How do we deal with the 25% of students who are not learning?

How do we deal with the highest achieving students who require constant challenge and many of whom are capable of doing even better?

How do we deal with the mid-range students who do OK but from whom we actually need to expect much more?

How do we deal with the mid-range students who are failing when they could be passing because we do not expect enough of them?

Regardless of how each of these questions is put, the answer to each of them is the same - improve the quality of teaching. For a long time now the answer to these questions has focused on students and their backgrounds. It is time to shift the focus away from students and put it on to the quality of teaching. That is the only way forward if New Zealand schooling is to take a step change into the future. Without that step change in schooling we will not get the step change in our economy which is essential if more New Zealanders are to enjoy the fruits of prosperity.

There is now widespread agreement across the education sector that of all the factors that contribute to whether a child learns or not, the quality of the teacher is pre-eminent. The teacher unions will use this wisdom to justify pay increases for all teachers, despite something we already know - teacher quality varies between schools and, where the Principal is not doing the job properly, within schools. There is a harsh reality to all of those and the most vulnerable to teaching of a variable standard are those two groups of midrange students that I identified earlier. One or two years of bad teaching is all it takes to put these children behind to an extent that they never catch up. And that remains the experience of too many youngsters in the schooling system.

When are we going to start measuring teacher performance against how well students learn? And when will pay rates follow teacher performance rather than length in the job? Some of the best teaching in New Zealand schools is coming from young and relatively inexperienced (in terms of years in the job) teachers. And they are the least well paid teachers in the system. Judging the performance of teachers against how well students learn would require a quantum leap forward in understanding what constitutes the type of teaching that makes youngsters learn. I sometimes despair that this country will never be ready to take that step. Of course the teacher unions have not wanted to have this discussion because to do so would be to draw attention to something we already instinctively know - that some teachers are more successful at making students learn than others.

It is easy to determine whether a teacher is making students learn. Regular assessment does that. National Standards will assist that judgement in the primary school system, if they are implemented effectively. The challenge for principals is to be able to identify the qualities to be looked for in a person which would suggest the ability to make students learn. The same challenge exists for those charged with the responsibility of selecting applicants for teacher training in the first place. Principals I respect frequently tell me that they are not satisfied with many of those seeking employment out of teacher training programmes. I worry that the qualities needed to successfully complete a teacher training course are not necessarily the qualities that are indicative of being able to make students learn.