The Ministry of Education has required teachers to sign non-disclosure agreements.
Photo: 123RF
The Principals Federation and the primary and secondary teachers’ unions say non-disclosure agreements are creating unnecessary secrecy around crucial education changes.
They told RNZ the Education Ministry’s use of the agreements prevented people from consulting their peers about their work on ministry-convened advisory and consultation groups.
But the ministry said NDAs were standard practice and the acting president of the Secondary Principals Association, Mike Newell, said he did not think there was a problem.
Principals Federation president Leanne Otene told RNZ there was a “concerning increase” in the use of NDAs and she refused to sign one nearly two months ago.
She said it would have prevented her from consulting with NZPF members about potential changes to the school curriculum.
“I can’t represent their views, so I just become one individual expressing my opinion. That’s not consultation. That’s a sham process that allows the ministry to claim they’ve consulted with the sector when they haven’t,” she said.
“The National curriculum isn’t a state secret – it’s a public document that will affect every child in New Zealand.
“When you prevent educational leaders, principals, teachers, anyone who is on these advisory groups from consulting with their communities, you’re not protecting anything. You’re undermining democratic participation.”
Otene said she raised her concerns with the ministry and was told NDAs were required because they involved policy that was “under active consideration”.
She said the requirement suggested the ministry did not trust teachers and principals to act responsibly.
PPTA president Chris Abercrombie said he too had raised concerns about the use of NDAs with the ministry and with Education Minister Erica Stanford.
The PPTA says it has raised concerns with Education Minister Erica Stanford.
Photo: Nick Monro
Abercrombie said he did not recall the ministry using NDAs previously and the change was significant.
“It’s quite unusual to have this many people sign NDAs,” he said.
“It’s a bit of a problem because why is our national curriculum and… our education system effectively being built in secret.”
Abercrombie said the agreements prevented subject association representatives from consulting with their peers.
He said he knew some teachers who refused to sign, but others had signed reluctantly because they wanted to be involved with the development of the curriculum for their subject.
Association for the Teaching of English president Pip Tinning said she recently refused to sign an NDA for involvement in curriculum work because she did not want to be prevented from consulting with association members.
“I said I wouldn’t be signing it. I said my loyalty was to my NZATE council and my members.
“I thought it was a conflict of interest to be signing a non-disclosure agreement with the ministry when I was consulting as president of NZATE and I thought it would put me in a really untenable position,” she said.
Tinning said the ministry subsequently included her in two meetings and she was not sure what effect her refusal had had.
She said she had spoken with several teachers and former ministry staff who said they had been threatened with legal action over suspected breaches of NDAs.
The Educational Institute said it generally did not advise members to sign the NDAs and they were rarely justified.
The union said NZEI representatives needed to be able to discuss matters with other members so they could make a contribution that was more than their personal opinion.
Secondary Principals Association spokesperson Mike Newell said the use of NDAs depended on their purpose.
“If it’s about being able to have frank and open debate and discuss the issues, I don’t really think that that’s a bad thing,” he said.
Newell said people panicked or made assumptions when information about reforms or curriculum changes got out and NDAs could stop that from happening.
“If you’re developing something, refining something, do you want everyone running off saying ‘oh, this is what was said’,” he said.
The ministry said non-disclosure agreements were standard when engaging sector representative groups and individuals in its work programmes so it could balance early collaboration with the need to protect the integrity of the work.
“In the case of curriculum development, NDAs are used because the content being shared is still under active consideration and, in some cases, has not yet been provided to the minister.
“These agreements allow selected participants to review and provide early feedback on draft content while making sure that sensitive or incomplete material is not prematurely released,” it said.
“We acknowledge that transparency and sector involvement are vital to the success of curriculum reform.
“The use of NDAs does not limit broader engagement. The sector and public will have the opportunity to provide input once draft curriculum content is ready for wider consultation.”
The ministry said it had not taken legal action relating to NDAs.
“On limited occasions, the ministry has reminded participants of their obligations under an NDA. These reminders are standard practice to make sure all parties understand the importance of confidentiality,” it said.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.