Science curriculum that ‘shocked’ teachers by skipping physics, biology shelved ahead of new government

Implementation of a controversial new science curriculum that sparked outrage over its lack of any mention of physics, chemistry or biology has stalled – to both the delight and disappointment of educators.

Consultation on
he draft of a new science curriculum, which caused an uproar when an early version was leaked, has been put on hold for a second time, with the Department for Education waiting to “engage” with the new government before it is sent out.

The National Party has waded into the education debate on the campaign trail, promising to “rewrite” New Zealand’s school curriculum, meaning the controversial proposal may never see the light of day.

Principals they talked to Herald said teachers are frustrated by the lack of security but are pleased that there is an opportunity to make improvements or start over.

A “quick draft” of the previous government’s new science curriculum was sent to several teachers for feedback in July, ahead of its wider release for consultation scheduled for August, but was leaked by concerned educators.

The draft contained no mention of physics, chemistry or biology and stated that science would be taught in four contexts – the Earth system; biodiversity; food, energy and water; and infectious diseases.

Teachers who have seen the document said they have serious concerns. It was inconvenient and would have led to “horrendous” drops in student achievement, they said.

One of the curriculum’s authors, the director of the Wilf Malcolm Institute for Educational Research at the University of Waikato, Cathy Bunting, defended it, saying teachers would teach “the chemistry and physics you need to deal with the big problems of our time”.

In August, the Department for Education informed “senior authorities” that the draft science curriculum would instead be put out for consultation in October, saying it wanted to “ensure that the next draft accounts for the concerns raised so far”.

The ministry said it would release the arts and technology curriculum designs at the same time.

This month, the Ministry of Herald release was again delayed as staff waited “Engage with future government before releasing updated drafts of revamped science, technology and arts learning areas”.

St Cuthbert’s College principal Justin Mahon said the delay in the consultation was a positive move as New Zealand education was in a “serious situation” at the moment and the next government should make scrapping the standard a priority.

“It’s actually really urgent, middle school teachers need security,” she said.

She said this was particularly frustrating for teachers in subjects such as science, which have to be taught very systematically.

“It takes a lot of planning for this, and then you have to have time to make sure teachers have the training and support to implement these changes properly,” Mahon said.

“So this is a matter of extreme urgency because you cannot have cohorts of young people who are not prepared to compete in the STEM world. New Zealand cannot afford to be left behind.”

She said it was entirely possible that the new government would decide to scrap the current proposal and believed that starting afresh would ensure the best outcome for students.

“Teachers always put the needs of their students first. They are very good at spinning and preparing, but they want to prepare and deliver a curriculum that is robust and rigorous and it is very difficult for them, as professionals, to be asked or expected to teach something that is not.”

New Zealand Minority Directors president Vaughan Cuyo, who is also New Zealand Minority Directors president, said he thought it would be “unwise” to rush the consultation now. He hoped that work could continue in earnest once a government was formed.

He admitted that science teachers across the country were “frustrated”. While sorting it out was a pressing issue, it was not urgent because it was not due to be implemented until 2027, he said.

“There are frustrations, but that’s because of the way the process has played out so far in terms of who has the loudest voice.” There is discontent and that is why I think it is very reasonable to leave it for now – wait for the government to be formed, see what direction the new minister, whoever he is, wants to take in this regard. And it might not happen before Christmas.

As for the new government’s complete removal of the revamped curriculum, Cuyo said that would be “problematic” and “a waste of taxpayer money”.

He believed that the direction of travel would change, but the current work could be built upon.

A spokesman for the National Party said they could not comment while coalition talks continued.

In July, Science Educators Association president Doug Walker said he was shocked when he saw a draft copy of the new science curriculum.

“Certainly in its current state I would be extremely concerned about this being our governing document as educators in Aotearoa. The lack of physics, chemistry, earth and space science, I was very surprised by this.

New Zealand Institute of Physics education board chairman David Housden said physics teachers were not happy either.

“We were shocked. I think physics and chemistry are fundamental sciences, and we would expect to find a broad curriculum with elements from space all the way down to the smallest particles.”

Amy Wiggins is an Oakland reporter who covers education. She joined the Herald in 2017 and has been working as a journalist for 12 years.