Te Manakotanga - Enrichment Evaluation Review

This is carried out four-to-five years after the previous ERO review.

Te Manakotanga - Enrichment Evaluation will be carried out where the whānau has highly effective self review, the kura is high performing and students attain high levels of achievement. ERO will provide an external evaluation that complements the internal self review of the kura. Leadership will also be considered as a contributor to the effectiveness of these kura.

ERO offers the kura whānau options for how their evaluation will be designed. Decisions are supported by a range of alternative exemplars.

This diagram sets out the options for review in the Te Manakotanga enrichment evaluation. There are 5 inital labels sitting across the top of the diagram they are 1 Focussed review, 2 Intergenerational reivew, 3 Success Models, 4 Case Study and 5 Self Review. Underneath this are three labels and information falling below this they are from left to right. Whanaungatanga - pre review, relationship, clarification, priorities, agreement, planning and onsite. Whakaaetanga - Onsite, relationship clarification, priorities, agreement and planning. Whakataunga - Onsite, relationship, clarification, agreement and reporting.  Underneath this relating to each column is from left to right 4 days, 2 weeks and 6 months. Below this is a banner labelled leadership.

Figure 18: Te Manakotanga- Enrichment Evaluation - options for reviews

Based on the option chosen, whānau can then negotiate the time frame with ERO (which will be subject to availability of ERO resources).

This type of evaluation focuses on providing information for influence and enhancement in the operation of the kura. Te Manakotanga follows a process similar to the other ERO evaluations and is informed and guided by ERO standard procedures.

ERO is aware that there is limited national information available about indigenous education. Where ERO reviews identify strong models of success in kura, it may also be possible to provide a national evaluation report that captures these successes for others, in order to share this information nationally and internationally.

Te Manakotanga - Review options

Below are some of the review options available to kura whānau.This diagram is four boxes that are from top left clockwise, Intergenerational Review - this focuses on student outcomes and provides the whanau with insight into the intergenerational journey. Focus Review - The whanau selects a kaupapa for their review that demonstrates progression and may be aligned to the previous review. Success Models - Begins with student outcomes and tracks contributory process. Case study - The whanau using self review can select a case study approach. This may be a curriculum area where students are having academic suceess. They may wish to coucs on the process used to enhance achievement. Sitting over the top of the four boxes in the centre joining them all together is Review Options.

Figure 19: Review options for Te Manakotanga evaluations

The review option selected may also influence the time taken and the timeframe. As they negotiate with the review coordinator, the whānau should be clear about what they want, for what purpose and the most likely impact it may have on the students and whānau.

Negotiating the time will also allow flexibility for the review coordinator to guide this process to best outcomes.

Throughout Te Manakotanga evaluation there are three distinct review process phases - Whanaungatanga, Whakaaetanga and Whakataunga. These are the formal stages of the process and involve interactions, communication, investigation, collection and collation, analysis, synthesis, decision‑making, recommendations and reporting.

What a Te Manakotanga Review will look likeThis diagram is a table that sets out what a Te Manakotanga review will look like. It is a table that is headed with the four following headings, Te Manakotanga review process, ERO, Te Runanga Nui (TRN), Kura Whanau.  The 9 rows below follow the headings and read as follows from left to right.  Whanaungatana pre review selection process - Senior leadership team uses the criteria for the timing of reviews, review file and report to make judgements about the the timing of the next review - (TRN) aware of review timing - Kura whanau recieve unconfirmed ERO report, initiate discussions with other parties. Formal notification - ERO sends confirmed report and schedules team and visits as appropriate - TRN aware of review timing - Kura whanau acknowledge confirmed report. Communication - ERO coordinator communicates with the kura - TRN attends as kaitaki - Kura whanau communicate with the coordinator about the review. Onsite relationships - Powhiri whakatu, review team arrives as manuhiri - TRN as kaitaki - Powhiri, whakatu, whanau as tangata whenua.  Self review, communication, clarification and priorities - ERO attends whanau hui as listener, opporutnity provided for whanau korero and evaluation plan handover, This provides clarification for the review and identifies priorities - TRN kaitaki an active member of the review team - Whanau self review hui where whanau provide information and detail pertaining to the review including the evaluation plan, timetable and arrangements for the review. The whanau can select from the options available and negotiate timeframes and work with coordinator to decide time onsite. Offsite communication - ERO communicates with whanau collecting information emailing and supporting the review to work through - TRN as kaitaki, ongoing inclusion in discussions - Whanau maintain contact in line with evaluation design priority and timeframes, keeping communication that supports the evaluation.  Whakaaetanga, evaluation design, relationships, clarification, planning and agreement - ERO team develops an evaluation design based on the self review whanau had, the evaluation plan, the timetable and any other relevant information. This includes the evaluative question. The plan is given to the whanau and the processs remains open and transparent - The kaitaki is intergeral to the developement of the evaluation design, the kaitaki works alongside and with the review team - The whanau acknowledge the evaluation design and provides information to support the review to proceed. Investigation, evidence, analysis and sythensis - The coordinator determines the onsite visit. The review team follows the direction of the evaluation design and makes modifications as appropriate, it gathers evidence and completes individual and team analysis. This is an ongoing process then the team completes the synthesis - Kaitaki works with the ERO team providing support for whanau and ERO - The whanau negotiate the onsite final visit and actively participates as part of the review process. Whakataunga, relationships, priorities and agreement - The review team talks about the process, the detail of the synthesis and makes an opportunity for whanau to comment. This allows all parties to reach agreement about the findings of the review - Kaitaki involvement as team member representing TRN and whanau - Whanau members attend hui to hear review findngs, they are encouraged to commment. The hui allows all partiees the opportunity to reach agreement about the review findings. Offsite reporting - Coordinator drafts report, ERO quality assurance process, decision on timing of next review and confirmed report sent to all parties - TRN recieves copy of confirmed report - The whanau recieve the unconfirmed report and can make comment on error of fact. It then recieves the confirmed report.