Two weeks ago we heard about the deletion of kupu Māori in junior readers. What is next? And where will it lead?
The publication of the Aotearoa Educators Collective (AEC) Substack piece, ‘At The Marae,’ posed some questions, and Aotearoa responded, reeling in shock at the deletion of te reo Māori and the threat of a whitewash of curriculum resources: ‘as we walk backwards into the sixties and seventies with every stroke of the twink.’ [1]
So now is a good time to pause for a moment, before Minister Stanford’s refreshed ‘knowledge-rich curriculum’ ‘surges’ too far, at too much ‘pace,’ and continue to ask questions.
Questions like:
Who will benefit from proposed changes to curriculum and assessment?
What influences and inspires the National-led government's vision and philosophy of education reform?
Is Aotearoa's educational achievement really as dire as it has been made out to be – compared to similar countries?
What classroom-based, longitudinal, and widespread evidence is there to justify recent and proposed curriculum changes?
Why have experienced teachers and educational leaders been disempowered and told what and how to teach?
Let’s start by excavating some of the policy roots for recent reforms.
Whose vision is driving current educational reforms, and whose knowledge will be contained within its pages?
Stanford’s visit to Florida in June sheds some light on this question. The Minister attended the Core Knowledge Foundation’s annual conference and took part in a panel discussion hosted by Robert Pondiscio titled, ‘No Boundaries, Just Possibilities: A Worldwide Call to Action for Knowledge Building in Education’ [2]. Other members of the panel were Dr. E.D. Hirsch Jr., Sir Nick Gibb, former Minister of State for Schools in England, and Paul Givan, Minister of Education in Northern Ireland. Also speaking at the conference was Dr. Nathaniel Swain, whose name may be familiar to school leaders as he is the keynote speaker for the Ministry of Education’s ‘Curriculum Roadshow’ next term.
It is important to explore the background and beliefs of these key players:
E.D. Hirsch is an American literary critic and educator best known for developing the concept of Cultural Literacy [3], which argues that shared background knowledge is essential for effective communication and learning. He founded the Core Knowledge Foundation to promote a content-rich curriculum in schools, influencing education debates in the U.S. and internationally. Hirsch argues that knowledge-building will equalise opportunity for all children and that progressive education has failed disadvantaged students by denying them the specific knowledge required for academic success and upward mobility. However, his Core Knowledge Sequence has been criticised for its Eurocentric focus, prioritising Western history and literature, and inadequately representing marginalised cultures. [4] Hirsch also strongly supports the Science of Reading, particularly the evidence on systematic phonics as essential for early literacy.
Robert Pondiscio is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), where he focuses on K-12 education, curriculum, teaching, and school choice. The AEI is a conservative think tank based in Washington, D.C., that conducts research on a wide range of public policy issues. AEI is one of the most influential conservative think tanks in the United States. It is particularly associated with neoconservatism and advocates for policies such as limited government, private enterprise, and a strong national defense.
Pondiscio argues that the curriculum’s purpose is to catalogue the “knowledge assumed by literate speakers and writers.” He posits that there is a “language of privilege” in America, and that for students to succeed, they need to acquire the “culture of those who are in power.” [5]
Nick Gibb is a British Conservative politician who served as the UK’s Schools Minister for much of the 2010s and early 2020s. He is best known for championing a “knowledge-rich” curriculum, phonics-based reading instruction, and traditional approaches to teaching, drawing heavily on the ideas of Hirsch. While praised by supporters for raising academic standards, he has also faced criticism for resisting calls to diversify or decolonise the curriculum. In a July 2021 speech, Gibb argued that children—including those from ethnic minorities—should learn the work of the “dead white men.” He stated that a “knowledge-rich” curriculum taught well is “inclusive and diverse” and opposed tailoring education to any particular group. [6]
Paul Givan is a politician from the right-wing Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) in Northern Ireland. He has served as Education Minister since February 2024, with a focus on structural and curriculum reform. During the conference panel discussion, the audience heard how Givan’s reforms are tracking about a year behind New Zealand, and Stanford quipped that Givan’s ten-point plan was based on her six-point plan for change.
It is becoming clear that Stanford sees these men, particularly Gibb and Hirsch as her mentors and she is operating using their playbook. It was interesting to hear her describe her journey towards policy change and her discovery of Hirsch’s work: a mirror image of Gibb’s trajectory, even to the extent that when they first discovered Hirsch’s book, The Schools We Need and Why We Don’t Have Them [7], they both read it at the beach—albeit almost two decades and two hemispheres apart.
Once you start researching and listening to Hirsch, Pondiscio, and Gibb, you begin to see and hear their terminology and ideology closer to home: knowledge-rich, consistent, core knowledge, ‘Matthew Effect,’ Science of Learning, structure, sequenced, common reference points…
PISA Shock
The justification for such drastic reshaping of education comes from the induced, heightened anxiety about student achievement. Speaking on Q and A last month, Welby Ings made a wise observation about the state of education in Aotearoa: “When we allow anxiety to rise, we will accept, or we will find fundamentalist answers to complicated problems.” [8] And this is what we have: a reductionist, one-size-fits-all solution, *aka* The Science of Learning and Structured Literacy.
Politicians often frame a “literacy crisis,” or other achievement crisis, because it serves political, ideological, and policy purposes. A crisis creates urgency, which justifies reforms, interventions, and major spending changes. Some of Stanford’s current favorite words appear to be ‘surge’ and ‘at pace’; she spoke of our education system ‘bordering on crisis’ and cited decades of declining achievement—particularly low PISA standings and falling literacy and numeracy rates. A crisis gives politicians a platform to be seen as ‘fixers’ and defenders of children’s futures.
However, let’s examine the recent PISA results. In the panel discussion in Florida, Stanford speaks of New Zealand’s literacy results tumbling over the past decade: “We used to be in the top ten in the world”…
So where are we now? Tenth!
At a score of 501 in 2022, we sit well above the OECD average of 475.6. We are the fifth non-Asian country, and we are ahead of countries with well-established Structured Literacy approaches such as Australia and Gibb’s UK. We even outrank Finland by 11 points. It isn’t perfect, of course, and our significant equity gap is nothing to be proud of, but our overall score is hardly a crisis.
One size DOES NOT fit all.
Many education leaders and literacy experts here and internationally have criticised the simplistic, one-size-fits-all approaches, and binary arguments promoted by Science of Learning and Structured Literacy experts. There are too many to describe here, but for further explanations, see the work of people such as Professor Stuart McNaughton, Dr. Liz Chamberlain, Dr. Rae Si’ilata, Dr. Paul Thomas, Dr. Robin Macpherson, Dr. Jeffrey Bowers, Professor Guy Claxton, and Associate Professor Rebecca Jesson. Or check out other Aotearoa Educators Collective Substack articles on the topic, including those by Dr. Sarah Aiono, Lynda Knight, and Michele Whiting.
The uniqueness of the child must guide our work: all will need different strategies, resources, and methods for engagement. Cultural alignment is a key factor. Skilled, diagnostic assessment informs teachers’ decisions about approaches, methods, and resources. Local context shapes curriculum delivery and content.
Intellectual Armour to Engage with the Sector
Does Stanford agree with Gibb when he says: “Hirsch’s work provides an unrivalled intellectual armoury with which reformers can equip themselves prior to engaging with the education establishment” ? [9]
Can the education establishment of Aotearoa find the chinks in the Core Knowledge armour? Will Te Tiriti o Waitangi be the undoing of the armour?
The AEC hosted a Live Discussion (18/8/25) with Bruce Jepsen, who leads Te Akatea, the national association of Māori school principals, Jepsen’s words resonated:
“Recolonisation is apparent in the emerging curriculum – in the stuff that we don't know because we are not involved in creating it. The changes that we are seeing in education policy are very disturbing. We notice that the Science of Learning replaces Te Tiriti o Waitangi…Shakespeare replaces Tangata Whenua.”
In the words of AEC co-host Claire Amos:
“If we want to attain substantive, equitable outcomes, we have to lean more into localised curriculum, te reo, tikanga, and mātauranga Māori.”
To find out more about the political and private business influences shaping curriculum and pedagogy in the United States, tune in to hear Associate Professor Elena Aydarova talk about: What is Behind the Science of Reading on 27 August. Details at: https://aecnz.substack.com/p/what-is-behind-the-science-of-reading
References:
[1] https://aecnz.substack.com/p/at-the-marae
[3] Hirsch, E. D., Jr. Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1987.
[4] Willinsky, John. Learning to Divide the World: Education at Empire’s End. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998.
[4] Using a Curriculum Rich in Arts, History, and Science Led to Big Reading Improvements
[5] https://www.coreknowledge.org/2017/07/
[6] Schools minister rebuffs calls to decolonise English curriculum | Race in education | The Guardian.
[7] Hirsch, E. D., Jr. The schools we need and why we don't have them. Doubleday. 1996.
[8] Top teacher: Why standardised testing, streaming doesn't work
[9] Gibb. R. How E. D. Hirsch Came to Shape UK Government Policy. In D. Didau (Ed.), Knowledge and the curriculum: A collection of essays (pp. 11–18). Policy Exchange. 2021
Oh the irony of the term "knowledge building". This is knowledge building - https://hail.to/netnz/publication/zcCkpW7