Abstract:
This theory only literature review seeks to compare and contrast education policy, and the socio-political and economic contexts of the two periods 1862-1899 and 1987-1999. It examines the major issues in education for each period and the responses of policy makers to these issues, with particular reference to issues of accountability.
It argues that the use of 'standards' at the end of the nineteenth century has strong parallels to the policy of national testing for primary school aged children announced by the, then National-led, coalition government in 1999.
An analysis of a range of literature from both the 'liberal-progressive' and 'radical-revisionist' schools of education history reveals the hugely negative effect the use of the 'standards' had on both teaching and learning, and social structures within New Zealand society at the turn of the previous century, leading in particular to a narrowing of the curriculum and the stratification of society.
Concluding that a sufficient degree of similarity exists between the eras to make a comparison valid, it argues that a (re)-introduction of a system of 'standards' in the contemporary era, in the form of national testing, would see a repeat and perpetuation of the negative consequences of the 1862-1899 era.
Examining questions of accountability in the modern era, especially the role, function and impact of the Education Review Office (ERO), it looks for ways of achieving acceptable levels of accountability within the education sector without resorting to rigid, external, examination based systems of review.
Its major recommendations are that a policy of national testing should not be pursued, but schools should be supported to develop systems of 'self-review for self-improvement' based around existing, and developing, resources such as the National Education Monitoring Project (NEMP), Assessment Resource Banks (ARBs), and new literacy and numeracy tests and exemplars of 'standards of achievement' currently being developed by the Ministry of Education. The Review Office's role would remain that of external reviewer, with an overseeing function of schools' own internal self-review processes.
