6.2 Education
This remains a critical issue for most farm families, and property values drop when there isn’t a school. Problems engendered by distance and travel are a major issue, but there are many aspects of schooling which are causing concern in the mid-Rangitikei. The major rural issues are discussed below:
School role size: falling rolls are causing problems in a number of the schools in the area.
Resources fall when rolls drop. In one school there were 12 pupils, with 8 families represented, in another 26 pupils, another 70 plus. One school is teetering on the threshold - one more child and they retain a second teacher for 1998. One school had their last new entrant in April 1996 and the next one is due in December 1997.
Rural school rolls can drop because of a number of factors, including withdrawal of children for various reasons, eg size or discipline policy. As well, women who work in town may take their children there to school, and new farm owners have different family demographics.
But roll numbers do not necessarily equate with need. It was suggested, for instance, that the ratios decided by the Ministerial Review Group of 29 pupils to one teacher may be adequate for a ‘straight’ class. However, in a multilevel class in a rural school, coping with the needs and demands of children aged from 5 through to 12 or 13 is difficult.
Community functions: all primary schools still serve as the focal point of their communities. Parents stop to chat when they drop children off at school; meet each other when helping with transport for manual or sports trips, and at working bees. The one function held regularly in the rural area may be the Friday afternoon sessions when parents, and grandparents, gather for a presentation ceremony, or the end of year Christmas break up.
One principal suggested that financial difficulties in the community are reflected in the school. "You notice this at fundraising activities at school - it’s more and more difficult eg catering for school sports - 3 years ago we made $2500-3000 profit; 2 years ago $800. This year... [it] just about broke even."
A number of schools had a high decile ranking [ Resources are expended by the Ministry of Education on the basis of ranking that takes into account the socio-economic status of pupils attending a school] and this did not, according to staff and BOT members, reflect reality. No one appeared to know that this ranking can be appealed.
Principals: one travels to and from school 14000 kms a year. At AA rates of 70 c a km that is equivalent to $9000 a year. The person receives a $2,000 travel grant a year from the BOT. Getting principal release days can be difficult given the diverse range of duties principals in rural schools are expected to perform. All the rural principals are said to be stressed by the end of the year – partly due to the pressures of the job but also to professional loneliness and being the one reference point, source of information, mediation, convenient scapegoat in the area. "Ministry of Education and Education Review Office officials don’t race out but when they do come it gives us a chance to talk - it really makes a difference."
Staffing: there were many comments about the difficulties of attracting good principals and staff to rural schools, and how staff have both time and expense difficulties in getting to courses such as those run by Massey University College of Education for professional development.
"There are phenomenal costs in getting staff to Wanganui or Palmerston North... or
getting kids or staff to courses. It is expensive to travel - costs more than the course.
The advisors’ courses cost too much and they’re not suited to our [educational] climate. [ these courses cover a range of services- curriculum, reading recovery, management, support. Numbers of advisors in this region have dropped since 1990] Often have a lot of head knowledge and no practical - better to ask someone who’s been successful in our own area."
School transport: school buses are considered the life blood of a community. Since the Ministry of Education tendered out the process schools have sought a variety of options. One school in this area has its own bus, and ‘the district’ owns the bus in another area. Owners contribute to the costs on a ratio basis, and most choose to continue payments after their children have left the school, for if there is no bus they will not attract workers with families to their stations. One of the first questions asked at an interview they suggest is: "where’s the nearest school and how do the children get there?"
One of the real issues is the safety of the buses, with schools juggling concerns about safety with recognition of tender difficulties; "do we blow the whistle on safety issues because if we do we may be left without a bus?" Such is the vulnerability of some schools that no bus means insufficient numbers which could mean closure.
Parents still have to drive considerable distances to meet up with school buses in many areas, and there was little praise for regulations regarding walking, biking, private conveyancing allowances. Any changes in routines, such as sports days or sickness, can cause strife as regular drivers, sometimes parents on a voluntary basis, have to shuffle pickup times, children and temporary arrangements.
Manual training can be a problem. "We’ve had to hire a bus otherwise two cars a week have to go in - we do get a subsidy from the government but it’s still going to cost us an extra $2000 a year so that’s... another penalty because we live out here."
Special needs: several teachers talked about the lack of resources in rural schools to enable them to deal with children with difficulties. There are concerns "with kids who are not well clothed, whose self esteem is low. They don’t have any stationery money, no books, not enough food"; and "There are difficulties in reconciling equity cases in a small school - when 2 children can take so much of a teachers time... all children have the right to an equitable education. Parents have the responsibility in partnership - [but] they don’t think about it - they’re selfish in their own existence."
Family/school relationships: these can be tense. One principal suggested that the tensions evident in many farm families are apparent in the school, both financial and social. "The kids feel the emotional pressures on their parents - there’s a sense of abandonment. Children can reflect the hard edges and hurt after the holidays." One telling comment was made to a principal by a BOT member: "Do not speak to me of anything that I can’t address. I have to live here for the next 20 years".
Boards of Trustees: Tomorrows Schools was said to be the worst thing that happened to rural schools. Several people commented on the responsibilities placed on the small numbers of people who are eligible and willing to stand for the BOT. Other comments about BOTs included lack of requisite skills, time and energy, conservatism, power relationship problems and divisiveness.
One person raised the notion of asking principals of five schools to drop their salaries by $5000 so a person could be employed one day a week to take up the administrative load.
Another area of real concern was that of bureaucratic requirements. Rural BOT often do not have a comprehensive skills base. BOT members say they get caught in having to pay, for example, an accountant to look at a set of books which cannot be submitted unless this step is taken. They have to pay computer companies such as the Wanganui Service Centre, who, it was suggested, know exactly what they are doing. This comment is deliberately double edged. They "know what they are doing but they also know how to make money from us... the Ministry of Education and the Education Review Office worked this."
Boarding/day school: there has been a tradition for children of farm families to go to boarding school. Few in this area seemed to question this. All of the families had considered at great length which boarding school was appropriate for a particular child, and considered comparative costs. Fees for boarding schools in the wider region range from $3,000 up to $15,000 a year.
Some farm families had made the choice to send their children to Taihape College. Others have done so because they could not afford boarding school fees. Most farm families continue to send their children to boarding schools. Taihape College is the only secondary in the mid-Rangitikei, a school which has a committed staff, a limited range of courses because of numbers, funding and staffing difficulties, and a generally negative standing based on a reputation for ‘slack’ discipline, bullying and a realistic image of imbalance.
It could be argued that to take most rural based children from the area away from the only secondary school is to deprive a population of their input and energy - then and later in their teens when they continue their stay in towns, in cities, for tertiary education or training. The impact of going to boarding school at age 12 or 13 on human development and on family relationships also needs to be explored. [ no research could be found which explored this issue]
This exodus can contribute to acknowledged problems such as many of the remaining students leaving in the fifth form and people who do not want to ‘shine’ or be different from the crowd. This applies to choice of subjects as well as prowess, except in sport.
One of the reasons given for sending a child to a private school was that his special needs were not being met. Budgets for special needs were exceedingly limited, and access to specialists difficult, in terms of access, regularity, availability when needed. One parent paid $350 for a child to be seen by a child psychologist in another town because she wanted the child assessed. "No one would acknowledge the difficulties. These teachers were social friends - I couldn’t get across the fact that I wasn’t judging them as failures. They judged me as a high achiever - this is small town stuff." "The special education grant is tied into the decile rating; it has absolutely nothing to do with the special needs programme."
Another family sent their son to Huntley Preparatory School because "his needs were not being met". They were running him twice a week to Marton for help - a 45 minute drive each way. When he was transferred "he came ahead in leaps and bounds".
Post-school training: there is a need for effective publicity and coordination for training opportunities and take up rates. These are a major problem in the mid-Rangitikei. Ruapehu REAP, based in Taihape, "provides for co-ordinated educational service delivery, from pre-schools to adults in the community". REAP runs seminars, workshops, conferences, arranges speakers, courses, field days, training, and acts as a resource centre. It coordinates activities such as WISE [ Women In Self Employment]
REAP has the capacity to ‘fill in the gaps’ in the provision of educational services in this area, and could, perhaps, be better utilised if better understood by the community. One of the difficulties is the lack of awareness of the need for flexibility in searching for jobs, the need for lateral thinking, and need for retraining. This means that the potential of many people is not being realised - young, middle aged, older people; farmers, especially those who are somewhat diffident about their lack of tertiary education, and people who feel ‘stuck’ who could, with a ‘little push’ be encouraged to take courses. Technological opportunities are scarcely being tapped.
No one mentioned the Agricultural ITO [ the national standards-setting body for the agriculture industry] though this has the potential to be involved in training, retraining and upskilling of farmers and members of their families eg educating present farmers in business methods, in schemes to enable farmers to look at options for other employment. The only training or education discussed by farmers was the existence of the focus farms, the agricultural courses at Massey or Lincoln and the farm discussion groups, which, it was suggested, prevent ‘tunnel vision’.
Nor did people seem to know about Skill Start, a financial incentive available to farmer trainers who take on a new cadet.
In February there were only 9 people enrolled in an individual based training programme coordinated by a person contracted to Wanganui Economic Development Corporation [WEDCO] though the numbers had lifted by May. The clients for this training have been registered for a period of time for the unemployment benefit.
Contact for Enquiries
Rural Affairs Coordinator
Sector Performance Policy
MAF Policy
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 4 894 0675
Fax: +64 4 4 894 0745
Contact this person
