New Zealand Teachers’ Council – by the teachers for the teachers?

By Max Christophersen

Introduction
The current governance structure of the New Zealand Teachers’ Council does not enable the teaching profession of New Zealand to become a true self governing profession. The only way forward is the removal of the crown owned entity status to that of a body corporate.

A reduction in the number of ministerial appointees on the council and the inclusion of a teacher training representative and Maori immersion representative is argued for. 

The body corporate would allow true elective representation; reduce compliance costs and remove the explicit threat of adverse ministerial intervention of future governments. 

Current Governance Structure
The NZTC is a crown owned entity that is wholly paid for by the 80,000 teachers of this country and as a crown owned entity can be directed by the Minister of Education to do anything he/she wants. 

Ministerial appointments, including the chair, make up five of the 11 member council with one each from the NZEI and PPTA respectively, and four “elected” members from each of four sectors principals, secondary, primary and early childhood. Ministerial appointees would have a permanent voting majority if the two teacher union representatives’ were not present.  

The “elected” teacher representatives on NZTC are in fact appointed by the Minister to the teachers’ council, a crown owned entity, after an election held by the NZEI, PPTA, early childhood and principals association to select the nominee. These “appointees” to crown owned entity, The Teacher’s Council, are prevented by law from speaking out publicly should they disagree with the Teacher’s Council policy or decisions.

Outrageous as it is that the elections for these four representatives are held, costing in excess of $250,000, and yet a Minister is able to ignore the result and simply appoint anyone whom he/she feels would do.  Waste of money aside unless all teacher representatives can be truly elected like those in a body corporate and have the ability to act as true representatives, teachers are exposed to future dangerous manipulation at a whim.

The crown owned entity status of the Teachers Council also means practicing teachers who serve on the NZTC cannot received any financial benefit for their long hours of work on our behalf. State employees working in a crown entity cannot receive payments, as the other Teacher Council representatives do, because that would mean they are “double dipping”. This does not apply to the five ministerial appointments.  Hardly a level playing field when a teacher must do their professional best by setting lessons and get paid nothing for long hours of reading of Teachers’ Council documents and spending days in meetings in Wellington and be paid nothing extra. 

In addition, to stand for election a teachers’ representative has to go cap in hand for their BOT’s permission.

Benefits of payment to Teacher’s Council representatives in the last quarterly report showed all the ministerial appointees generally earned greater sums than teachers. It is easier for non-teachers to get to council meetings and they are able to keep the money paid to them as well as other remuneration because they are not double dipping as government employees. 
Who Benefits from the Crown Owned entity Status of Teachers Council?
For any government the NZTC represents a cheap alternative to state intervention for policing teachers and controlling both their individual quality and their professional behaviour – policing is self funding through teacher registration fees.  Employees police themselves for free.  Page six of the NZTC Annual report makes it clear who the Teachers council works for as a crown owned entity when it states:

 “The Government’s overarching educational goals are…
Given the importance of the early childhood and schooling sectors to the theme of Families – young and old, the council has paid particular attention to this theme.”

Teachers’ registration fees can be used to fund educational research in the name of “professional leadership” which the Government does not have to pay for.  According to the NZTC annual report to June 2007, 7.5 million dollars of teachers’ funds have been placed on term deposit.  It would be interesting to know how many millions have been allocated by the council for “professional leadership projects”.   Again quoting the 2007 annual report of the Teachers Council page four:

“The Council has embarked on a number of projects aimed to promote and strengthen the profession.  These projects contribute significantly to the Government’s priorities of providing effective teaching for all learners and developing quality providers.”

The employer gets the employee to work out how they can be more productive for free – a neat trick which also provides work for ivory tower educationalists to implement their latest brainwaves at the expense of teachers’ personal wellbeing. 

Money is also spent by the New Zealand Teachers Council in ensuring that the Colleges of Education and other providers are vetted as in an ERO like process.

 Why on earth is teachers’ money being utilised in such a way surely this is a government responsibility?

Why not scrap the New Zealand Teachers Council?
The direct benefits accrued by holding teacher registration over and above the fact that you need a current registration to legally teach are:

• Teachers who are not of good character and fit to teach can be permanently removed from the system never to sully the reputation or cause more trouble for their colleagues again.
• The Complaints Assessment Committees of the NZTC is a cheaper alternative than court action for teachers in trouble.
• Your actions may be vindicated by people who are members of your profession and who understand the circumstances that brought you to them.
• As a registered teacher you get a dollar off books bought through Whitcoulls (a benefit not widely advertised).

However, given the tiny percentages of teachers who do engage in criminal and dubious behaviours and/or get into trouble with their communities, the direct benefits to teachers are vastly outweighed by those that fall to the employer – the Government.

Conclusion
In essence the issue with New Zealand TC in its current form boils down to the issue of no taxation without representation.  Professionalism means having unfettered charge of the affairs of one’s profession and teachers being acknowledged as being the fit and proper persons to regulate their own.  This is not currently the case. 

While it is true that the Government is a major stakeholder in education and should have a say it should not by means of a crown owned entity structure have almost total control over something it does not pay for.

Secondary Teachers as a whole must push through PPTA for change as soon as possible because given the rate of spending it will not be very long before registration fees will rise dramatically.

Education and politics | Comments (3)