Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:662;Page:10748] 
7. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Does she stand by her statement in regard to national standards that “There will be no concessions there will be no trial period.”? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Yes and I also stand by the next part of that quote: “Parents want National Standards and they are going to get them from next year. There will be constant evaluation the tenders are just being let and if adjustments need to be made then that will happen.” 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Does she agree with the statement that “the trials are an important step that allow standards and internal assessment resources to be road-tested with actual students before being implemented”? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: From memory that quote comes from the New Zealand Council for Educational Research’s submission as part of the consultation on national standards last year. It made three main points. Two of them we totally agreed with. In fact the council agreed totally with the national standards and the way in which they are being implemented and it was very complimentary. The third point related to the timing of the implementation. Its recommendation was that we have a national road test for 12 months. As I say that was one submission; 11000 submissions were made during the consultation period. I think that our agreement on two areas out of three was not bad. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Was the Minister aware that the statement I just quoted came not from the New Zealand Council for Educational Research but from last week’s edition of her  
Education Gazette  
on how to develop quality standards? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: As I stated in my previous answer from recollection that quote was indeed part of the New Zealand Council for Educational Research’s submission during the consultation period last year. That was its recommendation. I am on record as saying that we are happy to have this year with the standards as a bedding-in year. I think that whether one describes it as a bedding-in year or a road test they are pretty close. I think that it is very good to have a research organisation like the New Zealand Council for Educational Research onside with national standards. 
Colin King 
: Why did the Government not have a trial period for national standards? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: This Government was elected with a very clear mandate from parents to introduce national standards to ensure that their children were being assessed against nationally consistent benchmarks and to ensure that parents received reports in plain language about their child’s progress. I have seen all sorts of suggestions for trials—for example one suggestion would involve a 5-year trial of the standards. I can put it no better than one parent who attended one of the national standards meetings around the country who said: “Why should my children have to wait any longer?”. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Why does her Ministry of Education under her direction consider it vital to trial minor changes to the National Certificate of Education Achievement (NCEA) but not vital to trial national standards? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: There is such a difference between NCEA and national standards. NCEA has been in schools since early in the 2000s and there are very high stakes for students because it represents national qualifications. In NCEA we have a consistent process of improvement. That is exactly what I have said will be in place for national standards. We will constantly improve them because they are not about systems; they are about kids and their educational success. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Why is it vital to trial minor changes to NCEA but not vital to trial her new national standards? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: I have just answered that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the member feels that his question was not answered to his satisfaction he is entitled to use a further supplementary question to ask the same question again. I guess that if the Minister says that she has answered the question then that is a reasonable answer. Members can make their judgments about the adequacy of the previous answer.