Charter schools fiddling their results

110 comments on “Charter schools fiddling their results ”

• Comments are now closed

1. James 1

   9 December 2016 at 9:04 am

   This would never happen in a state school. http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=3585593
   • dv 1.1

     9 December 2016 at 9:24 am

     James 12 years ago.
     Discovered and sorted.

     Notice in the article both the principal and the board chair resigned.

     Any resignations from charter schools yet James?

     PS what were the fiddles the charter schools, was it just misreporting, or mismarking or????
     • james 1.1.1

       9 December 2016 at 9:30 am

       Im sure that punishments and accountability for this will come. As it well should.

       Personally – I think what they have done is disgusting.

       What I am pointing out – that it is something that can be fixed – and it is not a failing specifically of charter schools.
       • Molly 1.1.1.1

         9 December 2016 at 9:36 am

         “and it is not a failing specifically of charter schools”
         Except it is.

         Because the primary objective of charter schools is to run a business, not provide an education.
         • AmaKiwi 1.1.1.1.1

           9 December 2016 at 10:47 am

           + 100
       • wellfedweta 1.1.1.2

         9 December 2016 at 10:10 am

         Don;t jump top conclusions. Read David Seymour’s rebuttal, and you’ll see that clearly Hipkin’s demonstrates again he simply doesn’t understand how NCEA works. Never let the truth get in the way of a good headline though.
         • dv 1.1.1.2.1

           9 December 2016 at 10:59 am

           Read the rebuttal – didn’t help.

           Well fed perhaps you could give an explanation of how it works
           • wellfedweta 1.1.1.2.1.1

             9 December 2016 at 6:17 pm

             It comes down to measurement. There are two measures schools can use (three actually, including a hybrid), being leaver based and roll based. Hipkins makes two claims:

             1. that partnership schools have been “massively overstating” their exam results, and
             2. that they have been using a different methodology to other schools.

             Both claims are false.

             I’d also make this observation. Hipkins claims the pass rate for NCEA for 2014 for Vanguard was 60%. He is being deliberately misleading, or he is inept. In 2014 Vanguard had no level 3 students! In 2015 when they had a full ‘senior’ school, the pass rate was 86.2%, well above the national average for both measurement bases.
           • wellfedweta 1.1.1.2.1.2

             9 December 2016 at 6:34 pm

             You might also find this exchange informative.

             http://www.inthehouse.co.nz/video/47145

             Hipkins totally out of his depth against a well informed minister. Even one with serious limitations of her own.
         • Infused 1.1.1.2.2

           9 December 2016 at 11:58 am

           Well, Hipkins is a moron.
           • framu 1.1.1.2.2.1

             9 December 2016 at 12:03 pm

             seymours no great shakes either – but at least hes not as bad as whyte 🙂
           • Tricledrown 1.1.1.2.2.2

             9 December 2016 at 12:15 pm

             Confused attacking the messenger.
             Transparency is being shutdown in education deliberately by National.
           • wellfedweta 1.1.1.2.2.3

             9 December 2016 at 6:11 pm

             He’s been caught out telling some whoppers. I’m unsure whether it’s ignorance of dishonesty.
             • Natwatch …

               9 December 2016 at 10:18 pm

               Dealt with in the post. Irrespective of what Chris Hipkins does or doesn’t think, this is what the Ministry of Education said –

               Charter schools use a different method of calculating their NCEA pass rates to state schools – one which inflates their success.

               Education Minister Hekia Parata has been warned by her ministry that an imperfect impression of charter schools’ performance is being created as a result.

               Advice to Ms Parata shows that when charter schools are measured using the same roll-based methodology as state schools, their pass rates plummet.
               • wellfedweta …

                 10 December 2016 at 5:28 pm

                 Cite?

                 Charter school pass rates are published, compulsorily so. They are subject to a higher standard of scrutiny than are public schools. I remain agnostic, but the irrational, and frankly ill-informed, opposition to them is giving me many laughs.
                 • One Anonymous Bloke …

                   10 December 2016 at 5:42 pm

                   The cite is right there in the article you’re pretending to discuss, while in fact trolling and doing your best to divert and derail discussion, Maninthemiddle Wellfedweta.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     10 December 2016 at 5:58 pm

                     My question was to Natwatch. Stop trolling.
         • Marcus Morris 1.1.1.2.3

           9 December 2016 at 4:47 pm

           I have considerable interest in this debate. I have a grandson for whom seven years in a moderately expensive co-educationl private school did absolutely nothing. A year’s homeschooling did no better so that, at the end of a Year Eleven equivalence he did not have a credit to his name. In desperation his parents enrolled him at the Vanguard School. As a retired teacher and after forty five years in the state secondary service, where I reached Deputy Principal status, I had serious reservations. However the military style discipline of the Vanguard school suited the boy and after two years he graduated with Level 2 Numeracy and Literacy and with a hitherto unknown confidence that he was not entirely bereft of any academic ability. What I now find disturbing is the validity of those results. In other words is this debate questioning the standards set by these schools or “merely” the way they are reported to the ministry. If the latter, then that certainly needs to be brought into line but the lad’s qualifications are in order?

           I am not quite sure what you are trying to imply wfw. I worked with NCEA for the last ten years of my teaching career and I have argued from its inception that it is an excellent system and far superior to any of the others that we have had in the last sixty years. What do you think Hipkins doesn’t understand about it. The actual reporting of results has nothing to do with the process of assessment.
           • wellfedweta 1.1.1.2.3.1

             9 December 2016 at 6:07 pm

             Hi Marcus

             I recommend you read what David Seymour has had to say in response to Chris Hipkins. Hipkins has been caught out before twisting the truth, and on this occasion he is demonstrating his ignorance or his willingness to bend the truth.

             As far as I am concerned, the jury is still out on Partnership schools, but there is sufficient material to suggest they have made an encouraging start. Labour (and the teacher unions) hate the concept, because PS’s introduce choice they have little control over.
             • One Anonymous Bloke …

               9 December 2016 at 7:31 pm

               You know nothing, Wellfedweta. That’s ok: megaphones aren’t required to be sentient.
               • wellfedweta …

                 10 December 2016 at 5:32 pm

                 Are you sore at my exposing your mate Hipkins?
                 • One Anonymous Bloke …

                   10 December 2016 at 5:38 pm

                   You didn’t. Pay attention. The information comes from the MoE, and exposed your corrupt mates Rimmer and Parrot.

                   In any case, I was referring to your fatuous arrogant response to Marcus.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     10 December 2016 at 5:57 pm

                     I did. He either lied or is ignorant. Take you’re pick.
           • mpledger 1.1.1.2.3.2

             9 December 2016 at 7:17 pm

             What did you think about the quality of the standards he did?

             Where they all unit standards mostly? Or were they achievement standards mostly? IE could he have got an endorsement on his certificates?
             • wellfedweta …

               10 December 2016 at 5:43 pm

               Hi MPledger

               FYI Vanguard, like state schools, offer both unit and achievement standards subjects. They also provide breakfast to all students. In 2015, 94.8% of students passed level 1 NCEA, and 86.2% level 2. 75% of students are defined as ‘priority learners’.
               • One Anonymous Bloke …

                 10 December 2016 at 5:44 pm

                 Gone. By. Lunchtime. Diddums.
                 • wellfedweta …

                   10 December 2016 at 5:57 pm

                   Who? Clark? Goff? Shearer? Little?
       • Guerilla Surgeon 1.1.1.3

         9 December 2016 at 1:42 pm

         “and it is not a failing specifically of charter schools.”

         Except we were constantly told that charter schools were going to be better – right? Sort of like the right-wing promise that things were going to be transparent and accountable.
         • One Anonymous Bloke 1.1.1.3.1

           9 December 2016 at 7:34 pm

           …and that the market will provide, and that the SOE model isn’t completely munted, and that Murray McCully can live in the desert.
         • wellfedweta 1.1.1.3.2

           10 December 2016 at 5:45 pm

           no, we’ve never been told they will be ‘better’. Partnership schools are targeted at a specific student profile, and they appear to be working far more successfully for that student group than state schools Also, Partnership Schools have more accountability than do state schools. Publishing of their results is mandatory, and they are under far more MOE scrutiny.
     • NZJester 1.1.2

       9 December 2016 at 11:56 pm

       I think they only reported the results of the kids that went the full way through to the end of the year and actually took the tests. Those that dropped out or got kicked out so did not take the tests with them where not included in the final results I think.
       • wellfedweta 1.1.2.1

         10 December 2016 at 5:46 pm

         Ill informed red herring. In the case of Vanguard, there have been an extraordinarily low level of ‘leavers’. http://www.ero.govt.nz/review-reports/vanguard-military-school-29-08-2016/
   • the Joneses 1.2

     9 December 2016 at 9:54 am

     The big difference from that case was that a single school was acting fraudulently, where as in this case the government is setting up a fraudulent system so all charter schools get better looking results. It is a whole different magnitude of corruption.

     I think the title of this page is misleading as it is not the charter schools themselves which are really at fault in this instance, it is the government who dictates how they should report their results. Unless I am miss-understanding the story completely?
     • lprent 1.2.1

       9 December 2016 at 10:08 am

       Unless I very much mistaken, the standards set by the ministry for the charter schools for their reporting were far far lower than for state schools.

       What has happened is that the results for charter schools are now being recalculated on the same basis as public schools and coming up deficient.

       The political question is at what level was the decision made to do this?
       • adam 1.2.1.1

         9 December 2016 at 12:23 pm

         The only answer in my mind is that must have been at the cabinet level. Hekia, love her, or hate her is not that stupid, to have this all fall on her. And whilst I think she supported charter schools to give Maori a different option, I don’t think she is a ideological hack. For the record, I’m no fan of the Parata, or her politics.
         • Macro 1.2.1.1.1

           9 December 2016 at 1:33 pm

           Charter Schools want to be able to show that they are the bees knees when it comes to educational achievement, and they will stoop to seriously low levels of behaviour in order to do that. So they set the standard – way lower than State Schools – and having such a low standard, they can get their better students to jump over it easily.
           It’s nothing but educationally corrupt behaviour – but nothing more than you would expect from a group of non-professionals (remember you don’t even need to have teacher training to be let loose on students in these dame schools).
           • ropata 1.2.1.1.1.1

             9 December 2016 at 2:06 pm

             The long term lying and ideological stupidity is one thing. But what I find really offensive is that innocent kids are getting a second rate education and may not even have the basics — that would have been covered by a reliable state education.

             I hope the MPs responsible offer a personal apology to every child affected. Some kind of compensation for this appalling incompetence would not go amiss either.
           • HDCAFriendlyTroll 1.2.1.1.1.2

             11 December 2016 at 9:49 am

             Heh. They’ve got nothing on State schools who fiddle the NCEA results to make the pass rates much higher than what they should be. You can tell the schools that do this because they make the newspapers as “miracle schools” and when it gets to (equivalent of) UE time pass rates drop tremendously.
       • wellfedweta 1.2.1.2

         10 December 2016 at 5:47 pm

         You are very much mistaken.
       • Richard McGrath 1.2.1.3

         11 December 2016 at 7:28 am

         My impression is that the profile of kids entering schools such as Vanguard is somewhat different to that of entrants to your average state and private school. Until there is some matching against a control group in the state & private systems it may be invalid to make comparisons between charter schools and others. However I agree there needs to be uniformity in calculating results for the pupils of differing school systems.
         • wellfedweta 1.2.1.3.1

           11 December 2016 at 8:17 pm

           Richard you are correct that there are possible differences in the profile of students that attend state v partnership schools. Partnership Schools are targeted at children who have failed, or are failing, in the state system. Many have a history of truancy, poor educational outcomes and behavioral issues. There involvement in Partnership Schools makes the success of these schools even more remarkable. Partnership Schools also attract ‘mainstream children, however, unlike state schools, partnership schools are mandated to take a certain % of children who are at risk.
2. saveNZ 2

   9 December 2016 at 11:08 am

   Shocking. In my view there is widespread dissatisfaction against National Standards from parents.

   The Charter Schools are just plain frauds for cronies. The US and anywhere else they use them have worse standards than places like Finland.

   Please get rid of the Natz before they destroy the education of the next generation any further!

   When the current PM Bill English describes Kiwi youth as ‘pretty hopeless’ what a fucked up country we are becoming. The Natz have been in for 8 years so WTF – it’s their own making!!

   Let alone their immigration scams, their educations scams, the tax haven scams, their scenic hotel, Skycity, Saudi scams, health scams, education scams.

   Natz are scum, but they are very slippery and hard to defeat with all their trougher crony friends in high places.
3. Sorrwerdna 3

   9 December 2016 at 11:10 am

   I really can not understand the Lefts hatred of Charter schools. They provide a learning environment to those students who do not succeed under the State school model. This is not a criticism of State schools -it is just a fact of life that some students will perform and learn better in a different learning environment. Forgot the focus on profit and patch protection from the PPTA – it is about the success of the learners regardless of how you want to compare NCEA results with the State system
   • framu 3.1

     9 December 2016 at 11:13 am

     the reasons have been spelled out relentlessly – try google

     hint: its not because of your framing of the issue
     • Sorrwerdna 3.1.1

       9 December 2016 at 11:47 am

       “the reasons have been spelled out relentlessly – try google”
       because everything from Google is the honest truth -yeah right
       • framu 3.1.1.1

         9 December 2016 at 11:53 am

         no – google is just a search engine

         pretty sure you can find all sorts of articles where people explain why they are opposed

         but i sense your not really interested in that
         • wellfedweta 3.1.1.1.1

           10 December 2016 at 5:48 pm

           I suggest you search for the ERO reviews, not the teachers union opinion pieces.
   • Saarbo 3.2

     9 December 2016 at 11:19 am

     Because we should be fixing State Schools rather than spending money on profit making private schools.
     • UncookedSelachimorpha 3.2.1

       9 December 2016 at 1:22 pm

       +1
   • Tricledrown 3.3

     9 December 2016 at 11:26 am

     So sorry wording why do Charter schools exclude the very children you say are not achieving at state schools to make their performance look better.
     Why are Charter Schools not subject to the same transparency rules.
     National want to cut costs.
     Yet Charter schools cost 2 to 4 times as much as public schools.
     • wellfedweta 3.3.1

       10 December 2016 at 5:52 pm

       1. Partnership schools are, in fact, taking the pupils no-one else wants.
       2. PS’s are subject to the same transparency as state schools, and more.
       3. PS’s do not cost 2-4 times as much as state schools. Once they are full, they actually cost less per pupil. (http://www.education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Ministry/Initiatives/Partnership-schools/StatePartnershipSchoolsFunding.pdf)

       If you’re going to comment, I suggest you get your information form a more informed source than the teachers unions.
   • joe90 3.4

     9 December 2016 at 11:33 am

     Forgot the focus on profit and patch protection from the PPTA – it is about the success of the learners regardless of how you want to compare NCEA results with the State system

     Unions are bad – and we’ll lower the bar to prove it, m’kay.

     FIFY
     /
   • saveNZ 3.5

     9 December 2016 at 12:07 pm

     @Sorrwerdna

     Charter schools are cheating your kids: New report reveals massive fraud, mismanagement, abuse
     Millions of dollars are being vacuumed out of public schools and into the corporate pockets — or fraudulent execs
     http://www.salon.com/2014/05/07/charter_schools_are_cheating_your_kids_new_report_reveals_massive_fraud_mismanagement_abuse/

     The great charter school rip-off: Finally, the truth catches up to education “reform” phonies
     Fraud, financial mismanagement, lousy results: Reports highlight awful charter schools and people are catching on
     http://www.salon.com/2014/10/02/the_great_charter_school_rip_off_finally_the_truth_catches_up_to_education_reform_phonies/
   • BM 3.6

     9 December 2016 at 12:10 pm

     I doubt there are too many upset teachers when to comes to charter schools, kids who were probably a nightmare to teach, who sucked up their teaching time at the detriment of other students and are now getting the more focused attention they need in an environment more attuned to their needs.

     All I see is win win for everyone.
     • Puckish Rogue 3.6.1

       9 December 2016 at 12:46 pm

       Except for the Teachers Unions, less teachers in the union = less money for the union
       • Johan 3.6.1.1

         9 December 2016 at 1:47 pm

         Still trolling BM and Puckish Rogue? Why not stick to facts instead of relying on your tainted Tory opinions.
       • red-blooded 3.6.1.2

         9 December 2016 at 6:47 pm

         Two responses, PR:
         1) It’s “fewer” teachers, not “less” – we count individuals, rather than measuring them.
         2) PPTA is not worried about membership numbers. There’s a 90%+ membership rate from teachers in state and integrated schools. If PPTA chose to extend our coverage to independent school and charter businesses (I’m not going to dignify them with the word “schools”) we could. We don’t because we are philosophically opposed to them and see them as a poor model for education, both in terms of outcomes for individual kids and in terms of social equity and our national culture.
         • In Vino 3.6.1.2.1

           11 December 2016 at 7:01 pm

           Pockish Rouge never replies when he has been trounced. It is a favourite Troll argument that the good teachers are held back by the bullying union.
           Fact is that the 90% thing in my experience covers all types of teachers. So you get rid of the unionists – you lose 90% of your ‘good’ teachers. That cannot possibly be allowed to happen – the communities will start showing strong support for teachers, and right-wing govt. will back down. That is how it has always played out over so many years..
           So it was from the beginning, world without end. Bad luck, PR.. Teachers will stick together, including the vast majority of what the community and kids see as ‘good’ ones.
     • Molly 3.6.2

       9 December 2016 at 12:52 pm

       “All I see is win win for everyone.”

       None so blind as those that will not see.

       Where our model for charter schools has been in action for a while:
       Disciplinary Data from Charter Schools disproportionally excludes black and disabled students

       Academy school criticised for excluding council estates in admissions policy

       NC Charter School Bill Now Excludes Protections for Gay and Transgender Students
     • UncookedSelachimorpha 3.6.3

       9 December 2016 at 1:25 pm

       Why is the solution to difficult kids to introduce a profit motive and lose resources to private profit? Can’t see the connection or logic there.
       • BM 3.6.3.1

         9 December 2016 at 1:42 pm

         What profit? who’s making all the money?
         • Matthew Whitehead 3.6.3.1.1

           9 December 2016 at 3:18 pm

           Are you kidding?

           Charter schools can be for-profit, and are allowed to pocket government money they don’t spend so long as they can meet the minimum standards to avoid closure.

           Why are you even posting if you (apparently) don’t understand?
         • Siobhan 3.6.3.1.2

           9 December 2016 at 3:24 pm

           Currently the organisations running Charter Schools are all ‘Not for Profit’. Which is a definition very much open to interpretation.
           The ‘For Profit’, investor schools are meant to start up in the ‘next wave’.

           “There aren’t any for-profit proposals coming through as far as I am aware. They are all community groups, or existing schools or Iwi,” Isaac said.

           “They came in a later wave,” Isaac said.

           The first private interests likely to make a buck from charter schools would be landlords, entrepreneur Tony Falkenstein believes, as the first charter schools look for premises. ”

           http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/7994188/The-business-side-of-charter-schools
           • BM 3.6.3.1.2.1

             9 December 2016 at 6:12 pm

             Thanks for the link

             Has NZ had that second wave? or unlike Sweden, it’s still all not for profit?
             • Pat …

               9 December 2016 at 6:19 pm

               for profit or not for profit, there are ways…..especially when an agenda is being pushed.

               https://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/oct/24/academy-chain-fees-griffin-accountability-trustees

               https://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/jan/12/taxpayer-funded-academy-paying-millions-private-firms-schools-education-revealed-education

               https://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/jul/20/education-school-academies-michael-gove
         • NZJester 3.6.3.1.3

           10 December 2016 at 12:32 am

           Those running the carter schools are getting most of the money in their pockets for so called administration costs. While the charter schools receive more money per child the actual amount of money spent on supplying the actual education to those children themselves is lower than at a public school.
           They are not required to put out contracts for bids and so can use their own businesses to supply the schools with items at non discounted rates or even higher margins than they would offer to other customers.
     • Johan 3.6.4

       9 December 2016 at 1:43 pm

       BM, another one of your desperate, flawed conclusions.
   • Marcus Morris 3.7

     9 December 2016 at 6:06 pm

     Justify “patch protect” – utter nonsense -.
   • AB 3.8

     9 December 2016 at 7:13 pm

     Because the profit motive is intended to spur people into innovation, efficiency and excellence – right?
     But those things are incredibly hard to do – especially when you are under the gun to do it quickly. It is much, much easier to fiddle your numbers.

     All private sector organisations do this. There are so many ways of achieving profitability that are easier than genuine innovation and efficiency: fiddle the numbers, engage in short-term cost cutting that causes long-term damage, elect right-wing governments that dampen wage-increases through legislation and running high unemployment, outsource to low labour cost countries, etc.

     In other words every myth we hear about the superiority of the private sector is just that – myth.
     And children are too important to be playing this game with.
4. Rex Morris 4

   9 December 2016 at 11:30 am

   The hatred of, disgust and dissatisfaction with Charter Schools is not a “left” position – it is a position of educators from all walks of life, at all levels of the sector. The policy framework of charter schools is incredibly shameful. There is no evidence anywhere in the world that they are more effective than state schools. Many videos shown in the early days of the policy showed charter schools in the USA that actually ran on the same basis as our nz state schools. The charter school movement in the UK is a response to a quite different education system. The strange thing is they actually had an opportunity to do something worthwhile with all of the millions they were given but it seems they have failed. If the funds had been disbursed into the State sector [even with some conditions] they would have gained much more for the students. However. charter schools and national standards have actually lowered nz educational achievement [see OECD latest results]
   • Rex Morris 4.1

     9 December 2016 at 1:02 pm

     I should have said USA, not UK
     • garibaldi 4.1.1

       9 December 2016 at 4:21 pm

       The hatred of unions is a rightist problem. Their opposition to worker groups is unfathomable and just shows how stupid the righties are. Heaven forbid that we listen to a group of professional, trained teachers about teaching, let’s just leave it to a bunch of money grubbing and/or religious ignoramuses to screw our kids over. That’s the Charter Schools modus operandum.
       Creaming kids out of the state system ( then sending them back if they fail ) does not justify their existence.
       Far more efficient and productive to invest more in the state system and let the professionals do the job properly by funding them properly, without siphoning money off to private and or charter schools.
       • One Anonymous Bloke 4.1.1.1

         9 December 2016 at 7:36 pm

         unfathomable

         No, it isn’t. It’s motivated by a hatred for human rights and the rule of law. They’re in my way.
   • Marcus Morris 4.2

     9 December 2016 at 6:06 pm

     Well said.
5. Sorrwerdna 5

   9 December 2016 at 12:04 pm

   The argument should not be if Charters are better than State -it is all about student success -who cares which model performs better. Charter schools provide a learning environment that is not always easy to duplicate in the State school environment. Charter schools are not funded excessively more than state schools on a per EFTS basis. To fully understand the Charter school model you need to have an understanding of NZQA and the various paths available to any to gain a NCEA qualification, you need to understand TEC and their funding and reporting methodologies and conditions. -you need to understand the methodologies that TEC/MOE apply to the various funding streams to the University, Wananga, Polytech and PTE sectors -you need to understand the types of students attracted to Charter Schools . It is not an apples with apples scenario.
   • saveNZ 5.1

     9 December 2016 at 12:10 pm

     And the Fucked up Trolling Ideology award for Charter schools goes to….. Sorrwerdna
     • dukeofurl 5.1.1

       9 December 2016 at 12:23 pm

       Well the people running charter schools in church halls and former church offices ( see a pattern here ?) have to push back with their muddled thinking.

       The ‘piece of cake award’ for 2016 award goes to Seymour for this muddled thinking

       “Vanguard reported a 100 per cent pass rate for NCEA Level 2 in 2014, but Labour’s leaked report said when revised in line with state school reporting standards the pass rate fell to 60 per cent.

       However, Seymour disputed this, saying as more students graduated from the school in 2015, the figure improved to 84.5 per cent.

       So was it 100% but then ‘improved’ to 84% ??
     • Sorrwerdna 5.1.2

       9 December 2016 at 2:54 pm

       Thanks for the vote of confidence saveNZ
       • saveNZ 5.1.2.1

         9 December 2016 at 3:48 pm

         The selling of the state houses during the housing crisis is also going well…. apparently for this government… sarc.
   • Tricledrown 5.2

     9 December 2016 at 12:23 pm

     Sorrywerda baffling with BS.
     The costs are much higher
     Accountability non existent
     Cherry picking student’s
     Failed schools
     Unqualified teachers
     A failure.
     • Sorrwerdna 5.2.1

       9 December 2016 at 2:52 pm

       Treacledown -sorry to baffle you with BS but I feel you have zero idea how these schools operate apart from dribble you have been fed from the anti everything establishment – just because they may be considered a failure overseas you assume the same is happening here -please go visit a school and see the fantastic work they do -and take your mate Chris Hipkins and Angela Roberts.
       • One Anonymous Bloke 5.2.1.1

         9 December 2016 at 3:00 pm

         The article is about how the “fantastic work” they do is a lie, because they’ve been lying about their results. I see you’re in denial. 😆
         • Sorrwerdna 5.2.1.1.1

           9 December 2016 at 3:22 pm

           They have not been lying about their results -they have been reported in the required format but Chris Hipkins has chosen to cheery pick the data to give wildly misleading results without understanding the circumstances -unfortunately you will not hear or read retraction from him
           • One Anonymous Bloke 5.2.1.1.1.1

             9 December 2016 at 3:29 pm

             Thanks for admitting that the results are fake, set up that way by the person who’s telling you Hipkins has got it wrong.

             I would call you gullible but I think you like being ruled by your amygdala.
           • wellfedweta 5.2.1.1.1.2

             10 December 2016 at 5:56 pm

             Hipkins has form, unfortunately. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt and thinking he may just be ignorant. I’m swaying towards dishonest after his latest debacle.
   • UncookedSelachimorpha 5.3

     9 December 2016 at 1:37 pm

     “The argument should not be if Charters are better than State -it is all about student success -who cares which model performs better.”

     The logic is a little off…
   • Matthew Whitehead 5.4

     9 December 2016 at 3:26 pm

     The students care which model performs better. What a dumb question to ask.

     If the charter schools were actually helping at-risk students perform better than state schools under comparable metrics, that would be one thing.

     But they’re not. They’re a waste of money that could be more effectively used to help those students in order to soften the education system for eventual privatisation that ACT so desperately wants. The problem is that they’re so obviously disastrous that they’re not actually making any headway.
     • Matthew Whitehead 5.4.1

       9 December 2016 at 3:43 pm

       Whoops, there’s a missing “rather than” in the second sentence of the second paragraph there.
6. Infused 6

   9 December 2016 at 12:07 pm

   wrong thread.
   • Muttonbird 6.1

     9 December 2016 at 12:16 pm

     wrong forum too.
7. adam 7

   9 December 2016 at 12:44 pm

   There is another argument here, and lets not fight over the fact charter schools are the door to privatisation, and they have a strong anti-union ideological push behind them. Plus in every country where they are being tried, they have problems – especially around finance.

   My problem is slightly different and it is this. Where else is giving Maori and Pacific the chance to led education, to get Maori and Pacific success? The state system has failed many, and we have now had a few years with charter schools going to see if the state has improved, and frankly the same failures are going on.

   I would not like to see us go back to the a state education system, which systematically fails people because of the ethnicity.

   To me it’s time we looked to do somthing different, and somthing Maori and Pacific led. And unlike some here, I don’t think the charter schools have been a total failure on the ground. Having met a few of these kids before they started and now – some of these schools are producing amazing outcomes. Time to poach what is good – Maori and Pacific governance, control, and extra cash. And ditch what is bad, education as a business – it is actually a stupid idea, lets be honest.
   • Molly 7.1

     9 December 2016 at 1:00 pm

     “Where else is giving Maori and Pacific the chance to led education, to get Maori and Pacific success? “
     Redefine success for Maori and Pasifika students, and/or those who want to engage in meaningful and relevant studies, and push that definition into any conversation about state education.

     Was looking at the Barefoot College movement a couple of weeks ago, and it resonated with me because of some recent conversation with someone in the Ministry about Maori and Pasifika achievement.

     The short term gains to Maori and Pasifika in terms of leading their own schools are lost in the requirement to deliver to the charter school investors and the need to report back to Ministry on the same guidelines.

     The long-term cost is felt by all.
     • adam 7.1.1

       9 December 2016 at 2:34 pm

       I don’t think it is a short term project that Maori and Pacific want to control education, and it’s outcomes.

       I’m not sure what you are pointing to at the long term cost for this?

       I’m not willing and I know many others who are not willing to trust the state on this issue, when it has had a very long time to get it right. It has not done so, it is as simple as that.

       The state has failed to listened to Maori Educators, or Pacific for that matter. So love it or hate it – one of the outcomes of charter schools is the pedagogy of these groups are finally getting an airing. I can’t see that as anything but a good thing.
       • Molly 7.1.1.1

         9 December 2016 at 4:09 pm

         Adam, I looked into charter schools extensively many years ago – close to twenty – when I joined the NZ home education community.

         As a student, once exempted from attendance, you cannot access any Ministry of Education resources or external funding activities (such as swimming lessons, museum class trips etc).

         The United States had led the way with charter schools citing all the reasons including similar to yours – that specific under-served demographics in the state system would be better served.

         Often that was the case for the first couple of years, then the previously fully attended state school would lose funding because of the loss of pupils and would eventually be closed down, removing any choice.

         Once a monopoly was in place the charter school would do the barest minimum to continue, and sometimes even less.

         Taking part in the charter school system, would benefit organised home educators – but research into this system, indicated that those still within the state run schools feel the impact first, and then often the charter school students feel the loss in quality eventually. So I personally considered any benefit to our home community to be offset by detrimental effects on building and maintaining a robust state system.

         I have no problem with private schools being run with private funds.

         But state funded education of equal opportunity and quality should be accessible to all. This dividing of students into demographics – instead of addressing anomalies within the system itself – brings back that who “separate but equal” idea. Which in practice is a complete load of bollocks.

         Charter schools may/or may not benefit Maori or Pasifika who attend them, but they lessen the chances of Maori or Pasifika students who continue to mainstream of being accommodated. And long-term that is not a good outcome.
       • KJT 7.1.1.2

         9 December 2016 at 5:03 pm

         Government does not listen to Maori, Pakeha or Pacific Island Teachers.

         Because they know better, than trained Teachers, and researchers.
   • Rex Morris 7.2

     9 December 2016 at 1:10 pm

     Interesting comments re Maori and Pacific education. This may hint that the essence of the problem may not be in the education system. Its just like Parata et al saying more and a different emphasis must be placed on students who are not achieving. However the majority do come from areas where the schools are in the lower decile ranks. But if students come to school at five years of age 2-3 years behind, there is a huge gap to make up in the wider sphere of individual social and language development, not just pushing them up a few levels in reading or maths. There needs to be a greater focus on addressing poverty, [which is another whole discussion] and improved ECE, not on nonsensical things like national standards.
   • One Anonymous Bloke 7.3

     9 December 2016 at 3:23 pm

     1. Household income is the most influential factor in education.
     2. Perhaps giving schools triple the funding is the main difference.

     The systematic failure you refer to has nothing to do with state education, and everything to do with (1).
     • adam 7.3.1

       10 December 2016 at 9:23 am

       That is a massive oversimplification One Anonymous Bloke.
       • One Anonymous Bloke 7.3.1.1

         10 December 2016 at 1:59 pm

         What Rex said at 7.2 is a longer form of the same point.
8. Psych nurse 8

   9 December 2016 at 1:12 pm

   A schools roll is fixed at a certain date usually in March. That roll then becomes a schools year 12 or 13 cohort ect, no matter what happens to certain pupils, they may leave for any reason such as employment, they are included in a schools NCEA results as not sitting or failing. A Charter school only used those who sat NCEA in their statistics, eg 1 sat = 100% pass, the other 20 for instance never sat but were excluded from the school results unlike the state school.
9. UncookedSelachimorpha 9

   9 December 2016 at 1:38 pm

   John Oliver was good on Charter Schools in the USA

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_htSPGAY7I
10. Adrian 10

    9 December 2016 at 2:22 pm

    That’s not all on the privatisation model. There are 2 high schools in Blenheim, both single sex. The Ministry says they want one segregated school on one site because they won,t spend 22mill on the separate schools on quake strengthening and upgrading. Waste of money they say , we,ll spend 75 mil on a new school but there is nowhere to put it short of flattening a major sports venue or a park or two.
    TReasury said ” You’re dreaming and our figures prove it”.
    In the ” consultation ” Parata hid Treasurys papers, she is a liar said there were no papers.
    It turns out that it is to be a privately owned school leased back to the Ministry.
    Plenty of room there for under the table deals and outright corruption.
    Wonder why she left and where she’ll end up?.
    No prizes for that it’s too easy.
    • Pete 10.1

      9 December 2016 at 3:57 pm

      There have been claims of corruption in the Ministry of Education and with that Minister. The involvement of them in Rangiora High is a case in point.
      • rob 10.1.1

        9 December 2016 at 10:02 pm

        Are you surprised or was expected? I for one are not surprised.
11. johnm 11

    9 December 2016 at 4:31 pm

    You voted in JK the neoliberal U$ stooge. So now it’ll take forever to sort out the free market mess. Good Luck! I’m out of here!
    • rob 11.1

      9 December 2016 at 10:09 pm

      I wish I could chq out too! but alas I’m doomed in my own country, but time is catching me and New Zealanders are being taken over. It makes me sad but I have no off spring so good luck to whoeva is left if the nats keep getting in!
12. fustercluck 12

    10 December 2016 at 8:34 am

    Quelle surprise.
13. repateet 13

    11 December 2016 at 7:59 pm

    Sorrwerdna 5: 9 December 2016 at 12:04 pm
    “…you need to understand the types of students attracted to Charter Schools…”

    Do we need to understand the types of students attracted to State Schools too?

Links to post

1. MUST READ SUNDAY: Charter Schools in a Post-Truth Era « The Daily Blog: posted on 11 December 2016 at 1:31 pm
2. Charter Schools in a Post-Truth Era | Frankly Speaking...: posted on 16 December 2016 at 8:01 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS