Our research

There are 14 activity centres in New Zealand that cater for secondary school students (Years 9 ‑ 13) who are at risk of disengaging from mainstream schooling and at risk of low educational, social and vocational outcomes. Activity centres are established by agreement of the Minister of Education. Priority is given to those students whose behaviour is likely to impede their own learning and the learning of others, and who are most likely to benefit from the programme.

The Education Review Office (ERO) reviews Teen Parent Units (TPUs) on a three‑year cycle. During March and April, 2017 ERO investigated the quality of education provided by TPUs and the extent to which they supported positive outcomes for TPU students and their children.

The findings of this evaluation highlight improvements to the quality and consistency of the RTLB service, especially in overall governance and management. 

Wellbeing for success: a resource for schools has been developed to help schools evaluate and improve student wellbeing. It highlights the importance of schools promoting the wellbeing of all students as well as the need for systems, people and initiatives to respond to wellbeing concerns for students who need additional support.

This ERO evaluation reports on primary schools' progress in relation to the Government's Success for All policy. Success for All is about getting all schools to demonstrate inclusive practice for students with special needs.

This national report presents the findings of ERO’s recent evaluation of the 14 Activity Centres in New Zealand providing alternative schooling for secondary students likely to benefit from a specialist programme.

ERO evaluated how well schools included students with high needs. Approximately three percent of the student population have significant physical, sensory, neurological, psychiatric, behavioural or intellectual impairment. ERO’s evaluation showed that approximately half of the schools in the study demonstrated inclusive practice, while 30 percent had ‘pockets of inclusive practice’ and 20 percent had few inclusive practices.