Class quotas elude Govt

Press, 12 September 1987, Page 3

Class quotas elude Govt

The Government is only one-third of the way to meeting its promise of a 1:20 teacher ratio in junior schools, but no increase in teachers college quotas has been made, according to Education Department briefing papers. In 1984 and again this year, the Government promised to meet the 1:20 target in junior classes. It has until the 1990 election to fulfil its pledge. Since 1984, the Government has approved 860 teacher equivalents towards meeting this target, but another 1570 are needed.

“This additional staffing cannot be met from the community pool of teachers.”

"No provision has been made since 1984 to increase teachers college quotas to ensure that the required number of teachers will be available from teachers colleges to implement 1:20,” the briefing papers said. The department has called for all teachertraining quotas to be fixed up to five years in advance to ensure a consistent supply and demand and to minimise the likelihood of shortages. Teacher-training quotas now require annual ap-

proval by the Ministers of Education and Finance. The department also said that the Government was failing in its aim to attract a wide crosssection of teacher trainees.

“It seems unlikely that substantial progress will be made while the majority of teachers’ college students receive the basic tertiary student support” The department was preparing a paper on a new allowance scheme based solely on recruitment difficulties rather than personal circumstances.

It warned, however, that the primary and early childhood sectors would probably denounce the new scheme as it provided no new financial assistance for these groups, except for Maoris and Pacific Islanders.

The Post-primary Teachers’ Association was also likely to criticise the scheme. Although the new allowance scheme would benefit the secondary area, only trainees in certain subjects would beeligible. The department recognised that this would be seen by the P.P.T.A. as the first step towards differential salaries, which it opposes.