Search

In recent years, literacy achievement among school-aged students has received growing attention in Aotearoa New Zealand. Particular focus has been paid to reports of declining literacy levels over the past decade. In both the academic literature and popular press, a myriad of reasons have been proffered for this decline; however, the evidence base on which some of these claims are based is not as robust as often is implied. Given the number of literacy-focused policy initiatives currently being developed in Aotearoa New Zealand and the critical importance of young people developing strong literacy skills, this paper explores what evidence exists to support (or challenge) some of the claims most commonly made about literacy achievement in New Zealand. It also offers two further claims that are not frequently mentioned in research or policy discussion of literacy but none-the-less have a strong evidence base behind them to suggest they are impacting current literacy levels in Aotearoa New Zealand.

This article seeks to explain how Aotearoa New Zealand moved from a consensus that the New Zealand Curriculum (NZC) should grant a high degree of autonomy to teachers, to an emerging view that it ought to be more prescriptive about content. To do this, it takes an assemblage approach to policy analysis, understanding policies as constantly evolving 'bundles' of divergent components temporarily woven together. The article first explores the complex intermingling of Third Way priorities, knowledge economy discourses, educational progressivism and narratives of 'harmonious' biculturalism which constitute the 2007 NZC. It then explores the sustained critique of the NZC from the 2015 parliamentary petition calling for compulsory teaching of the New Zealand Wars, up to the government's 2021 'curriculum refresh' announcement. It is argued that this 'refresh' moves to reassemble the NZC so that it accommodates a series of demands made of it in recent years, including demands the curriculum take a more active role in redressing the impact of colonisation, and demands from both business-aligned groups and academics that the curriculum become more 'knowledge-led'.

The last 30 years have witnessed a global 'curricular turn', with curricula increasingly moving from specifying particular content to specifying broad, skill-based 'learning objectives'. This paper explores the implications of this curricular turn through a critical assessment of the current state of secondary school English in Aotearoa New Zealand. This is achieved through a critical discourse analysis of key curricular and assessment documents and a series of semi-structured interviews with English teachers. Biesta's concept of 'learnification', which captures how contemporary schooling can focus on learning in a way which can obscure important questions of what students are learning and why, is used as a lens through which to analyse this data. The paper argues that secondary school English in New Zealand is highly 'learnified', that is, both official documents and teachers are concerned above all else with ensuring 'learning' is happening and 'learning objectives' are being met, rather than with bigger questions of purpose. This problematically decreases the opportunity for what Biesta calls a 'pedagogy of interruption': the opportunity for curricular encounters to challenge and extend students' horizons.