hogue, Barbara Hore Christchurch Audrey Agnew, Carolyn Alcock, Donna Buchanan, Rebekah Carlsen, Julia Havell Rochelle Hurford, Kaye Hyams, Scott Jermyn, Natalie Johnston,

Jacqueline Kidd, Melody McCombe, Maria McDonald; Linda Milne, Raelene Moore, George Pearce, Mary Pearson, Julie Priddle, Nick Richardson, Katherine Ramsay, Chris Stace, Andrea Stoneman, Robbie Timo, Rena Viliamu-Smith Coromandel Peninsula Melanie Dorrian Te Kura - Correspondence School Marie Dawson Observer Eileen Kerr Ellesmere Amber Long, Peter Verstappen Far North Craig Benjamin Feilding Faye Todd Observer Pamela Millard Foxton Tina Maclean Observer Amanda Hunt Franklin Amanda Caldwell ANZEI, Kay Hume, Zac Markham Golden Bay Corina Ward Observer Wendy Drummond Grey Murray MacGibbon Observer Jo Wood Unofficial Observer Tracy Hall Hastings Joy Doggett, Nigel Jones, Rachel Niven, Mae Pullar, Phillippa Wischnowsky Heretaunga Leanne Burrowes, Beverley Johnston, Sandra Moore Hibiscus Coast Julie Cooney, Audrey Metcalfe Hokianga Dianna Boyle Horowhenua Lisa Cavanagh Howick Maureen Agnew, Jill Cowsill, Grant Kibblewhite ANZEI, Joelene McCarthy, Ken Nicholls, Amy Taylor, Olive Wallace Huntly Ngahiraka Marsh Observer Susan Smith Hutt Valley Rose Campbell, Ian Hastie, Marguerite McDonald, Judith McGhie, Rose Odlin, Christine Ongley, Shayne Parkes, Kaipara Suraya Esau Observer Janet Woodward ANZEI Kapiti Peter Corlett, Winsome Duncan, Emerald Nuttridge Komiti Pasifika Auckland Deborah Fischer Observer Oakore Koi Komiti Pasifika Wellington Sesilia Palu Observer Rob Ngan-Woo Mackenzie Chris Longbottom Observer John Longbottom Malvern Angela Jermyn Observer Tania Gallagher Mana Jodie Harvey, Pat Hutchison, Jill Merrick ANZEI

Manawatu Glenys Edmonds ANZEI, Liam Rutherford, Elaine Savage ANZEI, Pamela Townend, Andrew Turner, Kaye Webber Maniapoto, Elizabeth Jones Observer Marion Gauntlett Manurewa David Galvin, Sharleen Goodwin Ylonda Hancock, Linda Jordan, Joe Kake, Korrin Salisbury, Kathryn Staples, Jackson Vogt Marlborough David Paterson, Karen Paterson, Deana Quissy Matamata Karla Lyttle Observer Donna Harper Mid Canterbury Sylvia Huxtable, Juliana Protheroe Motueka Sue Partridge Murupara Kohine Tawhara Observer Helena Te Aho Napier Katrina Alexander, Jenni Beaven, Gill Howes, Meredyth Howie, Catherine Webster Nelson Paul Butterworth, Brooke Crawford, Deborah Klenner, Acushla Murphy, Virginia Stark, David Turnhout North Shore Jerome Brown, Vivienne Goldsmith D.J Goris, Cherie Gurney, Jackie Hawthorne ANZEI, Karen Jones, Barbara McIlroy ANZEI, SSANZEI, Chris Mack, Colleen O’Brien ANZEI, Nicky Poor, Jan Rhoades, Pamela Warner ANZEI North Taranaki Anna Crowley, Monique Jansonius-Albers ANZEI, Lynne Mckay, Jenny Sorensen ANZEI, SSANZEI, Trina Stanley Northern Wairoa James Nyssen Observer Glenis Guest Opotiki Kelly Barnett Observer Cammy Savage Otago Paula Bryan, Toni Clarke, Karen Ferguson, Marilyn Heyneman, Jan Lee, Deidre MacKay, Lee Phillips, Jan Taita, Gael Trevathan, Otahuhu Katrina Ballntine, Alison Rushbrook Pahiatua Bush Maureen Adlington Observer Tara Buchanan Papakura Davene Clarke, Julie-Ann Gauld, Janice MacKay ANZEI, Ester Watson Papatoetoe Linda Crump, Georgina Davis, Halima Dickie, Garth Houltham, Barney Manaia, Genneth Marshall-Inman ANZEI, Theodora Taitua, Tessa Willis Patea-Waverley Jessica Chapman Observer Stephen Sammons Piako Jane Macqueen Poverty Bay Amie Williams Rangitikei Heather Warren Observer Leigh Harvey Reefton-Murchison Marcia Murphy Rodney-Otamatea Sharlene Tornquist

Observer Katinka Gregoire Rotorua Marion Brits, Glen law, Joanne Lincoln-Moore, Erika Locke, Roger Pooley, John Wyatt ANZEI Ruapehu Katherine Forster South Canterbury Jacqui Barnes, Elizabeth Murray South Otago Carolyn Rogers Observer Natasha Groenewegen South Taranaki Daphne Bhana, Robbie Bird South Wairarapa Dylan Braithwaite Southland Jill Crawford, Kristy Ferguson, Lorraine Howden, Louisa McDonald, Mary Miller, Kay Schimanski, Jo Vaughan Taihape Carol Gilbert Taupo Mara Brown, Tracy Fraser Tauranga Suzanne Johnston, Christine McClymont, Marcia Martin, Gina Prebensen, Lynne Sperring, Jan Tinetti ANZEI, Graham Woodhead, Shona Woodhead Te Puke Stefan Andreassen, Alison Gray Thames Lianne Dudson, Karen Harper Tokoroa Ron Creigh-Smith Observer Jan Stobie Turangi Gina Geros Observer Melissa Tupara Waiapu Suzy Morete Waikato Margaret Barclay, Margaret Begley, Judy Benton, Val Clarke, Claudine Eriepa, Rebecca Finlay, Denise Hird ANZEI, Abby Mein, Karen Morrison, Dianne Pollard-Williams, Eileen Raynel ANZEI, Michelle Ryan ANZEI, Vicki Signal ANZEI, Waimate Ann Davis Observer Sarah Bennett Wainuiomata Krystyna Wishnowsky Observer Tute Porter-Samuels Waipa Jackie Woodland ANZEI Wairarapa Jane Gannaway, Ginny Macpherson Wairoa Sharon Jane Observer Sue Smith Waitaki Carol Bourke

Waiuku Gina Yelchich Observer Barbara Prescott Wanganui Lani Cotterill, Sue Nimmo ANZEI, Christine Omundsen Wellington Alison Beer, Kane O'Connell, Sharon Payne, Mary Sellwood, Rebecca Thomas, Catherine Wylds Wellington North Adrianne Pollock, James Riley, Bridget Wylie West Auckland Meredydd Barrar, Savita Chandra, Sheryl Charles, Shirley Donaldson, Margaret Harness ANZEI, Margaret Laidlaw, Anna Lee, Pam Leonard, Leith Matthews, Sharon Pond, Graham Stewart, Beverley Sullivan, Simon Tafea, Malia Tuala Westland Merle Bradley Observer Karen Jordan Whakatane Ellen Hill, Vera Pawson, Chanel Prasad Whangarei Sheryle Beckham, Jo Collyer, Heather Hayward, Jo MacDonald, Liz Moon, Donna Pulupaki

Area Council Representatives

Auckland Julie Fox ANZEI, Jesse Greenslade, John Pelesala Bay of Plenty Janeve Green, ANZEI Central East Bridget Dunn, Francis Nicholas Murihiku Southland Kay Stevens Otago Nicki Fairbairn, Jessica Story, Bron White Tai Tokerau Anita Newland ANZEI Taranaki Dawn Osman ANZEI Te Haunui Central Ann Brouwers ANZEI, Emma McKay, Sarah Thomas Te Piripi Mananui o Nga Tataha-a-Maui Ripeka Lessels, Patricia Pike, Sharleena Short Te Tau Ihu o Te Waka a Maui Anni Kolff, Rachael Parsons, Stephanie Stuart Waikato Kevin Rae Waitaha Canterbury Sandra Spekreijse Wellington Adam Burchmore, Jo Fothergill

NATIONAL PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS

Address by Frances Nelson, National President Te Manukura, NZEI Te Riu Roa: Rau rangatira ma

Tena Koutou, tena koutou, tena tatou katoa.

Ki nga manuhiri tuarangi

Nau mai nau mai whakatau mai

On behalf of the National Executive, I want to extend a very warm welcome to this auspicious Annual Meeting. It brings with it, some significant “firsts”. It is the first time we meet under the reorganized and revitalized NZEI Te Riu Roa structure. It is the first time for many, many years Annual meeting has been held outside Wellington. Both factors will require that we change and morph to meet our new context. It will be an interesting time, full of challenge and a lot of good will from us all – I hope – to make this work well. The programme for this Annual Meeting is different both in format and content. As you know, the organizational review sought to make NZEI more responsive and more capable of meeting the challenges in front of us. I believe we have reached a point where we need to be flexible enough to develop a programme that meets the needs of the day without losing the inherent culture of an organization that is 127 years strong. That is the yardstick by which the National Executive- and hopefully each of you - will measure this years meeting. The change is proving both timely and critical to our continued role as a key player in the education sector. Over the past year, the government has made its agenda very clear. NZEI, along with a number of other professional and industrial organizations and groups has been targeted on a range of fronts and challenged on issue after issue. We begin our Annual Meeting with a very different context laid before us. In order to look at what this means for us, it is appropriate to look at the world around us fairly broadly. Being “Union” has become a derogatory term and is now used by government to offset criticism of opposing views. The union movement as a whole and working people such as ourselves and the families in the communities we serve, across the board, have taken something of a battering with the dogged and unrelenting imposition of a number of pretty draconian claw back on the employment front. Our professional work has been both insulted and assaulted. Educationally, NZ is identified as one of the higher performing systems within the OECD. This makes the assault on our professional work all the more egregious. If only other sectors in NZ could boast the position held within the OECD by education…….whilst we are continually in the top quartile, our economy and many of our social indicators rate significantly lower and ……unlike education most areas of our work……… genuinely need urgent attention and improvement by the government.

The recession is certainly imposing some constraints in a monetary sense, but this should not mean that the view from the frontline is disregarded and the professional expertise we bring to the work we do is caste aside. Respectful relationships are what hold education together - and consensus decision-making is the “wind in its sails”. This is a sadly missed component of our work across the board and one that I believe will be at the root of many of the problems the sector and the country face in the short and medium term if we do not manage to make progress on this front. To use the “earthquake” analogy, the change in our professional, social and economic context over the past year has been nothing less than “seismic”. We are clearly moving away from a partnership model that saw “Big P” politics mediated by the voice and contribution of “experts” and practitioners. That was then backed up by public opinion rallying around the voice of reason based on good evidence and trust. Public opinion (sometimes uninformed) and polls – now appears to drive decision making for the government. There is a growing concern about an absence of evidence to give strength and confidence to decisions. We could well call this the “emperor has no clothes” syndrome - and it appears to be taking over from evidence and expertise. Day after day, we hear glib phrases such as “high standards”, “greater accountability” and a drive for us to become “better” state servants…..whatever this may mean! Students and their families are fast becoming consumers instead of learners and education positioned as a personal “good” with little sense of it also being an important “public good”. Educators at all levels used to be considered professionals and expert partners in the delivery of quality education to New Zealand’s young people. Suddenly, the value of having qualified teachers at all levels of the system has been dismissed as no longer relevant and no longer necessary. This doesn’t bode well for our para-professional colleagues either. Recently, I read an e-newsletter sent to schools by our minister – the honourable Anne Tolley. Apparently, she intended to invite a number of sector groups (including NZEI) to attend a National Standards Advisory Group meeting to give views on the implementation of national standards and guidance for improving assessment practice. This in response to urgent sector challenges around the problems in the construction of the standards. NZEI Te Riu Roa, along with a number of other sector organisations, first learnt of this through the media, not by direct contact with the Minister or her office. In an effort to decipher the message being sent by this type of action, I cast my eye around to see what is happening to relationships in other sectors. We seem to be in “good company”. The legal profession is angst-ridden over the government decision to legislate to “fix” what they perceive to be failures in the law. This, without either seeking or heeding the advice of the legal profession. Against the advice of the medical profession, we now see legislation proposed to enable employers to seek a medical certificate for a single day of absence. In reality, medicos say this will clog doctor’s surgeries and emergency medical centres if regularly enacted by employers and potentially compromise access by patients with more serious injury or illness. All three examples alienate professional groups who have, for years, worked harmoniously with governments on a range of important issues. The voice of the

professionals is, by degrees, being marginalized. Informed opinion and expertise no longer appears to hold value in the decision-making processes. The expert voice will soon disappear from the landscape and become a muffled whisper if we are not very careful. Society will surely be left to mourn its loss if, in a democracy it is neither heard nor heeded. Sometimes it takes a crisis for to bring out the best in people. Inspiring examples of leadership have emerged from the debris of the Canterbury earthquake. These examples demonstrate the difference we can make when we work together, consider others and acknowledge the role that expert opinion plays in resolving difficult problems. It is clear that using the skills of those who have them brings a much speedier and more enduring solution. It also prizes collaboration and shared responsibility for the generation of these solutions. In this way and under difficult circumstances, our Canterbury colleagues have risen to what were and in some ways continue to be – significant challenges. We send our continued best wishes and moral support to them and can learn a lot from their examples. If the new leaders arising within NZEI Te Riu Roa to meet the challenges confronting us as educators and citizens become as significant as the challenges they face…….they will be impressive indeed. It is clear we need to back up our challenge with the research and therefore the evidence to successfully shape the debate and lead the way forward. This Annual Meeting, we have placed importance on providing strong policy platforms on which to base our work. In the planning sessions, we are looking to provide you with tools for working with this policy and we’re urging you to build consensus around it in your own local and regional context. Is this a call to arms? ………consider the words of Dante Alighieri (Inferno) who said…….

"The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality."

There is much at stake here.

We often talk of ensuring we have funds “for a rainy day” set aside. Make no mistake colleagues, what is happening rapidly around us is tantamount to disaster, it’s more like a tsunami than a rainy day! And it’s time to put those rainy day funds to good use.

We have three days of serious work ahead.

We are here to talk together, think together, plan together, work together …….and aim to make a difference!

The question we need to be able to answer by Wednesday when we leave this forum, is “what will our disaster recovery plan look like?” Will we as leaders within NZEI Te Riu Roa be ready, willing and well prepared to take this challenge on. Or….will we (using the seismic analogy) quake, shake and crack apart? The answer needs to be a “loud and resounding” Not on my watch!

I want to repeat the whakatauki that I shared with you last year because once again, I think it encapsulates the essence of being “NZEI” and being union -

E hara taku toa,

I te toa taki - tahi

Engari, he toa taki - tini.

My work is not that of an individual ………but that of the multitude. I wish you all well in the deliberations and plans that you will make over the next four days, it is important work and as leaders and activists …….you hold the mana and wairua of our organization in your hands. No reira,

tena koutou,

tena koutou

tena tatou katoa.

At the conclusion of this speech, which was received with acclamation, Ian Leckie thanked Frances Nelson, noting the achievements and the challenges that lay ahead in taking NZEI Te Riu Roa forward. Frances Nelson’s and Ian Leckie’s comments were followed by a waiata. The National President, Frances Nelson then acknowledged members, staff and friends of NZEI who had died during the past year. The National President advised that greetings hsd been received from Past Presidents and Life Members – Bruce Adin, Bob Baird, Ira Charles, Irene Cooper, Frank Dodd, Lex Familton, Bruce Kelly, Keith Moore, Ernie Nightingale, Roy Norman, Liz Patara, Jack Smith & Colin Tarr. Messages were as follows: Ira Charles

Thank you for the invitation to your reception and Annual Meeting dinner. I would dearly like to make it but, unfortunately, have to decline. My very best wishes to you and all the members for a pleasant and most successful conference. Past President, FNZEI.

Colin Tarr and Liz Patara E nga mema o NZEI Te Riu Roa e nga hau e wha. Nga mihi nui, nga mihi aroha, ki a koutou katoa.

Our greetings and best wishes to all for a successful annual meeting held, this year, in Te Arawa country. We are in Adelaide this week so won't be able to attend parts of the hui this time. Best wishes again, and kindest regards.

Liz Patara - National President 1998 & Colin Tarr - National President 2004/ 2005.

Ernie Nightingale Ernie Nightingale wishes to thank you for the invitation to attend the Annual

Meeting functions in September, but will be unable to attend. He sends best wishes for the success of the occasion.

Past President, FNZEI. Jack Smith

Jack Smith thanks the President for her kind invitation to attend Annual Meting 2010 but regrets that, owing to a prior engagement, he is unable to attend. This is particularly so as he first attended Annual Meeting as a representative of the Rotorua Branch. Please convey my Greetings to Annual Meeting. Jack Smith, Life Member, Past President, FNZEI.

Roy Norman Please convey my thanks to President Frances for the invitation to attend the

Annual Meeting Dinner and other sessions of the Meeting. Unfortunately age and the restrictions it brings, now prevent me from moving too far from home. My best wishes to you all for a happy and successful meeting, despite the concern you all must feel in the present climate.

Roy A Norman Life Member, FNZEI ,Past President 1973-74.

Bob Baird Please thank Frances for her kind invitation to attend NZEI Annual Meeting on the

26th. Unfortunately Judy and I are both committed to an Old A's meeting the following morning in Auckland. We don't travel quite as energetically as we used to. I hope everything goes well and good luck for your campaign re National Standards.

Very kindest regards, Bob Baird.c Frank Dodd

Thank you for forwarding the National President's invitation to this year's annual meeting. Sadly I shall be unable to attend but will, as usual take a keen interest in the deliberations. Please pass on to Frances my best wishes to her for annual meeting and my congratulations to her for another fine year at the helm of the Institute. It is twenty five years since I was installed as national president and much has transpired in the years since. No single issue has been as vexing as the so-called National Standards. Please continue the good work in maintaining the principled opposition to this irrelevant nonsense. Please accept my apologies for non attendance and send my greetings to annual meeting.

Frank Dodd FNZEI, Past President. The National President, Francis Nelson then acknowledged the presence of NZEI’s guest, Angelo Gavrielatos (Federal President of the Australian Education Union). The National President explained to Annual Meeting the taonga: Pouwhenua and then presented it to Pakeke for its journey around membership.

As the chain of office of the NZEI Te Riu Roa National Presidency represents and symbolises the past in terms of the union’s leadership – Pouwhenua represents the future and continuity of the office. Shortly the Pouwhenuawill be taken to the paepae to present to the Pakeke. After the Pakeke have blessed Pouwhenua it will be passed through the hands of all members at the meeting to be imbued, once again (as it has

been in years gone by) with the strength, support and spirit of the membership. On Wednesday afternoon the Pouwhenua will again be passed to the National President-elect to symbolise the continuity of the office and to provide the President with the strength, support and spirit of the membership.

Pouwhenua was then presented to Koru Toma who received it with a karakia.

Matters of Administration/Registration

1. Registration

The National President advised that all representatives must have registered to be able to speak and have their votes counted and needed to be registered before 8.30am on Monday morning. Any changes of representation needed to be notified urgently to the registration desk.

2. General Information about the running of the meeting

The National President reminded members that they needed to be familiar with the Formal Resolutions in the Annual Meeting Guide as these would be used to ensure the smooth running of Annual Meeting. The National President said that she did not intend to go through the Formal Resolutions individually, but to get started, there were a few that were important to be aware of:

• To get their name on to a speaking list, representatives were to raise their

orange card with the number clearly visible to the “spotters”. • Speakers’ names would be read out in groups of 3 or 4. When their name was

read out representatives should move quickly to the nearest microphone and wait to be called on to speak.

• The timekeepers would ring a single warning bell one minute before the time

allocated had lapsed. At the end of the speaking time a double ring signalled time was up and the microphone would be turned off.

The National President drew members’ attention to the Standing Orders. Standing Orders Standing Orders were “the rules of engagement” which are detailed in the agenda booklet for easy reference. They are often confusing for new Annual Meeting representatives so a brief explanationwas given when these were used so that they all knew what was happening. Voting NZEI Rules do not provide for any right to abstain during voting. Representatives were required to vote on behalf of the members they represented.

The National President reminded branches sponsoring recommendations on the rules and policy to notify the Registration Desk of the names of movers and seconders as soon as possible. Members were reminded that resolutions to amend Institute rules and policy that related to a particular report would be taken when that report was discussed, wherever possible. Movers and seconders should be prepared to speak to their resolution at any session. Hot Issues Session In accordance with past practice, a session for Hot Issues was set on the agenda for Wednesday. This session would be contingent on the other scheduled business of the meeting being completed by the allotted time on Wednesday morning. Representatives were reminded that if the hot issues session was able to be held and they wished to speak at this time, they should record their name on the speaking list available at the Registration Desk by the end of Monday. Each speaker would have a maximum of 3 minutes speaking time. Writing a Recommendation or Amendment The procedures were set out on page 12, in Section No. 19 of the Annual Meeting Guide. Staff were seated with their Area Council and would be able to assist in completing this process. AMRAC The National President introduced the Annual Meeting Resolution Advisory Committee (AMRAC) which included Francis Nicholas, Ann Brouwers, Janeve Green, Judith Karaitiana, Kay Stevens and chair Jo Fothergill – AMRAC provided advice on the substance of resolutions and the order that these were to be taken. The National President said she would be working through the resolutions in the priority determined by AMRAC. The National President advised that where appropriate, these would be taken at the time reports were discussed. The order for rules and policy recommendations would be shown to members, in an onscreen presentation. AMRAC would be the basis of the President’s Advisory Group. With the addition of Judith Nowotarski, Liam Rutherford and Tiri Bailey-Nowell, this group would meet each day to give advice to the National President regarding the progress of Annual Meeting. The National President reminded branches sponsoring recommendations on the rules and policy that they were to notify the Registration Desk of the names of movers and seconders, as soon as possible. Members were also reminded that resolutions to amend Institute rules and policy that relate to a particular report would be taken when that report was discussed,

wherever possible. Movers and seconders should be prepared to speak to their resolution at any session. Applying for Leave from Annual Meeting The National President reminded members that there were formal procedures to be carried out when they apply for leave from any session of Annual Meeting and that members should refer to page 15 of the Annual Meeting Guide. The staff seated with their Area Council would assist with this if needed. Ian Leckie (National Executive) moved, Donna Mason (National Executive), seconded: "That the formal resolutions set out in the Agenda booklet be adopted". Agreed Other Information The members were informed of the following: Rotorua Energy Events Centre was a no smoking area – this included anywhere

inside the building. Cell phones must be turned off or on silent mode when representatives were in

both the Events Centre and the meeting rooms. Health and Safety requirements meant a need to highlight the procedures. The

Emergency Evacuation Notice was in representatives’ folders and they must make themselves familiar with it.

Refreshments would be available during break periods. Water would be available in the refreshment area.

Political Panel Session on Tuesday The Panel would be taking place after lunch on Tuesday. Members of the panel were: Catherine Delahunty, Education Spokesperson for the Green Party, Te Ururoa Flavell, Māori Party Member for Waiariki and Trevor Mallard, Education Spokesperson for the Labour Party. The National and Act parties were invited to provide a Member of Parliament for the political panel but both parties chose not to.

The politicians would each have 5 minutes to speak. This left 25 minutes for questions. If representatives wished to have a question included in this debate they needed to be submitted in writing by the end of session on Monday 27th September and include their name and branch/area council.

Forms for this were available from the registration desk, and completed forms should be placed in the box marked “Political Panel”. Questions needed to be addressed to an individual and contain no more than one lead-in sentence and the question.

National Executive Report and Updates The National President introduced the National Executive Report, and advised that it included the National Executive Report, Financial Statement, the Updates Booklet, and the Te Reo Areare Report to Kahui Whetu on the 2010 work programme. Oral questions would be taken on the first section of the National Executive Report from Page 6 to Page 20. When speaking to the meeting, representatives must first state their name and the branch, aronui tomua, komiti pasifika or area council they represented. Then identify the section of the report they were addressing by stating the page, the title of the section and paragraph, then ask their question. The substance of the question must be closely related to the substance of the paragraph identified. Once a representative had asked their question, they could make a brief statement if the question needed to be clarified. The National Executive members involved in the work area would respond to the question. The same process would be used when the meeting came to the Te Reo Areare Report to Te Kahui Whetu. The following representatives then spoke to the report and asked questions: Denise Hird (Waikato) Shone Woodhead (Tauranga) Direct debits Jo Collyer (Whangarei) Leadership training Meredydd Barrar (West Auckland) Special Education Suraya Esau (Kaipara) New Area Council Serena Lewis (Te Reo Areare) Te Kohanga Reo Kevin Rae (Waikato Area Council) Funding threshold Debbie Fischer (Komiti Pasifika Auckland) Size of National Executive Questions were responded to on behalf of Natioal Executive by: Ian Leckie, Nigel Wilson, Niki Mayo, Judith Nowotarski and Clint Green The National President then advised the meeting would move to the Te Reo Areare Report to Te Kahui Whetu. Donna Mason (National Executive), moved, Tiri Bailey-Nowell (National Executive), seconded: "That the Report of the National Executive and the Updates and the Te Reo Areare Report to Te Kahui Whetu be received”. Agreed

Questions/Statements on Te Reo Areare Report The following members spoke or asked questions: Lara Askin – (AT Waitaha) Discrimination of National Standards

against Maori.

Joanne Noanoa When will there be a 1 page info sheet (AT Te Ropu Manawatahi o Murihiku) for kura Stewart Whakaata (AT Whanganui A Orotu) Need to sit exam, but MoE have not paid this qualification? Judith Karaitiana (AT Kahuranaki) How far away is Miro Maori page on

website? Cherie George (AT Hokianga ki Taumarere) Page 40 – How far away? June Renata (AT Turanga) Annual/Bi-annual Meetings. Hariata Samuels (AT Manukau Whanui) Scholarships for Maori language? Meri August (Te Reo Areare) National Standards will not only discriminate against our Tamariki Maori, but also against our whanau, hapu, and our iti Maori. Ahi Pere, Meri August, Wini Emery, (Te Reo Areare); Frances Nelson (National Executive)and Colleen Mohi (AT Rotorua) replied. Frances Guy (National Executive) moved, Te Aroha Hiko (National Executive) seconded: “That the Report of the National Executive and the Updates and the Te Reo Areare Report to Te Kahui Whetu be printed in the record of proceedings of this meeting”. Agreed Frances Guy (National Executive) moved, Te Aroha Hiko (National Executive) seconded: “That the Area Council Reports received from the Bay of Plenty, Murihiku, Central East, te Tai Tokerau, Waikato and Wellington Area Councils be printed in the record of proceedings of this meeting”.

Agreed

FINANCIAL REPORT Nigel Wilson (National Executive) moved, Ian Leckie (National Executive) seconded: “That the Financial Report and Balance Sheet be received”.

Agreed The National President advised that for the discussion of the Financial Statement the meeting would go into closed session for the initial consideration of the Institute’s financial position so that any discussion would be confidential to members. No one was allowed to leave the hall while Annual Meeting was operating in closed session. Passing this resolution meant the information would be kept within the Annual Meeting forum and was not for publication. Nigel Wilson (National Executive) moved, Ian Leckie (National Executive) seconded: "That the Institute go into closed session". Agreed

The National President invited members of the Executive Finance Committee and staff supporting the report to the stage. She then called on Nigel Wilson, Chair of the National Executive’s Finance Committee to present the Financial Report. Nigel Wilson presented the Financial Statement. Members of the Executive Finance Committee assisted in the discussion. Nigel Wilson (National Executive) moved, Ian Leckie (National Executive) seconded: “That the financial report and balance sheet be received”. Agreed The mover, Nigel Wilson (National Executive) spoke to the report.

There were three documents to refer to

Summary of the Audited Financial Statements to 31/12/2009 A Copy of the full set of Audited Financial Statements for the year ended

31/12/2009. The update report – Financial Statements for the period to 31/7/2010

(a) Governance – 2009 busy with organisation of Governance changes

Return Institute to positive outcome (p22) 2008 deficit of $900,000 2009 profit of $722,369

Good budgeting decisions – excellent relationship with auditor. All members of National Executive needed to have detailed knowledge of monitoring of financial expenditure. NZEI is not immune to the impact of the Global Financial Crisis. Maximising income through subscriptions is hugely important.

Operation Switch – for last 3 years – hugely important for NZEI to reduce Ministry of Education costs for contract. 2010 cannot claim depreciation on Education House. Softening on tenancy – but Education House has good occupancy.

Four Divisions

OPERATION ) ORGANISATION ) Page 22 GOVERNANCE ) EDUCATION HOUSE )

Setting budget for 2011 causes considerable thought. There was a need to reflect campaign plans, ( 3 year cycles) and to cater for the professional and industrial focus of NZEI Te Riu Roa. Membership Activity and Support has been high priority along with Campaign Programme. As we move forward it was important to build the financial assets of NZEI and build on capital funds. Education House profits would be used for Capital Expenditure. 2009 was a challenging year – but NZEI is in good heart to move forward. Thanks were extended to Darrell Ward, Assistant Secretary.

Chris Barber, Senior Audit Partner of PricewaterhouseCoopers, was in attendance during this session and Prashant Patel, the NZEI accountant, provided back-up on the Financial Report as necessary. The National Secretary, Paul Goulter, and Assistant Secretary, Darrell Ward, commented on Education House. The following representatives spoke to the report or asked questions: David Paterson (Marlborough) Congratulated Finance Committee and

NZEI staff. Anna Lee (West Auckland) Consider “rainy day” Amavi Mey (Auckland) Questioned increase in staff salaries Erika Locke (Rotorua) Is 2010 Annual Meeting more

economical than 2009 Annual Meeting? Anita Newland (Tai Tokerau Area Council Are NZEI accounts above reproach? Karepa Wall (AT Te Whanganui A Tara) Were the Rotorua Welfare Units being

used and are they economical? Questions were responded to on behalf of Natioal Executive by Nigel Wilson Nigel Wilson (National Executive) moved, Ian Leckie (National Executive) seconded:

“That the Financial Report and Balance Sheet be printed in the record of proceedings of this meeting”.

Agreed Judith Nowotarski (National Executive) moved, Diane Leggett (National Executive) seconded:

“That the Institute resume in open session”.

Agreed It was reported that in the closed session Nigel Wilson and members of the Executive Finance Committee presented the Financial Report and Balance Sheet. A motion was agreed authorising the printing of the Financial Report and Balance Sheet in the record of Annual Meeting. Nigel Wilson (National Executive) moved, Ian Leckie (National Executive) seconded: "That the business done in closed session be confirmed in open session". Agreed The following members of the Finance Committee were thanked – Nigel Wilson, Irene Cooper, Te Aroha Hiko, Ian Leckie, Frances Nelson, Judith Nowotarski, plus staff members Darrell Ward, Paul Goulter and Ailsa Coutts.

Contextualising the Current “State of Affairs” Politically. Paul Goulter, National Secretary, addressed Annual Meeting, covering the following issues: Current trends in the Education Sector. The Governments goal of privatisation. The National Standards Debate. Trends in Sweden, England and the USA. The need for NZEI Te Riu Roa to challenge Government’s vision for education. He reminded those present that it would be necessary to defend both our values and our vision and the challenge must be taken really seriously. He stated that our vision must be rock solid and reminded members that what counted the most was their views, their passion and their determination. The following representatives commented or asked questions: Vivienne Goldsmith (North Shore) Team Solutions Meredydd Barrar (West Auckland) Privatisation by stealth Peter Verstappen (Ellesmere) Need for well organised members Dylan Braithwaite (South Wairarapa) Problem of strong private model in ECE Erica Locke (Rotorua) QPE – a moral imperative. Denise Hird (Waikato) QPE – where does the vision document fit Barney Manaia (Papatoetoe) Sought reassurance of NZEI’s capabilities. Amanda Caldwell (Franklin) Target school for National Standards Marion Brits (Rotorua) Questioned the need for change to the NZ education system. Fiona Matipo (National Executive) Mokopuna must have a quality education system Gina Yelavich (Waiuku) Public Private Partnerships. Graham Woodhead (Tauranga) Aligned the ECE and National Standards campaigns. Julie Fox (Auckland AC) Emphasised the need to have an informed parent community Manu Pohatu (Te Reo Areare) Early Childhood and Kohunga Reo cuts. Garth Houltham (Papatoetoe) Need to budget for election campaign in 2011. Ian Leckie (National Executive) Careful thought required about shaping framework and plans. Debbie Fischer (Komiti Pasifika- Ak) Public Private Partnerships The following responded to questions during the discussion Frances Guy Paul Goulter The National President thanked Paul Goulter for his insight into problems facing education in New Zealand. The National President then advised that in regard to the National Executive Reports, further questions could be put in writing and would be answered during Term 4 by the National Executive members.

The National President called the Members who were standing for National Executive, to the front of the meeting so that other representatives could see who they were and also advised there was a photo board in the foyer. She further advised they would have 2 minute speeches from the candidates on Tuesday afternoon. The National President called Kaumatua Toma Waiherere to close the business for the day with karakia. Following the waiata, Annual Meeting was adjourned until 8.25am, Monday 27th September 2010.

AWARDS CEREMONY At Awards Dinner, Sunday 26 September 2010. Karakia - Alex Waihirere (Kaumatua) Frances Nelson (National President) & Judith Nowotarski (National Executive) officiated at the Awards Ceremony. The following guests were acknowledged:

Dr Helen May Peter Lind and Alison McAlpine Director and Chair (respectively) of

the New Zealand Teachers Council, The Honourable Steve Chadwick, MP and the Honourable Trevor

Mallard, MP. Past Presidents Bill Noble and Iria Whiu Ross Knight Angelo Gavrielatos

NZEI Te Riu Roa – Grades of Membership Awards Award of Honorary Fellow Frances Nelson (National President) called Helen May to come forward to accept the award of Honorary Fellow. Helen May was escorted to the stage by Diane Lawrence. Frances Nelson (National President) read Helen’s citation. Dr Helen May has been made an Honorary Fellow of NZEI Te Riu Roa in recognition of her outstanding commitment and service to the Institute and to education. Helen May is a pioneer in early childhood education in New Zealand and aleader in teacher education. She trained as a primary teacher in the 1960s but moved into early childhood when she had her children and became the co-coordinator of the Victoria University Crèche. In 1987 Helen began working in teacher education at Hamilton Teachers’ College and later the University of Waikato. During the early 1990s she worked with Margaret Carr on the development of Te Whāriki – the first national curriculum guidelines for early childhood education in New Zealand. In 1995 Helen was appointed to the first New Zealand professorial Chair in Early Childhood at Victoria University. In 2005 she went on to be appointed Professor of Education and Head of Faculty of Education at the University of Otago and in 2007 was appointed as the Dean of the University of Otago. Helen has spoken and published widely in the field of early childhood education and on the history of early years education. She is held in high esteem both nationally and internationally. Helen was at the forefront of the changing face of the politics of early childhood education. She was the first president of the Early Childhood Workers Union when there were no minimum wages or conditions for childcare workers.

In 1984 Helen was a member of the team that negotiated the first Consenting Parties Award. Helen has had a long association with NZEI TE Riu Roa which goes back to her days as a student teacher in the 1960s. As a NZEI member she has provided leadership and professional support and has been dedicated to working for quality education for teachers, children and families. In recognition of her outstanding contribution NZEI Te Riu Roa is proud to confer the award of Honorary Fellow of the New Zealand Educational Institute on Dr Helen May. Frances Nelson (National President) presented the Honorary Fellow Certificate and Badge to Dr Helen May. Helen May responded. This was followed by a waiata. Associates Frances Nelson (National President) read out the list of recipients of the Associate Award, and presented the Awards to those recipients who were present at Annual Meeting. She said: The award of Associate is presented to the following people in recognition of their stature in education and as members of the New Zealand Educational Institute

Margaret Barclay, Waikato Meg Moss, Auckland Anna Lee, West Auckland Dora Taitua, Papatoetoe

Frances Nelson (National President) read the names of recipients not present, and said: The following recipients of the Award of Associate would be presented with their awards at a meeting of their nominating branch or aronui tomua.

Wilhelmus (Ernie) Buutveld, Marlborough Jack Reid, Cambridge Myrtle Terekia, Aronui Tōmua Te Ropu Murihiku

NZEI Scholarships The National President announced the recipients of the NZEI Scholarships and said the awards would be presented to them at a meeting of their branch.

Early Childhood Scholarships

Adam Buckingham, North Shore Branch Joanna Young, Taranaki Branch

Support Staff Scholarships

Helen Tina, Rotorua Branch Karyn Ward, Ashley Branch

MONDAY, 27 SEPTEMBER 2010

Second Session Karakia/Mihi Kaumatua Toma Waihirere opened the session with karakia at 8.30am; followed by waiata. Frances Nelson, National President called the meeting to order. The National President gave a brief update on National Standards. 1. Government intent on pushing through irrespective of any opposition.

Last week the petition was presented at a hearing of the Education/Science Committee - Teachers, parents, children all presented – a non-hostile reception at committee.

ACT ally in seeking trial, Labour and Green parties also positive.

Hopefully the Select Committee will go back to Minister and Prime Minister and advise that the foundations of National Standards are shaking.

NZEI highlighted that the standards were flawed.

2. NZEI presentation to Ministers National Standards Advisory Group.

Group will go back to Minister with recommendation.

Gave outline of all the work NZEI had done – but Minister absolutely stuck in the position that “there is nothing wrong with standards” and that teachers will make them work.

NZEI will not send data forward.

Advisory Group is to help the Minister find ways to make National Standards work.

Belonging to Advisory Group at this point – great deal of support for NZEI but Government still unshakeable.

Need to look at construction of standards – can work with the Ministry to do this.

Growing sense across the sector that we need to do something about it.

Frances Nelson, National President then introduced the following Special Report.

National Standards – A Cautionary Tale Recommendation 1 Diane Leggett (National Executive) moved, Niki Mayo (National Executive) seconded: “That the Special Report to Annual Meeting 2010 ‘National Standards – A Cautionary Tale’ be received”. Agreed Diane Leggett (Mover): It is my responsibility to introduce this special report to Annual Meeting 2010 and I do so with grave reservations that the Government’s current policy on National Standards and its implementation will undermine the high quality and respect that primary education currently holds in New Zealand and overseas. Political Overview The government’s National Standards policy has been one of the most derisive

education policies legislated for New Zealand’s primary schools in the past 150 years.

National Executive’s concerns about the National Standards relate to unresolved issues about design flaws, the introduction of a system shift without evidence, infrastructure of resourcing to support the requirements.

The speed with which National Standards have been designed and is being implemented is being widely criticised by principals, teachers, Boards of Trustees, parents, academic experts, and the wider community.

How do we know the National Standards are robust? – There is no data, no evidence, no evaluation, no trial – they are pronouncements without evidence.

The National Standards therefore remain untested and experimental.

Why have National Standards been introduced?

The reason for this has changed over time! To improve student achievement in reading, writing and mathematics To lift the tail of underachievers To compare children’s achievement from one school to another To ensure accountability with teachers who need to change their ways and

step up To ensure “plain English” reporting to parents

The lack of a trial period or testing of the Standards has caused concern. Education sector groups and academics sought a phased introduction of the Standards, as is occurring with Nga Whanaketanga rumaki Maori, as opposed to full implementation in Schools during 2010. No opportunity has been given, to see whether the standards in either medium have been set at the correct level, or to see how they relate to actual patterns of student progression over time.

There is lack of clarity about the concept of the National Standards. They continue to be described in a number of ways by the Minister and the Ministry of Education as: benchmarks, reference points, signposts, standards, aspirational standards, and more recently as the NZCNS. What a confused picture! Niki Mayo (Seconder): Legislated Documents - New Zealand Curriculum - Te Marautanga - Ka Hikitia

Conflict with the NZC NZ Curriculum provides breadth and richness of learning, local answers and innovative responses; nurtures individual talents, cultivates creativity, celebrates diversity, inspires curiosity and acknowledges the importance of a student’s personal learning journey. All of these are basic building blocks for lifelong learning. In contrast, the National Standards policy is a “one size fits all” and encourages more standardisation, treats learning as linear and age related, and is the first step down a slippery slope towards high stakes testing and test based accountability Lack of Evidence There is no research which shows that passing NCEA Level 2 requires the levels of progress indicated by the published National Standards, this is sheer guess work (Warwick Elley, Fundamental Flaw 4). Lack of Alignment Concern has been expressed that with no trial of the standards there has been no opportunity to establish whether they have been set at the correct level or to see how they relate to actual patterns of student progression over time. There is no consistent relationship between:

Norm referenced tools (eg. asTTle, PAT, STAR) of what student can do at a particular age and the National Standards which are backward mapped from NCEA 2.

Curriculum resources eg. Ready to Read

In Conclusion I want to acknowledge the National President’s initiative in calling together a forum of academics, principals, boards of trustees, teachers and national organisations which has been missing from the Ministry’s implementation phase and has provided a broad platform for each group to participate in the National Standards debate.

Recommendations 2 & 3 Diane Leggett (National Executive) moved, Niki Mayo seconded: 2. “That no school be compelled to implement the National Standards until

that school’s community is satisfied the Government’s National Standards policy and implementation process is:

Fair to students and communities (ie. Meet student learning needs and

parent needs for shared information).

Respectful of educators (ie. Principals, teachers, and the school community including boards of trustees, and parents).

Evidence – based on best available knowledge”.

3. “That, prior to embarking on the implementation of the Standards, professional development and learning opportunities are essential to enable staff and trustees to confidently understand and work with a revised system and to ensure the process supports quality teaching in The New Zealand Curriculum”. Carried

The Mover and Seconder then spoke to the Recommendations. Diane Leggett (Mover) System Shift To enable the system to function successfully there must be interdependence

between groups of individuals, structures and processes. The government’s National Standards policy is a “systems shift” as it requires a change process to occur in our system.

To work, the development and implementation processes must be respectful of professional knowledge and must secure public confidence.

Where is the evidence that this policy will lead to improved student outcomes, progress and motivation?

The Education Minister has remained inflexible in her stance.

The Minister talks about consultation with the sector. What consultation?

Dissemination of information about what has been done and what is expected of schools.

These have been imposed within a very short timeframe.

Best Evidence Synthesis.

Do we have ownership? NO.

The sidelining of the profession and the academic community is one of the most destructive parts of the New Zealand National Standards process. It has resulted in significant alienation and dissatisfaction among principals and teachers.

Niki Mayo (Seconder) Maori Medium Community Nga Whanaketanga Rumaki Maori (National Standards for Maori-medium

education settings) have been developed by Maori-medium leaders using a consultative and trialling process, however, the majority of tamariki Maori are in English-medium settings. For those children, Te Reo Areare, and 200 educators attending Te Kahui Whetu earlier this year, expressed strong concerns around discrimination, labelling, removal of mana and lack of regard for cultural identities causing a marginalisation of child potential.

The lack of a consistency in the delivery of National Standards for all tamariki Maori is a huge concern and similar concerns have been expressed around the marginalisation of our Pasifika and many ESOL children too.

Early Childhood Community Although the National Standards have been written with a primary sector focus the

downward pressure of standards expectation will inevitably affect the Early Childhood Sector.

The potential to damage the philosophy and principles of Te Whariki and its delivery in Early Childhood settings is very real.

An Early Childhood Education Forum involving practitioners, academics and representatives of private and community based institutions was hosted by NZEI. The strengths of Early Childhood education were emphasised and the risks due to the introduction of National Standards were identified. The untrialed Standards will have potential consequences to a sector already reeling from funding cuts.

Students, Parents and Whanau One of the initial justifications of National Standards was around inconsistencies

in reporting to parents with a strong emphasis on “plain English” reporting, however little regard was given to the many schools who had consulted well with their communities and had full support for their reporting systems.

A survey by the New Zealand Herald earlier this year revealed that while the majority of respondents supported the idea of National Standards, only 11% felt they understood them. A follow-up survey in July revealed a substantial drop in support that correlated with an increase in those who claimed to understand the Standards.

Diane Leggett (Mover) Recommendation 3 also requires a change process.

Alignment of current assessment tools to the Standards is not complete.

Can we be assured of consistency with Overall Teacher Judgements?

Group moderation processes within a school and across schools provides sound scaffolding. But at what cost? And to whom? This compares most unfavourably with the respect and support that has been given to secondary teachers in the implementation of NCEA.

The quality of the professional development has been questioned by attendees with lack of consistent or coherent advice offered by facilitators.

Workshop numbers have been limited with size of school not being taken into account.

There is a lack of focused information to address issues raised by schools.

The number of workshops has not met the national need for all teachers to receive professional development.

And research tells us that the cascade model of professional development does not work!

NZEI has described the National Standards policy as fundamentally flawed and called for a trial because there are so many inconsistencies in the standards that should have been overcome before applying them across the whole country. None of the selected issues below have been addressed in the Ministry’s submission; for example: There is disparity between the National Standards and NCEA Level 2 raising

questions about the accuracy of the backward mapping.

There is lack of clarity how the National Standards fit with vital curriculum resources.

There is conflict with the spirit and intent of the NZC also in legislation.

The wording of the literacy standards make many interpretations possible.

There is a lack of recognition and resourcing to support teacher moderation.

The media will be able to publicise and represent the results in league tables, this is a major flaw which has resulted in the abandonment of similar policies in Wales, Scotland and even England.

Overseas experience shows us that these kinds of compulsory assessment/reporting plans do not reduce the size of underachievement by particular groups of students.

In Conclusion It is imperative that resourcing is sufficient and timely.

Concentration needs to be on the NZC which is world renowned as being a very forward thinking curriculum.

There is an assumption that “one size fits all”

The working is vague and capable of many interpretations. NZEI will continue to advocate for: A robust evidence-base which show the National Standards are supportive of

teaching and student learning, motivation and self esteem.

Clear alignment with the spirit and intent of The NZ Curriculum to guide teaching and learning programmes in schools.

Sufficient resourcing for professional learning and development opportunities that meet the varying needs of staff and trustees is essential prior to embarking on the full implementation of the National Standards.

Clear guidance about how to achieve consistent teacher judgement nationally.

You are urged to vote for the recommendations.

The following representatives then spoke to the Recommendations. Jo Collier (Whangarei) Supported the recommendations. Stressed the need for teachers to read the

documentation carefully. Debbie Fischer (KP – Auckland) Supported the recommendations. Young teachers under pressure to implement.

Principals are under pressure – must lead opposition.

Zac Markham (Franklin) Supported the recommendations Spoke on Special Education – Brian Laing (Auckland) Supported in principle but has reservations

regarding Resolution 3. Whole pathway should be abandoned.

The National President advised she had received an Amendment, but had resolved not to accept it. This decision was challenged. The National President put her ruling to the meeting. Her ruling was agreed to. Brian Laing (Auckland) Questioned what really was the intent of

setting out the pathway? Niki Mayo (National Executive) Responded that the process is fundamentally

flawed and NZEI is trying to work towards a solution.

Louis Guy (Auckland) Highlighted fundamental flaws – Principal in

difficult position when he reports children could never obtain/achieve this standard.

Must find a way to move forward. Recommendation 4 Diane Leggett (National Executive) moved, David Kennedy seconded: “That NZEI supports and confirms the position agreed by the NZPF National Conference 2010 regarding the Government’s National Standards policy and its implementation by stating: That the National Standards will not deliver the outcomes as intended. That a complete revision of the National Standards system in partnership

with the sector be auctioned with urgency”. Agreed Diane Leggett (Mover)

Over the last couple of months NZEI and NZPF have been gathering significant

support from schools and their communities in recognising that the National Standards are flawed.

Hastily prepared

Poorly promoted

Illogical

Simplistic

Not been tested

Wording is vague and capable of many interpretations

“will be of no use to extend the bright and will be too hard for the slow” to quote Warwick Elley, 2010.

There is a need to concentrate on a partnership approach with colleagues, the Federation and our communities.

Caution should be taken on any immediate work by schools for setting targets for the National Standards when there is little confidence that they are robust.

There is a policy/outcome mismatch.

David Kennedy (Seconder) The initial resistance to the flawed National Standards began in the extreme ends

of the country, Northland and Southland. Principal associations in these provinces were amongst the first to take united action against the National Standards after discovering for themselves the obvious disconnects and concern over the lack of consultation with the profession. To give some detail and perspective to the campaign at a local level I have chosen to highlight Southland, home of the Ranfurly Shield and a rather diminished stadium.

Southland principals worked closely with their boards and organised meetings with Eric Roy, the local National MP. One half of the National Standards Bus Tour began in Southland, starting in Bluff and then moving to Invercargill and rural Southland. With each school visit the passion of both principals and staff to protect their children from an untested system was apparent and in most cases they were fully supported by their Boards.

A creative element was revealed when one principal decided that the National Standards would make the New Zealand Curriculum a redundant document and so posted it on Trade Me. The auction generated national attention and the questions and answers were both entertaining and informative.

National Standards have had a constant presence in the Southland Times with supportive editorials, constant letters to the editor, reports on local action and hard hitting political cartoons.” Random Audits” not so randomly targeted a couple of Invercargill principals, the veiled threats they were subjected to made national headlines.

Invercargill Boards of Trustees felt a level of conflict between their views on National Standards and what was being promoted by their National Officers. A letter expressing their frustration was sent some months ago, but they have yet to receive a reply. Lester Flockten was brought to Invercargill to present his thoughts

on National Standards at a public meeting. Southland principals turned up in force to the NZPF’s Queenstown conference and strongly advocated that their own position become that of the Federation:

Concerns about the poor quality of the National Standards PD was communicated through a joint letter to the Ministry and a collective boycott of any further PD was announced.

John Faire was recently brought to Invercargill for a public presentation on National Standards. Over 200 people attended.

The realities of what many Primary Principals must be going through was expressed to me by a Gore Principal recently. She explained to me that she had always tried to do the “right thing” as a teacher and educational leader and fulfil any expectations placed upon her. She has never sought public attention and yet her frustration at making National Standards work in her school has resulted in her writing to the local newspaper and working with other principals in a public campaign to reveal the flaws in the standards and the potential ill effects on children.

In Conclusion NZEI will continue to advocate for: Sufficient time to allow for confident implementation by the profession and to gain

parent support.

You are urged to vote for the recommendation.

The following member then spoke to the Recommendation. Graham Woodhead (Tauranga) Concerned but supported. Need to get large

numbers on board. Must press statement that system is flawed. Teachers face dilemma in being required to implement.

The National President then put Recommendation 4. Recommendation 5 & 6 Diane Leggett (National Executive) moved, David Kennedy (National Executive) seconded: “That NZEI confirms its policy that assessment data should be used only for the purpose it has been collected ie. to support teaching and learning”. Agreed Diane Leggett (Mover) Each school needs to ensure that their reporting process meets the needs of their

community.

Assessment data needs to inform teaching and learning, but also meets the needs of parents too.

Schools are now required to report annually, identifying the number and proportions of students at, above, below, or well below the Standards.

However, there is no mandated requirement in NAG 2A for schools to report to parents on individual students on that four point scale but the Minister and Ministry have made it clear that this is their expectation.

Remember also, that flawed National Standards will produce flawed data that will not support teaching and learning.

Much more teacher time will be spent assessing, reporting, moderating and defending their judgements!

When results are made public, comparisons of schools will be the next step and all assessments will become “high stakes”.

Home and family engagement is critically important in supporting children’s learning. Effective reporting to and with students and parents/whanau ensures children achieve their potential and get the support they need when they need it. The Government says its National Standards will help engage parents and whanau in students’ learning because schools must use plain English in their reporting. Although schools do not have to legally do so, earlier Ministry of Education materials promoted a plunked graph style of reporting and the rating of students’ achievement as above, at, below or well below the standard. But does this mean that parents will really get a good picture of their child’s progress and achievement? Will it genuinely help them to engage in their child’s learning? The Ministry of Education data working group has met on a number of occasions in

2010 but has now been disbanded.

The Minister of Education said to this group that she sees no way of stopping league tables being produced and published.

Schools will be judged unfairly, by parents and the media.

Many children will be labelled as failures, by their parents and peers.

David Kennedy (Seconder) NZEI, NZPF and NZAIM’s range of solutions.

NAG 2A? Frances has asked me to hold fire on this as updates will alter content.

In Conclusion NZEI will continue to advocate: for no harm to be done to students and their

learning, to schools or their communities through the generation of league tables.

And for assessment data being used for the purpose it is collected and/or collated for, that it is focused on appropriate use at school level for teachers, students, parents and the school community.

You are urged to vote for the Recommendation.

The following members spoke to the Recommendations Janice Mackay (Papakura) Questioned whether or not NZEI should support requests for tests to be trialled. The National President then put Recommendations 5 & 6.

Recommendation 7 Diane Leggett (National Executive) moved, Niki Mayo (National Executive) seconded: “That the NZEI Te Riu Roa Special Report on the Government’s policy on National Standards and its implementation is endorsed”.

Agreed Diane Leggett (Mover) Given the political nature of the National Standards Government policy and the

potential harm to students I urge you to adopt this report.

Niki Mayo (Seconder) Acknowledge the growing support nationally and the need to review this policy

and the National Standards.

You are urged to vote for the Recommendation.

The National President then put Recommendation 7.

A Vision for the Teaching Profession (Advancing Quality Public Education) Frances Guy (National Executive) moved, Meg Moss (National Executive), seconded: 1. "That the Special Report to Annual Meeting 2010 NZEI Te Riu Roa Advancing Quality Public Education be received. Agreed The mover spoke to the report. The Political Climate: A De-professionalising Agenda? The need for this work has been made imperative by the current political climate. As was outlined to us all yesterday, the Government has revealed more of its agenda for changing public education in New Zealand. We have faced: The Introduction of National Standards Threat of League Tables Early Childhood funding cuts Attack on our professionalism Undervaluing of the work we do Slide 1 The refusal to roll out the Practice Based Attestation. Budget provisions that will allow schools to ‘cash up’ part of teacher staffing

allocation. The Government’s policy of encouraging private/public ownership of schools and

the Ministry’s position that bargaining is a purely industrial process. There is little evidence that the collective experience and expertise of the professionals in the sector or NZEI members is valued. This Annual Meeting Special Report is an enabling Report to develop a NZEI paper that pulls together our belief that Quality Public Education is a right and the responsibility of society to provide it. Frances Nelson (National President) and Paul Goulter (National Secretary) noted yesterday the increased attacks on the sector. As a response to these, we have acknowledged the importance of NZEI developing its own position and not being reactionary to the agendas of others. This paper will be A positive document Have an explicit moral purpose Be firmly based in professional beliefs of all educators and will be central to the election campaign and beyond This paper is intended to be a tool – It is not an end in itself.

As was outlined to us all yesterday, the Government has revealed more of its agenda for changing public education in New Zealand, National Standards introduction, early childhood funding and teacher registration cuts, no rollout of the Practice Based Attestation, budget provision for schools to ’cash-up’ part of teacher staffing allocation. Ministry’s position that bargaining is a purely industrial process. There is little evidence that the experience and the expertise of NZEI members are valued. Slide 2 This paper will have limited text It will build on previous work such as QPE421c It will have key clear statements that can be easily remembered, similar to the

way that NZC has memorable headings, ie. cognitive portability This will enable it to be easily recalled and able to be advocated for It will be inclusive of all sectors and groupings There will be background material online for those who want more detail; For example, a statement on leadership would have separate backups about leadership in ECE, Support Staff, Teachers and Principals, but the vision document would have the over arching statement about what are the beliefs, and what is strongly advocated for. Slide 3 There have already been some trial workshops undertaken. Reaction to these has shown members were excited to have the opportunity to be talking positively about what we believe in and what is worth fighting for and fight we will have to. If you agree – ongoing workshops will be help to help develop the paper to ensure that the membership voice is reflected in the paper and that they will have ownership of it. The workshops will use current policies and positions. They will be used to test the priorities and issues for the paper. A workshop to assist with members input will be available online and be provided in hard copy upon request. Developing the paper will in itself lead to informing membership of the fight we are in and go on to lead them to action. Area Councils will be asked to run one workshop in Term 4 before mid November. Where there is an interest, Branches could also facilitate a workshop. We urge you to take the opportunity to take part in a positive professional forward looking consultation process so we are clear about what we believe in and what we are going to advocate for. The ensure Quality Public Education is a reality for tamariki in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Frances Guy (National Executive), moved, Meg Moss (National Executive), seconded: “That the NZEI Te Riu Roa Advancing Quality Public Education paper be actioned through the NZEI Te Riu Roa 2010 and 2010 Strategic and Operational Plans”.

Agreed The following representatives then spoke in support of the recommendation. Meredydd Barrar (West Auckland) Emphasised this NZEI vision is absolutely

critical. Shona Woodhead (Tauranga) Questioned. Is this another policy on EC? Maureen Adlington (Pahiatua Bush) Concerned with barriers – absenteeism, many

children do not want to learn Erika Locke (Rotorua) Supported. Zac Markham (Franklin) Political landscape has changed New paper

needs to be more robust. Frances Guy (National Executive) replied.

Resolution 2 Anna Lee (West Auckland) moved, Sharon Pond (West Auckland) seconded: Te Ara Kokiri / Unified Teaching Profession “That action be taken by NZEI Te Riu Roa, as an education union, to promote the understanding that it is necessary to have a robust, well resourced quality public service to provide an effective infrastructure to meet the needs of children and their families”.

Agreed The mover spoke to the resolution. Arguments: Families need to be able to access effective and timely services to meet their needs.

The effectiveness of all government departments to function has a profound effect on children’s well being and ability to reach their potential to be productive citizens, whether it be health, education, social policy, or welfare or justice.

When children need support from government departments, under-resourced skilled staff often struggle to provide services even for the most extreme cases.

Where more effective and less expensive preventive and remedial measures are not available unfortunately it can be too little and too late.

Resources are most often used in crisis situations, which are more costly.

Preventative education programmes such as reading recovery, Public Heath Nurses, youth mental health services and professional counsellors cost significantly less than placing a person in prison at $100,000 per year.

The running down of the public services leads to dysfunctional services, loss and overwork of skilled staff and the loss of public confidence in a state run public service.

Where state services are reduced schools often become the advocate for the child and parent and bear the “cost” in terms of time and distraction from focussing on children learning.

Where services to schools and centres, such as water supply, are commercialised/privatised for profit they will inevitably increase in cost. This will take funds from the operations grant that should be spent on our children’s education.

The current purpose of running down the public service within NZ is to privatise the profitable parts leaving the liability for taxpayers.

Resolution 4 Anna Lee (West Auckland) moved, Meredydd Barrar (West Auckland) seconded: Teacher Professionalism 4. “That section 3.0.1 be amended by the insertion of the words: “NZEI Te Riu Roa is opposed to any increase in Teachers’ Council fees until

such time that the Teachers’ Council is an organisation run ‘for teachers, by teachers, with teachers’ following the current wording of 3.0.1.”

Lost Mover Spoke to the Resolution. Arguments: As a Crown owned entity should the Teacher Registration Board require additional

funds in order to do its legislated business, then the Crown, not teachers should increase its contribution.

To be able to teach more than 10 days, teachers are legally required to be registered.

Fee increases are paid from most teachers’ salaries: $228 per 3 years or $238 after 1st October 2010.

Members are unhappy at increased fees.

Seconder Spoke to the Resolution. Reinforced arguments. The following members spoke to the Resolution. Nigel Wilson (National Executive) Opposed.

Political environment – do not want government to take more control over Teacher Registration First increase since 2002

Chris Stuart (Auckland) Opposed. A big increase, but gives protection.

Mover in Reply Significant changes since resolution written. Practice Based Attestation Presentation Michael Bain (Principal), Heather Wilkie (Teacher), Kay Foy (Teacher), from Te Mata School, made a presentation to Annual Meeting. Fiona Matapo introduced this group stating they showed courage, and that skill-based attestation fits well. The group introduced the presentation. PBA Fits Too many on Step 10 who are work horses Targeted focused independent professional development Put grant around quality learning and education Benefited children PBA Model Identification of K.S.A. (Knowledge/Skills/Attribute) Tie in with Registered Teacher Criteria Data needed ownership Framework Use of exemplars Professional knowledge Professional practice Relationship and values Teachers provided evidence in 3 areas, Literacy/Numeracy/Own Choice PBA process is not P.D. What I have learnt/read/do differently Roles within the process Trust with others crucial to the process Needed to identify gaps in own knowledge Enjoyed challenge of linking practice with theory Principal’s Role Setting up system across 16 schools interesting process System had to be rigorous/robust to show external moderators who visited 3

times Questions from group became deeper as process continued Evidence from wide range of sources In-school release provided so could see/judge others Discussion Groups justified 3 people in rooms at all times

Gaps identified and teachers moved on Workload terrific but would do it again Teachers must see themselves as learners and must challenge practices of

others Groups started from different levels of understanding. Points to Ponder Currently NZEI has served injunctions on three Hawkes Bay Schools to the Employment Relations Authority – Schools will be on the Ministry of Education side. The Te Mata team was then thanked by Frances Guy who acknowledged the huge amount of work that the schools concerned had put into making it a successful trial. The process came out of the 2007 Collective Agreement Negotiations. However at the last minute the Government refused to acknowledge this side of agreement, and therefore in 2010 there will be no professional input in Collective Agreements.

EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION – QUALITY AT RISK Children are our most precious resource and our most important investment Judith Nowotarski (National Executive) moved, Hayley Whitaker (National Executive) seconded: 1. That the Special Report to Annual Meeting 2010 “Early Childhood Education – Quality at Risk” be received.

Agreed The mover spoke to the report. “A rich and fruitful life begins with quality early childhood education”. Slogan, recently adopted by Education International a Global Federation, of which

NZEI Te Riu Roa is a member

Introduction Context

Benefits of Early Childhood Education

Research Findings – high quality, positive, long lasting impact

Te Whaariki

Two Factors

Structural, qualified teacher, child ratios, small group size

& Process, high quality interactions child, whanau connections, meaningful relationships, quality practices

Commitment to 100% - Vision for the future

Background This Government continues to espouse the belief that the investment to the Early Childhood sector has not resulted in any ‘gains’, ie. increased participation. Ngahuarahi Arataki 10 Year Strategic Plan

8 years on the sector responded

Increase number of qualified teachers

Enthusiastic about improving quality

Growing awareness and acceptance

Operators, parents, community

2009 the government changed direction, the erosion began

May 2010, erosion compounded by cuts to funding that supported qualified teachers

$435 million cut

A quarter of that return to initiatives to encourage participation

This is welcomed

But no compensation for the children affected immediately, let alone longer term

NZEI Te Riu Roa the fight for 100% Advocating for high standards

Expert opinion

Margaret Carr & Professor Anne Smith

Links to the LTWP

Unified teaching profession

Commitment to Pay Parity

Is it realistic? UNICEF recommendation – government spend 1% GDP on Early Childhood

Education

New Zealand spends much less – 0.6%

Research shows $1 spent = $17 return

Education, workforce, health, socially

What is NZEI Te Riu Roa doing? QUALIFIED TEACHERS MATTER Without funding, services may lower quality

They may charge more

Families may not be able to afford to attend

NZEI Te Riu Roa is standing up for our youngest citizens

NZEI’S CAMPAIGN Précis of Activity Our Campaign started back in 2009 when the 100% qualified teacher requirement was abandoned by the Minister and the 80% qualified teacher requirement put in its place. Letters

Visits to MP’s

Postcards

Media reporting – visiting centres, spokespeople speaking publicly

Early Childhood Network Caucus

Working with others in the sector

Community meetings

Tauranga peaceful March

Involvement in the Fairness at work campaign

Early Childhood Education Together and Facebook Sites

Reframing the debate: investment rather than cost

We are back on the streets – arm in arm, fighting for what we know is right, Quality Early Childhood Education. Judith Nowotarski (National Executive) moved, Hayley Whitaker (National Executive) seconded: 2. That NZEI confirms its policy of 100% qualified and registered teachers

in regulated positions in early childhood services. 3. That NZEI adopt as policy: That the Government should spend 1% of

Gross Domestic Product on early childhood education, as advocated by UNICEF.

Agreed Mover spoke to the Recommendation. ECE high quality, positive; long lasting effect

Need high quality interactions with children/whanau

Need to increase quality of teachers

2010 eroded 2009 gains

NZEI will continue to advocate for 100% trained, qualified Teachers.

The following representatives commented in support of the Report: Erika Locke (Rotorua) - Children receive much better care/education from qualified /registered teachers. Denise Hird (Waikato) Children were being removed from centres with only 80% to those with 100%. This gave a strong message to Government to fund at 100%. Dylan Braithwaite (South Wairarapa) $1M loss in funding for his association Management has asked teachers to come up with entrepreneurial ideas to raise funds. Shayne Parkes (Hutt Valley) Association lost $950,000 – which meant a loss of teachers. Will be applied to primary sector next. Zac Markham (Franklin) Need to remember that last National Government removed funding from Early Childhood – problem is it is a female dominated industry. Graham Woodhead (Tauranga) Recently Minister stated she wanted highly qualified Post Graduates in primary schools but can have 20% unqualified in early childhood education. Peter Corlett (Kapiti) Opposed 3rd Recommendation.

Difficulty with 1% GDP - would prefer different figure.

The National President put Recommendations 2 & 3. Judith Nowotarski (National Executive) moved, Hayley Whitaker (National Executive) seconded: 4. That the report Early Childhood Education – Quality at Risk is endorsed.

Agreed The National President put Recommendation 4. Following a number of reminders and organisational matters for the afternoon, the meeting was adjourned by the National President at 12.30pm

MONDAY, 27 SEPTEMBER 2010 Third Session When the meeting resumed at 1.45pm the National President, Frances Nelson reminded Annual Meeting of protocols for the visit of the Minister of Education, Anne Tolley, and checked that those asking questions were present and prepared. Ian Leckie (National Executive) met and accompanied the Minister of Education to the stage. Frances Nelson (National President) called upon Kaumatua Alex Waihirere to mihi to the Minister followed by waiata. She welcomed the Minister to Annual Meeting and noted NZEI appreciated the opportunity to discuss issues of day with her and then invited the Minister to address Annual Meeting.

Minister of Education – Hon Anne Tolley E nga mana, e nga reo, e nga hau e wha. Tena koutou, tena koutou, tena koutou katoa. Good afternoon everyone and thank you Frances for your introduction. I'd like to begin today by acknowledging those of you who are from Canterbury. During my visits to Christchurch over the past few weeks I have seen for myself the damage caused by the earthquake. I've seen some heartbreaking scenes, but was hugely impressed by the dedication and determination of Canterbury principals, teachers, board members and Ministry of Education staff as they worked to get schools open for students. Many of the teachers and trustees I spoke with were rallying around their schools despite serious issues with their own homes. I know you will have experienced not only the physical trauma of the quake, but also acknowledge the emotional toll it has taken on you, your families, your students, and your colleagues. Thank you for your efforts to restore a sense of 'normality' for the young people of Canterbury during what I know has been a very trying time. The next thing I want to do is set the record straight. A few people in the education sector -and in Parliament feel it's their job to mislead you on my views about teachers. Well, I want to make something clear. I value and respect teachers and the important job that you all do in educating our children. I come from a family of teachers -both my mother and my father were teachers and my sister and brother are also qualified teachers -the daily challenges and rewards of the teaching profession have been an integral part of my upbringing. I thank you sincerely for your efforts. Sometimes when we disagree, it can be seen as if we're talking past each other. But actually we want the same thing. A great education for our children as we prepare them for the modern world. It's vital that we don't lose sight of that common goal. So today I thought I'd talk to you about this Government's investment in education and

update you on the work we are doing around the implementation of National Standards. I’ll also talk about some of the changes we're making to Early Childhood Education, so that you understand why we're making the changes. As a result of the measures the Government took in Budget 2009 and due to the resilience shown by many New Zealanders, we have come through the worst recession this country has experienced in 80 years in better shape than many other countries, but our recovery is slow and difficult. The Government finances face ongoing challenges. Simply put, we are spending more than we earn and, over the next few years, Government debt is set to increase significantly. Budget 2010 makes progress in getting back to surplus sooner, it aims to help the economy grow faster and so, deliver better living standards. Despite the economic environment, Government invested a substantial amount in education as part of the Budget with an additional $300 million in the 201 Oil I year. We are focused on education -it forms a significant part of our economic plan. In all, the Budget allocated an extra $1.4 billion to education over four years, as we continue to focus on frontline services to help lift student achievement. Total Vote Education spending will rise to $I2billionin 20I011 I, but because every single dollar is precious we are making sure funding is directed into those priority areas which make the biggest difference to students. This includes: A 4 per cent increase in schools' operational funding, or an additional $I56 million over four years. $350 million for new funding over four years for school property. This includes funding for building new schools and improving existing school buildings, and comes on top of Government funding of more than $500 million last year. Over $48 million this year in building ultra-fast broadband under the School Network Upgrade Project, pmt of the $150 million allocated for this. We've also invested another $I5million in for the Positive Behaviour for Learning Action Plan, to expand the training and delivery of programmes for teachers and parents. And, of course, an additional $107 million into early childhood education, lifting expenditure in the coming year to $1.3 billion. This Government is serious about education. We believe every single young New Zealander deserves the opportunity to reach their potential. To do this, they must have the literacy and numeracy skills they need to succeed in the 21st Century. As Education Minister, my absolute priority is to ensure all young New Zealanders have the reading, writing and maths skills they need to succeed. This is essential to raising achievement and delivering the education outcomes we all want for our young people. And National Standards are a tool to make sure this can happen.

I'd like to read from just one of the many emails I have recently received from principals, about their experience with the Standards. The principal says: "Teachers have learnt a lot from collaborative work and teasing out the process of making sound judgements. Well done for this work it is all coming together well at this school." And this is something that has been repeated many times to me as I visit schools around the country. I want to thank you for your hard work over the past nine months and for the progress being made in implementing the Standards. I have great confidence in the professionalism and expertise of teachers and principals to get this right. Everywhere I go in New Zealand, parents tell me how delighted they are with their plain-language reports, and the conversations on how their child is doing at school. And much of the credit for that must go to you, the teachers. We also recognise that to ensure teachers have the tools and techniques they need to lift student achievement they must also have the Support they need. As you'll know I've asked the Ministry to redesign its approach to professional development for principals and teachers. The Government invests $86 million a year in this area, and we need to make it much more targeted, much more responsive, to make sure it helps teachers and schools to lift student achievement, in a way that meets their needs. This recognises that you, our teaching professionals, want to do a good job for your students, and deserve quality supp0l1 to keep up with the latest developments in effective teaching, leadership and assessment practices. The Ministry is also making significant changes to the way it operates. Up until now it has largely concentrated on administering the system, but from now on the Ministry will have a much stronger focus on frontline support in and alongside schools -something principals and teachers have told me is the kind of direct assistance that they have needed for a long time. We've listened to concerns from teachers and principals about the students who are really struggling. With the roll-out of the Standards well underway, the next step is getting those students who have been identified as requiring extra support, back on track. To ensure we are helping those students who need it the most at least 50 expert practitioners from the Ministry and the education sector will be appointed to work closely with schools and build strong relationships. These experts will have proven ability in lifting student achievement, and will give specially-designed support to schools to meet the specific needs of their students and teachers. They will use student data obtained through National Standards to assess where support will be most effective, and make sure schools get that support much earlier. We also announced an extra $36 million which will go towards new intervention programmes for students who need more support.

We need tailored and concentrated support for students and teachers. This could include access to a specialist literacy teacher or specialist resources for maths. We will continue to work with you on the design and effectiveness of this support. The Ministry has also developed guidance on including National Standards targets in school charters for 20 I 1 and this will be rolled out to schools shortly. There have also been questions about teacher judgements -OTJs. I know that you use them effectively now, and I am confident in your ability and expertise to continue to use different types of information and data from a range of sources to identify what students know, how much progress they have made, and what they need to learn next. A single score on a single test cannot be more accurate than that. We can improve the consistency of judgements through moderation. Moderation should seek to build a shared understanding of the curriculum, the learning progressions and the National Standards, and moderation should be a professional activity as teachers establish learning communities. The Ministry can assist you with this: They've aligned assessment tools to the Standards Student Management systems have been enhanced to show assessment results for each student alongside OTJ’s. Online moderation will be available enabling teachers to share practices And good practices of moderation already underway in schools will be published online. This isn't just about getting support to the almost one in five children who are leaving school without the basic skills they need. It's also about raising the bar for achievement for all students and identifying those children who are doing well but who can do even better, by setting achievable goals. And the recently released National Education Monitoring Project highlighted this. It found that maths performance in primary schools for Year 8 students has not improved for twelve years, and that in some particular areas there has been a decline in performance. Yes, our top performers are among the best in the world, but we cannot continue to stand still-because the world our children will face as adults is changing dramatically, requiring higher skill levels. We will continue to monitor and evaluate the National Standards throughout the three-year implementation, to make sure they are working as they should be, and you'll be aware of the independent technical group of experts which is providing me with direct advice. In response to conversations I've had with teachers and principals I'm also establishing a National Standards Sector Advisory Group. All of the relevant sector groups, including NZEI, have been invited to take part, to enable representatives to

share experiences and be more involved, and to have constructive input throughout the implementation. To ensure the group receives practical advice, four extra places will be available. They could be filled by principals, teachers or advisors. And I can tell you that the feedback I have received about this group has been fantastic. Many principals and teachers have put their names forward to be a part of it, because they want to share their ideas and expertise, and discuss how their own schools are successfully implementing the Standards. I look forward to meaningful and ongoing dialogue with your NZEI representatives and other sector groups on National Standards and how to get this right. Our students deserve nothing less. And I'll give the last words on National Standards to another principal, who says: I am so pleased we haven't had to use a "one test" system like they did in Britain. Reporting against the National Standards has caused us to "tweak" what we have currently been doing, and has resulted in the parents getting information presented in a way that they can understand more readily. We also included a lot of information, more than we used to, on how the parents can help with the "next steps" so that if a child is currently below the standard, it can now be more of a concerted attempt between child, teacher, and parent to get them up to the standard. I would have preferred a more gradual journey into implementing the standards... but other than that it has been a positive experience. Parents are happy that they know exactly where their students are, and what they can do to help. " Before I finish today I'd like to talk about early childhood education and emphasise that this Government is absolutely committed to high-quality early childhood education and the benefits it provides for our youngest New Zealanders. Budget 20I0 made an additional $107 million investment in ECE. In the coming year we're investing a total of $1.3 billion in this area. We've expanded the 20 Hours ECE policy to include kohanga reo, playcentres, and 5-year-olds, and over the next four years we're also investing $91.8 million to boost participation in areas where large numbers of children are missing out. In total, Government spending on ECE has trebled in the last few years. But this escalating cost has not delivered the rise in participation which was promised by the previous Government. In fact, there has been hardly any rise at all less than one per cent. As a result, substantial changes to funding priorities had to be made to release funds to address participation rates in areas of the greatest need, and to manage the sky-rocketing and unsustainable costs. From February 2011, teacher-led ECE centres will continue to receive financial incentives to increase the proportion of their staff who are registered teachers to reach the Government's target of 80 per cent registered teachers by 2012. A $46.7 million cost adjustment, a 2.4 per cent increase in simpler terms, over four years will help providers meet increasing costs and reduce the need for fee increases.

Currently only 64 per cent of staff in ECE services are qualified and registered teachers. That's why we pushed the target out to 2012, because if we'd kept the previous Government's target of 80 per cent by this year, about 1000 services would have had to close. So we are actually trying to lift the number of qualified teachers in teacher-led services, and spread qualified teachers across the sector as too many of our services are struggling even to reach fifty per cent. In education, as in all Government portfolios, funding is limited. We have to invest in areas which make the biggest difference. In early childhood this is all about funding the best way to increase participation among those children who are currently missing out. In some areas 25 per cent of Pasifika children and 20 per cent of Maori children are missing out, so the children who we know will benefit the most are the least likely to take part. We're launching five intensive community-led projects, beginning in Waitakere and Northland next month, to make an additional 3500 places available for children. The new programmes will build on the experience of the Counties Manukau participation project, which has placed hundreds of extra children into new, quality early childhood services. This involves building new services, and funding supported playgroups, street side playgroups and play days in local communities, to attract families into ECE. And we'll continue to focus on early childhood education to make sure it reaches the children who need it. Education is vital to the Government. Every decision we make is focused on making the biggest difference for students' learning. In a difficult economic environment, we have to invest in areas that best meet the needs of our young people. And I believe we are making the right decisions. It's up to all of us to make sure that every single young New Zealander has the opportunity to reach their potential. We are ambitious for our children, and have high expectations of our curriculum and of quality teaching -to deliver a high standard of education for our students that equips them with the knowledge, skills and values they need to be successful. Thank you for your time today -I wish you all the best for the remainder of your conference. No reira, tena koutou, tena koutou, huri noa te ruma, kia ora mai tatou katoa. Thank you. The following members asked questions or made statements: Kay Hume (Franklin) Teachers, Principal, Board of Trustees are (Year 1 Teacher) Puni School unhappy.

Boys often take years to settle down. Many will be below standard for some years before finally achieving it.

Only one child in her class close to achieving National Standards in Reading, therefore the benchmarks are wrong.

Discussed with parents – normal children making normal progress and National Standards not a means to improve children’s learning.

Individuals are all different. “Will you listen to teachers and call a halt to

National Standards while flaws are addressed?”

Minister of Education Replied that she will not change her position.

Proud of NCEA Level 2 as their goal. No teacher should label a child as a failure. Teachers can lift student achievement.

Hayley Whitaker (National Executive) The Government

has acknowledged that quality early childhood education is fundamental to a child’s start in life

The research confirms that 100% qualified teachers is a critical factor in quality early childhood education.

We want the government to commit to the 100% qualified target and reverse the recent Budget cuts to ensure quality early childhood education for all children and their families.

Minister of Education Replied that research does not show 100%

qualified teachers is the most effective answer, but that a diverse range of the public can provide quality early childhood education. She does not envisage the 100% policy being necessary.

Judith Nowotarski (National Executive) thanked the Minister as follows: Minister we asked you to address this Annual Meeting, knowing full well what you would likely share with us – and you delivered. Your messages were in keeping with those that you have been consistently

delivering to the education sector, since the National Government took office. Possibly, there is someone, somewhere, attesting you against their National

Standards on Advocacy, on Potential, and on Quality. In front of you Minister is a merging of colour – but most noticeably, the spectrums

of orange and green. Orange – our National Standards Campaign. Advocacy for potential.

Green – our Early Childhood Campaign. Advocacy for Quality. Interestingly, the colours meld and move together really well. No surprises there – we are the New Zealand Educational Institute Te Riu Roa – we

are stronger together. The major need is for a positive relationship between this Government and NZEI. Thank you for your attendance today. Judith Nowotarski (National Executive) then gave the Minister a symbol – Koru – that represented new beginnings – life of child – experiences gained as the child develops. This was followed by a waiata.

Angelo Gavrielatos – AEU President Fiona Matapo (National Executive) introduced Angelo Gavrielatos, Australian Education Union President, as follows: Angelo Gavrielatos recently wrote a paper titled “Education Funding and the 2010 Election”. In this paper Angelo claims: Separated by water we may be Holders of the Bledisloe Cup, one of our teams may be BUT United we are in our thinking to fight for the rights of teachers, principals and support staff to work in a properly funded and state resourced education system. His commitment to unions is the core focus of his work. Angelo welcome back to NZEI Te Riu Roa’s Annual Meeting and I invite you to come forward and address our members. Angelo Gavrielatos thanked Fiona Matapo, and then addressed Annual Meeting. He made the following points: He realised that NZEI members were struggling in their relationships with the

government and admired the discipline of members. There was no doubt that NZEI members took their responsibility towards students seriously and government must provide funds for this.

He acknowledged the strength and resilience shown by colleagues in Canterbury. He believed strongly in the quotation – “who we are, what we are, who we

should be”. There was also no doubt that NZEI was on the march with Early Childhood

issues and NZEI members needed to be loud and proud in putting students learning first and in improving learning of students, even if politicians repeatedly ignored the evidence of thisHe noted that the Early Childhood target of 80% qualified teachers lacked aspiration and wondered which MP’s would allow their child to be taught by an unqualified teacher.

He emphasised that students were not a commodity and that MP’s who ignore that fact do so at their peril. There were 70,000,000 children not at school in

world and to achieve the goal of education for all requires an investment of funds and therefore politicians have their priorities wrong. It was unbelievable that almost $400 million had been removed from the Early Childhood sector in New Zealand.

However Australian politicians were as bad as NZ politicians, and there, also, policy makers were obsessed with importing failed campaigns from overseas. Australia now has national standardised tests in years 3,5,7 & 9, which are used to create league tables which lower standards and do not extend students, but in fact dumb them down.

He noted a serious problem was that the new Australian Prime Minister had introduced “Performance Bonus Pay for Teachers” in which up to 10% of their salary was based on student achievement. Also of concern was that two new programmes of teacher training had been introduced.- firstly, for those who find formal qualifications a hurdle and secondly, eight weeks training to teach disadvantaged students.

There was no doubt that teachers knew about standards and excellence, that the global agenda would continue and unions must be strong to protect the education of children.

Finally he acknowledged the growth in bonds of solidarity between the New Zealand and Australian education unions.

His speech was followed by waiata. Clint Green (National Executive) proceeded to thank Angelo Gavrielatos for his inspiring address and stated he had commented extensively on many education issues including the intention to overturn legislation introduced in 1997 in NSW which will see the publication of league tables. He noted that Angelo had stated “League tables will not improve choice, just cause damage- and pitting schools against each other over performance is not progress”. He noted that New Zealand and Australian education unions share many philosophical battles. Teachers are great battlers for social justice but this was not a priority of governments. NZEI members needed to look at AEU website and other world based unions. NZEI members also needed to look at New Zealand Round Table Website. The National President then updated members on the events that had taken place outside the Annual Meeting venue involving the Minister and the media. She began by stating how proud she was of the representatives when the Minister was present - “You Rock” – She said it was an outstanding response, and the red and green lollipops were an extremely effective stunt that rattled the Minister. She also thanked Kay Hume for an outstanding performance. She was “disconvovulated” as she left Annual meeting with the Minister. The Minister was immediately surrounded by media who watched her continuing to dig a hole even deeper. “When you’re digging a hole the best practice is to stop and the Minister didn’t.” The Minister got isolated from her team as she met members of the community who were chastising her. She noted that as National President she had also been interviewed by the media.

Ian Leckie thanked the National President for her role and noted that everyone was a star in the organisation.

Strategic Framework Judith Nowotarski (National Executive) moved, Ian Leckie (National Executive) seconded: That the Strategic Framework Presentation be received. Agreed Judith Nowotarski spoke to a power point presentation..

Judith Nowotarski noted the Strategic Framework was a table of the contents of the social, political, educational world within which we function. Plans that underpin our work Rules, objectives shape us Vision of Need to Stand Strong This is a framework and platform on which NZEI will move forward. Need to listen to members and that vision is forward looking. Process of consultation around Quality Public Education. 3-5 years Strategy – Leveraging. NZEI working under Campaign Format. Strength of NZEI also lies in our professional capacity. Also need to interact with Government. Goals to develop our strategy – BUILD, GROW, WIN. Way we communicate, way we do things. Need to grow and maintain membership density and professional creditability. We will win if we do campaigns well and deliver what members want and

expect. NZEI will develop to be most powerful education union in New Zealand. Key Strategic Plans (a) Building Our Industrial Profile (foundation on which we can build and achieve.) (b) Building A Professional Union (c) Giving Effect To Te Tiriti O Waitangi (d) Organisation Effectiveness (resulting from Organisational Review)

Implementing Key Strategic Plans Ian Leckie (National Executive) Local Structures & Processes – Area Councils,

Branches, Aronui Tomua, Networks & Staff need to develop a close relationship.

National Structure & Processes – eg. National

Executive; Te Reo Areare; National Executive Advisory Groups, Steering Groups will enable us to BUILD, GROW & WIN

The following members spoke to the report or asked questions. Christ Stuart (Auckland) How will this vision assist in our links with PPTA? Jean Dolheguy (Auckland) Where does our “service” commitment fit within

this vision? Ian Leckie and Judith Nowotarski (National Executive) replied

Ian Leckie (National Executive) moved, Judith Nowotarski (National Executive) seconded: That the Strategic Framework as presented be endorsed. Agreed The National President advised the Strategic Framework would be taken to the Area Council planning meeting the next day.

Public Private Partnership. Ian Leckie (National Executive) moved, Clint Green (National Executive) seconded: “That the report Public Private Partnerships in Public Education be received.” Agreed The Mover,Ian Leckie, spoke to the report. (National Executive) Annual Meeting – you will see from the very first statement in the first session of this report that NZEI opposes Public Private Partnership’s in education. To this end we have publically declared our firm opposition to Public Private Partnership’s in schooling. In spite of our opposition the government has ‘moved the introduction along’ to the point that they are beyond Stage1 of an implementation process and are now into appointing staff and preparing a business case to allow the first Public Private Partnership’s to occur. Planning for a roll out of the first Public Private Partnership is scheduled to occur subject to Cabinet approval, from March 2011 when the first company ‘expressions of interest’ will be sought. Contracts are timed to begin in the fourth quarter 2011. The New Zealand education system is premised on being state funded, and ‘provided for’ - this is why the word “public’ is in the title of this paper. The current, publicly funded process, allows self-managing schools to operate 24/7 ensuring local management and operation, under the jurisdiction of the Board of Trustees and its school leadership. Public Private Partnerships have the potential to remove that right – that of ownership, and also of self-management for the operation of buildings and facilities. New Zealand, as well as overseas companies, are already expressing public interest in being involved in the first Public Private Partnerships. Seconder Clint Green then spoke to the Report. Annual Meeting – please note that this report has eight sections, starting with the ‘Introduction’, and you are welcome to number them so that any reference point will be easily identifiable. The report traces through NZEI’s previous work and reports on Public Private Partnerships, outlines our current policy position, details government and Ministry of Education developments and progress towards the introduction of Public Private

Partnerships. This does not make good reading and this is especially relevant as NZEI has been cynically marginalised by this government. This government believes they are a fait accompli and that opposition is fruitless. When trying to raise the subject in a meeting with the Minister of Education we were responded to with anger and dismissiveness and a refusal to engage. Annual Meeting – this report suggests a response to be made by NZEI, as we head through what looks to be a torturous road ahead on this subject. It suggests levels of activity and these are addressed through sections 7 and 8 of this report. In outlining these we need to confront the reality that this government, despite our opposition, has pushed on with Public Private Partnerships. So we are left with the harsh decision – do we sit on the sidelines or do we campaign wherever and however we meet this challenge? Fiona Matapo spoke to the Report. First the report suggests we will continue to engage with the Minister as we try to influence the development of government policy. This is important so that we are involved in the setting of the ‘rules’ under which Public Private Partnerships will operate. We need to answer questions like – how will ownership, management and operation look in a self-managing model? It is important education users have a say in this and the many other questions that need to be answered. We think it is not appropriate that the state removes itself from property ownership – where does this leave the state system of education we ask? Secondly we would ask many questions about how a Public Private Partnership would be negotiated into practice between the contractor, the Board of Trustees and School leadership. Will the school have to ‘hire’ its own facilities after school and in the evenings? What is school use? What use is available to the community and how will this look? We cannot avoid asking questions about variations and changing needs of schools as they grow, decline, replace and upgrade. What will the school really look like at the ‘end of contact’ time. Thirdly NZEI looks at mounting a campaign, member and community based, that will develop the realities for the schools community should NZEI be unsuccessful in placing the necessary safeguards into these contracts. Such a campaign would be nationally co-ordinated and activities would be very much community based and nationally publicised. Ian Leckie exercised his right of reply Annual Meeting – this is a very important paper – Public Private Partnerships will challenge the place of quality public education in New Zealand and will be a step towards the commercialisation and privatisation of education by this government. We have been assisted by our sister union, the Australian Education union in development this response and of course we walk this path with the PPTA. We ask you to support the content and directions suggested in this report. The following members supported the Report or asked questions.

Anna Lee (West Auckland) Timely document, as Government attacks QPE. Need to be wary of Government plans Public funds to private company to profit Need to reinforce QPE Outright attack on taking public out of QPE. Need to discuss with members. Meredydd Barrar (West Auckland) Risks in having to live with Public Private

Partnerships. Public Private Partnerships are PRIVATISATION.

(Public take risks, private employment takes profit).

NZEI needs to be strong when responding in our opposition.

Debbie Fischer (KP – Auckland) Schools under seige. Need to look at policy of Public Private

Partnership very carefully. Must strongly fight to avoid discrimination of

Quality Public Education otherwise public will be removed from statement.

Erica Locke (Rotorua) Had experience of Public Private Partnership

system overseas when schools had 3 shifts of students utilising school.

Everything had to be removed from walls end of day.

Mary Pearson (Christchurch) Inevitable Public Private Partnership’s will be

used to assist rebuilding of schools damaged in earthquake.

Lynne Sperring (Tauranga) Public Private Partnership goes against

philosophy of self managing school. Question. (a) Where does NZEI see existing schools fitting

into Public Private Partnerships? Lynne Sperring (Tauranga) Question

(b) What is NZEI’s view on conflict that could arise if “iwi” involved in Public Private Partnerships?

Ian Leckie (National Executive) replied Ian Leckie (National Executive) moved, Clint Green (National Executive) seconded:

2. That the Campaign outlined in section (8) of the report is confirmed as the way forward.

3. That action be taken to re-establish a National Executive working group

to oversee the campaign. Carried

The mover stated that Recommendation 2 confirms that NZEI: Te Riu Roa will mount a public campaign as outlined in section 8 of the report. It will be both nationally focussed and locally centred and will ensure communities are fully aware of the threats Public Private Partnerships present to their local schools. Recommendation 3 confirms National Executive oversee this work. The seconder stated that the National and local consultation and negotiation will determine the terms and conditions of the Public Private Partnership. There is clear involvement for Board of Trustees, School Leadership and Communities, and of course for NZEI: Te Riu Roa. The following members spoke or asked questions: Garth Houltham (Papatoetoe) Supported. NZEI owes it to our members that the working

group takes into consideration existing Public Private Partnerships in other countries and other areas of government spending.

Kevin Rae (Waikato Area Council) Questioned. How Recommendation “3” related to

Recommendation “5”. Barney Manaia (Papatoetoe) Questioned. What will happen at local level? Ian Leckie (National Executive) In Reply. School communities are the key.

- Public Private Partnerships challenge self-management.

Zac Markham (Franklin) Supported. Experienced local members need to be involved

in the working group. Ian Leckie (National Executive) There will be both national and local activity by

NZEI. Recommendation 4 Ian Leckie (National Executive) moved, Clint Green (National Executive) seconded: That NZEI Te Riu Roa adopt as policy: Teaching and Learning programmes

within the school should sit within the framework of the New Zealand

Curriculum /Te Marautanga o Aotearoa and be free of commercial influence or interference.

Agreed

The Mover spoke to the report) The mover stated that this recommendation was a clarification of the wording of policy principle 3 in section 6 of the report. The new wording reasserts and confirms the place of the New Zealand curriculum and Te Marautanga o Aotearoa which underpin a local school’s curriculum. The Seconder spoke to the report. The seconder stated that this recommendation also confirms NZEI: Te Riu Roa was opposed to a school’s curriculum being influenced by commercial interests and interference. Recommendation 5 Ian Leckie (National Executive) moved, Fiona Matapo (National Executive) seconded: That NZEI Te Riu Roa adopt as policy: Contracts established under PPPs

should allow the school full use of the site and not limit the use to school hours and term dates. It must not fetter the ability of any school to provide comprehensive programmes and a range of events or services on site, which are responsive to local context and community interest. These decisions belong to the Board of Trustees and the school leaders.

Agreed The Mover spoke to the resolution He stated that it was intended to replace Policy principle 4 of section 6 of this report. This recommendation was to ensure the school’s freedom of use of the school site 24/7 in the delivery of it’s and the community’s programmes.

The Seconder spoke to the resolution The only way unions can influence Public Private Partnerships in order to avoid their negative and dangerous impact and to foster any positive aspects, is to enhance their involvement in the Public Private Partnership debate. Such engagement requires strategic thinking and an international perspective on the issue. We think it is not appropriate that the state removes itself from property ownership – where does this leave the state system of education we ask? Secondly, we would ask many questions about how a Public Private Partnership would be negotiated into practice between the contractor, the Board of Trustees and School leadership. Will the school have to ‘hire’ its own facilities after school and in the evenings? What is school use? What use is available to the community and how will this look?

We cannot avoid asking questions about variations and changing needs of schools as they grown, decline, replace and upgrade. What will the school really look like at the ‘end of contract’ time. Annual Meeting – this recommendation is at the centre of all that we hold important to the way a school can operate under a Public Private Partnership. This recommendation will enshrine in our policy that decisions regarding the use of the school site should be determined solely by the BOT and school leadership. Recommendation 6 Ian Leckie (National Executive) moved, Clint Green (National Executive) seconded: . That the report Public Private Partnerships in Public Education (2010)

be endorsed. Agreed

 The National President thanked the committee members for their work.

Resolutions to amend Rules and Policy The National President stated that Rule Changes A, B, D, E, F, G, H, and I resulted from the situation that arose as a result of Annual Meeting 2009 decisions on the NZEI Te Riu Roa Organisational Review. There were four core changes recommended by the Review. Three of those were agreed to by Annual Meeting. The collective impact of rule changes A, B, D, E, F, G, H, and I will be to remove from the rules any reference to the term “Biennial National Meeting,” and to clarify the use of abbreviated terms.

Resolution A Rikki Sheterline (National Executive) moved, Louise Green (National Executive) seconded: Contents That the Table of Contents of the rules, Part 4, line 4.1.3, be amended by the deletion of the words “Biennial National” and the replacement of those words with the word “Annual”. Agreed

Resolution B Rikki Sheterline (National Executive) moved, Louise Green (National Executive) seconded: 1.7 Interpretation That rule 1.7 be amended by the deletion of “(DC)” following the words “Area Councils”, and the insertion of “(AC)” in its place. Agreed

Resolution D Rikki Sheterline (National Executive) moved, Louise Green (National Executive) seconded: 3.5 Area Councils That rules 3.5.2.1 (a) and (b), rule 3.5.2.2 , and rule 3.5.4.1 be amended by the deletion of “AC” and the replacement with the words “Area Council”, in each instance. Agreed

Resolution E Rikki Sheterline (National Executive) moved, Louise Green (National Executive) seconded: 3.5.5.1 Meetings That rule 3.5.5.1 be amended by the deletion of the word “District” and its replacement by the word “Area”. Agreed

Resolution F Rikki Sheterline (National Executive) moved, Louise Green (National Executive) seconded: 4.1.2.3 Nominations That rules 4.1.2.3 (a) and (c) be amended by the deletion of the words “Biennial National” and by their replacement with “Annual” in each instance. Agreed

Resolution G Rikki Sheterline (National Executive) moved, Louise Green (National Executive) seconded: 4.1.3 Election by Ballot at the Biennial National Meeting That the heading 4.1.3 be amended by the deletion of the words “Biennial National” and their replacement with the word “Annual”. Agreed

Resolution H Rikki Sheterline (National Executive) moved, Louise Green (National Executive) seconded: 4.1.3.1 Election by Ballot That rule 4.1.3.1 be amended by the deletion of the words “Biennial National” and their replacement with the word “Annual”, in both instances. Agreed

Resolution L Ricki Sheterline (National Executive) moved, Louise Green (National Executive) seconded: Other Matters That all references to ‘Members’ Support Teams” and “Members’ Support Personnel” in section 8.1 to 8.1.3.5 be amended to read “Members Assist Personnel”. Agreed

Resolution P Jackie Hawthorne (North Shore) moved, Nicky Poor (North Shore) seconded: 3.2 National Executive That Section 3.2 of the Rules of the New Zealand Educational Institute (Inc)

be amended by the inclusion of: 3.2.1.2 No member shall hold the position of National President for longer than

four years in total, and with no more than two years being served consecutively.

Lost Jackie Hawthorne (Mover) stated With elections now being held biennially the position of National President is very

demanding on any person, their family and their workplace. The Principal and Board of Trustess were all involved in this relationship. This resolution will assist in building capacity and leadership within the union

structure and will provide a clear pathway for those members with aspirations of such representation.

The National President is an advocate for the membership. This will allow NZEI to keep the voice of the union fresh and vibrant in the public arena.

Nicky Poor (Seconder) Reserved. The following members spoke to the Resolution. Sharlene Goodwin (Manurewa) Opposed.

National President should have right to stand as many times as they felt they were able to carry out the position.

Hayley Whitaker (National Executive)Opposed. Heather Warren (Rangitikei) Opposed. Undemocratic – should be able to stand if

they wished. Nicky Poor (Seconder) In Reply.

Not undemocratic – intention was to encourage greater participation from bottom up.

Resolution M Jill Crawford (Southland) moved, Kristy Ferguson (Southland) seconded: First Schedule Section A

That the following be added to the schedule of Established Branches of the New Zealand Educational Institute Te Riu Roa (Incorporated): Hokonui Takitumu Argument These are the names of the branches established following a restructuring of the

Southland Branch. Agreed

Resolution N Jill Crawford (Southland) moved, Kristy Ferguson (Southland) seconded: First Schedule Section A That “Southland” be deleted from the schedule of Established Branches of the New Zealand Educational Institute Te Riu Roa (Incorporated). Argument The Southland Branch has restructured– see Resolution M. Agreed

Resolution O Rikki Sheterline (National Executive) moved, Louise Green (National President) seconded: First Schedule Section B That “Pipiri Mananui o Nga Tataha a Maui” be added to the schedule of Established Area Councils of the New Zealand Educational Institute Te Riu Roa (Incorporated). Carried The following members spoke to the resolution or asked questions:

Chris Stuart (Auckland) Opposed. Queried which Area Council is responsible. 3.5.1.2 has not been met. New Area Council crosses boundaries of

many Area Council areas and not acceptable – why was it accepted by National Executive?

National President Not covered by 2009 Rule Change. Now the

Area Council has been established the process cannot be stopped.

Chris Stuart (Auckland) Wished to ask a Supplementary Question.

Karepa Wall (AT Te Whanganui a Tara) rose to a point of order arguing that the current discussion was irrelevant to the topic (5.7.8.4 (d)). This was upheld by the National President

Anna Lee also raised a point of order questioning the ruling of the President under 5.7.8.4 (a). the point of order was not accepted by the National President.

Resolution Q Viv Goldsmith (North Shore) moved, Chris Mack (North Shore) seconded: 3.5.1 Establishment of Area Councils That Section 3.5.1.2 of the Rules of the New Zealand Educational Institute (Inc) be amended by the inclusion of a new clause, 3.5.1.2(f), reading: “There has been relevant consultation where established boundaries and/or membership are affected by the change.” Lost Viv Goldsmith (Mover) noted that this amendment essentially clarified and reinforced the intent of the rule. NZEI consisted of not only branches in a boundary sense, but also strong and diverse sector and interest groups. Any group may form an Area Council under the present rule without affecting any boundaries but could affect membership numbers and collegiality in an established Area Council. This addition will ensure that there is some consultation offered to all members in an established Area Council if their numbers or boundaries are affected by thebreakaway, or the formation of, a new Area Council. Seconder Reserved. The following members spoke or asked questions: Fiona Matapo (National Executive) Opposed. Urged caution when discussing rules. Chris Stuart (Auckland) Probably opposing as already stated in 3.5.1.2 Karepa Wall Process is process. No issues. Happy to (AT Te Whanganui a Tara) discuss face to face if opposed. Frances Nelson (National President) Explained the background to the formation of

the new Area Council. Reminded about discussion at 2009 AM. Queried whether NZEI needed a further rule based on the explanation.

Murray MacGibbon (Greymouth) Spoke to a Point of order: Wanted to delay the decision as Area Council Chair not currently present at Annual Meeting,

The National President ruled that discussion would continue. Kevin Rae (Waikato Area Council) Members just wanted to be informed before it

happened. Frances Nelson (National President) Acknowledged there was angst. The Mover exercised her right of reply, emphasising that the resolution was only concerned with process, not specifically with process. The formation of a new Area Council would not necessarily involve a change of boundaries.

Resolution R Sandra Spekreijse (Waitaha Canterbury Area Council) moved, Mary Pearson (Christchurch) seconded: 5.1 Composition of Meeting That Section 5.1.1 of the Rules of the New Zealand Educational Institute (Inc) be amended by: 5.1.1(d) being renamed 5.1.1(d)(i). And the following clause being added: “5.1.1(d)(ii) Where an Area Council is unable to fill its student teacher member

representative allocation as per rule 3.5.2.1(b), that Area Council will appoint another full member or full members to fill the allocation.”

The Mover spoke to the resolution The Waitaha Canterbury Area Council believes it is vital that all Area Councils are fairly represented at our Annual Meeting. Each Area Council is entitled to send their Area Chair and two student teacher member representatives. Whilst we strongly believe that the student voice is vital within our organisation and particularly at our Annual Meeting, we have become increasingly aware of how difficult it is at times to find available Student Representatives. Where an Area Council is unable to find suitable Student Teacher member representatives, they are unable to substitute other available representatives in their place. We believe this disadvantages that Area Council. It is not the intention of this rule change to take away the Student Teacher Member Representative. We believe that Area Councils should do everything that they can to find suitable Student Teachers as representatives. However, this rule change simply allows the Area council to maintain their representation at a fair level, should those student representatives not be available.

Debate on this resolution was interrupted and deferred to a later session.

Preparation for Area Council Planning Workshops REMINDERS Frances Nelson, National President gave notice of the agenda items for the following day, including: Reminders of how resolutions to amend policy or rules, are progressed (as

necessary); Review of progress on agenda business. During the lunch break on Tuesday the following special interest groups would meet; YMN - First Sovereign Trust Room Men’s Caucus - Works Infrastructure Room Women’s Caucus - Skellerup Room Lobby Network - Sigma Room.

The political panel would be held at the beginning of the fifth session after lunch (Tuesday). Te Ururoa Flavell (Maori Party), Catherine Delahunty (Green Party) Trevor Mallard (Labour) and Louise Upston (National) have confirmed their attendance as members of the Political Panel. For those members who were attending, the breakfast hosted by the Gender Caucus would be held in the Banquet Room in the Convention Centre. The guest speaker was Anaru Grant a policeman who works with youth and is very involved with kapahaka in Rotorua. After Koro Alex closed Annual Meeting with karakia and waiata, Annual Meeting stood adjourned until 1.45pm Tuesday. However members were reminded the breakfast would take place at 7am and then the Area Council Planning workshops would commence at 8.25am until lunch time..

TUESDAY, 28 SEPTEMBER 2010 Fourth Session The day’s business began at 7.00a.m. with a Breakfast hosted by the Gender and Equity Caucus in the Banquet Room of the Convention Centre. The hosts were Dave Kennedy and Winnifred Morris and the guest speaker was Nigel Wilson, filling in at the very last minute for Anaru Grant, who had been called away on urgent police business. At 8.30a.m. all members attended the Area Council Planning workshops. The following Special Interest groups met during the lunch break:

YMN Men’s Caucus Women’s Caucus The President’s Advisory Group

TUESDAY, 28 SEPTEMBER 2010 Fifth Session Annual Meeting resumed in full session at 1.45pm.

POLITICAL PANEL Frances Nelson, National President handed the floor to Judith Nowotarski and Ian Leckie (National Executive). Ian Leckie (National Executive) thanked and welcomed the Political Panel. 1st Speaker Te Ururoa Flavell (Maori Party) Representing Dr Pita Sharples, Education

Spokesperson. still under-achievement of maori students -

involved in (a) cultural competency standards of

teaching (b) random sample 12 schools stated

great examples in teaching of maori (c) workforce development

- Maori Teachers College - Maori Leadership

(d) literacy/numeracy achievement important (whanau hoara approach)

2nd Speaker Trevor Mallard (Labour)

Referred to contribution of Helen May to education whose research shows quality of children’s education depends on quality of teacher, particularly early childhood education.

Any government needs to invest money in education – removal of $400M from early childhood education undermines sector in which New Zealand were world leaders.

Investing in teachers is best way of making improvements.

Pay is one way – but more important is investment in professional development and cuts here will do long term damage and these cuts of great concern.

National Standard questions – Minister will not answer questions in house

National Standards as they exist should be scrapped.

3rd Speaker Louise Upston (National Taupo)

Praised dedication of teachers and what they do.

Acknowledged passing of Jill Weiderbohn. Emphasised importance of early childhood

education for Maori/Pasifika - $91M provided in the budget for early childhood education in problem areas in next three years.

National Standards is of high priority to raise achievement in literacy and numeracy – will show where Board of Trustees and schools will need to focus efforts along with Ministry of Education.

Introduction in 2011 of Trade Academies. Government committed to enable all students to

achieve full potential.

4th Speaker Kevin Hague (Green) Apology from Catherine Delahunty, whose

father passed away recently. Big picture is government has relationship

wrong. Economic growth is wrong for government to

focus on. Social environment goals are the most

important factors that need to be addressed (a) Concerned education is being treated by government as individual benefit but it should be treated as a society benefit. (b) Concern of lack of respect being shown for professionalism of teachers, discounting of fully qualified early childhood education and the Ministers’ “vision” doing away with Teachers’ Colleges.

The following members asked questions: Hita Foster Salutations to you and your position, Te Ururoa

(Flavell) in the Maori Party. Greetings also to the Labour Party, National and the Greens. Greetings to the three of you.

Question: I acknowledge the evidence that 85% of Maori

children are in general stream schools. However, given that thought, those schools will have to evaluate/assess our tamariki, mokopuna under the National Standards.

The challenge to you Minister is, ‘What is the

thinking, the discussions that have brought the Maori Party to the conclusion that these (National Standards) will not trample, and/or belittle the prestige essential inner force,

wellbeing, spiritual wholeness, mental wellbeing of parents and families, of our children and grandchildren. What, if any, discussions have you had about this pathway you have chosen?”.

Te Ururoa Flavell In Reply. Time has come to ensure maori tamariki are achieving at full potential. Big question is whether standards are correct ones. National Standards alone will not stop underachievement. They are a starting point.

Implementation is not in Maori Party hands. Ron Creigh-Smith (Tokoroa) Question to Louise Upston.

Yesterday we had Anne Tolley tell us that she had many letters and emails supportive of National Standards.

It has been reported that you have told

Principals in your electorate that you only had one or two principals raise concerns with you about the standards.

In June 2010 however, you had teachers and principals in Taupo and Tokoroa visit you to raise concerns about the Standards.

In Cambridge, your colleague Lindsay Tisch, had 22 people including six principals visit him to raise similar concerns.

Did you raise our concerns with the Prime Minister and Minster of Education?

What was the response of: - Mr Key? - Mrs Tolley?

Louise Upston In Reply.

She took the questions to the Minister and has received no reply.

Peter Verstappen (Ellesmere) Question to all MP’s.

Will your party listen to the experiences of principals and teachers this year, and support a halt to implementation of National Standards while their fundamental flaws are addressed?

Kevin Hague In Reply.

Yes, must start with having good evidence followed by trial which is then evaluated. Not an uncontrolled experience.

Louise Upston In Reply.

No, Government needs to get feedback – reality is this is too important to get wrong.

Trevor Mallard In Reply.

Not convinced National Standards are fixable – assumption that every New Zealander can pass NCEA is wrong – therefore every level is wrong. Parents complaining reports are shallower and tell less but based on exemplars.

Te Ururoa Flavell In Reply.

Yes, always willing to listen to teachers and representations made are forwarded to Minister and Pita Sharples.

Hayley Whitaker Question to Louise Upston. (National Executive) What can you tell us about the early childhood

task force that the Minister of Education is convening to review the sector.

Louise Upston In Reply.

National was concerned about huge funds going into early childhood and will make details available to the National Secretary.

Nicki Fairbairn Question for all MP’s. (Otago University Student) Documented research indicates that children

who have two years quality early childhood education have a 50% better chance at early achieving at primary school. As Roslyn Noonan the Human Rights Commissioner informed us at a recent Meeting at Otago University, “Quality early childhood education and care is a crucial element of the right to education and the right of every child in Aotearoa New Zealand to get the best start in life.”

Please tell me what your party will do to achieve this, particularly given the recent cuts in funding to early childhood centres that are 80-100% staffed by qualified teachers?

Te Ururoa Flavell In Reply.

Quality of early childhood education must be a priority – especially of maori children. Staffing should be highest quality.

Trevor Mallard In Reply. Early Childhood Education – set up Consultative Group to prioritise areas and continue with previous 2008-2012 plan especially pay centres properly; with trained teachers entirely, ratio needs to be looked at. Early Childhood Education is best investment.

Kevin Hague In Reply.

Labour put much money into early childhood education and this is very important and this is supported by Greens.

Louise Upston In Reply.

Inability of sector to attain 80% target (1000 centres would have to be cut) Priority to increase from 25% attendance in Counties/Manukau.

Sue Nimmo (Wanganui) Question to all MP’s. Convenor of NZEI Support Staff Support Staff are essential to the running of

National Curriculum, 21st century schools and to supporting children’s learning. What is your party’s commitment to implementing the recommendations of the Government’s report on pay and employment equity and ensuring school support staff get a fair pay deal and an opportunity to develop professionally?

Louise Upston In Reply.

Agrees with importance of support staff – cannot comment on pay negotiations

Kevin Hague In Reply. Greens agree with NZEI – importance of pay parity

Trevor Mallard In Reply.

Non release of report disgraceful. To attract/retain high quality teacher aides you must pay a reasonable wage.

Te Ururoa Flavell In Reply.

Need to pay them at a higher rate. Fiona Matapo Question to Louise Upston. (National Executive) In the Herald today, Bill English criticised the

PPTA for failing to put up constructive solutions. NZEI has worked hard for three years with the Ministry and STA on developing a skills-based pay model, but your Government has walked away from this work. What commitment can your Government give to sitting down together with us so this work can come to fruition?

Louise Upston In Reply. That she would give this question to the

Minister. Judith Nowotarski thanked all the M.P’s for their contribution.

Resolution J Rikki Sheterline (National Executive) moved, Louise Green (National Executive) seconded: 6.11 Legal Assistance Fund That rules 6.11.2 and 6.11.3 be deleted.

Agreed Argument These provisions no longer reflect current practice, and present the potential for unmanageable financial risk. The following representatives spoke or asked questions: Chris Stuart (Auckland) Opposed. Process National Executive would use

to administer the Legal Assistance Fund? Peter Corlett (Kapiti) Queried whether this will:

(a) cause financial risk to NZEI (b) make it harder for members to access the

Legal Assistance Fund. Jean Dolheguy (Auckland) Stated that NZEI membership used to be the

best insurance, hoped this was still the case. Charlene Thompson Questioned what will be the role of Member (Rodney/Otamatia) Assist members. Amanda Caldwell Queried who could bring requests forward. (Franklin) Rikki Sheterline and Winifred Morris (National Executive) and Darrell Ward (Assistant Secretary) replied.

Resolution C Winnifred Morris (National Executive) moved, Tiri Bayley-Nowell Te Reo Areare) seconded: 3.2.4 Functions of National Executive 6.11 Legal Assistance Fund 8.1 Members Support Teams 8.2 Ethics That all references to the term “Institute Counsellor(s)” and/or “Counsellor(s)” in the Rules of NZEI Te Riu Roa be deleted and replaced with ther term “Member Assist Team Member(s)” Agreed

Resolution I Rikki Sheterline (National Executive) moved, Louise Green (National Executive) seconded:

4.2.2 Order of Election That rule 4.2.2 be amended by:

(i) The insertion of the words “most recent” between the words “…in the…” and “…Ballots for National Executive…”

(ii) The deletion of the words “Biennial National” and their replacement with the word “Annual”, in both instances.

Agreed

Resolution K Rikki Sheterline (National Executive) mover, Louise Green (National Executive) seconder: 6.11 Legal Assistance Fund That rule 6.11.4 be amended by deleting the words “subject to the foregoing provisions”. Argument The deletion of rules 6.11.2 and 6.11.3 makes the words “subject to the foregoing provisions” superfluous. Agreed

RESEARCH PROJECT The National President advised she had had initial discussions with Area Council chairpersons regarding a planned Research Project, as National Executive had decided there was a need to strengthen the professional side of NZEI work. The first research project would be a three year project entitled “Changes in the way Education is Delivered” This project had been discussed and a contract had been confirmed with Martin Thrupp (Waikato University) at an initial cost of $60,000 per year. However Martin Thrupp had since advised that in order to carry out thorough research into this topic, the cost would be $100,000 per year for the full project. The National Executive believe that it is important firstly, that a full and thorough research topic be undertaken, and secondly, it is very important that, rather than search for outside assistance, NZEI retain full control by fully financing the proposal, so that it can be robust and transparent. It has been suggested that the increased cost could be funded from the 2010 surplus in the Member Initiative Fund, however the National Secretary will also possibly undertake research into the Political Climate and the funds for this could logically come from this source also. As a large number of members consider NZEI should be a research organisation alongside our other activity, it is felt that Area Councils might like to be engaged in this research activity and this will be further discussed with Area Council chairpersons at their next meeting with a view to making a final decision at the November Executive meeting

The following members commented or asked questions: Colleen O’Brien (North Shore) Statement.Research needs to be transparent, so should approach other providers. Kay Stevens Statement. Murihiku Southland Area (Murihiku Southland Area Council) Council would offer $10,000 towards project. NZEI had agreed to go forward with the current Waikato proposal, so the question will be the level of research that will be undertaken.

HUI SESSION Annual Meeting 2010 Hui Session began with the mihi whakatau mai te kaumatua Toma Waihirere ki Rita Walker, the manuhiri for this session. The major part of the hui session consisted of this address which was focused on Te Whatu Pōkeka, Kaupapa Māori Assessment for Learning resource. Begun in 2003 the focus for Te Whatu Pōkeka was on developing Kaupapa Māori frameworks and exemplars of assessment by exploring cultural contexts and methods that contribute towards nurturing all aspects of each child’s growth and development through assessment. Rita focused her korero on the key principle underpinning Te Whatu Pōkeka that there is an utmost belief in the transformative power of ancient Māori knowledge as a foundation for Māori theory and development. As Rita provided her many examples to illustrate each point so the audience of Annual Meeting became drawn into the discussions surrounding the concept that the Pōkeka (the baby wrap) grows and expands according to the growth and development of the child just any assessment should grow and develop with the child.

Candidates for National Executive The National President then resumed as Chair for the election speeches of the National Executive candidates. Frances Nelson advised Representatives that Diane Leggett was no longer standing for a National Executive Principal position as she had accepted a new position at Massey University. The remaining candidates then spoke for 2 minutes inclusive of a Mihi with the speaking order having been determined by a ballot. A copy of the candidates’ Curriculum Vitae was in representatives’ folders. The National President reminded members that the elections of the National Executive would take place as business progressed the following morning. All electioneering material must be removed from the Auditorium before then.

Representatives must be seated than no later than 8.25am on Wednesday morning. After karakia and waiata Annual Meeting was adjourned.

WEDNESDAY, 29 SEPTEMBER 2010 Sixth Session Annual Meeting reconvened at 8.25am. Komatua Toma Waiherere opened the session with karakia, followed by waiata. The National President advised representatives of the business to be dealt with during the session.

ELECTIONS FOR NATIONAL EXECUTIVE The National President explained the procedures for the election of the National Executive. During elections all representatives must remain in the hall until the collection of the ballot papers for that election was completed. She then announced the following eleven persons to be the scrutineers. Gael Trevathan, Erika Locke, Dawn Osman, Joy Heremia, Peter Hughes, John Law, Sue Nimmo, Elaine Fountain, Denise Cornford, Glen Steven. She advised that representatives only were entitled to vote and that the ballot papers were in their folders. They were colour-coded and each representative must take part in all ballots. She reminded observers that they were unable to vote. The National President asked representatives to do a branch check to make sure that they were all present and to immediately advise the registration desk if any were absent. She also advised that while waiting for each ballot to be counted the meeting would proceed with the business on the agenda.

Order Of Elections

Election for National President Once that result announced, the Election of National Vice President Once that result announced, the Election of National Executive General

Representatives Once that result announced, the Election of National Executive Sector

Representatives Election of National Immediate Past President

The Elections then commenced.

Election of National President Frances Nelson, National President stated; “There are two nominations for the office of National President that of Judith Nowotarski and Ian Leckie. Therefore an election is necessary. The ballot paper for this election is marked with the yellow band”. The ballot was progressed. Result of Voting:

Ian Leckie 183 Judith Nowataski 180

Ian Leckie was announced as National President for 2011-2012.

Election of National Vice-President Frances Nelson, National President stated: “There are now four remaining nominations for the office of Vice-President: that of Clint Green, Frances Guy, Diane Leggett and Fiona Matapo”. The ballot was progressed. Result of Voting:

Frances Guy 144 Fiona Matapo 120 Diane Leggett 67 Clint Green 31

Frances Guy was announced as National Vice-President for 2011-2012.

Election of National Executive General Representatives Frances Nelson, National President stated: “We are now dealing with the election for the National Executive General Representatives. To be valid a voting paper must not contain more than four names”. The ballot was progressed. Result of Voting:

Judith Nowataski 254 David Kennedy 164 Fiona Matapo 134 Rikki Sheterline 103 Niki Mayo 96 Louise Green 96 Viv Goldsmith 89 Clint Green 78 Diane Leggett 61

Meg Moss 60 Winnifred Morris 57 Hayley Whitaker 34 Ann Hoglund 32

Judith Nowatarski, David Kennedy, Fiona Matapo and Rikki Sheterline were elected as National Executive General Representatives for 2011-2012.

Election of National Executive Sector Representatives Frances Nelson, National President stated; “We are now dealing with the election for the National Executive Sector Representatives. The instructions are clearly set out on the ballot papers. To be valid a voting paper must not contain more than one name for the each of the following sectors. Elections would be held for Primary Teaching Sector and Early Childhood Sector. As Diane Leggett had accepted a new position and was no longer a principal, there was only one nominee for the National Executive Primary Principals’ Sector, no election was necessary. As there was only one nominee for the National Executive Support Staff Sector, no election was necessary”. The ballot was progressed. Result of Voting: Primary Teaching Sector

Niki Mayo 159 Clint Green 109 Viv Goldsmith 91

Niki Mayo was elected as Primary Teaching Sector Representative for 2011-2012. Primary Principals’ Sector Louise Green was elected as Primary Principals’ Sector Representative for 2011-2012. Early Childhood Sector

Hayley Whitaker 209 Meg Moss 157

Hayley Whitaker was elected as Early Childhood Sector Representative for 2011-2012.

Support Staff Sector Ann Hoglund was elected as Support Staff Primary Sector Representative for 2011-2012.

Election of Immediate Past President The National Secretary – Paul Goulter referred Annual Meeting to Section 4.1.2.2 of the Rules concerning nomination for the office of Immediate Past President. One nomination had been received for Frances Nelson from the Otahuhu Branch. Frances Nelson was therefore declares elected as Immediate Past President for 2011-2012. The National President then read the complete list of the newly elected National Executive for 2011-2012 including the three Te Reo Areare representatives: National President Ian Leckie Immediate past President Frances Nelson Vice president Frances Guy National Executive Tiri Bailey-Nowell Louise Green Te Aroha Hiko Ann Hoglund David Kennedy Fiona Matipo Nikki Mayo Judith Nowotarski Rikki Sheterline Sophie Short Hayley Whitaker Karl Vasau (National Executive) moved, Donna Mason (National Executive) seconded: "That the ballot papers be destroyed after 28 days."

Agreed The National President then thanked all scrutineers for their work. She acknowledged the unsuccessful candidates and congratulated them on putting themselves forward. She said democracy was only effective if people participate. Tough though, this sometimes is, for those not successful; on behalf of their colleagues, she thanked them all for their preparedness to put themselves forward to work at this level as part of their union. Throughout the Elections, Annual Meeting had continued with the following business:

Subscriptions and Resources Report Nigel Wilson (National Executive) moved, Ian Leckie (National Executive) seconded: “That the report on Subscriptions and Resources be received”. Agreed The mover spoke to the Resolution. The following representatives commented on the report or asked questions: Zac Markham (Franklin) Questioned whether subs would be reviewed

within 12 months if membership did not increase?

Denise Hird (Waikato) Noted there was nothing in report with regard to what happens if the Ministry of Education did not continue to take out subs directly.

Cath O’Loughlin (Buller) Questioned the anomaly as to how much a member would be paying.

Linda Milne (Christchurch) Stated that some members don’t know about Switch to Direct Debit.

Nigel Wilson (National Executive) replied. He stressed the importance of the Switch process. Nigel Wilson (National Executive) moved, Ian Leckie (National Executive) seconded: 1. Subscription Rates 2011: a. That the threshold at which the full subscription becomes payable from

1st January 2011 remains at $37,000 gross earnings per annum. b. That the minimum fortnightly subscription payable by any full member

be $2.00. c. That for 2011 the maximum fortnightly subscription be $20.77. d. That for 2011 the minimum subscription of $2.00 per fortnight be paid

by those full members earning less than or equal to $354.79 gross per fortnight.

e. That for 2011 those full members earning more than $354.79 gross but

less than or equal to $709.59 gross per fortnight pay a subscription of $5.19 per fortnight – one quarter of the full fortnightly subscription.

f. That for 2011 those full members earning more than $709.59 gross but

less than or equal to $1,064.38 gross per fortnight pay a subscription of $10.39 per fortnight – one half of the full fortnightly subscription.

g. That for 2011 those full members earning more than $1,064.38 gross

but less than or equal to $1,419.18 gross per fortnight pay a

subscription of $15.58 per fortnight – three quarters of the full fortnightly subscription.

h. That for 2011 those full members earning more than $1419.18 gross per

fortnight pay a subscription of $20.77 per fortnight. i. That for 2011, those support staff members not receiving 26 regular

pays, and who elect to pay their subscriptions by a method other than payroll deduction, shall have their projected earnings annualised for the purposes of determining their fortnightly subscription.

j. That for 2011 the annual subscription for honorary members be $20 per

annum. Agreed k. That the annual subscription for student teacher membership be $5.00

per annum. Withdrawn The National President advised that she had accepted an Amendment to k. Glenys Edmonds (Manawatu) moved, Liam Rutherford (Manawatu) seconded: “That there be no subscription for Student Members”. Carried The following members spoke or asked questions: Chris Stuart (Auckland) Supported. Really important for our young

people not to have to put their hand in their pocket.

Jo Fothergill (Wellington Area Council) Supported. A need to recruit many more young members

to NZEI. Eileen Raynel (Waikato) Opposed. $5.00 is only a token amount and

are we going to allow other members who have hardships to pay less?

Karepa Wall Opposed. Why are we even having this

debate? $5.00 shows they are committed to the organisation.

Gina Yelchich (Waiuku) Opposed. Cost is a minimum.

Meredydd Barrar (West Auckland) Supported. Would be helpful to encourage younger members.

Hinewai Smith (AT Tamaki-Makarau) Opposed. $5.00 not a lot to ask. Judith McGhie (Hutt Valley) Opposed. Many support staff would jump at

$5.00 per year membership. The Mover exercised her right of reply. She acknowledged that for support staff the payment of subscriptions was often difficult for those who had an income. However, most students had none. Student membership would expire every year on 31st December.

This amendment was then put. The National President, Frances Nelson stated that the result (on the show of cards) was unclear. A count was taken.

In Favour 180 Against 176

The amendment was therefore carried. Nigel Wilson (National Executive) moved, Ian Leckie (National Executive) seconded: “That the Report on Subscriptions and Resources be adopted”.

Agreed

The National President then returned to a discussion of Resolution R which had begun in Session 3.

Resolution R Sandra Spekreijse (Waitaha Canterbury Area Council) moved, Mary Pearson (Christchurch) seconded: 5.1 Composition of Meeting That Section 5.1.1 of the Rules of the New Zealand Educational Institute (Inc) be amended by: 5.1.1(d) being renamed 5.1.1(d)(i). And the following clause being added: “5.1.1(d)(ii) Where an Area Council is unable to fill its student teacher

member representative allocation as per rule 3.5.2.1(b), that Area Council will appoint another full member or full members to fill the allocation.”

Lost Note: This Resolution was declared lost after a count was taken. However later in the meeting, in response to as question regarding the fact that the scrutineers were out of the hall when the vote was taken. The National president suggested that a new vote would be taken, as they had returned. She asked for an indicative vote as to whether the mover and seconder and two speakers who were against should be allowed to speak and the vote would then be retaken. However this indicative vote was Lost, so the original vote stands. Arguments:

The Waitaha Canterbury Area Council believes it is vital that all Area Councils are fairly represented at our Annual Meeting. Each Area Council is entitled to send their Area Chair and two student teacher member representatives. Whilst we strongly believe that the student voice is vital within our organisation and particularly at our Annual Meeting, we have become increasingly aware of how difficult it is at times to find available Student Representatives. Where an Area Council is unable to find suitable Student Teacher member representatives, they are unable to substitute other available representatives in their place. We believe this disadvantages that Area Council. It is not the intention of this rule change to take away the Student Teacher Member Representative. We believe that Area Councils should do everything that they can to find suitable Student Teachers as

representatives. However, this rule change simply allows the Area Council to maintain their representation at a fair level, should those student representatives not be available.

The Mover spoke Purpose is not to disenfranchise student membership. Praised field staff recruitment. Does not mean should not try to recruit student members. If rules provide 3 members from Area Council – only 5 from 13 Area Councils have full representation at this meeting. The Seconder spoke: Importance of retaining student /young members. The following members spoke or asked questions: Adam Burchmore Opposed strongly Students are the. (Wellington Area Council) future of NZEI and need to be kept

involved. Frances Nelson (National President) Asked Ian Leckie (National Executive) to

explain the effect of this resolution and how the current representation came about.

David Kennedy (National Executive) Against. Intent is for Student Rep. Eileen Raynel (Waikato) Against. Basically saying any member can

come to Annual Meeting. National President Advised in relation to points of clarification,

that all Branches and Area Councils must act in accordance with the rules.

Karepa Wall (AT Te Whanganui a Tra) Supported. Anita Newland Supported. No student members attend Area (Tai Tokerau Area Council) Council meetings, but young teachers do. Donna Buchanan (Christchurch) Supported. Gives alternative, so Area Council

can have full representation. Joanne Lincoln-Moore (Rotorua) Supported. Aim is to keep numbers of

representatives up. The Mover exercised her right of reply :Strong feeling about role of young members. Area Council must ensure rigorous programme of enrolling student members – not an attempt to disenfranchise young members.

RESOLUTIONS TO AMEND POLICY

Resolution 5 Alison Beer (Wellington) moved, Sharon Payne (Wellington) seconded: Teacher Registration “That NZEI Te Riu Roa take action to promote an updated and improved tutor teacher training programme for all new and returning Tutor Teachers”.

Agreed

Arguments: • Currently, any fully qualified teacher can apply to be a Tutor Teacher, without any

prior training or experience. • The Satisfactory Teacher Dimensions has been updated to the Registered Teacher

Criteria, and Tutor Teacher’s need to be familiar with what this means to PRT’s. • Many beginning teachers have unsatisfactory relationships with their tutor

teacher, which is detrimental to their development as confident and competent teachers. Tutor teacher training may help to establish appropriate working relationships.

• Beginning teachers attend PRT seminars, and Tutor Teachers should attend similar training to prepare them for their role as mentor.

• The university based teacher training courses have changed significantly over the past years, and ‘untrained’ tutor teachers may not take that into account when dealing with beginning teachers.

• An establishment of a tutor teacher network would further support Tutor Teachers, and a training course could develop this network.

The Mover spoke: Many tutor teachers do an outstanding job, but this is not always the case. Need to give Tutor Teachers tool to assist PRT. Seconder Reserved. The following members spoke or asked questions: Sian Brown (Auckland) Supported. Many PRT’s not well supported by

Tutor Teachers and PRT’s need support. Diane Leggett (National Executive) Supported. 13 PRT’s on staff – school has had

to set up own support training for their Tutor Teachers – probably should need a university paper in future.

Louise Green (National Executive) Supported. Noted work of New Zealand Teachers Council. The need for mentor teachers to be trained has been recommended by Teachers Council and NZEI should assist them with their research.

As there would not be time to debate the remaining Policy changes, the National President then made the following statements in regard to them. She also advised that the information she was giving could be taken back to members.

Resolution 1 Te Ara Kokiri / Unified Teaching Profession “That action be taken by NZEI Te Riu Roa’s President and Executive to approach the PPTA, to together develop a co-ordinated approach to the upcoming 2011 General Election campaign encompassing Quality Public Education as a theme”.

The National President advised that this was already taking place, so would not be debated.

Resolution 6: Conditions of Service – Bargaining “That action be taken by NZEI Te Riu Roa to ensure that all members are equipped to be able to establish a safe and manageable workload on all worksites”. The National president advised that this was an integral part of the Primary Teachers Steering Group.

Resolution 7: Early Childhood Education “That NZEI, in accordance with NZEI Policy 13.1.2 (to affirm the right of all children to health), support, campaign and lobby for the removal of GST from milk products, fresh meat, fish, vegetables and breads”. The National President advised that the priority goals were already determined, and this resolution would not be debated.

Resolution 8: NZEI Organisation “That action be taken by NZEI Te Riu Roa to circulate a paper newsletter to all worksites to inform and encourage membership participation”. The National President advised that this has a good feel for members. The National Executive and staff were currently testing the use of organising tools.

Resolution 9: NZEI Organisation “NZEI adopt as policy that there be a position added to the Principals’ Council for Head Teachers/Supervisors of ECE”. The National President advised that this resolution was withdrawn by Auckland Branch prior to Annual Meeting.

Resolution 10: NZEI Organisation

“That NZEI adopt as policy that we lobby for funding for First Time Head Teachers in ECE modelled on the ‘First Time Principals programs’”. The National President advised that the resolution will be discussed by the Early Childhood Steering Group.

Resolution 11: NZEI Organisation “That NZEI take action to review the effectiveness of existing channels of communication with individual members”. The National President advised that this was similar to Resolution 8. National Office was receiving good feedback on the Out Call Centre.

Resolution 12: NZEI Organisation “That NZEI identify the current inequities existing for relieving teacher members of NZEI Te Riu Roa and report back to Annual Meeting 2011 with resolutions aimed at maximising the engagement of this membership group”. The National President advised that an inquiry re relieving teacher members was currently going ahead through Field Staff and other strategies and this information would be given to Steering Groups.

Resolution 13: NZEI Organisation “That NZEI Te Riu Roa take action to develop leadership capacity by providing members taking up leadership positions in branches and networks with training in their roles and responsibilities”. The National President advised that NZEI has whole range of workshops that can be organised for branches eg Workplace Bullying

Resolution 14: NZEI Organisation “That action be taken to investigate and identify issues considered to be workplace bullying in our schools and devise a strategy to minimise or eliminate these issues for our members”. The National President advised that this was a major exercise that could not be considered at this time.

Resolution 15: NZEI Organisation “That NZEI investigate, approach and negotiate with organisations such as museums, art galleries, bookstores and cinemas to provide all members with favourable discounts”. The National President advised that this was a hardy perennial and was not considered to be priority work for National Office. The following members spoke or asked questions: Meredydd Barrar Questioned re. Resolution 7. (West Auckland) Whether NZEI would endorse the Labour

Party GST Policy. National President In Reply.

NZEI will not put financial resources into this area.

The National President advised that as the time for debate had now finished, the Hot Issues Session would not be taken. However, if notes from those members were given to the Minute Takers, they would be included in the Minutes of the Meeting. A break was then taken to allow preparations for the Closing Ceremony to take place.

HOT ISSUES The following members had indicated they would make statements on the following topics: Jo Collyer (Whangarei) Workload of Volunteers within our organisation. Nigel Jones (Hastings) Teaching in England under National Standards

and Statistics – the Government’s next step? My personal experiences are warnings for us all.

Melanie Dorrian Classroom Release Time in Area Schools. (Coromandel Peninsula) Units in Area Schools. Celebration that NZEI has begun an Area

Schools Network and the need to promote this. Ensuring that NZEI pushes the unique claims

Area Schools have in this round of negotiations. Meredydd Barrar (West Auckland) Draw members attention to the Recent OECD. Report comparing teachers pay and hours of

work. Anna Lee (West Auckland) Member activism and communication.

Chris Stuart (Auckland) Thought Awards were great. However, Reps should be able to support award recipients without having to have/pay the dinner.

Voting Order at Annual Meeting. Will it be possible in 2011 to vote for the single

positions (including sectors) before all of the National Executive group for 2012?

Sandra Bennett (Auckland) After speaking to members – This year support staff members were not given

their own copy of their collective agreement. I have also been told that this is the same for teachers. The members I have spoken to are very dissatisfied with this, as they don’t have direct access to knowledge of what they should be and are entitled to.

Will this change so that members can have own personal copies?

Leith Matthews & Sharon Pond To bring attention to and understanding of (West Auckland) the Resource Teacher: Literacy Service The Minister referred to ‘specialist’ literacy

resources. There are 109 Resource Teachers Literacy nationally, so we are the most interested in how this ‘resource’ is to be presented by MOE as a new/expanded resource – and how this is to be available/accessed by those in need.

WEDNESDAY, 29 SEPTEMBER 2010 Seventh Session Closing Ceremony The National President – Frances Nelson stated that Annual Meeting 2011 would be held on a weekend in August 2011 on a date and at a venue yet to be determined She proposed a comprehensive vote of thanks to the National President’s Advisory Committee, facilitators of meetings and discussion groups, timekeepers, video controllers, microphone controllers, minute takers and all staff and the media. She congratulated the Executive members who have been returned to office. The National President thanked other members who have served on the National Executive over the year, for their considerable service to NZEI members and wished them well for the future. She invited National Executive members not returning to briefly address Annual Meeting. Diane Lawrence There was both sadness and relief when she made her decisions to stand down. She thanked all those who had assisted her. She wished the 2011 National Executive all the best. In future would re-attend Mana Branch meetings and the Teachers Refresher Course Committee. Nigel Wilson This was a difficult decision to retire after forty two years of wonderful experiences and opportunities. He thanked all members for their huge support, especially his Otago colleagues and his National Executive colleagues, who were a talented group. He also thanked staff for the way they carried out their huge workload, especially Darrell Ward for his support in financial matters. In future he would continue to enjoy the company of his tamariki. Donna Mason Heartfelt thanks to all members, but particularly Support Staff members – four wonderful and challenging years on National Executive, but still awaiting Support Staff Report which is a real regret – friendships forged have been most rewarding – will find other ways to further Support Staff causes.

Karl Vasau Six years membership on National Executive – has been very interesting – originally came on to further cause of Pasifika, as a resulting of vacancy with no voting rights. National Executive is best professional development possible. Thanked all Pasifika members – has lost weight and has found “love” – will participate at local levels, particularly for Pasifika people. Gaye Parlane Pleasure to be part of a hard working National Executive. She thanked all staff especially Kevin Burrows and Sharyn Gibbons. Have had many opportunities on National Executive that were outside her comfort zone – and enjoyed all these challenges and will continue to help Support Staff, Build, Grow & Win. Diane Leggett Currently eleven years on National Executive. Privilege to represent NZEI on Teachers Council and to be a Convenor of the Professional Committee for three years. She will continue the friendships she has enjoyed. She thanked Wellington and Christchurch Branches and Area Councils. She is now becoming Director of Curriculum Development at Massey University. Clint Green Thanked those who supported him. Newly elected National Executive will do well. It will be difficult to not be on the National Executive after two years. He acknowledged support from his employer. He has made great personal growth over past two years. He looks forward to having more time with his family, doing gardening, fishing and his job, and to write more songs. Winnifred Morris Had enjoyed her time on the National Executive and had learnt a great deal and appreciated the support of all members, particularly the Aronui Tomua and Te Reo Areare. Meg Moss Not disappointed – delighted with Executive appointed. Have learnt a lot during her years experience. Will study Maori at night classes in 2011. These speakers were followed by waiata and presentations. Judith Nowataski then spoke on behalf of the 2011 National Executive and offered sympathy to those not returning.

She noted that Annual Meeting had elected an awesome team to take NZEI forward in 2011 and 2012 and were grateful for representatives support and korero. Representatives could have confidence that National Executive would BUILD, GROW & WIN. INSTALLATIONS The National President then installed Ian Leckie as National President for 2011 and 2012. She held up Pouwhenua, the taonga which is presented to the President elected at Annual Meeting to take office for the next calendar year and symbolises the continuity of the office of President. She then presented Pouwhenua to Ian Leckie. Ian Leckie – In Reply. He thanked Annual Meeting for the confidence they had shown. Sympathised with Judith Nowotarski in a tight election. Very difficult year, hostile environment, hostile government. The Election must focus on issues that are important in education. There will be a need to put into effect, further changes from the Organisational Review.Including re-shaping the work of a National Executive with only 14 members. It will also be necessary to reshape Annual Meeting 2011 into a weekend. He was looking forward to this first two year term as President – and thanked his school, particularly during this “Leaky Building” time, who supported him in his presidency. He acknowledged support of his wife, their 7 children and 14 grandchildren and 1 great grandchild. He also acknowledged the support of Bay of Plenty Branch and Area Council, as well as Waikato Branch.

Ian Leckie installed Frances Guy as National Vice-President. Frances Guy - In Reply. Acknowledged tamariki – children, grandchildren and all students we teach.

She acknowledged her school, Branch (West Auckland), the Auckland Area Council and her husband Louis (whose wise advice gave her confidence). She acknowledged the newly elected National Executive and all activists in NZEI Te Riu Roa. These will be challenging, exciting years in which we will succeed and win reasonable fair agreements. Together we will move this government. Ian Leckie then installed Frances Nelson as National Immediate Past President and noted that she continues in the office of President until 1st January 2011. Frances Nelson - In Reply. She has worked hard for this Past President’s badge. She acknowledged Irene Cooper, (the current Immediate Past President) who has been an extraordinary hard worker for NZEI, who would continue to work for Quality Public Education. This remark was received with acclamation. She noted that Annual Meeting this year was a challenge – with a new venue – and a changing structure in the focus of Annual Meeting and NZEI as an emerging organisation. She noted that a knowledge of standing orders should not stand in the way of democracy, but must find a balance, and all representatives must feel that they can stand up and challenge and debate, which you have all done very well. Personally she was very encouraged by the election of a smaller National Executive, who will stand up to this challenge. She will be there as Immediate Past President to assist Ian. She congratulated Frances Guy on her election as Vice President and noted that she had worked very well on the National Executive. She congratulated the staff for their work as she knew she was a hard task master. It had been exciting to work with Paul Goulter and to see how far we could take this fight.

She acknowledged her partner Ross, who is looking forward to her coming home and noted it had often been hard to attend family functions including losing her step-father who had died last week. Her school had been amazing and would not accept her resignation last year – and she was looking forward to returning there in 2011. She thanked all Representatives for their participation and knew that they will support Ian Leckie and Frances Guy in the next two years. This was received with acclamation and a standing ovation. The National President then declared Annual Meeting Closed and handed over to the Poroporaki for the Closing Ceremony. Hone Niwa then handed the “feather” back to the hosts, which was followed by waiata. The hosts accepted the “feather” which was followed by another waiata. Following the waiata, the National President then called upon Koro Alex to close the business for the day with karakia and waiata. Annual Meeting closed at 1pm.