CRT Eligibility Threshold and Curriculum Implementation Workload – Advice and Engagement with NZEI
SPENCER JONES made this Official Information request to Erica Stanford
Currently waiting for a response from Erica Stanford, they must respond promptly and normally no later than (details and exceptions).
From: SPENCER JONES
Dear Erica Stanford,
Office of the Minister of Education
Subject: CRT Eligibility Threshold and Curriculum Implementation Workload – Advice and Engagement with NZEI
Dear Minister,
I write under the Official Information Act 1982 to request the following information.
1. Advice regarding CRT eligibility thresholds
Please provide all briefings, aide-memoires, Cabinet papers, internal correspondence, reports, or advice (1 January 2022 to present) that discuss:
a) The ≥0.8 FTTE classroom release time (CRT) eligibility threshold under clause 3.28 of the Primary Teachers’ Collective Agreement;
b) The impact of that threshold on part-time teachers below 0.8 FTTE;
c) Any consideration of extending CRT eligibility below 0.8 FTTE during implementation of the refreshed curriculum (including English, mathematics, and structured literacy changes).
⸻
2. Curriculum implementation workload analysis
Please provide:
a) Any workload impact assessments undertaken prior to or during rollout of the refreshed curriculum;
b) Any modelling or estimates of additional planning or redesign hours expected of classroom teachers;
c) Any risk assessments relating to teacher workload, retention, or wellbeing connected to curriculum implementation timelines.
⸻
3. Engagement with NZEI Te Riu Roa
Please provide:
a) Any correspondence, meeting notes, aide-memoires, or advice between the Minister’s office (or Ministry officials advising the Minister) and NZEI Te Riu Roa relating to:
• Curriculum implementation workload;
• CRT eligibility thresholds;
• Requests for additional teacher release time or change-management recognition.
b) Any advice provided to the Minister summarising NZEI’s position on CRT eligibility or teacher workload in relation to curriculum refresh implementation.
⸻
4. Comparative advice – Principals vs Classroom Teachers
Please provide any advice or briefing that:
a) Compares the $15,000 curriculum or NCEA implementation allowance provided to principals with measures available to classroom teachers;
b) Assesses equity implications between leadership-level allowances and classroom teacher workload mitigation measures.
⸻
Administrative clarification
This request is for existing documents only. I am not requesting creation of new analysis.
If any part of this request is likely to be refused under section 18(f), please contact me so I may refine the scope.
If any information is withheld, please specify the precise statutory grounds relied upon and the public interest considerations applied.
Kind regards,
SPENCER JONES
From: Erica Stanford (MIN)
Erica Stanford
Thank you for contacting the Office of Hon Erica Stanford, Minister of
Education, Minister of Immigration, Lead Coordination Minister for the
Government's Response to the Royal Commission's Report into Historical
Abuse in State Care and in the Care of Faith-based Institutions, and
Member of Parliament for East Coast Bays.
We appreciate you reaching out – the Minister considers all correspondence
to be important, and all messages are carefully read and considered.
Please do note it is not always possible to provide a personal response to
every email received. Personal views, feedback and suggestions are
gratefully received and will be passed on to the Minister and/or relevant
Agencies.
Please note the following to help us direct your correspondence:
* If you are seeking ministerial intervention for an immigration case,
please contact Associate Minister of Immigration, Hon Chris Penk, at
[email address] Minister Stanford is unable to comment on
individual cases.
* Emails relating to education matters that are operational in
nature will be transferred to the Ministry of Education (or other
agency). Minister Stanford is unable to comment on individual cases.
You can contact the Ministry directly at:
[email address]
* For assistance related to historical abuse in state care, please
contact the Survivor Experiences Team at
[email address].
* If you have invited Minister Stanford to an event, or requested a
meeting, a member of staff may contact you for more information.
* Official Information or Privacy Act requests will be managed under the
relevant Acts, which may include transfer to another Agency.
* If you are a journalist, your request will be referred to the Press
Secretary.
* If you are a constituent of East Coast Bays, your email will be shared
with the Electorate Office.
Thank you again for writing to Minister Stanford.
Kind regards,
Office of Hon Erica Stanford
Reception: +64 4 817 6805 | Ministerial Email:
[1][Erica Stanford request email] |
Web: beehive.govt.nz | Post: Freepost Parliament, Private Bag 18 041,
Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160, New Zealand
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[Erica Stanford request email]
From: Erica Stanford (MIN)
Erica Stanford
OIA ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Dear Spencer,
Thank you for your Official Information Act 1982 (the Act) request,
received on 25/02/2026, in which you requested the following information:
1. Advice regarding CRT eligibility thresholds
Please provide all briefings, aide-memoires, Cabinet papers, internal
correspondence, reports, or advice (1 January 2022 to present) that
discuss:
a) The ≥0.8 FTTE classroom release time (CRT) eligibility threshold under
clause 3.28 of the Primary Teachers’ Collective Agreement;
b) The impact of that threshold on part-time teachers below 0.8 FTTE;
c) Any consideration of extending CRT eligibility below 0.8 FTTE during
implementation of the refreshed curriculum (including English,
mathematics, and structured literacy changes).
⸻
2. Curriculum implementation workload analysis
Please provide:
a) Any workload impact assessments undertaken prior to or during rollout
of the refreshed curriculum;
b) Any modelling or estimates of additional planning or redesign hours
expected of classroom teachers;
c) Any risk assessments relating to teacher workload, retention, or
wellbeing connected to curriculum implementation timelines.
⸻
3. Engagement with NZEI Te Riu Roa
Please provide:
a) Any correspondence, meeting notes, aide-memoires, or advice between the
Minister’s office (or Ministry officials advising the Minister) and NZEI
Te Riu Roa relating to:
• Curriculum implementation workload;
• CRT eligibility thresholds;
• Requests for additional teacher release
time or change-management recognition.
b) Any advice provided to the Minister summarising NZEI’s position on CRT
eligibility or teacher workload in relation to curriculum refresh
implementation.
⸻
4. Comparative advice – Principals vs Classroom Teachers
Please provide any advice or briefing that:
a) Compares the $15,000 curriculum or NCEA implementation allowance
provided to principals with measures available to classroom teachers;
b) Assesses equity implications between leadership-level allowances and
classroom teacher workload mitigation measures.
⸻
Administrative clarification
This request is for existing documents only. I am not requesting creation
of new analysis.
If any part of this request is likely to be refused under section 18(f),
please contact me so I may refine the scope.
If any information is withheld, please specify the precise statutory
grounds relied upon and the public interest considerations applied.
Your request will be answered within the provisions of the Official
Information Act.
Kind regards,
Office of Hon Erica Stanford
Office of Hon Erica Stanford
MP for East Coast Bays
Minister of Education
Minister of Immigration
Lead Coordination Minister for the Government’s Response to the Royal
Commission’s Report into Historical Abuse in State Care and in the Care
of Faith-based Institutions
Website: [1]www.Beehive,govt.nz
Private Bag 18041, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160, New Zealand
Disclaimer: The information in this email (including attachments) is
confidential and may be legally privileged. If an addressing or
transmission error has misdirected this email, please notify the author
by replying to this email and destroy the message. If you are not the
intended recipient, any use, disclosure, copying or distribution is
prohibited and may be unlawful.
show quoted sections
SPENCER JONES left an annotation ()
Public Annotation – CRT Eligibility Threshold & Curriculum Workload Advice (Governance Context)
This request seeks existing documentation concerning:
• The policy rationale for CRT (Classroom Release Time) eligibility thresholds;
• Whether those thresholds were reviewed or modelled in light of curriculum implementation workload;
• Advice provided regarding workload implications for teachers below CRT eligibility thresholds;
• Engagement or correspondence with NZEI concerning these matters.
This request does not seek negotiation detail or collective bargaining positions. It seeks governance-level advice and modelling relevant to policy settings that affect workload distribution.
⸻
Why this request is structurally important
The refreshed curriculum rollout has workload implications across the schooling sector.
CRT thresholds determine whether teachers receive additional release time. Where eligibility thresholds are set by FTTE (Full Time Teacher Equivalent), the effects can differ materially between:
• Larger urban schools;
• Smaller rural schools;
• Composite or area schools;
• Part-time or split-class staffing models.
If curriculum implementation increases planning and adaptation workload, then CRT thresholds interact directly with equity.
The key governance question is:
Was the CRT eligibility threshold reviewed, modelled, or reconsidered in light of curriculum implementation workload?
If it was reviewed, documentation should exist.
If it was not reviewed, that absence is itself governance-relevant.
⸻
What a substantively complete response would include
A complete response would ideally identify:
1️⃣ Internal briefings or aide-memoires analysing CRT threshold settings during curriculum rollout;
2️⃣ Modelling papers or scenario analysis assessing whether threshold adjustments were considered;
3️⃣ Risk assessments concerning implementation burden on teachers not meeting CRT thresholds;
4️⃣ Correspondence or formal engagement records with NZEI on CRT threshold interaction with curriculum change;
5️⃣ Advice provided to Ministers regarding threshold equity implications.
If no modelling or review occurred, confirmation of that fact would also be informative.
⸻
Clarifying scope (to avoid drift)
This request does not ask the Ministry to:
• Create new modelling;
• Re-negotiate collective agreements;
• Provide union bargaining strategy;
• Compile new datasets.
It seeks only existing advice, modelling, or documented engagement relating to CRT thresholds and curriculum implementation workload.
⸻
Governance significance
Threshold mechanisms are technical policy levers. When system-wide reform occurs, threshold settings may produce differential impacts.
If advice exists, public release promotes transparency about:
• Whether equity considerations were assessed;
• How workload implications were quantified;
• Whether smaller or part-time staffing structures were considered in implementation planning.
If no such advice exists, that is equally informative.
It would suggest that curriculum implementation decisions were made without documented reassessment of workload thresholds that directly affect release time access.
⸻
Interaction with related workload modelling requests
This request sits alongside other inquiries into curriculum implementation workload modelling.
Together, they aim to clarify whether:
• Workload impacts were modelled system-wide;
• Mitigation mechanisms were analysed;
• Threshold-based eligibility settings were reviewed in light of implementation pressures.
The purpose is transparency regarding documented decision-making — not commentary on collective bargaining outcomes.
I will update this thread once a substantive response is provided.
From: Erica Stanford (MIN)
Erica Stanford
Dear Spencer,
Thank you for your email of 25 February requesting the following
information:
1. Advice regarding CRT eligibility thresholds
Please provide all briefings, aide-memoires, Cabinet papers, internal
correspondence, reports, or advice (1 January 2022 to present) that
discuss:
a) The ≥0.8 FTTE classroom release time (CRT) eligibility threshold under
clause 3.28 of the Primary Teachers’ Collective Agreement;
b) The impact of that threshold on part-time teachers below 0.8 FTTE;
c) Any consideration of extending CRT eligibility below 0.8 FTTE during
implementation of the refreshed curriculum (including English,
mathematics, and structured literacy changes).
2. Curriculum implementation workload analysis
Please provide:
a) Any workload impact assessments undertaken prior to or during rollout
of the refreshed curriculum;
b) Any modelling or estimates of additional planning or redesign hours
expected of classroom teachers;
c) Any risk assessments relating to teacher workload, retention, or
wellbeing connected to curriculum implementation timelines.
3. Engagement with NZEI Te Riu Roa
Please provide:
a) Any correspondence, meeting notes, aide-memoires, or advice between the
Minister’s office (or Ministry officials advising the Minister) and NZEI
Te Riu Roa relating to:
• Curriculum implementation workload;
• CRT eligibility thresholds;
• Requests for additional teacher release
time or change-management recognition.
b) Any advice provided to the Minister summarising NZEI’s position on CRT
eligibility or teacher workload in relation to curriculum refresh
implementation.
4. Comparative advice – Principals vs Classroom Teachers
Please provide any advice or briefing that:
a) Compares the $15,000 curriculum or NCEA implementation allowance
provided to principals with measures available to classroom teachers;
b) Assesses equity implications between leadership-level allowances and
classroom teacher workload mitigation measures.
The Ministry of Education (the Ministry) is responsible for undertaking
policy work and providing advice to me on the matters referenced.
Therefore, the information requested in parts 1 a), b) and c), parts 2 a)
b) and c), part 3 b), and parts 4 a) and b), as well as part of the
information requested in part 3 a), (that part requesting information
between Ministry Officials and NZEI Te Riu Roa) are more closely connected
to the Ministry. These parts of your request have therefore been
transferred to the Ministry under section 14(b)(ii) of the Act, as the
information requested is more closely connected to the functions of the
Ministry. You can expect to receive a response from the Ministry on these
parts of your request in due course.
For the avoidance of doubt, my office will respond to the following part
of your request directly:
3. Engagement with NZEI Te Riu Roa
Please provide:
a) Any correspondence, meeting notes, aide-memoires, or advice between the
Minister’s office and NZEI Te Riu Roa relating to:
• Curriculum implementation workload;
• CRT eligibility thresholds;
• Requests for additional teacher release
time or change-management recognition.
Office of Hon Erica Stanford
MP for East Coast Bays
Minister of Education
Minister of Immigration
Lead Coordination Minister for the Government’s Response to the Royal
Commission’s Report into Historical Abuse in State Care and in the Care
of Faith-based Institutions
Website: [1]www.Beehive,govt.nz
Private Bag 18041, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160, New Zealand
Disclaimer: The information in this email (including attachments) is
confidential and may be legally privileged. If an addressing or
transmission error has misdirected this email, please notify the author
by replying to this email and destroy the message. If you are not the
intended recipient, any use, disclosure, copying or distribution is
prohibited and may be unlawful.
From: Erica Stanford (MIN) <[email address]>
Sent: Thursday, 26 February 2026 10:05 am
To: 'SPENCER JONES' <[FOI #33858 email]>
Cc: Erica Stanford (MIN) <[email address]>
Subject: RE: ESOIA899 | Official Information request - CRT Eligibility
Threshold and Curriculum Implementation Workload – Advice and Engagement
with NZEI
OIA ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Dear Spencer,
Thank you for your Official Information Act 1982 (the Act) request,
received on 25/02/2026, in which you requested the following information:
1. Advice regarding CRT eligibility thresholds
Please provide all briefings, aide-memoires, Cabinet papers, internal
correspondence, reports, or advice (1 January 2022 to present) that
discuss:
a) The ≥0.8 FTTE classroom release time (CRT) eligibility threshold under
clause 3.28 of the Primary Teachers’ Collective Agreement;
b) The impact of that threshold on part-time teachers below 0.8 FTTE;
c) Any consideration of extending CRT eligibility below 0.8 FTTE during
implementation of the refreshed curriculum (including English,
mathematics, and structured literacy changes).
⸻
2. Curriculum implementation workload analysis
Please provide:
a) Any workload impact assessments undertaken prior to or during rollout
of the refreshed curriculum;
b) Any modelling or estimates of additional planning or redesign hours
expected of classroom teachers;
c) Any risk assessments relating to teacher workload, retention, or
wellbeing connected to curriculum implementation timelines.
⸻
3. Engagement with NZEI Te Riu Roa
Please provide:
a) Any correspondence, meeting notes, aide-memoires, or advice between the
Minister’s office (or Ministry officials advising the Minister) and NZEI
Te Riu Roa relating to:
• Curriculum implementation workload;
• CRT eligibility thresholds;
• Requests for additional teacher release
time or change-management recognition.
b) Any advice provided to the Minister summarising NZEI’s position on CRT
eligibility or teacher workload in relation to curriculum refresh
implementation.
⸻
4. Comparative advice – Principals vs Classroom Teachers
Please provide any advice or briefing that:
a) Compares the $15,000 curriculum or NCEA implementation allowance
provided to principals with measures available to classroom teachers;
b) Assesses equity implications between leadership-level allowances and
classroom teacher workload mitigation measures.
⸻
Administrative clarification
This request is for existing documents only. I am not requesting creation
of new analysis.
If any part of this request is likely to be refused under section 18(f),
please contact me so I may refine the scope.
If any information is withheld, please specify the precise statutory
grounds relied upon and the public interest considerations applied.
Your request will be answered within the provisions of the Official
Information Act.
Kind regards,
Office of Hon Erica Stanford
Office of Hon Erica Stanford
MP for East Coast Bays
Minister of Education
Minister of Immigration
Lead Coordination Minister for the Government’s Response to the Royal
Commission’s Report into Historical Abuse in State Care and in the Care
of Faith-based Institutions
Website: [2]www.Beehive,govt.nz
Private Bag 18041, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160, New Zealand
Disclaimer: The information in this email (including attachments) is
confidential and may be legally privileged. If an addressing or
transmission error has misdirected this email, please notify the author
by replying to this email and destroy the message. If you are not the
intended recipient, any use, disclosure, copying or distribution is
prohibited and may be unlawful.
show quoted sections
SPENCER JONES left an annotation ()
Annotation – Request partially transferred to Ministry of Education
This request has been partially transferred by the Office of the Minister of Education under section 14(b)(ii) of the Official Information Act 1982, on the basis that most of the requested information is more closely connected to the functions of the Ministry of Education.
The Minister’s office advised that the Ministry undertakes the policy work and provides advice to the Minister on the matters covered by this request. As a result, the following components of the request have been transferred to the Ministry of Education for response:
• advice regarding CRT eligibility thresholds, including any briefings or policy advice relating to the ≥0.8 FTTE threshold under the Primary Teachers’ Collective Agreement;
• curriculum implementation workload analysis, including any modelling, risk assessments, or workload impact assessments relating to the refreshed curriculum rollout;
• engagement between Ministry officials and NZEI Te Riu Roa relating to curriculum implementation workload or CRT eligibility; and
• any advice comparing principal implementation allowances and classroom teacher workload mitigation measures.
The Minister’s office has indicated it will respond separately only to the portion of the request that relates specifically to correspondence or engagement held directly by the Minister’s office with NZEI Te Riu Roa.
A substantive response from the Ministry of Education on the transferred portions of the request is therefore expected in due course.
This request forms part of a broader set of inquiries examining how curriculum implementation policy decisions intersect with teacher workload, classroom release time (CRT) eligibility thresholds, and consultation with the teaching profession.
Researchers following these issues may wish to monitor the forthcoming Ministry of Education response, which is likely to contain the primary policy advice and workload analysis associated with these decisions.
From: Enquiries National
[UNCLASSIFIED]
Kia ora Spencer
Thank you for your information request which was partially transferred to
the Ministry of Education on 11 March 2026. The Ministry will consider and
respond to your request in accordance with the Official Information Act
1982 (the Act).
Under section 15(1) of the Act, we are required to make and inform you of
our decision on your request as soon as reasonably practicable and in any
case not later than 20 working days after the day on which your request is
received. You can therefore expect to receive our decision on your request
on or before the 10^th of April 2026. If more than 20 working days are
needed due to the potential workload and/or consultations involved in
answering your request, we will notify you accordingly.
Please note, the Ministry may publicly release on our website the response
to your request five days after you have received it. Any personal
information will be removed.
In the interim, if you have any questions about your request, please email
[1][email address].
Ngā mihi
Enquiries National Team | Te Tāhuhu o te Mātauranga | Ministry of
Education | IB
National Office, 1 The Terrace, Wellington
[2]education.govt.nz
He mea tārai e mātou te mātauranga kia rangatira ai, kia mana taurite ai
ōna huanga
We shape an education system that delivers equitable and excellent
outcomes
[3][IMG]
From: Erica Stanford (MIN) <[4][email address]>
Sent: Wednesday, 11 March 2026 6:43 pm
To: 'SPENCER JONES' <[5][FOI #33858 email]>
Cc: Erica Stanford (MIN) <[6][email address]>
Subject: RE: ESOIA899 | Official Information request - CRT Eligibility
Threshold and Curriculum Implementation Workload – Advice and Engagement
with NZEI
Dear Spencer,
Thank you for your email of 25 February requesting the following
information:
1. Advice regarding CRT eligibility thresholds
Please provide all briefings, aide-memoires, Cabinet papers, internal
correspondence, reports, or advice (1 January 2022 to present) that
discuss:
a) The ≥0.8 FTTE classroom release time (CRT) eligibility threshold under
clause 3.28 of the Primary Teachers’ Collective Agreement;
b) The impact of that threshold on part-time teachers below 0.8 FTTE;
c) Any consideration of extending CRT eligibility below 0.8 FTTE during
implementation of the refreshed curriculum (including English,
mathematics, and structured literacy changes).
2. Curriculum implementation workload analysis
Please provide:
a) Any workload impact assessments undertaken prior to or during rollout
of the refreshed curriculum;
b) Any modelling or estimates of additional planning or redesign hours
expected of classroom teachers;
c) Any risk assessments relating to teacher workload, retention, or
wellbeing connected to curriculum implementation timelines.
3. Engagement with NZEI Te Riu Roa
Please provide:
a) Any correspondence, meeting notes, aide-memoires, or advice between the
Minister’s office (or Ministry officials advising the Minister) and NZEI
Te Riu Roa relating to:
• Curriculum implementation workload;
• CRT eligibility thresholds;
• Requests for additional teacher release
time or change-management recognition.
b) Any advice provided to the Minister summarising NZEI’s position on CRT
eligibility or teacher workload in relation to curriculum refresh
implementation.
4. Comparative advice – Principals vs Classroom Teachers
Please provide any advice or briefing that:
a) Compares the $15,000 curriculum or NCEA implementation allowance
provided to principals with measures available to classroom teachers;
b) Assesses equity implications between leadership-level allowances and
classroom teacher workload mitigation measures.
The Ministry of Education (the Ministry) is responsible for undertaking
policy work and providing advice to me on the matters referenced.
Therefore, the information requested in parts 1 a), b) and c), parts 2 a)
b) and c), part 3 b), and parts 4 a) and b), as well as part of the
information requested in part 3 a), (that part requesting information
between Ministry Officials and NZEI Te Riu Roa) are more closely connected
to the Ministry. These parts of your request have therefore been
transferred to the Ministry under section 14(b)(ii) of the Act, as the
information requested is more closely connected to the functions of the
Ministry. You can expect to receive a response from the Ministry on these
parts of your request in due course.
For the avoidance of doubt, my office will respond to the following part
of your request directly:
3. Engagement with NZEI Te Riu Roa
Please provide:
a) Any correspondence, meeting notes, aide-memoires, or advice between the
Minister’s office and NZEI Te Riu Roa relating to:
• Curriculum implementation workload;
• CRT eligibility thresholds;
• Requests for additional teacher release
time or change-management recognition.
Office of Hon Erica Stanford
MP for East Coast Bays
Minister of Education
Minister of Immigration
Lead Coordination Minister for the Government’s Response to the Royal
Commission’s Report into Historical Abuse in State Care and in the Care
of Faith-based Institutions
Website: [7]www.Beehive,govt.nz
Private Bag 18041, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160, New Zealand
Disclaimer: The information in this email (including attachments) is
confidential and may be legally privileged. If an addressing or
transmission error has misdirected this email, please notify the author
by replying to this email and destroy the message. If you are not the
intended recipient, any use, disclosure, copying or distribution is
prohibited and may be unlawful.
show quoted sections
From: Erica Stanford (MIN)
Erica Stanford
image001.jpg
9K
Download
ESOIA899 Response Letter.pdf
4.1M
Download
View as HTML
ESOIA899 Appendix A Redacted.pdf
4.4M
Download
View as HTML
Good morning Spencer,
Please see attached the response to your Official Information Act request.
Kind regards,
Office of Hon Erica Stanford
Office of Hon Erica Stanford
MP for East Coast Bays
Minister of Education
Minister of Immigration
Lead Coordination Minister for the Government’s Response to the Royal
Commission’s Report into Historical Abuse in State Care and in the Care
of Faith-based Institutions
Website: [1]www.Beehive,govt.nz
Private Bag 18041, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160, New Zealand
Disclaimer: The information in this email (including attachments) is
confidential and may be legally privileged. If an addressing or
transmission error has misdirected this email, please notify the author
by replying to this email and destroy the message. If you are not the
intended recipient, any use, disclosure, copying or distribution is
prohibited and may be unlawful.
From: Erica Stanford (MIN) <[email address]>
Sent: Thursday, 26 February 2026 10:05 am
To: 'SPENCER JONES' <[FOI #33858 email]>
Cc: Erica Stanford (MIN) <[email address]>
Subject: RE: ESOIA899 | Official Information request - CRT Eligibility
Threshold and Curriculum Implementation Workload – Advice and Engagement
with NZEI
OIA ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Dear Spencer,
Thank you for your Official Information Act 1982 (the Act) request,
received on 25/02/2026, in which you requested the following information:
1. Advice regarding CRT eligibility thresholds
Please provide all briefings, aide-memoires, Cabinet papers, internal
correspondence, reports, or advice (1 January 2022 to present) that
discuss:
a) The ≥0.8 FTTE classroom release time (CRT) eligibility threshold under
clause 3.28 of the Primary Teachers’ Collective Agreement;
b) The impact of that threshold on part-time teachers below 0.8 FTTE;
c) Any consideration of extending CRT eligibility below 0.8 FTTE during
implementation of the refreshed curriculum (including English,
mathematics, and structured literacy changes).
⸻
2. Curriculum implementation workload analysis
Please provide:
a) Any workload impact assessments undertaken prior to or during rollout
of the refreshed curriculum;
b) Any modelling or estimates of additional planning or redesign hours
expected of classroom teachers;
c) Any risk assessments relating to teacher workload, retention, or
wellbeing connected to curriculum implementation timelines.
⸻
3. Engagement with NZEI Te Riu Roa
Please provide:
a) Any correspondence, meeting notes, aide-memoires, or advice between the
Minister’s office (or Ministry officials advising the Minister) and NZEI
Te Riu Roa relating to:
• Curriculum implementation workload;
• CRT eligibility thresholds;
• Requests for additional teacher release
time or change-management recognition.
b) Any advice provided to the Minister summarising NZEI’s position on CRT
eligibility or teacher workload in relation to curriculum refresh
implementation.
⸻
4. Comparative advice – Principals vs Classroom Teachers
Please provide any advice or briefing that:
a) Compares the $15,000 curriculum or NCEA implementation allowance
provided to principals with measures available to classroom teachers;
b) Assesses equity implications between leadership-level allowances and
classroom teacher workload mitigation measures.
⸻
Administrative clarification
This request is for existing documents only. I am not requesting creation
of new analysis.
If any part of this request is likely to be refused under section 18(f),
please contact me so I may refine the scope.
If any information is withheld, please specify the precise statutory
grounds relied upon and the public interest considerations applied.
Your request will be answered within the provisions of the Official
Information Act.
Kind regards,
Office of Hon Erica Stanford
Office of Hon Erica Stanford
MP for East Coast Bays
Minister of Education
Minister of Immigration
Lead Coordination Minister for the Government’s Response to the Royal
Commission’s Report into Historical Abuse in State Care and in the Care
of Faith-based Institutions
Website: [2]www.Beehive,govt.nz
Private Bag 18041, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160, New Zealand
Disclaimer: The information in this email (including attachments) is
confidential and may be legally privileged. If an addressing or
transmission error has misdirected this email, please notify the author
by replying to this email and destroy the message. If you are not the
intended recipient, any use, disclosure, copying or distribution is
prohibited and may be unlawful.
show quoted sections
SPENCER JONES left an annotation ()
Annotation – Partial release from Minister’s office; substantive policy issues transferred to Ministry of Education
This response is only a partial answer to the request. The Minister’s office has transferred the substantive policy parts of the OIA to the Ministry of Education under section 14(b)(ii), including advice on:
• the 0.8 FTTE classroom release time (CRT) eligibility threshold;
• the impact of that threshold on part-time teachers;
• any consideration of extending CRT eligibility below 0.8 FTTE during curriculum implementation;
• curriculum implementation workload analysis;
• Ministry engagement with NZEI; and
• comparative advice on principal allowances versus classroom teacher workload mitigation. The Minister’s office has responded only to the narrower part concerning correspondence between the Minister’s office and NZEI. 
What has been released so far is still useful. Appendix A shows that NZEI sought a catch-up hui with the Minister and listed “new curriculum and assessment roll out” as an agenda item. It also includes a 16 October 2025 letter from the Chair of the NZEI Te Riu Roa Principals’ Council asking the Minister to accept an open letter on curriculum reform, and that open letter urged the Government to pause rollout deadlines until clarity, full resourcing, and workload impact measurement/mitigation were in place. In other words, the material already released confirms that workload and rollout concerns were being raised directly with the Minister’s office by principal-sector representatives.
That context matters because the wider policy background already shows curriculum implementation and CRT were active system issues. The Ministry’s published material on the Primary Teachers’ Collective Agreement confirms that from Term 1 2025 full-time primary teachers were to receive 2.5 hours’ release time per week, and that part-time teachers employed for at least 0.8 FTTE would receive CRT on a pro-rata basis. The current collective agreement text reflects the same threshold.  The Ministry has also proactively released school staffing material noting that 2025 staffing changes included another increase in CRT for teachers covered by the PTCA, alongside structured literacy support changes. 
Taken together, the release from Parliament appears to establish three points of public interest. First, the Minister’s office was aware that principal representatives were raising concerns about curriculum rollout and workload. Second, the key decision-making and policy-analysis material sits with the Ministry of Education, not Parliament. Third, the substantive issues in dispute are tied to an existing system rule — the 0.8 FTTE threshold — that was already embedded in the relevant employment framework while curriculum implementation changes were being rolled out. 
For researchers and investigators, this thread should therefore be read as pending in substance, not concluded. The Parliament-side response appears complete for Ministerial-office correspondence, but the main policy record — workload modelling, threshold advice, Ministry/NZEI engagement, and comparative equity analysis — remains to be received from the Ministry of Education following transfer. 
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
- Download a zip file of all correspondence (note: this contains the same information already available above).
Offensive? Unsuitable?
Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid requests for Official Information (read more).
If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators
Report this request
SPENCER JONES left an annotation ()
Public Interest Framing Note (For FYI Publication)
Title: Curriculum Implementation Workload and CRT Eligibility – Public Interest Clarification
This Official Information Act request seeks technical advice held by the Ministry of Education relating to two intersecting issues:
1. The ≥0.8 FTTE classroom release time (CRT) eligibility threshold under the Primary Teachers’ Collective Agreement; and
2. The workload implications of implementing the refreshed curriculum (including structured literacy and mathematics changes).
Recent settlements have publicly recognised the leadership workload of principals through targeted implementation allowances. At the same time, classroom teachers are responsible for day-to-day programme redesign, assessment alignment, and instructional delivery under the refreshed curriculum framework.
The public interest questions are:
• Was formal workload modelling undertaken prior to rollout?
• Was the CRT eligibility threshold analysed in light of curriculum redesign demands?
• Was the impact on part-time teachers (below 0.8 FTTE) assessed?
• Were fiscal options for additional release-time support considered?
• Were workforce retention or wellbeing risks formally evaluated?
The purpose of this request is not adversarial. It is to clarify whether technical modelling and equity analysis underpin implementation decisions affecting thousands of classroom teachers.
The refreshed curriculum represents a significant system-wide change. Transparent disclosure of workload modelling and equity assessment contributes to:
• Informed public understanding;
• Workforce sustainability discussions;
• Evidence-based education policy debate;
• Accountability in public expenditure decisions.
The request is confined to existing documentation and does not seek creation of new analysis.
Given the scale of curriculum reform and its implications for teaching practice, there is a clear and ongoing public interest in understanding the evidentiary basis for implementation settings.
Link to this