Stanford Erica; Tinetti JanERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays): Thank you Madam Chair. I want to ask the Minister of Education about the science curriculum—the leaked draft science curriculum. I asked her in the Chamber a little while ago why it didn't include chemistry biology and physics and her answer was: The member is wrong; the final curriculum will include chemistry physics biology and other core science topics. That is not in question." I just want to get the Minister to elaborate on that. Does that mean that those topics will be as they are at the moment? So you do physics you do biology and you do chemistry and within each of those disciplines you learn many things—I'm sure; I never did them so who knows? But the point is that I would like the Minister to just let us know whether or not the draft curriculum that we've seen is not going to be the final curriculum and that actually the final curriculum will include physics chemistry and biology as stand-alone subjects that young learners will get scaffolder learning through?Hon JAN TINETTI (Minister of Education): Firstly it wasn't the draft curriculum; it's called a fast draft. It's almost a draft of thinking. It's a way that a lot of different places will put out thinking to start with to see whether it's going to resonate with the sector or not. The draft curriculum is scheduled to be released later this year but I also want to make sure that we're getting that right as well—and clearly there was some feedback.But can I just go back to what the member was saying. There was almost a thought there that nothing had to change and that's not what the evidence shows us. The New Zealand Council for Educational Research 2019 analysis for the Ministry of Education shows that in the current curriculum science concepts are unclear and it is hard to see how learning would deepen. The OECD 2015 report: 15-year-olds have low awareness of science concepts associated with climate change and sustainability. The National Monitoring Study of Student Achievement data shows that achievement in science drops from years 4 to year 8 where only 20 percent of students achieve at or above curriculum expectations. Otago NCEA data 2023: science pathways through senior secondary show that the success rates for those who do sciences year 12 to 13 are low and are dropping. That tells me that there needs to be work done on the curriculum and that we can't have it that we're just keeping the curriculum in its form at the moment. In fact every science teacher that I have spoken to and every scientist that I have spoken to—including the Prime Minister's Chief Science Adviser—have all told me that we can't just expect to keep the same because we are not going to have and produce the science expertise that we need in this country.Indeed the final science curriculum will include chemistry physics biology and other core science topics. That is not in question. How that looks I am not going to presuppose the work that the experts in the sector are working on at this moment and are working through a new curriculum and are testing different options between themselves and looking at it to make certain that we're getting that right. They are making certain that the feedback that has come back from that first thinking is incorporated into that next step and I think that's really important and that's why we want to take the time to get it right.ERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays): Thank you Madam Chair. So in the draft that wasn't a draft could I ask the Minister of Education: what was the feedback that was received and how was it received? As she said that she's aware of the feedback and how it's been received. I'm just keen to know how it was received and what the feedback was when those core topics were stripped out and replaced with earth system biodiversity food energy water and infectious diseases.Hon JAN TINETTI (Minister of Education): I think that the member will have seen some feedback that came through in the media and that's no different to what I've seen. People were concerned that those core science topics might be not covered if we went too far in one area of looking at context only and the context. But the context is important. So it's a mixture of both. And what's been received—I'm not really certain what the member's getting at; are you meaning how the ministry received it? It came through in the normal way of how it was—Erica Stanford: How was it received? Like as in what was the feedback?Hon JAN TINETTI: Just exactly what I've said—Erica Stanford: Terrible.Hon JAN TINETTI: —so exactly what I've said—no I wouldn't say that at all to that member; I would say that there was a feeling that we were probably here and we've gone too far here and we've got to find a place in the middle. That's exactly why we do the testing: to get this right. If we don't do the testing and test it out with the sector which I have seen happen so many times in education that would be one of the worst things that we could do. We are not prepared for those kids to be guinea pigs like they have in the past in many other initiatives that I have been privy to—one of those being national standards. I'm not prepared as Minister to lead that sort of environment in our education system and that's why I will make no apologies for taking a document such as the science thinking out for testing.ERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays): For all of the science teachers the heads of departments and principals that have contacted me—many many many of them who are very concerned—I have one simple question for the Minister that they're all asking: can she confirm that a student wanting to sit NCEA will be able to pick a topic called "chemistry" a topic called "biology" and a topic called "physics"?Hon JAN TINETTI (Minister of Education): The member is conflating NCEA and the curriculum. The NCEA subjects have been quite explicitly put out there to the sector for the sector to know what they are. They know what's going to be expected. They are there to see right now. So you cannot conflate the two. Yes they are interrelated and we have had that discussion in the Education Committee but to say that is going to then determine what the NCEA subjects are is not quite correct.What I will say is that we do have to make certain that our young people have the broad science knowledge that underpins good scientific experiment hypothesis and learning and that is really important which is why I understand that the ministry will use the feedback they receive from teachers to build on the draft curriculum and I expect that the basics will be more explicitly covered in the next version of that draft."