Teacher training: an economists’ view of the cuts

Press, 10 November 1981, Page 34

Teacher training: an economists’ view of the cuts

By N. L. MACBETH, a journalist and part-time economist for many years, now a full-time economist. Since leaving journalism three years ago he has spent much of his time studying and writing on the economics of education.

The Minister of Education (Mr Wellington) has announced a reduction from 1600 to 700 in the number of students to be accepted at teachers’ college for training as primary school teachers. The announcement produced predictable reactions from trainers and trainees: “Massive and savage cuts" — principal of Christchurch Teachers’ College; "appalling timing of the announcement” — Christchurch Teachers’ College Trainees Association. The only surprise about the announcement, indeed, is its timing: the decision could have been made (should have been made, some say) years ago.

Primary school rolls reached a peak of just over 525,000 six years ago (see

Table 1). They have since fallen to 506,600 — a decline of nearly 19,000 or 3.5 per cent.

The 1975-76 peak had been predicted many years earlier; the subsequent decline in school rolls reflects the lower birth rate since the mid-19605. The continuing decline in the birth rate virtually ensures further falls in primary school enrolments until, say, 1990 at least. In that year the number of children in primary schools in New Zealand is likely to be 425,000 to 435,000. A drop of 90,000 to 100,000 — 17 to 19 per cent — during the 15 years after peak enrolments would require, other things being equal, a drop of 17 to 19 per cent in

the number of teachers required. There were 21,200 teachers in primary schools, State and private, in 1975 (see Table 2). A reduction to 17,500 teachers by 1990 would maintain the 1975 teacher-pupil ratio. (A more modest reduction — to 19,400 — would improve the ratio by 10 per cent.) At first sight, there is a puzzling discrepancy between the numbers entering teachers’ colleges and the employment of teachers: the quota for entry to teachers’ colleges peaked at 2400 in

1970 and has been held at 1600 for the last four years (Table 3); yet the number of teachers employed in primary schools has risen during that period from fewer than 19,000 to more than 20,000. Several factors contribute to the explanation. First, there are fewer drop-outs in teachers’ colleges (presumably because the standard of entrants has risen); and second, the turnover of teachers has been reduced.

The “retention- rate” (the reciprocal of the turnover) has been rising in recent years. According to Mr Wellington, the retention rate in primary schools rose last year from 82.7 per cent to 85.6 per cent, which represented an extra 470 teachers. No doubt the dearth of alternative employment for teachers has contributed to the higher retention rate in recent years; and the smaller number of pregnancies among women teachers must also have made a contribution.

There is already unemployment among primary school teachers, and (even discounting much of the scare talk of special pleaders) there is likely to be more unemployment of teachers next year. If a reduction over the last 10 years of one-third in the trainee quota has not been sufficient to balance the supply of teachers with the demand, will next year’s re-

duction of more than half redress the balance? Looking further ahead, how many entrants should teachers’ colleges accept to ensure enough teachers, but not too many, by 1990? Before answering that question, I would like to ask another question: are the aspirations of 900 school leavers (those who will not now be accepted for teacher training next year) more important than the responsibility of the community to secure the best available teachers for half a million school pupils? This raises another, question too seldom discussed in education circles: why not give priority to the recruitment of former teachers instead of school leavers?

The heavy wastage of teachers until recent years has created a pool of thousands of former teachers, many of whom — typically, married women whose children are now at school — would like to resume teaching. As the supply of teachers has risen in recent years, it has become increasingly difficult for these aspirants to get back into teaching.

Priority in recruiting trainees for teachers’ colleges is given to graduates (a one-year course) and then to school leavers (three-year course), rather than to retraining former teachers, many of Whom would need

no more than a one-term refresher course. The present policy maintains employment of teachers’ college staff, deprives the schools of the services of thousands of trained teachers, and costs the taxpayer perhaps ten times as much as is necessary to put one extra teacher into a school. To give former teachers priority ahead of school leavers brings about redundancies in the teachers’ colleges, and their 500 staff. Three teachers’ colleges could probably handle the training of both primary and secondary school teachers, releasing 200 or 300 staff members for university or school teaching. The redundant colleges might be closed at yearly intervals to minimise disruption of classes and teachers.

If such a drastic reduction in teacher training raises protests of disregard for the interests of the trainers of teachers, the reply might be that education administrators have shown too little regard for the children in the classrooms and too much for the maintenance of an overblown teacher training system. The day of reckoning cannot be postponed much longer. Postponement - on the ground that redundancies should be deferred until un-

employment is reduced is politically appealing, but makes no contribution to the solution of New Zealand’s pressing problems. Indeed, the need for restructuring in the fields of education provides a nice illustration of the relationships in the New Zealand economy between each sector and all the other sectors.

Education expenditure represents 14 per cent of total government expenditure, which is estimated to exceed its revenue this year by ?2 billion, or 8 per cent of Gross Domestic Product. This is the highest government deficit in New Zealand’s history — and one of the highest in all the 24 countries which comprise the Organisation for Economic Development.

It is no coincidence that New Zealand also has one of the highest rates of inflation in the 0.E.C.D., the lowest rate of growth in real G.D.P. per capita, and a chronic balance-of-payments deficit. Do those who oppose the cautious retrenchment in. education expenditure announced by Mr Wellington wish to bequeath an economy in its present state to the next generation of school children? As well as a steady influx of teachers less mature, less experienced than those who could be recruited ?

TABLE 3: TRAINING OF PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHERS

TABLE 1: PRIMARY SCHOOL ENROLMENTS Year State Private Total Increase Schools Schools per cent 000 000 per annum 1960 373.0 52.9 425.8 3.1* 1965 ; , 416.5 57.2 473.8 2.1* ' 1970 466.6 50.9 517.5 1.8* 1971 468.3 51.0. 519.3 • 0.3 1972 469,8 50.9 520.7 0.3 1973 471.2 50.7 521.9 0.2 1974 473.1 50.6 523.7 0.3 1975 474.6 50.7' ... '525.3 0.3 1976 ■ ’ 475.1 49.9 525.0 ■ ' -0.1 1977 473.6 49.3 522.9 ' -0.4 1978 " 472.1 48.9 521.0 -0.4 1979 467.6 48.4 516.0 -1.0 1980 461.0 45.6 506.6 —1.8 • Source: Department of Education, annual reports. •Average of previous five years.

TABLE 2: EMPLOYMENT OF PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHERS Year State . Private Total Increase Schools Schools percent per annum 1960 12,619 1424 14,043 1965 15441 1654 16459 3.7‘ 1970 17,135 1656 18,791 2.2* 1971 17,538 1627 19,163 2.0 1972 17,839 1660 19,490 1.7 1973 18,171 1660 19,831 1.7 1974 18,400 1686 20,086 1.3 1975 19,500 1687 21,187 5.5 1976 19,500 1839 21,339 0.7 1977 19,100 1744 20,844 -2.3 1978 19400 1910 21,110 1.3 1979 18,928 1894 20,823 -1.4 1980 18,664 1738 20,402 —2.0 ‘Average of previous five years. Source: Department of Education, annual reports.

Year Enrolment at Teachers’ Colleges of — Total Enrolment First-year Quota .r Students Actual Enrolment 1960 n.a. . n.a. 3133 1965 n.a. 2169 4109 1970 ." 2400 2470 6439 1971 2300 2313 6659 1972 2300 2340 6704 1973 2150 2137 6444 1974 2075 2047 6136 1975 2095 2057 5839 1976 2100 1987 5724 1977 1640 1532 5233 1978 1600 \ 4817 1979 1600 4508 1980 1600 , 4406 1981 1600 1982 700 Source: Department of Education, annual reports.