Is there a match between the Education Review Office's identification of concerns and the Ministry of Education's Statutory Intervention in schools on Supplementary Review in specific case studies?
Manion, C. (2008). Is there a match between the Education Review Office’s identification of concerns and the Ministry of Education’s Statutory Intervention in schools on Supplementary Review in specific case studies? (Thesis, Master of Education (MEd)). The University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10289/2464
Permanent Research Commons link: https://hdl.handle.net/10289/2464
Abstract In New Zealand's compulsory education sector quality assurance is undertaken by the Education Review Office (ERO). When a school is found to be less effective than is acceptable through the triennial review process, ERO may return to review that school within six or twelve months. This Supplementary Review is identified to the Ministry of Education (MOE) which has several levels of intervention at its disposal which can be employed singularly or in concert to improve the school. Despite the support and interventions funded and/or managed by MOE, some schools have consecutive Supplementary Reviews and some remain under Statutory Intervention for several years. Commonalities among these schools that repeatedly or consistently present as 'at risk' may indicate a need for greater or different support or intervention. Self managing schools, while effective for many schools, may not be a workable and sustainable proposition for others. This may well be particularly true for those schools identified as 'at risk'. This paper considers ERO's process to identify schools 'at risk' and subsequent interventions employed by MOE to support the Principal and Board of Trustees in addressing improvements required within the school. Statistics and document analysis were used to extract data from documents with findings presented as a series of tables. It seeks a match between what is identified by ERO and the Statutory Intervention engaged by MOE. It explores the commonalities of schools under Statutory Intervention and on Supplementary Review. Practice in other countries is also considered in an effort to understand and contextualise the ideas and beliefs that support these approaches. While there is evidence ERO identifies teacher and Principal performance as major areas of concern, lead issues for Statutory Interventions in the same schools focus on the performance of the Board of Trustees as those with the responsibility of governing the school. The focus on governance to improve school performance is not working for some schools, more or different support may be necessary to effect positive change. The balance between capacity building, incentives and accountability for all involved in schools with Statutory Interventions, appears necessary for those with the capacity to improve.
The University of Waikato
All items in Research Commons are provided for private study and research purposes and are protected by copyright with all rights reserved unless otherwise indicated.
- Masters Degree Theses