Incoherent education policy

Written By: - Date published: 8:22 am, August 3rd, 2012 - 215 comments
Categories: national, schools - Tags: , ,

The Nats forced perfectly good state schools to use national standards as a “solution” to the problem that some kids (they claim 1 in 5) leave school without a formal qualification:

[Tolley] “New Zealand elected a Government that promised to introduce national standards so that every single child could read, write, and do maths when they left school. That is what the country voted for. No matter what the briefings say, no matter what the Opposition may say now, almost one in five children failed.”

Now the Nats are ramming through charter schools, supposedly as a solution to the same problem:

[Key] “The schooling system is failing some kids and we need to try some different things.”… Ms Parata said the charter schools would target the one-in-five students who currently leave school without an appropriate education or qualifications.

But charter schools don’t need to use national standards:

However, they will be able to determine whether they operate under the National standards programme and offer NCEA qualifications or adopt an “alternative curriculum framework”.

So – ahhhh – WTF? The right hand of National’s education policy doesn’t know what the far-right hand is up to. Unless, of course, these aren’t really “education” policies at all.

215 comments on “Incoherent education policy ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Wyndham 1
    3 August 2012 at 8:30 am

    The so-called charter schools are nothing more than a sop to John Banks and the tattered remnants of the Act Party.

    • Olwyn 1.1
      3 August 2012 at 8:39 am

      Given that they were not even mentioned until the coalition talks, they look more like the use of ACT to get policies favoured by “our sponsors” in, without having to first convince the public.

      • Gosman 1.1.1
        3 August 2012 at 8:42 am

        ACT has always been in favour of more choice and independence in Schooling. It is not true to state that Charter Schools don’t match their philosophy.

        • Te Reo Putake 1.1.1.1
          3 August 2012 at 8:51 am

          Who’s saying it doesn’t match ACT’s philosophy, Gos? It’s a rubbish proposal, so, from my perspective, it perfectly matches everything ACT stands for.

          • Gosman 1.1.1.1.1
            3 August 2012 at 8:55 am

            It is a trial and there is evidence that Charter Schools make a positive difference to those the current system fails.

            • Carol 1.1.1.1.1.1
              3 August 2012 at 8:56 am

              Great. So they are experimenting with children.

              Which they don’t need to do, because there is plenty of evidence that most Charter Schools don’t work, and when they do, the same approach can be followed within the existing education system.

              • Gosman …
                3 August 2012 at 9:01 am

                A number of Kids are failing already. You could argue that we are already experimenting badly with these kids under the current system. Of course we don’t need to put it to trial if you don’t want to. Go straight to introducing this across the board.

              • Gosman …
                3 August 2012 at 9:05 am

                BTW there is not plenty of evidence that most Charter Schools don’t work. There is in fact evidence that they can make a positive difference to those that the Public School system fails.

                http://www.economist.com/node/21558265

                • Frank Macskasy …
                  3 August 2012 at 9:55 am

                  Rubbish.

                  This is the same article you referred to in another blogpost and you’re peddling it as supportive of your position. As usual, you are mis-representing to suit yourself.

                  The article states, in part,

                  “Much political capital has been made of a 2009 study of 16 states that found that only 17% of charter schools were better than public schools, 37% were worse and the rest were about the same. The work was done by the Centre for Research on Education Outcomes (Credo) at Stanford University.

                  The Credo study has been criticised for not comparing the results of children who have won charter-school lotteries with those who have not—a natural experiment in which the only difference between winners and losers should be the schooling they receive. Such studies suggest that charters are better. For example, a lottery study in New York City found that by eighth grade (around 13), charter-school pupils were 30 points ahead in maths.

                  However, recent work by Mathematica, an independent policy group, suggests that the Credo study is sound. The bigger problem is that its findings have been misinterpreted. “

                  If you’re going to post links to articles, exercise more honesty in what you’re claiming.

                  • Gosman …
                    3 August 2012 at 10:12 am

                    Frank, did you not read further than that paragraph?

                    Did you not read and understand the sentence “The bigger problem is that its findings have been misinterpreted. “?

                    What do you think that actually means?

                    Try and use some analytical skills when reading. That article was in favour of Charter Schools. Why was it in favour?

                  • Gosman …
                    3 August 2012 at 10:37 am

                    This is why you are disingenuine Frank. You deliberately stopped mid way through a paragraph as if that made your point, That article goes on to state the following AFTER the section you quoted out of context.

                    “Credo finds that students in poverty and English language learners fare better in charters.”

                    “Credo thinks that the variation in quality can be traced to the governing legislation behind the schools.”

                    The rest of the tone of the acticle points out that while there are obvious flaws in some Charter schools they do provide benefits to kids curently being failed by the Public education system in the States.

                  • UpandComer …
                    6 August 2012 at 10:20 am

                    KIPP schools show Charter schools can work for underprivileged kids much better then public schools.

                    The point is that Maori kids have been failing for decades, why not try something new to see if it will work for them?

                    Just throwing more money at public schools hasn’t ever worked, and won’t work.

                • Carol …
                  3 August 2012 at 10:10 am

                  Ultimately, there is no evidence that NAct’s Charter Schools are likely to be more “successful” than our very good state schools. The differences between the 2 sides of the debate, amount to differences in philosophy about the nature of education – and I think it is no accident that Banks uses a private military school as his inspiration/model – it would most likely favour an authoritarian approach, that focus on an uncritical approach to performing physical activities. Not something that would encourage critical thinking or individual imitative.

                  The CREDO study, that the Economist article focuses on, actually is inconclusive as it only registers slight differences between charter and public schools. It has been claimed as evidence to support both sides of the charter school debate.

                  The differences are no bigger than those between various public schools and between diverse charter schools – so it partly depends on which schools are in the samples compared. See here for a fairly detailed analysis of this.

                  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/a-new-look-at-the-credo-charter-school-study/2011/10/07/gIQAl8r5aL_blog.html

                  I would suggest, once again, that we aren’t getting good answers because we’re not asking the right questions. It’s not whether some charters seem to do better or worse, but rather why (CREDO does provide some state-level results addressing this – they’re worth checking out, but very limited).

                  That is, how can we explain the performance of any “good” or “bad” school and, in so doing, hopefully identify specific policies and practices that can be used to improve all schools?

                  Also, as far as I can see, the measures used by the CREDO study are tests on reading etc. The problem I have with the US school education system as they are focused too strongly on testing and teaching to tests. This to me is not an in-depth education in knowledge and understanding, but has more to do with an authoritarian approach to training in selected skills. Hence it is an ideology-based form of education, and one I’m sure NAct would be happy to follow

                  And, ultimately, the need for New Zealand’s failing students, is to identify successful approaches to teaching the least successful students in our system, as well as to identify what counts as success: i.e. what measures as used. The debate on state vs Charter Schools is as much about a debate between 2 different philosophies of education as about which approach is more “successful”.

                  There’s been a lot of work done in these areas by educationists over the decades and much knowledge on it by trained and qualified teachers. This can best be done within the state sector, and not through some hit and miss (axe the failing schools) approach in some Charter School experiment.

                  • Gosman …
                    3 August 2012 at 10:27 am

                    It could possibly be done within the State sector, (although it hasn’t to date) and it possibly could be done via a combination of the State and Charter Schools. That is the nature of the debate. I would prefer that we see if these Charter Schools actually make a difference. If they do then surely that is a good thing.

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      3 August 2012 at 10:56 am

                      It could possibly be done within the State sector, (although it hasn’t to date)

                      It has been done to date in state schools. That’s why our schools are better today than they were when I went to school.

                    • Dv …
                      3 August 2012 at 11:10 am

                      LOOK AT THIS
                      http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/local-papers/kapi-mana-news/3910236/Fears-for-the-future-of-Porirua-Alternative-School

                      Sounds like the ‘Charter schools’ model proposed and done within the current system since 1985
                      (Govt trying to shut it down in 2010)

                      Fears for the future of Porirua Alternative School

                      Porirua resident Lloyd Martin set up the school in 1985. It is one of 163 alternative education centres in New Zealand.

                      The Ministry of Education last year proposed that the current system be dis-established. A ministry report said success rates at AE schools were poor.

                      Mr Tiatia disagrees: “Out of the 16 students we have, 50 per cent were chronic truants, but here we have a 90 per cent attendance rate.

                      Sixteen students attend the Cannons Creek school, where they learn basic numeracy, literacy, computer and life skills. The school has its own NZQA accredited curriculum and students are encouraged to gain NCEA credits

                      The school has four staff, including a qualified teacher and two part-time youth workers. The community is also heavily involved, with support coming from local schools, Lions clubs, Northern United rugby club, and Porirua Vikings rugby league clubs.

                    • urban rascal …
                      3 August 2012 at 11:12 am

                      Bullsh*t, there are some great initiatives being tried in State schooling. My own mother has been involved in some of the most engaging and experimental teaching programs I have seen through IT and technology development. This is not treating IT as a subject but as a provider for all subjects. She now works at
                      http://www.hingaiapeninsula.school.nz/

                      A school that is trying joined year group classes (i.e years 0 – 3), studio classrooms. Multiple teachers to a class. etc
                      They have just set up a system where students can track their goals with parents and teachers commenting and assisting online.

                      National standards are supposed to help parents. Well what’s better than a system where you can directly see what you child is learning, what their teacher is saying they should work on etc.

                      There are great things happening within the state schooling sector that actually make a difference. Charter schools are a political policy and ignore the development of fresh ideas that the system is already trying out.

                      This is just one school out of many in just the Auckland region trying new teaching methods. We have teachers from overseas come for apple bus tours of our schools to take notes on how we have intergrated technology to help our kids.

                    • Gosman …
                      3 August 2012 at 11:20 am

                      There is nothing stopping state sector schools continuing to do what your mother has been involved with. Charter Schools are just another option.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      3 August 2012 at 11:23 am

                      Charter schools an option to dumb down teachers and teaching

                    • urban rascal …
                      3 August 2012 at 11:34 am

                      The only thing Charter schools seem to do is remove accountability, remove qualified teachers and privatise education.

                      Fair enough it’s only a trial, but tax payer money should not be used on an education policy that isn’t in the interest of funding better classroom learning.
                      I recommend you visit some of our primary to intermediate schools before casting your political leanings over our high rated education system. You’ll find that the schools aren’t failing children.
                      Parents who can’t or don’t feed their children under the strain of our economic system are what are failing our children.

                      But i’ll be F*%ked if NACt would every do anything positive about that, they are too busy helping the “free” market rebuild a CBD and sucking off casino’s to build convention centres for the “free” market. Oh and selling of electricity assets because the “free” market can’t build their own and compete.

                      You get the sense that the “free” market failed along time ago and some people are yet to release us from your failed idealogies and the cold, death grip you have on this country. Yet the free market can solve education can it… not with out (you guessed it) some state funding.

                    • Dr Terry …
                      3 August 2012 at 12:22 pm

                      Oh, they will make a difference alright! The question is, a difference for the better OR THE WORSE?
                      It is good to receive intelligent input from Carol, though intelligence is probably not highly wanted or valued in society at large.

                    • Frank Macskasy …
                      3 August 2012 at 12:57 pm

                      “I would prefer that we see if these Charter Schools actually make a difference. ”

                      A difference to what?

                      How will Charter Schools “make a difference” when Finland doesn’t use Charter schools and rank higher than us (#2, and #3) on OECD PISA scales – while the US ranks far lower.

                      If you think we need to “make a difference”, wouldn’t logic suggest we follow Finland rather than our poorly achieving American cuzzies?

                      Just a thought. Y’know, pursuit of excellence and all that kinda stuff..,.

                    • Rob …
                      3 August 2012 at 4:23 pm

                      How are we able to measure our schools on an international basis and then rank them against other countries, when we are being told that we cannot rank the performance of our own schools together as they are so different. Can someone please explain what this international ranking system is and what national measure they use in comparison.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      3 August 2012 at 11:17 pm

                      Hey dodo those international rankings don’t compare schools, they compare student performance. May be you should talk to someone “qualified” in order to learn more.

            • marsman 1.1.1.1.1.2
              3 August 2012 at 9:27 am

              ‘there is evidence that Charter Schools make a positive difference’ There is also evidence that there is no difference AND evidence that there is negative difference. So what’s your point!

              • Gosman …
                3 August 2012 at 9:29 am

                Did you read the article? If so, which parts do you disagree with and why?

                • marsman …
                  3 August 2012 at 9:47 am

                  Google -‘Charter Schools a failure’ then ‘Charter Schools a success’.

                • Frank Macskasy …
                  3 August 2012 at 9:58 am

                  The question should be, Gosman, have you read it properly ?! Because it appears you have not.

                  • Gosman …
                    3 August 2012 at 10:24 am

                    Answer the questions I have asked you about that article Frank. If you think it is stating what you are claiming this shouldn’t be a problem.

                    • Frank Macskasy …
                      3 August 2012 at 11:31 am

                      HAVE.YOU.READ.THE.ARTICLE.GOSMAN?

                      It’s an article YOU posted. Surely you must know what it contains.I’ve already given you a C&P excerpt from it.

                      What part of this do you find difficult to comprehend?

                    • Gosman …
                      3 August 2012 at 11:35 am

                      Just because you seem to be ignoring this post I made I’ll repeat it here.

                      This is why you are disingenuine Frank. You deliberately stopped mid way through a paragraph as if that made your point, That article goes on to state the following AFTER the section you quoted out of context.

                      “Credo finds that students in poverty and English language learners fare better in charters.”

                      “Credo thinks that the variation in quality can be traced to the governing legislation behind the schools.”

                      The rest of the tone of the acticle points out that while there are obvious flaws in some Charter schools they do provide benefits to kids curently being failed by the Public education system in the States.

                      Simple question for you Frank, was that article pro or anti Charter schools?

                    • Frank Macskasy …
                      3 August 2012 at 12:06 pm

                      Now you’re being pathetic.

                      It matters not one whit what I think of the Economist article. The fact is that YOU posted it, and you used it to back up you position.

                      Are you now backing away from it because you didn’t read through it properly?

                      You complain when we don’t read your linked-to articles, and then you complain when we do – and challenge you on their content.

                      You can’t have it both ways, Gosman.

                    • Gosman …
                      3 August 2012 at 2:08 pm

                      Sometimes I think you might have suffered a brain injury Frank. I have pointed out how you have misrepresented that article by not including the sections on the Credo study that were discussed AFTER the segment you quoted. Deal with that issue and don’t keep avoiding it.

            • Bored 1.1.1.1.1.3
              3 August 2012 at 1:27 pm

              It is a trial and there is evidence…so if their is “evidence” why is there need of a “trial”?

            • Georgecom 1.1.1.1.1.4
              3 August 2012 at 10:56 pm

              In jurisidictions that have weaker education systems than NZ, and longer tails of underachievement, charter schools have been shown not to have made a difference in raising education standards.

              So, with our world class education system, how is a failing policy from overseas going to magically be a success here.

              Of course, it won’t, except in the minds of ideologues like John Banks and ilk.

              A failed policy from overseas will simply replicate failure.

        • Carol 1.1.1.2
          3 August 2012 at 8:55 am

          Charter Schools may match ACT’s philosophy, but they never mentioned the schools in their election campaign.

          • Gosman 1.1.1.2.1
            3 August 2012 at 8:58 am

            It isn’t a stretch to see this policy being promoted by ACT though. It is like Free Trade agreements. They don’t generally make it to the policy sheet at election time but you would expect political party’s that are supportive of the free market to look to promote them if they win power.

            • Olwyn 1.1.1.2.1.1
              3 August 2012 at 9:12 am

              “It isn’t a stretch to see this policy being promoted by ACT though.” True, but it is a stretch when they are pulled out of the hat as some sort of bottom line in coalition talks, when they have so far gone unmentioned.

              • Gosman …
                3 August 2012 at 9:17 am

                I don’t see what your problem with ACT promoting this though. I understand you don’t like the policy considering you are from the left of the political spectrum. It seems silly to me that you as a leftist would be bothered which policies a right leaning political party would want to make bottom line in any talks with another right leaning political party. As stated Charter Schools are entirely consistent with ACT party philisophy and I see no problem with them promoting it.

                • Olwyn …
                  3 August 2012 at 10:27 am

                  Imagine the squawks from your own team if the same thing happened on the left, if Labour went into talks with Hone and came out adopting a controversial policy that had so far gone unmentioned but was nonetheless consistent with Hone’s philosophy.

                  • Gosman …
                    3 August 2012 at 10:58 am

                    i would regard this as equally ridiculous. For example if Labour went in to a coalition agreement with Mana and suddenly decided to increase benefits across the board by 50% I wouldn’t be surprised. I would think it was an economically idiotic policy but I wouldn’t be surprised.

                • Macro …
                  3 August 2012 at 10:37 am

                  What you argue is that an “educational policy”, which was not part of any manifesto before the election, and which is entirely bereft on any educational merit whatsoever, is good policy simply because a political party which represents approximately 1% or less of the entire population thinks that it is a ‘good idea”; especially as it will keep the masses even dumber than they are already, and we can then hoodwink them even more easily.

                • framu …
                  3 August 2012 at 12:13 pm

                  “I see no problem with them promoting it.”

                  except the didnt did they – i know you mean promote differently here (surprise surprise), but the association of corrupt thieves never promoted this to the electorate

            • Hayden 1.1.1.2.1.2
              3 August 2012 at 9:17 am

              political party’s

              Are you using yourself as an example?

            • Frank Macskasy 1.1.1.2.1.3
              3 August 2012 at 9:59 am

              Carol is correct, Gosman.

              ACT makes no reference to Charter schools on their website.

              You are being disingenuous, again.

            • Frank Macskasy 1.1.1.2.1.4
              3 August 2012 at 10:04 am

              So you’d be alright with, say, a Labour-led government raising taxes without disclosing it prior to an election?

              Just as John Key raised GST without raising it at the 2008 election.

              You’d be fine with that, Gosman?

              • Gosman …
                3 August 2012 at 10:22 am

                Yes I would. I would expect it as a matter of course from a left leaning Government.

                • Frank Macskasy …
                  3 August 2012 at 11:33 am

                  But you think it’s ok for ACT to implement policy it never campaigned on, and is not included in their education policy?

                • Gosman …
                  3 August 2012 at 11:36 am

                  Yes, because it is consistent with their underlying political philosophy. Just as raising benefits is consistent with Mana’s.

                  • Frank Macskasy …
                    3 August 2012 at 12:09 pm

                    Like raising GST, when Key promised not to?

                    Or borrowing for tax cuts when Key promised not to?

                    • Gosman …
                      3 August 2012 at 12:12 pm

                      That’s right, raising GST is a legitimate area where you can attack John Key on for going against his party and previous position. Lowering taxes though is something you can’t do the same.

                    • Frank Macskasy …
                      3 August 2012 at 12:51 pm

                      I didn’t say “lowering taxes”.

                      I said borrowing for tax cuts. Key promised he wouldn’t – but National ended up borrowing $380 million a week, at one stage.

                      That’s a broken promise. And irresponsible at that.

                    • Gosman …
                      3 August 2012 at 2:10 pm

                      You don’t borrow for tax cuts. You borrow for expenditure that you can’t fund from revenue. Tax cuts are not expenditure.

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      3 August 2012 at 3:52 pm

                      Tax cuts are not expenditure.

                      No, they’d be that revenue stream that used to cover the expenditures before the tax cuts.

                  • Dr Terry …
                    3 August 2012 at 12:29 pm

                    At this point I bow out from “the Gosman column”. If he talks long and loud enough he might convince himself, but is very unlikely to prevail upon anyone else.

            • KJT 1.1.1.2.1.5
              3 August 2012 at 10:34 am

              No surprise at all that loony policies like the TPP, asset sales and charter schools are supported by the lunatic fringe that supports ACT.

              Just shows that National, now, are equally lunatic. Just constrained by the need to get re-elected.
              Or they would be if they were not going to big paying jobs with their fellow thieves when they leave Parliament.

              I wonder how many of the principled conservatives that used to be part of National are turning in their graves.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                3 August 2012 at 11:04 am

                Just shows that National, now, are equally lunatic.

                They’ve been equally lunatic for awhile now. If National honestly articulated their policies and principles (rather, the lack thereof) there’s no way they’d ever get in government.

        • Frank Macskasy 1.1.1.3
          3 August 2012 at 11:40 am

          ACT has also been opposed to subsidies.

          Please explain why this has now changed for Charter Schools.

        • Bored 1.1.1.4
          3 August 2012 at 1:23 pm

          Choice…independence nice words, what do they really mean?

          Choice…could be a case of who is choosing…for example somebody choosing to take a government funded revenue stream to profit from provision of “choice” education.
          Independence..could mean not controlled by the funders (who are one and the same as the state system…(could this be an “independent” arm of education policy and provision)?

          The way I see it if somebody chooses to run an independent school they are currently free to do so. If they want their results to be recognised they have known standards to adhere to. If they want funding they can find their own.

    • Sally Cron 1.2
      5 August 2012 at 10:34 am

      Personally I think they should be encouraging Technical type schools (as they had in the past) where children can persue courses in woodwork, mechanics and other practical subjects that eventually offer employment and are of more interest to many of them. Include core subjects but maths should be ‘useful maths’ for the future of these children ie keeping accounts etc. Social Studies could be made fun rather than having to learn for exams they won’t pass and give them confidence to work in the outside world.

    • Sally Cron 1.3
      5 August 2012 at 10:34 am

      Personally I think they should be encouraging Technical type schools (as they had in the past) where children can persue courses in woodwork, mechanics and other practical subjects that eventually offer employment and are of more interest to many of them. Include core subjects but maths should be ‘useful maths’ for the future of these children ie keeping accounts etc. Social Studies could be made fun rather than having to learn for exams they won’t pass and give them confidence to work in the outside world.

  2. Tiger Mountain 2
    3 August 2012 at 8:53 am

    Unregistered low wage “teachers”, non educationalists in charge, state funded but privately run with little if any accountability to tax payers, Destiny Church and various other organisations wanting to run one–how bad can charter schools get?

    National previously seemed very keen on witch hunting unsuitable teachers but anything goes it seems with ACT’s deadly spawn Charter schools. That dirty filthy neo-lib micro party has been the true sting in the tail of ShonKeys govt. Bennie bashing, Super City, local government capping and now this.

    Take all steps to impede and halt this backward leap, don’t leave it to the teacher unions. Even NZSTA is opposing Charter schools. From time to time there are debates on blogs about the dearth of public intellectuals in NZ, well add competent educationalists to that too because this is partly the result of the MoE having driven out most of the decent people.

    • Gosman 2.1
      3 August 2012 at 9:00 am

      “…with little if any accountability to tax payers”

      Do you have any evidence that their will be little if any accountability to tax payers for Charter Schools.

      The information I have read about them is they can be strictly managed and controlled via agreements with the State.

      • mac1 2.1.1
        3 August 2012 at 9:36 am

        Yeah, right!

        • McFlock 2.1.1.1
          3 August 2012 at 1:35 pm

          no, straight up – they’ll be “strictly managed” just like the private prison is. Under what National perceives to be NCEA rules – if they get “failed to achieve” or less than half of their minimum targets, they’ll have unlimited chances to make it up.And still be paid.

      • Frank Macskasy 2.1.2
        3 August 2012 at 10:00 am

        Do you have any evidence that their will be little if any accountability to tax payers for Charter Schools.

        Do you have evidence there will be?

        • Gosman 2.1.2.1
          3 August 2012 at 10:21 am

          “The Minister of Education would approve the schools and the contracts would include detail, including the maximum number of students allowed which can be reviewed annually.

          They would have to accept all students regardless of background and have to report against National Standards for Year 1-8 students and offer NCEA or an equivalent qualification.

          The schools’ contracts with the Crown would be for a fixed term and require specific targets which would be reported on. ”

          http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/7398757/Charter-schools-could-employ-unregistered-teachers

          This would suggest that they will be held to a high degree of accountability by the State.

          Now do you have any evidence that they won’t be?

          • Kotahi Tāne Huna 2.1.2.1.1
            3 August 2012 at 10:45 am

            Oh, that sounds like a really believable bunch of assurances, Gossamer, just like the rest of the mendacious dreck ACT have been shovelling around these past thirty years, and it’s all bullshit. If any of their policies worked, they wouldn’t be polling below the margin of error, and they wouldn’t be led by a criminal clown.

            The whole purpose of this policy is to put public funds in private wallets: utterly venal and corrupt.

            • Gosman 2.1.2.1.1.1
              3 August 2012 at 11:01 am

              That’s your opinion. You are entitled to it. Obviously other people have a different opinion. Working out which gets implemented as policy is called politics.

              • Frank Macskasy …
                3 August 2012 at 11:42 am

                “That’s your opinion. You are entitled to it. Obviously other people have a different opinion. Working out which gets implemented as policy is called politics.”

                ???

                So you’ve gone from providing evidence to back up your position – to now “opinions”?

                Perhaps it might help if you read up a little more on this subject, Gosman, before embarressing yourself.

                • Gosman …
                  3 August 2012 at 11:49 am

                  States the man who somehow stops readin an article after he thinks it supports his view point.

                  Perhaps you would like to address my points about that rather than waste your time attacking me and not adding to the debate.

                  • Frank Macskasy …
                    3 August 2012 at 12:15 pm

                    Oh dear. You really don’t like it when your own ineptitude is thrown back at you, do you?

                    Perhaps next time you’ll read your own articles more carefully before linking to them.

                    As I pointed out above, you complain when we don’t read your articles – then complain when we do, and challenge you on their content.

                    You need to take responsibility if you’re going to debate complex issues with others, Gosman.

            • framu 2.1.2.1.1.2
              3 August 2012 at 12:18 pm

              ” If any of their policies worked,”…. they (not act per se – but neo-liberals) wouldnt have needed pinochet to get started and wouldnt have needed to enact their ideas by stealth or force in any country theyve tried it on.

              lets not forget – ACT style policies have NEVER been voted in by an electorate anywhere in the world

          • Draco T Bastard 2.1.2.1.2
            3 August 2012 at 11:21 am

            Serco prison statistics. Can’t even meet the standards set by the state run prisons and yet are still not being held to account.

          • Frank Macskasy 2.1.2.1.3
            3 August 2012 at 11:35 am

            State the details of that accountability please, and the mechanism by which it will be implemented?

            Then explain how it differs from current ERO assessments of state schools.

            • Gosman 2.1.2.1.3.1
              3 August 2012 at 11:39 am

              Have they released all the details of the Charter school legislation yet Frank? When they do so, if it doesn’t have these mechanisms in place then you have cause to complain. I will even join with you on that one. Think about it Frank, you and I joined in a common cause. The world will surely implode.

              • Frank Macskasy …
                3 August 2012 at 11:44 am

                Can you make a point without the constant need to frame it as a question?

                Honestly, you sound very needy.

                The point I made was valid: explain how it differs from current ERO assessments of state schools.

                It’s a simple request.

                • Gosman …
                  3 August 2012 at 11:51 am

                  I have no idea. Is it the same as the ERO? Are you happy with the current ERO framework? If so, then surely this means there is a good level of oversight to these schools. Unless you think the current ERO framework only works for State Schools.

  3. George 3
    3 August 2012 at 8:58 am

    There is only one reason for charter schools and that is to pay teachers less, thereby bringing the cost of education down.

    • Hayden 3.1
      3 August 2012 at 9:18 am

      Would it be paranoid of me to link this to the attempt to lay off a few thousand teachers a couple of months ago?

      • Gosman 3.1.1
        3 August 2012 at 9:25 am

        Yes it would. Although perhaps they could have got a job with the new Charter Schools 😉

        • Frank Macskasy 3.1.1.1
          3 August 2012 at 11:45 am

          At $13.50 an hour?

          George may have a point; “There is only one reason for charter schools and that is to pay teachers less, thereby bringing the cost of education down.”

          • Gosman 3.1.1.1.1
            3 August 2012 at 12:00 pm

            No he doesn’t have a point for the reasons outlined in that article I linked to.

            • Frank Macskasy 3.1.1.1.1.1
              3 August 2012 at 12:24 pm

              The one you haven’t read properly, Gosman?

              I one that concluded that the Stanford University CREDO report “… is sound. The bigger problem is that its findings have been misinterpreted”?

          • Colonial Viper 3.1.1.1.2
            3 August 2012 at 12:03 pm

            Charter schools are cheap government sponsored borstals. Nothing more, nothing less.

            • Gosman 3.1.1.1.2.1
              3 August 2012 at 12:10 pm

              In your opinion.

              • Colonial Viper …
                3 August 2012 at 1:02 pm

                They’re also designed to give the not-so-subtle finger to teachers unions and education specialists, who are of course great friends of the National Party.

          • Dv 3.1.1.1.3
            3 August 2012 at 1:38 pm

            The cost to education will not go down, the private provider will pocket the difference.

          • KJT 3.1.1.1.4
            3 August 2012 at 1:49 pm

            Yep. We have to pay millions to motivate managers to do their jobs, but we will get better teachers by paying them less and making their job almost impossible.

          • UpandComer 3.1.1.1.5
            6 August 2012 at 10:37 am

            That shows the problem with the establishment – you still think it’s all about teachers.

            Who cares if the people teaching at those schools get paid less, or haven’t done the teacher’s College indoctrination.

            What matters is the results – and currently the public system is not working for a lot of Maori/Pacific Island young people.

            The status quo isn’t working, so lets try something else. If the results are bad, then we can move to sth new.

      • fender 3.1.2
        3 August 2012 at 11:58 am

        No not paranoid at all, quite justified, and obvious NAct were planning to fund charter schools with savings made from legitimate schools.
        Tells us everything we need to know about National, they were happy to damage our education system just to buy the support of the law-breaking fool that is John Banks.

        • KJT 3.1.2.1
          3 August 2012 at 1:57 pm

          I suppose withdrawing funding from, and dumbing down, State schools will make charter schools look better.

          Same principle as putting overpaid MBA’s in and demanding extra dividends from, SOE power companies, to enable the private ones to compete.

    • Gosman 3.2
      3 August 2012 at 9:26 am

      That factually incorrect. It may be the only reason you see for them. However that would indicate you are blinded by your ideology.

      • framu 3.2.1
        3 August 2012 at 12:22 pm

        unlike your self though aye? your a paragon of honest debate and the non-idealogical examination of ideas arent you?

  4. Adrian 4
    3 August 2012 at 9:26 am

    This is not about education, it’s about corporate entities being able to clip the education ticket. That’s why they can be managed by non-teaching background, I bet that slippery Catherine Issac is already set to go. 10 or 20% of the education budget is lot of money.
    And it is not just in education. I found out last night that a mysterious corporate outfit is buying up GP’s practices. Sure, they are already private operations but are generally individually or collectively owned doctor-run practices. This is something completely different, this is about full privatisation by stealth.
    Has anyone else come across anything similar happening?

    • Gosman 4.1
      3 August 2012 at 9:28 am

      Did you read the Economist aticle I linked to or are you simply deciding this on the basis of your blind ideological allegiance to leftist views?

      • Frank Macskasy 4.1.1
        3 August 2012 at 10:02 am

        Is that the Economist article you are constantly mis-using to prove your point? In fact, the Economist article does no such thing.

        The CREDO research is still sound, as The Economist points out.

        Which you would know if youi’ve actually read the whole thing, instead of just the headline.

        • Gosman 4.1.1.1
          3 August 2012 at 10:16 am

          So was the Economist article in favour or against Charter Schools?

          How does it state the Credo research impacts on the argument for and against Charter Schools?

          Answer those questions Frank if you are interested in a debate about this issue instead of being an arse.

          • Draco T Bastard 4.1.1.1.1
            3 August 2012 at 11:25 am

            Who gives a fuck about what an Economist article states? Get peer reviewed research that states it and then we’ll talk. Until then, STFU.

          • Frank Macskasy 4.1.1.1.2
            3 August 2012 at 11:38 am

            Deflection and evasion.

            Simple question, Gosman. You must know what that article contains – you used it to back up your position.

            If you can’t even explain your own evidence, then explain to us why we should take it – and you – seriously.

            You seem to have some difficulty with this sort of thing, Gosman.

            Thankfully, that Economist article was useful in my own assessment of this issue: http://fmacskasy.wordpress.com/2012/08/02/charter-schools-another-lie-from-john-banks/

            • Gosman 4.1.1.1.2.1
              3 August 2012 at 11:41 am

              Read my post about you being disingenuine and misquoting that article (you left out large sections after that one you cheery picked) and answer my questions. The fact you are avoinding doing so speaks volumes to me about your engagement in this discussion.

              • Frank Macskasy …
                3 August 2012 at 11:49 am

                Hmmm, you’re copying my style of writing. Nice.

                You may even learn something from what I write, as well as HOW I write.

                To remind you, I posted that excerpt and stated that they were part-quotes. What part of that did you find hard to understand?

                Gosman, pay attention: if you’re going to post links to articles, you better well make damn sure you know what you’re posting. Expect your linked-evidence to be read, examined, and thrown back at you if it’s found wanting.

                If you’re going to chuck your toys just because we are unimpressed by your poor standard of research, then expect to be treated as a fool.

                • Gosman …
                  3 August 2012 at 11:55 am

                  I gave you the reasons why your interpretation was wrong. You selectively quoted and failed to add the information that the article goes on to state about the Credo study AFTER the section you quoted. Deal with the quotes I linked to rather than obsessessively focusing on the one section you misquoted. Also answer the simple question I asked about the tone of that article – was it pro or anti Charter schools?

                  • Frank Macskasy …
                    3 August 2012 at 12:30 pm

                    No, Gosman.

                    I simply read what you linked to and found information that you either missed or in your blind ideological reverance of neo-liberalism, ignored.

                    “Selectively quoted”? I took a relevant piece from the article that found the CREDO report was sound.

                    If you have information that the CREDO report is unsound – please present it. However, before you do, read the bloody thing! Because we will read it and you will be challenged when/if you f**k up.

                    Don’t blame me and others, if the information you present doesn’t support your beliefs. Otherwise you sound like some whinging cultist who is upset that the rest of us don’t revere your quasi-religious dogma.

                    • UpandComer …
                      6 August 2012 at 10:42 am

                      If the Credo report was sound, then so was Gosman’s except that said Charter schools were better for students in poverty and English language learners.

                      That statement is bourne out by the results from KIPP schools for instance.

                      Hmmmm. What students are being failed currently by the public school system in NZ who might be covered by that valid statement from a sound (in your own words) study. Hint – they’re brown.

              • Carol …
                3 August 2012 at 11:51 am

                🙄

                A graduate from the John banks School of Educational Failure?

            • Carol 4.1.1.1.2.2
              3 August 2012 at 11:49 am

              Great analysis. Yay for Finland’s approach to education! And how much more does Dishonest John Banks’ shonkey arguments need before he is totally discredited in the eyes of the public?

              • Frank Macskasy …
                3 August 2012 at 11:51 am

                Indeed, Carol.

                And the worst aspect of John Banks dishonesty is that he listed Finland as a country that employed Charter Schools – where as they do not.

                It’s fascinating how right wingers like Banks, Gosman, et al, mis-use information to suit their own narrow ideological obassessions…

                • Gosman …
                  3 August 2012 at 12:02 pm

                  States the man who seemingly stopped reading an article after it stated something he thought agreed with him.

                  • framu …
                    3 August 2012 at 12:23 pm

                    🙄

                  • Frank Macskasy …
                    3 August 2012 at 12:34 pm

                    Gosman, four points and a question;

                    1. Finland is #2 and #3 on various OECD PISA ranking

                    2. Finland does not use Charter schools

                    3. The US uses Charter Schools

                    4. The US is at #18, #23, and #26 on the same OECD PISA ranking.

                    Which country do you think we should look more closely at, in terms of educational outcomes?

                    • UpandComer …
                      6 August 2012 at 10:27 am

                      Charter schools are primarily aimed at Maori kids, who clearly are being failed by our ‘very very excellent awesome great public system’.

                      Does Finland have Maori kids?

                      Do KIPP schools help African American kids living in the ‘real’ Ghettos achieve?

          • Macro 4.1.1.1.3
            3 August 2012 at 11:44 am

            Since when has the “Economist” been an Educational journal? Opinion pieces in a lay business tabloid do NOT qualify as educational research – no matter what they say. (And it seems that the article, in which you place so much faith, is ambiguous in its promotion of your ideals anyway.)

            • Gosman 4.1.1.1.3.1
              3 August 2012 at 12:04 pm

              I don’t think that article was ambiguous in it’s support of Charter Schools at all. It is also based on, (and heavily references it), the peer reviewed research you desire.

              • Macro …
                3 August 2012 at 12:21 pm

                “I don’t think that article was ambiguous in it’s support of Charter Schools at all.”

                That’s because you don’t think Gosman. – you base all your concepts upon a flawed ideology. Your arguments are all based on pre-conceived bias.

              • Frank Macskasy …
                3 August 2012 at 12:35 pm

                In your opinion, Gosman.

    • marsman 4.2
      3 August 2012 at 9:30 am

      Dentists are also being bought by American Corporates.

  5. KJT 5
    3 August 2012 at 9:40 am

    Charter schools are simply a means to break the last vestige of trade union rights and to give the private sector access to tax dollars spent on education.

    The private sector that is so good at education that most private schools had to be bailed out by tax payers.

    Note; that despite all the tax payer dollars and effort poured into charter schools in the USA, 83% do not do any better than State schools. (Stanford University study, among others) The majority do worse. Given the poor performance of State schooling in the USA generally that is not a recommendation.

    Why follow the disaster that is schooling and health in the USA.

    We will see a few initial Potemkin charter schools do well, then the poor results of others will be buried.

    They will not have any better results than resourcing State schools properly, to use already proven programs to reduce the tail. Successful programs such as remedial reading and Teacher aids in every classroom are being starved of funds so the Government can fund ideological nightmares such as charter schools.

    If NACT was serious about bringing up educational achievement they would be working on reducing child poverty and funding extra help at early primary level for those falling behind, instead of gifting the private sector money out of education funding.

    If the private sector are so good at education why don’t they start their own schools. Wait! they did. We are paying to bail them out right now!

  6. marsman 6
    3 August 2012 at 9:49 am

    Well put KJT!

  7. Nick 7
    3 August 2012 at 10:16 am

    If people really want their kids going to schools with an unofficial curriculum, odd opening hours and holidays and unqualified teachers let them pay for it themselves. Surely the tax payer money that is being spent on this can be spent elsewhere. In fact if the government canned charter schools and stopped subsidizing private schools they’d have a lot more money to spend on the schools they are supposed to be supporting.

    • Draco T Bastard 7.1
      3 August 2012 at 11:29 am

      +1

      I don’t know why people just don’t get this. Can the state support of private schools and funding for the public schools that the state is supposed to be funding could go up.

  8. Kotahi Tāne Huna 8
    3 August 2012 at 10:33 am

    Close all these private schools by lunchtime – aggressively investigate financial links between the National Party and the owners. Make sure they lose their investment, to punish and deter them from any further attacks on New Zealand.

    • Gosman 8.1
      3 August 2012 at 11:07 am

      I look forward to some credible party of the left advocating these policies. Somehow I doubt even a hard left party like Mana will do so.

      • Frank Macskasy 8.1.1
        3 August 2012 at 11:39 am

        I look forward to you actually understanding the articles that you link to. I was in serious error about your ability to comprehend these complex issues, Gosman.

        • Gosman 8.1.1.1
          3 August 2012 at 11:53 am

          As stated above, address the points I made about you misquoting that article. I am sick of you running away everytime you are challenged on your nonsense.

          • Frank Macskasy 8.1.1.1.1
            3 August 2012 at 12:43 pm

            “I am sick of you running away everytime you are challenged on your nonsense.”

            If you’re referring to me, I’m not going anywhere. I’ve finished my blogpost challenging untruths about Charter Schools – now you have my undivided attention.

            You can start by answering this:

            Gosman, four points and a question;

            1. Finland is #2 and #3 on various OECD PISA ranking

            2. Finland does not use Charter schools

            3. The US uses Charter Schools

            4. The US is at #18, #23, and #26 on the same OECD PISA ranking.

            Which country do you think we should look more closely at, in terms of educational outcomes?

            • mike e 8.1.1.1.1.1
              3 August 2012 at 12:53 pm

              Frank gooses own evidence proves that charter schools are no better than ordinary schools 17% are worse, Thats in the USA as you have pointed out above ranking
              18 to 26 th place in the world so given that evidence we can look forward to another ACT policy fail.
              The USA should be copying us not the other way round.
              This is just a union busting ideology!

              • Frank Macskasy …
                3 August 2012 at 1:02 pm

                On the nail, Mik e.

                It appears that Gosman is somewhat irate that the evidence he linked to actually DISPROVED his ideological position rather than backing him up.

                I must thank him though; that Economist article had a relevant point that I used in my blogpost. But not in the way he thought.

                The evidence on Charter schools and following our American cuzzies is damning. But Gosman is so wedded to his Party and free market, that he refuses to see what’s in front of him.

                It’s like arguing with a Creationist that the Earth is not 6,000 years old and Humans did not walk with dinosaurs (desite what we see on ” The Flintstones”)…

            • UpandComer 8.1.1.1.1.2
              6 August 2012 at 10:46 am

              These statements beg so many questions and are so broad and disconnected as to be logically worthless.

              I could just as validly say.

              1. Finland is 2 and 3 on rankings.

              2. Finland has Finnish people.

              3. The US does not have Finnish people.

              4. The US ranks lower.

              Seriously mate, go and talk to some Maori and Pacific Island teachers/parents/kids and ask them if the public system is so infallible as to require bolstering from your dickishness

          • Frank Macskasy 8.1.1.1.2
            3 August 2012 at 1:04 pm

            ” I am sick of you running away everytime you are challenged on your nonsense.”

            It appears that Gosman has run away.

            His last post here was at 12:19. Nothing since.

            Oh dear.

      • bad12 8.1.2
        3 August 2012 at 11:52 am

        Here, get a proper education,

        ”On the Federal Test, known as the National Assessment of Educational Progress, from 2003 to 2009 Charter schools have never out-performed public Schools” unquote,

        http://www.collegiatetimes.com/…/charterschoolsfailonpromise…-United States

        The text you rely upon to support your contentions are in fact unsupported by the facts, but, i suppose we have to expect that from the commenters of the right as their political advocates in the Parliament cannot bring themselves to have even a passing knowledge of the facts,

        Here are where the REAL studies are to be found,(just for your education),

        America’s charter schools- National Education Policy Center
        http://www.epsl.asu.edu/epru/articles/EPRU-0412-78-OWI.pdf

        Can’t reach it through there, the Google is,
        National Assessment of Educational Progress United States/Charter Schools Data…

    • Herodotus 8.2
      3 August 2012 at 2:11 pm

      We in NZ are willing and accepting to write off these amounts. And why was the $2.5m overpayment to private schools not repaid? Perhaps you are right KTH
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/6696317/Pinched-private-schools-ponder-integration
      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10800517

  9. prism 9
    3 August 2012 at 11:45 am

    I’ll try to remember to put a total tonight for Gosman here this Friday. It’s trolling or bad blogging surely.

  10. captain hook 10
    3 August 2012 at 12:02 pm

    whey dont you fuck off gosman.
    you dont contribute anything except mean backbighting relentless nastiness.

    • Gosman 10.1
      3 August 2012 at 12:05 pm

      Ironic much?

      • bad12 10.1.1
        3 August 2012 at 12:31 pm

        Ironic much is the ‘fact’ that when presented with the facts as in my comment above at 8.1.2 you still continue to run off at the mouth like some demented out of control sewer with a jammed tap,

        I did notice your earlier comment where you try and disrupt the debate by deliberately pointing to questions that you thought people should Google which in effect would have lead the debate even further from the facts than what you had already managed to partly accomplish,

        It’s a pity that most of the commentors supporting the right here cannot either access the real evidence nor have the intelligence to further their contentions with intellectual debate based around the actual facts…

      • bbfloyd 10.1.2
        3 August 2012 at 12:37 pm

        young gossamer…. have you been into your dads stash of viagra again? You know the mess you make every time you do something like that…..

        Look at the horrible mess you’ve made of yourself, and this comments thread…. you seem to have contracted Little pete bad hairs affliction. ….

        Narcasism mixed in with having been told you are “special” far too many times by a desperate mother….

        I look forward to gathering more of your comments, so that i can give them to a friend of mine, who is doing his fourth year of a psych degree….

        He thinks there is a huge amount of useful info in there regarding some of the obsessions he is studying at present…

        • bbfloyd 10.1.2.1
          3 August 2012 at 12:54 pm

          apology to little bad hair… i notice he is actually making a positive contribution on the “incoherent education policy” post……

          That just leaves you…durex boy…..even bort is attempting to say sensible things occasionally…

          The last one in the padded cell…. that must get lonely…

          • Bored 10.1.2.1.1
            3 August 2012 at 1:34 pm

            I wish I knew how to draw a smiley.

            • prism 10.1.2.1.1.1
              3 August 2012 at 7:35 pm

              bored 10 1 2 1 1
              I’ve decided to have a range of icons. Choice that’s the name of the game today. So I’ve picked 7 out of the list under FAQs. They’re easy enough for me just colons round a word whatever describes the required one. And I have memorised the previously indecipherable form that enables me to link under a heading. Don’t know what this relates to but I’m as pleased as a kid who has learned how to use a slide.

    • Kotahi Tāne Huna 10.2
      3 August 2012 at 12:18 pm

      I have found the use of emoticons can alleviate the symptoms of troll-related stress.

  11. Te Reo Putake 11
    3 August 2012 at 12:27 pm

    Can I just point out the irony of being lectured on education by a person who thinks disingenuine is a real word?

    • Hayden 11.1
      3 August 2012 at 12:52 pm

      Can you provide evidence that it’s not a word? I’ve never seen any publisher of dictionaries dictionary’s state that it isn’t a word.

  12. marsman 12
    3 August 2012 at 12:39 pm

    Another post drivel dribbled on by Gosman’s Act on Campus rhetoric.

  13. Frank Macskasy 13
    3 August 2012 at 1:30 pm

    Gosman seems to have disappeared (run away) after 12:19.

    Convenient.

    He has evaded answering this;

    1. Finland is #2 and #3 on various OECD PISA ranking

    2. Finland does not use Charter schools

    3. The US uses Charter Schools

    4. The US is at #18, #23, and #26 on the same OECD PISA ranking.

    Which country do you (Gosman) think we should look more closely at, in terms of educational outcomes?

    • Rob 13.1
      4 August 2012 at 7:18 am

      I am amazed that we can be consistantly measured against a host of international schooling systems and ranked , whilst we cant even do a fair testing comparison against a set of national standards for schools in the same local town.

    • Rob 13.2
      4 August 2012 at 7:27 am

      Actually what we should do in NZ, is have all the NZ Secondary Schools do the PISA assesement for 15 year old students and then have those published, just like the PISA study does. Now that would be very useful.

      • Colonial Viper 13.2.1
        4 August 2012 at 7:50 am

        What would be useful is forcing elite private schools to use unqualified teachers.

  14. muzza 14
    3 August 2012 at 1:47 pm

    For crying out loud, why do you lot react to Gosman the way you do. It is obvious that Gosman really is only on here to stir, and may or may not even give a toss about the nonsense which comes through the words he/she types.

    If the energy used in this site was actually transferred into somehing which would make a difference, imagine what could be achieved.

    Just keep typing and letting non entities like Gosman suck the soul out of you, while getting heated up thinking that the words make a difference, they don’t!

    • framu 14.1
      3 August 2012 at 2:16 pm

      quite right muzza – perhaps the only good response is no response or…

      🙄

      (now ive learned it i love it)

      • muzza 14.1.1
        3 August 2012 at 2:44 pm

        Eye rolling is a response and an acknowledgement of the post.

        People who respond are getting something out of doing so, hence the need to respond, as opposed to ignoring.

        The best response is not to respond at all.

        • bbfloyd 14.1.1.1
          3 August 2012 at 3:02 pm

          Or just using him as a practice dummy for lampooning……The japanese use life size blow up figures of the boss as a punching bag…. durex boy could serve a useful purpose that way….

      • prism 14.1.2
        3 August 2012 at 7:40 pm

        Hayden
        That’s a new word to me and I see from my Collins that it dates back to 15th century. What are KFC Double Downs? Are they extra special hamburgers.

        framu
        I like cool 😎

    • Gosman 14.2
      3 August 2012 at 2:43 pm

      That pretty much applies to almost every single one of the comments by most people on this entire site, including yours. You do realise that most of the stuff posted on here is so extreme that no mainstream political party would touch it with a ten foot barge pole.

      • bbfloyd 14.2.1
        3 August 2012 at 2:58 pm

        Sounds like someone forgot his pills…. just remember litlle gossomar… wash them down with WATER this time……i know vodka looks like water, but it really isn’t…

      • mike e 14.2.2
        3 August 2012 at 3:02 pm

        most extreme BS comes from you Goose.
        Now you have cooked yourself again
        17% of US charter school doe worse than public US schools!
        Given the US education system is ranked 18th in the world, If we followed this we would fall rapidly down to where we were under the last national Government who kept demoralizing the education sector with another failed policy which brought from 6th in the world to 16th.

        National are consistent in their failures economically educationally generally!
        If National were a charter school they would close themselves down.

        • Draco T Bastard 14.2.2.1
          3 August 2012 at 4:13 pm

          17% of US charter school doe worse than public US schools!

          Actually, it’s 37% do worse, 17% do better, the rest are about the same.

      • McFlock 14.2.3
        3 August 2012 at 3:25 pm

        You miss the point (again) gos.
               
        Muzz and most others here offer their opinions, links and information honestly. They have read their sources, believe them to be of value, and share their opinions to inform the like-minded and possibly persuade fence-sitters. Even if some of what they offer is batshit crazy, it’s still a thousand times more interesting and worthwhile than your contributions.
                
        You don’t seek to genuinely share opinions or debate issues – you just distract, deflect, and in many cases deny reality. You frequently fail to read your own supporting evidence (and on several occasions it has directly contradicted your case), and when you do you fail to understand it. You frequently compare chalk and cheese and then pretend you’ve made a massive victory, like Socrates debating Glaucon.
               
        But most importantly, your motives aren’t honest. I don’t care if you’re an employed shill or it’s just that being a trool is more satisfying for you than internet porn, but you’re a lying dissembling stupid vain fuckwit.
             
        Muzz might or might not be mad, but at least they’re honest. 

        • Gosman 14.2.3.1
          3 August 2012 at 3:50 pm

          Muzza, information, and honesty in the same sentence. I haven’t laughed so hard in ages so thanks for that. I believe he was one of the four or five of you that trries to argue the EU was the same as the Eurozone. He is also seemingly a big believer in wacky conspiracy theories involving the big investment banks. In short I regard him as borerline insane.

          • McFlock 14.2.3.1.1
            3 August 2012 at 3:55 pm

            That may be the case.
               
            But you are just dishonest.
                 
            If you see no fundamental difference between dishonesty and insanity, then you fail Humanity 101.

            • Gosman 14.2.3.1.1.1
              3 August 2012 at 4:12 pm

              We’ve had a variation of this discussion before. Just because you disagree with my views do not make them dishonest. Dishonesty is all about spreading deliberate mistruths. I have put forward views here that were wrong a couple of times but I have always done so in the opinion that they were factually accurate. When there are facts I am not sure about I always couch my language in terms which suggest that it is as far as I am aware. I also acknowledge when I get facts wrong. This is not something I can say for many people here. You at least sheepishly acknowledged that felix stuffed up on the reasons for the original nationalisation of BNZ, although you then rapidly changed the subject. Most others aren’t even that self aware.

              • framu …
                3 August 2012 at 4:23 pm

                ” Dishonesty is all about spreading deliberate mistruth”

                its also about the way people choose to communicate.

                And you, boyo, constantly distract, shift goalposts, avoid main points to focus on minor ones etc etc and so on and so on

                – and you bloody well know you do it. Not just here but pretty much everywhere your name crops up that ive ever seen

                in short – while you might not think so (but i think thats not correct), your come across as a dishonest communicator of the highest order. And its pretty clear that you make a choice to behave this way

                “We’ve had a variation of this discussion before”

                yes… we have… we all have….

              • McFlock …
                3 August 2012 at 4:35 pm

                “A couple of times”?!
                         
                With your track record, if you said it was raining I’d want to check the metservice, an outdoor webcam and stick my head out of the window.
                       
                But it’s funny you should bring up the BNZ – as I recall the issue of whether the BNZ was bailed out immediately before its first privatization was a relatively minor point in the thread, and yet you resurrect it constantly as some sort of war trophy. Get over yourself – it’s one of the exceptionally few times you’ve even approached the characteristic “corresponds to reality” (somewhat tangentially, as well). But of course pretending it’s a trophy distracts from the topic and implies you have a certain amount of credibility. That’s a lie on both counts. Now you’ve started the same with Frank and the economist article – an article which had arguments from both sides, so you regard as supportive of charter schools.
                         
                The only reason I am convinced you are a barefaced liar is that I really don’t think that anyone could be as stupid as you profess to be.   

                • Gosman …
                  3 August 2012 at 5:00 pm

                  It was actually central to the argument which was around assets being built up by the State not being able to be sold off for some reason. BNZ was raised as an example of assets that the State did not build up (along with Coal mines) which were nationalised. Felix tried to argue that it was nationalised because it went bust. If he was correct it would have put a serious dent in my argument so it wasn’t a minor distraction.

                  • McFlock …
                    3 August 2012 at 5:21 pm

                    But then of course it had been rescued 50 years previously, and then been subsidised by being the chosen bank of the NZgovt, so to argue that state policy had not built and kept the BNZ in existence was farcical. What you keep resurrecting is whether the BNZ needed a massive bailout in single-digit years prior to its nationalisation. As I said, a minor point.
                       
                    And now, to demonstrate your jedi powers of distraction, can I point out that we are arguing about the BNZ in a thread about education policy? It’s amazing how shit like that happens to damned near every thread you involve yourself in.  
                         
                     

              • Frank Macskasy …
                3 August 2012 at 5:31 pm

                Gosman, I’ve now asked you this about half a dozen times;

                1. Finland is #2 and #3 on various OECD PISA ranking

                2. Finland does not use Charter schools

                3. The US uses Charter Schools

                4. The US is at #18, #23, and #26 on the same OECD PISA ranking.

                Which country do you (Gosman) think we should look more closely at, in terms of educational outcomes?

                It appears you are evading responding because you have no answer to give. There is no way Charter Schools can be of any benefit to us taking the points above into consideration.

                To quote a certain oily cetacean: gotcha!

          • mike e 14.2.3.1.2
            3 August 2012 at 4:12 pm

            Goose you expect every body to read your links and we do then we find you don’t even read your own links.
            But when it cones to conspiracies and investment banks.
            You’ve cooked your goose again.
            Find me an honest investment bank/er
            So Goldman Sachs managers didn’t retire because of massive corruption within the organization over greek loan frauds they perpetrated.
            ML haven’t committed any offences thats why they have been fined billions.
            If muzza is boderline that makes you stark raving bonkers goose.

      • Draco T Bastard 14.2.4
        3 August 2012 at 4:10 pm

        Ever considered that might be because the mainstream parties are out of touch with reality?

    • Frank Macskasy 14.3
      3 August 2012 at 5:19 pm

      Actually Muzza, I do it because I occassionally have a “writer’s block” on a blogpost I’m working on, and being distracted by Gosman’s inanities helps to “clear the cobwebs”. Kinda like re-booting my train-of-thought. (Otherwise I can’t be bothered with him.)

      Failing that, I go for a walk…

  15. outofbed 15
    3 August 2012 at 1:50 pm

    If the charter schools roof has a great big hole in it, the builder who fixes it has to be registered
    If
    I wonder why?

    • Rob 16.1
      3 August 2012 at 4:36 pm

      Yep, they are turning around some pretty desperate communities over there. At least the community is having a very decent say into how they should be run and what they need to focus on. Something that was missing prior.

  17. captain hook 17
    3 August 2012 at 3:42 pm

    wow?

  18. fabregas4 18
    3 August 2012 at 3:54 pm

    I struggle to join these dots.

    Key and Parata say “we need to lift quality of teachers because they are the biggest influence on achievement” and then propose staffing schools with unqualified teachers.

    Parata says “it is the tail of underachievement that we cannot let continue” but they propose schools that are not targeted to this group.

    Tolley said “National Standards are designed to lift the achievement of the 20% of failing children” but they are for all schools.

    Key and Banks say “don’t be worried by unqualified teachers” but send their kids to private schools with qualified teachers.

    Parata says “Teaching should be a four year degree but proceeds to cut access to student funding and then says that unqualified teachers are ok?

    Left hand meet the right hand.

    • Dv 18.1
      3 August 2012 at 4:38 pm

      AND if you add that most of what in wanted by act is already able to be done in the current system.

      For example the alternative school operating in Porirua east SINCE 1985
      And Banks son example

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/local-papers/kapi-mana-news/3910236/Fears-for-the-future-of-Porirua-Alternative-School

    • bad12 18.2
      3 August 2012 at 4:42 pm

      Dot dot dot along to a sidebar that says ‘Private sector want to make profit from education budget’ and the complexities of understanding what exactly Hekia and Slippery the Prime Minister are on about and up to become apparent,

      Slippery can hardly come out in a press conference and broadcast the fact that the supporters who vote National want an ‘in’ to Budget Education for profit so an efficient means of selling the idea to a public very uneasy about having their kids education messed with has had to be produced,

      Whenever National fronted by the present Slippery little Shyster unveil something new in the guise of ‘helping our kids’ just think BULLSHIT and then work around the issue from that point of view…

    • Frank Macskasy 18.3
      4 August 2012 at 1:27 pm

      fabregas4, I think their right hand is too busy doing something else…

  19. captain hook 19
    3 August 2012 at 3:55 pm

    go back to the top.
    read the caption.
    read the whole thread.
    separate into posters.
    who is the most incoherent?

  20. Georgy 20
    3 August 2012 at 6:15 pm

    There is absolutely no other purpose for charter schools than to reduce the cost of education for the govt. The reasons given for establishing a charter school including the so called 1 in 5 failing, simply do not match charter schools as a solution – no set curriculum, no national standards, unqualified teachers……………. – how will these lead to solving the alleged problem of 1 in 5 failing – are they all going to be bused to the charter school? Is there going to be a charter school along the road from every state school so parents have a choice……..? Totally illogical.

  21. jack 21
    3 August 2012 at 8:02 pm

    “However, they will be able to determine whether they operate under the National standards programme and offer NCEA qualifications or adopt an “alternative curriculum framework”

    That alternative curriculum framework is called PROFIT. Seen it done in the states. doesn’t work when they make a profit on education. The whole concept falls apart because they’ll cut corners for profit. Also, why is Key changing his mind about standards? Too much inconsistency means PROFIT. Follow the money.

  22. prism 22
    3 August 2012 at 8:10 pm

    Georgy 20
    The purposes for charter schools that have started this off could be a mix. Some that come to mind are –
    1 – is letting private business make a buck from providing alternative schooling to public
    2 – to let church organisations from the fringes to have wider rein at reinforcing their propaganda
    and creating divided communities – Destiny, Exclusive Brethren, sects within mainstream
    churches
    3 – to provide learning for children who aren’t in the oral, aural mainstream style enabling their
    learning with more kinetic approach. Also the hero approach, the leading by example of the
    outdoor man, or the active man with a goal to shake the kids from daily time-filling.
    4 – to tailor learning to the children’s needs – there was a school in Auckland I think called
    Four Avenues or such. They decided that they would give a sporting component by taking
    teenagers to the golf driving range. I remember Rodney Hide didn’t like that. It got shut
    down although it was working with youngsters who had dropped out of school. Now ACT
    is pushing this
    Why this couldn’t be carried out now as part of school outreach I don’t know but it seems that education gets bogged down not in tomorrow’s schools but yesterday’s. John Tamihere is willing to try it. I don’t know if he and similar others are the best, but they may be able to bring another valuable tool to the learning process, and that is include the parents and motivate them to help their kids. I think peer group pressure on the kids can be dominant and for parents to get included and motivated would help families work together and in the end enjoy each other’s caompany.

  23. Georgy 23
    4 August 2012 at 9:42 am

    Prism – short answer to your question “Why this couldn’t be carried out now as part of school outreach I don’t know……………..” is very simple. Many many schools would love to do this – but they can’t do it on fresh air.

    If all the money that has been wasted on national standards and charter schools to date was put into a pot and schools invited to submit a proposal outlining ways they could deal to the failing children, then they could get on with it.

    Many schools do similar things on shoestring budgets and goodwill of teachers and volunteers.

    Remember schools mostly run on money supplied for very specific things [staff and resources] according to a very strict formula.

    We have the people, the physical resources – all schools need is $$$$ to implement programmes .

    Lets not waste money on privatisation!!!!

  24. Frank Macskasy 24
    4 August 2012 at 3:30 pm

    “I want to ensure that New Zealand has a world-leading education system that equips all our young people with the
    knowledge, skills and values to be successful in a world that is increasingly complex, fluid and uncertain. A good
    education gives our young people opportunities and choices.”

    Source: http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/109317/994_Future-oriented-07062012.pdf

    (Hat tip to Kerry, who posted the link on my blog.)

    So… our education system not only “ain’t busted” – but is “world leading”?!

    So why are we pursuing an American system when they rank so poorly;

    It’s interesting to note that in reading achievement, Finland, New Zealand, and the US ranked;

    # 3 Finland

    # 9 New Zealand

    #18 United States

    In mathematics,

    # 2 Finland

    # 9 New Zealand

    # 26 United States (below OECD average)

    In science,

    # 2 Finland

    #10 New Zealand

    # 23 United States

    Source: http://www.oecd.org/education/highereducationandadultlearning/48631550.pdf

    I look forward to Gosman’s reply on this. (Or he going to keep boycotting me…?)

  25. UpandComer 25
    6 August 2012 at 10:29 am

    Once again.

    Is New Zealand’s public education system working for Maori.

    Does Finland have any Maori.

    Are Charter schools aimed at Maori (yes).

    • framu 25.1
      6 August 2012 at 10:41 am

      i would dispute that – they are aimed at those who seek to profit from taxpayer funding and/or those who seek to weaken unions

      Thats not to say that a school tailored to maori requirements is a bad idea – but consider two things

      1) a school tailored to maori needs can already be set up under the current system
      2) the people who are pushing charter schools and who these people are funded by

      When we look at what you cant do under the current system – we see the real reasons for charter schools

    • Frank Macskasy 25.2
      6 August 2012 at 11:51 am

      Finland has the Sami, an indigenous people.

Links to post