Week 8 Blog Post

 Until doing this paper, I hadn’t really given much thought into the origins of our education system in Aotearoa and why things are the way they are. I’d always considered education to be a traditional aspect and something that potentially didn’t keep up with the realms of an adaptive and changing society that we live in.  I suppose I just accepted it for what it was. In the last module I reflected on the colonisation of Māori and how there was an expectation by the Crown and British settlers that they would assimilate into European ways, because that was the ‘best’ way to do things. Settlers who came to Aotearoa had been heavily interpellated into a class system and wanted that system to be replicated in their new colony, including the education system. 

Our current education system is modelled on a traditional Western society, it perpetuates the concept that there is a required and desired ‘normality’. Schools reproduce “a set of universals that articulate and normalise one way of being” (Ball & Collet-Sabé, 2021, p. 6). That ‘way of being’ allows the government and wider society to retain power and control through pushing their own agendas in classrooms. While critical thinking is one of the values listed in the New Zealand Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2007), critical thinkers are not exactly conducive to the power structure of society. Every day practices within schools and classrooms interpellate tamariki over time without it seeming like massive indoctrination in one go. As Backer (2018) puts it, “interpellations are therefore small moments with big meanings” (p. 5).

It is overwhelming to sit within the education system and see genuine possibilities for change when the mountain seems so big. Simply modifying what we currently have will not be sufficient. That is not transformative, not a true counterinterpellation. However, if we as educators and change makers do start to counter-act or counter-interpellate those small moments with big meanings, then the transformation begins. While small moments of activism seem like just a drop in the bucket, it is these small moments that can change the tide. 

My three-year tenure as mathematics curriculum leader culminated in a pivotal decision point at the close of 2024: the selection of supplementary resources to support the refreshed mathematics curriculum. This process brought into sharp focus the inherent tension between my deeply held pedagogical beliefs, cultivated through ongoing postgraduate study, and the imperative for collective staff decision-making. While I championed a vision rooted in a nuanced understanding of how students learn mathematics, I recognized the crucial need to honor the diverse perspectives within our staff.

The context of this decision was significant. Our school had just completed a three-year professional learning and development (PLD) journey marked by considerable success and pedagogical transformation. My primary concern was that adopting resources aligned with a potentially simplistic, 'one-size-fits-all' Ministry approach would undermine this hard-won progress. I harbored particular reservations about commercial textbook resources for older students, fearing they would promote procedural learning over genuine conceptual understanding. My initial inclination was towards the Ministry's free resources, with a preference for the concrete manipulatives offered by Numicon for our junior learners. Beyond this, however, I struggled to see how a textbook-driven approach would foster the deep, relational understanding I valued.

The outcome of the staff meeting, the majority vote for PR1ME, triggered a profound sense of deflation. I foresaw my leadership in 2025 being consumed by the need to understand and implement PR1ME, diverting energy from the critical work of unpacking the refreshed curriculum and embedding the learning from our extensive PLD. This perceived misalignment between the school's chosen direction and my pedagogical convictions led to the difficult decision to relinquish my leadership role. This was not a rejection of collaboration, but rather a conscious choice to step aside when I fundamentally disagreed with the chosen path and believed I could not authentically lead its implementation.

Reflecting on the current academic year, my initial anxieties appear to have been validated. Observing the new mathematics leader, the implementation of the Ministry's resources, specifically the year-level-based student books, has presented challenges. While the accelerated nature and high expectations of the refreshed curriculum hold potential, the practical realities of diverse learning needs, particularly those of Tier 2 and Tier 3 students, seem to have been overlooked. The subsequent 'in-house' redistribution and return of resources underscore the difficulties encountered in applying a uniform approach.

In conclusion, this experience has served as a stark reminder of the inherent tension between advocating for deeply held pedagogical beliefs and navigating the complexities of collective decision-making within a school context. My conviction in the necessity of student-centered, conceptually-driven mathematics instruction has, in this instance, manifested as a form of activism, a refusal to endorse a direction I genuinely believe may not serve the best interests of all our akonga. The decision to decline leadership of the Ministry's supplementary resources, while personally challenging, stemmed from an ethical imperative to remain true to these beliefs. This situation underscores the intricate dynamics of leadership when individual pedagogical philosophies diverge from the chosen institutional path, forcing a critical examination of one's role and the extent to which one can, in good conscience, lead a direction they fundamentally disagree with. Ultimately, this reflection highlights the ongoing need for open dialogue and a commitment to ensuring that resource adoption aligns with pedagogical principles that prioritize equitable and effective learning outcomes for all students.

References:

Backer, D. I. (2018). Interpellation, Counter-interpellation, and Education. Critical Education, 9(12), 1-21. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.17613/M6VD6P449 

Ball, S., & Collet-Sabé, J. (2021). Against school: an epistemological critique. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2021.1947780 

Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand Curriculum. Learning Media.