Staff Feedback Information

1. D.E.E.P.
Staff Feedback
1. What are the benefits of this concept?
a. LAG was simple not worth the time allotted to it. A well thought through and well implemented
change can work. Enthusiasm and organization would be the keys to success. Nonacademic
interests could also be developed. It could help us bring back school production. A good way to
make sure groups can get together (sport, culture).
b. We may engage some, but probably the good kits will be afraid of hard work. May be fun.
c. Is a holistic concept – brings balance. Encourages students to get involved in hobbies/interests.
Broadens their experiences. Puts in learning help where needed.
d. Opportunities for students to experience different activities/develop passions etc. Takes advantage
of teachers strengths/interests.
e. Engage kiss in things they like to do. Make extra assistance available for core subjects. Give G.A.T
experiences for some. Less LAG time. More constructive expectations in LAG.
f. Student empowerment over education – more ownership. More experiences available.
g. It provides an opportunity to extend the depth of engagement and improve the productivity of
extracurricular activities. It encourages cross-curricular activity offers an opportunity for students
from various year groups to work together - which encourages leadership and positive role
modelling within the student body. It can provide an opportunity and incentive (through
exclusion) for students who are not meeting the expected level to step it up.
h. I think that it has many good points if it is run properly and enthusiastically by all teachers. All
students need to ‘buy in’ to it too. Past elective programs ‘died’ because teachers became too
indifferent and many student truanted.
i. Good for junior students – yet to be convinced about benefits for seniors.
j. Introduces new curriculum class concepts – novel subjects – cross curricular – new ways of
achieving.
2. What are the weaknesses are there?
a. Lose advantages of 6 day time table (i.e. different classes on Fridays). Less time for subjects. Less
opportunity for pastoral car/developing rapport with LAG. Too many changes too often. You risk
apathy if change is imposed and/or comes too often. Can enthusiasm can be maintained? Could be
quite messy in terms of student movement. Do we have more than one model to refer to which
shows process and degree of success over time?
b. Extension & essentials – kids will get more out of class time – why not have extra classes so there is
more time to get through stuff. Pushing learning into less and less time means more pressure for
teachers and students and less time to explore fun stuff in the curriculum.
c. Getting staff fully on board.
d. Possible cost of activities. Availability of transport/help. Time. Number of students in activity.
e. People buying in.
f. Junior/Seniors segregated. More changes in the timetable means weaker relationships between
teachers and students – every term a new class of people.
g. If not supported (by staff or through a softly-softly approach that waves in under-performing
students) it could lose integrity and turn into a monumental waste of valuable teaching time.
h. Some classes will have high numbers and some will have low. Some students won’t do topics where
they don’t’ like the teacher. Some students will not want to do anything.

2. i. Continuity with LA for pastoral senior want more class time not less.
j. Potential for timetable chaos. Exposes fear of the new in staff. Sounds like another major
reorganization with doubtful tangible benefit.
3. Is there any way we could alter the structure of DEEP to make it more useable?
a. I think that we need more specific details to make an informed decision. Also we need a public
discussion with negative and positives canvassed. Feedback via a sheet like this is of more limited
value. Past changes have used this form of feedback which has simply been ignored by the SLT.
Unless you get staff on board you risk a degree of alienation and the felling of “it’ll all change in a
year or two anyway so there’s little point in getting too enthusiastic.”
b. Maybe have more hobbies and interests at lunch and afterschool. Or do one day for activities + LAG.
c. SPEC has some great resources for yr 7-10 for Inquiry Projects that could assist Pouako.
d. Have it timetabled to run into a lunchtime period to allow more flexible time.
e. Time period – are there going to be “short-term” choices (i.e. 10 weeks) cf “long term” choices (e.g.
daily making of sports leadership).
f. Is it necessary for each child to ‘do’ curriculum at deep time. If they are doing ok would it be
necessary?
g. Not sure
h. I can offer credits and meaningful learning opportunities to students who may not have been able
to select this subject.
i. Perhaps thinking about different structures for Junior/Senior.
j. Controlling the DEEP subject (no tiddlywinks type subjects).
k. Maybe simplier if it were just a whole day every week/fortnight.
4. What is your overall opinion of the concept?
a. Overall if it goes ahead I’ll try to help it work.
b. It sounds fun but it feels like we’re taking sports and hobbies and putting them into curriculum
time. Learning time keeps getting chopped back, but we still want the kids to achieve. Remember
most kids do want to learn and their parents want them educated.
c. Great – this is a stepping stone in our Learning Advisory Journey. It’s not another new thing but a
development of the Learning Advisory from a holistic viewpoint. Obviously needs to be a
requirement of teaching at Waihi College not a choice and needs to be monitored so all fully
engaged and involved (staff).
d. Fantastic.
e. I think that the students will really like the opportunity to learn about passion subjects. They may
be more encouraged to come to school. They may also engage more willingly in ‘catch up’ subjects.
f. Would this time be better spent on “normal” classes? What are our goals? Rote/Boring lesson suck
but they do increase our pass rates. How come E.R.O. gives 5-year cycles to the more traditional
schools and checks up on the more innovative schools more frequently? We have conflicting
messages from curriculum and NCEA/ERO.
g. I am writing to support your idea to introduce the DEEP program. Brendon and you are making a
positive mark on this school and I am very excited about the new initiatives you have put forward.
Personally I am very supportive of the idea (DEEP) and if introduced will stand alongside the
initiative if introduced ...110 percent. It is my personal opinion (I have worked in the public sector
for a long, long time) that if one is employed one follows the vision and goals of what the employer
has implemented. I struggle at times in the education system where employees appear at times to
dictate and dominate (if of a better word(s)) and so new ideas become "lost" in the struggle for
positive change because of employees not on the same "wave length" of their employer. I have seen
many changes occur at this school and I have committed for every change that has happened,
however (personally) I feel that it is evident that if it is not welcomed by at least 97 percent of the

3. staff (it falls down) and we will travel down a similar path (as seen) where resistance of employees
overrides employer outcome. It would work (trying to find a solution) if for EVERYONE regardless
of title or years’ experience had the same expectations put upon them (perhaps written and quite
specific) and if they didn’t meet the required expectations there were personally supported by
senior management to help them achieve what is expected of them. I could keep going, but my
main goal is to convey my support of change to improve student learning, It is just important that
we are all on the same page otherwise fairness goes out the door and resistance and negativity
rears its head eventually.
h. I love the idea of the DEEP programme.
i. I think that staff are apathetic because of all the changes they had over recent years with little or no
consultation. Sometimes “consultation” has been a waste of time/lip service. I believe strongly that
we should have a full staff meeting about this and it/they need to be held afterschool so there are
no time constraints.
j. Not against the idea. Has good possibilities need full thinking and discussion.
k. Overall in favour.