The+Official+Information+Act+Material


 * Official Information ACT (OIA) Material Showing Ministry of Education Inaccuracies in Research Data and Interpretations**

** 2010/ 2011 Quotes data from the Ministry of Education OIA, letters to parents & community and public documents including research commentary on this. ** ** Key-quotes from MoE in italics; Our comments bold in [ ] **


 * Our Comment//- Literacy// is now used to equate with //literacy in English// //only.// //Pacific language literacy// now appears to be excluded from the definition of //literacy// used by the Ministry**

//The specific key drivers for this work and the Advisory Group are two Education priority outcomes and three goals from the PEP for compulsory education// **(Terms of Reference, OIA Wall Manning Material (1) 18 November)**//..//**Including-** // ...to produce material for underachieving students in English literacy // ( Terms of Reference OIA Wall Manning Material (1) 18 November // English literacy and academic achievement //
 * //Ministry Priorities//**
 * [That is the lack of policy in the 2009 PEP to support Pasifika language bilingualism. Language maintenance and revival ** ** drives the decision to stop publishing L1 Pasifika language material as language maintenance and revival is no longer a goal of the PEP (see below) **
 * Yet the NZ Curriculum 2007 says: **

// Languages and cultures play a key role in developing our personal, group, national, and human identities… because of New Zealand’s close relationship with peoples of the Pacific, Pasifika languages…have a special place NZ Curriculum, 2007, p.2. //** (OIA Appendix 1 Tupu: Overview p.1) **
 * [How is this special relationship shown in policy and programmes?] **

// The main purpose of Tupu and Fōlauga is to support Pasifika student’s English literacy achievement //
 * [This is a deliberate distortion of the research and the facts. This was never really the main purpose of the materials as the OIA documents show. Appendix 1 & 2 Tupu/ Folauga: Overview] **

// The research review will recommend how publications can support Pasifika student’s achievement and acceleration in English Literacy. // // The existing series of Tupu and Folauga do not appear to be closely aligned to these priorities, as the focus is on language acquisition. However through the PEP there is a mandate to ensure effective support is provided for Pasifika students: …. progress and achievement in[English] literacy // **(MoE Memo 23 July 2010, p.1).**
 * OIA Wall Manning Material (9) 18 November//.// (MoE Memo 23 July 2010). **

// The Ministry and Simon (Chair) emphasized that the workshop should focus on supporting Pasifika student’s English literacy learning (as opposed to Pasifika language learning) // **(MoE Minutes 23 July 2010, p.1).**
 * [All agree Literacy in English is essential. However as the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs says – //The learning of English does not need to be at the expense of Pasifika languages]// **

p.9 We //know that more Pasifika students have English (rather than a Pasifika language) as their first language.. Given budgetary constraints and the diversity of Pasifika students language resources we may have to target this group of Pasifika students which has implications for language resource.// **[This is another error of research facts - see below]-** (MoE Minutes 23 July 2010, p.2). //An MOE officer…She questioned the assumption that Pasifika materials need to be in Pasifika languages when many Pasifika students are not strong in English or their home language//**.**
 * Minutes 27 May 2010, p.6 **
 * .. ** //For many English is their first language// **[around 40% actually]**, //for a minority their Pasifika languages is their first language//
 * [Actually research shows it is over 65% as a first language. This is an error of fact in the research - see below] **


 * [This is another research error and the facts- Actually research by McCaffery & McFall 2010 and Taylor et al ‘s (2010) //Pacific Islands Family Study// shows that //around 60%// of all Pasifika school age children up to age 18 yrs are bilingual in both languages. Cook Is Niuean and Tokelau chn are weakest at around 36% (i.e. 64% cant) But among Samoan and Tongan the figure who can is over 70%. This is because Samoan and Tongan children make up nearly 80% of the total PI school age population **
 * For the MoE to have neglected PI languages for so long that they are now being lost, and then to claim they therefore do not need to support them, is a clear example of the case for a deliberate breach of Human Rights. **

p.9 //some research suggests parental involvement and support// **[ for Pasifika language reading materials ]** //can have a detrimental effect//
 * [WHERE IS THIS RESEARCH? NOT KNOWN TO US. This appears to be is a deliberate attempt to misrepresent the research and the facts to justify making the cuts] **

** PEP Plan 2008-2012 Goal 16 **// Increase opportunities for building strong Pasifika language foundations through Pasifika language curriculum and resource development. // // **Strategies & Actions included:** // // The following actions will be based on creating opportunities for enhancing strong Pasifika languages contributing towards achievement through**:** // // ..Language revitalization means that Pasifika communities continue to seek language in schools which contributes to improving learning outcomes. // // 1. Supporting schools to offer Pasifika language curricula by ensuring adequate teacher supply and that teaching and learning resources are available for all published curricula: // // 2. Support communities to enhance language proficiency as foundation for learning and achievement, maintenance and preservation // // • home to Pasifika bilingual, immersion and mainstream ECE services // // • ECE to schooling // // •within schooling // // •schooling to further study and/or sustainable employment. // // 1) Develop an action plan to: // // • Increase research into effective bilingual pedagogies and language acquisition processes, and explore their implementation in designated bilingual classrooms // // •Increase effective teaching practices for bilingual students through professional learning for teachers in Pasifika bilingual classrooms and English medium classrooms // // • Support the transitions of Pasifika bilingual students (into, within and between Pasifika bilingual ECE services, Pasifika Bilingual classrooms and English medium classrooms. // // The Plan will: // // • Be clearly informed by ongoing national and international research on effective pedagogies for monolingual, bilingual and plurilingual students, and evidence-based practices for supporting student outcomes. // // • Include professional learning for teachers within designated Pasifika bilingual classrooms and English medium classrooms (this includes Languages Enhancing Achievement for Pasifika (LEAP tki .org) and strengthening links with existing professional learning opportunities. // // • Include the development of relevant resources and assessment tools for teachers of bilingual students (including Pasifika bilingual students) across a range of year levels and within Pasifika bilingual classrooms and English medium classrooms. // // The Ministry of Education to support student’s language learning through strong early Childhood. School community language learning opportunities //
 * Removal of Bilingualism goals from the PEP 2008-2012 - //Education Sector Wide// section **
 * The new 2009 Pep Plan does Not just simplify the PEP it eliminates crucial goals as follows- **
 * PEP Plan 2008-2012 Goal 15. **// Increase Pasifika families and communities engagement in education and partnerships with school that are focused on achievement. //
 * Strategies included- **// building on strong foundations in language…• being strong in a language **[Pasifika**] on which to base learning a second language…strengthen the relationship between home and school and assist parents to help their children at home with literacy.. //
 * PEP Plan 2008-2012 Goal 17 **// Increase effective teaching for Pasifika bilingual students in a range of settings. Increase transitions by ensuring there are clear pathways available from**:** //
 * // Strategies & Actions included: //**
 * ALL goals and strategies now effectively abandoned in the revised 2009-2012 PEP. Now perhaps the Palagi Plan for Pasifika Education(PPEP). **
 * Advisory group **

// *to explore how best support Pasifika students to raise their academic achievement in English literacy // (**MoE Memo 23 July 2010).** **The decision to cut the materials was unanimous?** // The Advisory group was fully briefed, there was robust discussion throughout the day and the group arrived at their decision through unanimous agreement //. **HOWEVER**

Although the Advisory group recommend that Folauga not be paused- on financial grounds and lack of policy alignment- the Ministry of Education officials also paused the Folauga series-
 * Budget Reprioritization** ** (MoE Memo 23 July 2010, p.2). **

//p. 2 …This// **[Folauga Journal]** //is a reasonably focused series achieving its current purpose…// //p. 11 • Folauga continues, given it is well targeted and focused and that 58% of all Pasifika students in NZ schools are Samoan//

//Actual satisfaction at 77% by teachers and schools with both series is high// …//Both Tupu and Folauga were identified for savings as given their language learning focus; they do not meet current priorities**…**//** (MoE Memo 23 July 2010, p.2). **
 * [Obviously not a unanimous decision.**** This is also a deliberate distortion of the Advisory Committee recommendations and the facts] **


 * p.1 Fact Sheet December 2010.** //The review of these materials is part of the Ministry’s business as usual curriculum support materials production cycle//
 * [This appears to not be correct. This appears to be the first time resources have been stopped before undertaking the review. Normally they continue until the research is done, and then decisions made about the materials. This is also the first time the money used to produce resources has been taken away and used to fund the research review of them. None of this is normal, usual or business as usual MOE review practice. Pasifika materials appear to have been targeted as an easy money savings area] **

// Any texts intended to be read by students should be leveled, and there are no established and tested systems for leveling Pasifika language texts //
 * [This is because the MOE has refused to do so itself or discuss the existence of this work in Samoan bilingual schools –And the claim is not correct. Auckland Samoan Bilingual Schools Cluster has done so over many years and researcher John McCaffery says the research he is doing on the use of this leveling system shows the leveling is very accurate and reliable and work is continuing on it in 5 schools right now] **


 * Participants Advisory Committee recommendations below, on place and role of Pasifika first languages have been almost completely ignored by the actual contract let by the Ministry of Education. The following are research Questions the Advisory Committee asked to be explored in the review- but have been ignored in the contract. **

• // What is the role of Pasifika /first languages in meeting English literacy learning needs? // • //What is known about pedagogy that supports translanguaging?// // • How do we help teachers draw on the richness of student’s language resources? (Research from John Cummings could be helpful // ) • //How do teachers use Tupu and Folauga and how well do these series meet the English language learning needs of students?//
 * ( Advisory Committee Minutes, 2010 p. 11) **
 * [Actually he is Jim Cummins, which suggests they have not read any research by Cummins and are not familiar with //translanguaging// at all]. **

**None of these recommendations from the Advisory Committee are part of the research Contract let – Why? How do we know this? The contact is publicly available and the UoA is the contractor. The contract team confirms these matters are NOT in the contract requirements. In spite of this the Minister and MoE continues to publically claim they are part of the research review – Why? See the many letters and press releases and publicity for details. An example** // • The review allows for recognition that for students who have strong heritage language ability, that this is strength in supporting English literacy achievement. **(p.1** //** December Fact Sheet MoE) **

// **MOE says**: New materials produced for the Learning Languages Series are specifically designed to support the Pasifika language guidelines for teachers (who are new to the language) to teach a Pasifika language at an introductory level. These resources are aimed at (but are not exclusively for) teachers and students in Years 7 & 8 for second language learning and teaching. // // The Pasifika learning language series (such as //// gagana Tokelau //// ) are targeted to Years 7-10. // // All full primary schools (with Years 7 & 8), Intermediates or Secondary schools can request any or all of the Learning Languages resources. //
 * Claims of replacement material from the Learning Languages NZ Curriculum strand (See McCaffery & McFall’s research, 2010, pp.106-108) **

• //The [new LL] Pasifika language resources support the preservation and maintenance of five Pasifika languages.//
 * // These materials are designed for new speakers of Pacific languages and teachers not already familiar with Pasifika languages. //**** We have seen the material and it is not suitable for L1 or bilingual literacy development. And- it is targeted only at ages 11-14- schools years 7 Fm1 -10 Fm 4 and will not be distributed to primary Schools yrs 1-6. which now lose ALL their Pasifika reading materials as do ECE Centres. **
 * [This is not true. These new materials cannot achieve this. They are explicitly designed for second language learners to learn a new language they do not already know- not to maintain and revive languages that 65% plus of all Pasifika students already speak. The needs of 65% of all Pasifika students to have access to reading materials in their own languages is being systematically, totally deliberately ignored. The languages will not contribute to academic success the transfer of skills to English literacy, translanguaging and will not survive in NZ unless literacy is taught in the languages to Pasifika children. ] **

// Learning Languages uses the term 'Learning Languages' and 'new Language' to refer to languages other than those used as mediums of instruction and the students own language. (p.7) // // Many communities strive to maintain their linguistic and cultural heritage in New Zealand; These may be called community languages. ..Learning languages does not focus on programmes of this nature..(p.8) //
 * The MOE's learning languages documentation (MoE 2002, p.7) actually says- **

// The Ministry has developed new Pasifika materials that are better than Tupu and Folauga // // The Ministry supports Pasifika languages that are under threat by continuing to provide language guidelines, resources and professional development for teachers (p.5 MoE Fact Sheet Dec 2010) //
 * Other inaccuracies in the documentation **
 * (Karen Sewell the Secretary of Education to Catherine Delahunty, Green MP personal communication confirmed in email to us from Catherine) **
 * The MOE confirms that the replacement materials they talk about are designed for beginner second language learners being taught by beginner teachers who themselves DO Not speak a Pasifika language!!! **


 * Only classes from Fn 1 yr 7 up are in the Learning Languages curriculum programme, primary schools yr 1-6 get nothing. There are to be no Pasifika language programmes in primary schools yrs 1-6 and no plans to introduce them. **
 * Overall it is not too strong to say the research appears to show the MoE is using spin that has half-truths and little basis in the facts and has been systematically designed to mislead Pacific families and community. This spin will be tested in the Human Rights Courts of the nation and internationally and shown up for the probable institutional racism, discrimination and linguistic genocide that current international research (Skutnab-Kangas, 2008, 2010) claims it actually is. **


 * References where material is drawn from- Full documents available on request . **

Ministry of Education( 2010, November) Unpublished Official Information Act (OIA) material released to to Ms Feeonna Wall 19.11.2010. Wellington : Ministry of Education.Ministry of Education( 2010, December) Unpublished Official Information Act (OIA) material released to to John McCaffery & Judy McFall- McCaffery, 16.12.2010. Wellington : Ministry of Education. Ministry of Education( 2008) Pasifika Education Plan, 2008-2012. Welington: Ministry of Education. Ministry of Education( 2009) Pasifika education plan, 2009-2012. Welington: Ministry of Education.

Researcher for the Coalition - John McCaffery