National standards – a failed crusade

Written By: - Date published: 9:35 am, May 3rd, 2016 - 260 comments
Categories: national, schools, useless - Tags: , , , , ,

Great to see The Herald doing a focus on primary education this week! The first piece in the series seems (from the list at the bottom of the article) to have started life titled “National Standards: A failed crusade?”. Yesterday it was “The $250m National Standards policy – is it working?”. Today it is:

Primary schools in NZ: Is the $250m policy working?

Thousands of children begin secondary school each year without the reading, writing or maths skills needed to make it through. … Six years and $250 million on, Kirsty Johnston asks if the National Standards policy has been worth it.
…
Six years and $250 million on, with data showing just a small increase in achievement levels, questions are again being asked about the impact of the standards – not just on achievement but on the whole primary system.
…
National Standards was introduced in 2010 after a successful National Party election campaign. They require teachers to judge children twice-yearly against a four-point scale, and were prompted by concerns that one in five students were leaving school without basic literacy and numeracy skills.

In a 2008 press release, John Key vowed to fix that. “National believes that the first task of our education system should be to ensure that every child from every background can read, write, and do maths at a level that allows them to participate in a modern economy,” he said. Key pledged $47 million towards a literacy and numeracy “crusade”, including $18 million a year in targeted funding for struggling students.
…
After six years, many believe the standards have only served to highlight already well-documented trends. For example, the data shows the largest differences are between rich and poor. Just half of children at Decile 1 schools met maths expectations at Year 8, compared to 80 per cent at Decile 10. Boys, and Maori and Pasifika children, also lagged behind.

“None of that surprises me. National Standards haven’t told us anything we didn’t already know, and the problems haven’t gone away,” said Labour’s education spokesman Chris Hipkins. “The whole exercise has diverted time and attention away from what really matters – teaching and learning.”

A related article has the numbers:

Primary school pass rates have virtually flatlined despite an six-year government literacy and numeracy “crusade” costing more than $250 million.

Data shows a quarter of children entering high school are below the National Standards in reading, writing and maths.

Of the almost 60,000 students who began Year 9 last year, 17,900 were unable to meet writing requirements, 18,500 were behind in maths, and 12,700 could not read at the expected level, meaning they would have to be rapidly “caught up” to have any hope of passing a high school qualification.

The figures remained largely unchanged over three years, rising an average 1 per cent across all year levels since 2012.

One percent over four years is statistical noise, and these are subjective assessments with a built-in pressure for grade inflation (just like NCEA).

National told us “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.” It was always a stupid promise. In reality the standards have made no difference to achievement, just as the experts predicted. What a waste of time and money.

Print
(From The Herald)

260 comments on “National standards – a failed crusade ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. International Rescue 1
    3 May 2016 at 9:56 am

    National Standards have been part of arresting the decline in literacy and numeracy and achieving a modest improvement. That’s great news, no matter how you try to spin it.

    • Lanthanide 1.1
      3 May 2016 at 10:16 am

      Can you provide evidence that there was a decline up until NS were implemented?

      • International Rescue 1.1.1
        3 May 2016 at 11:23 am

        http://www.educationreview.co.nz/news/new-news-feed-issue/maths-report-raises-more-questions-than-answers/#.VyfhXxV97eQ
        “The report highlighted international studies such as PISA and TIMSS (Trends in Mathematics and Science Study) and NEMP (New Zealand’s National Education Monitoring Project) which have all shown a gradual decline in New Zealand students’ mathematics performance since 2002.”

        • framu 1.1.1.1
          3 May 2016 at 12:30 pm

          “produced by independent public policy think tank New Zealand Initiative,”

          you missed that bit when quoting

          plus the bit you do quote doesnt back up your claim in the slightest

          • McFlock 1.1.1.1.1
            3 May 2016 at 12:33 pm

            and the comments in the article ripping shit out of the report.

            • International Rescue 1.1.1.1.1.1
              3 May 2016 at 1:35 pm

              The report is sound.

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                3 May 2016 at 1:47 pm

                The New Zealand Initiative exists to author sanitised hate speech. They have to self-publish because no ethical journal will touch them.

                • International Rescue …
                  3 May 2016 at 1:53 pm

                  The article is published by the Education Review. Do you know anything about the numeracy project OAB? It is a horrible experiment foisted on my children by idiot academics. No, I guess you don;t.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke …
                    3 May 2016 at 2:25 pm

                    The Education Review did not publish the report, cretin, they published an article about it, which quoted people with actual expertise, who noted its failures.

                    The New Zealand Initiative exists to sanitise hate speech, that’s why they have to self-publish.

                    • International Rescue …
                      3 May 2016 at 4:11 pm

                      “The Education Review did not publish the report, cretin, they published an article about it, ”

                      Here’s my comment:

                      “The article is published by the Education Review.”

                      Article. Where did you learn to read?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      3 May 2016 at 4:17 pm

                      “The report is sound”. That’s what you said, cretin. Then, you pretended the Education Review’s credibility is somehow connected to that of the NZ Initiative, which exists to sanitise hate speech.

                      The Education Review notes this by pointing out that the hate-washing factory’s effluent “raises more questions than answers” – a euphemism for useless.

                      Asking questions is not an argument, cretin.

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  3 May 2016 at 6:40 pm

                  +1

                  Bunch of libertarians the lot of them all running on pure belief.

          • International Rescue 1.1.1.1.2
            3 May 2016 at 1:34 pm

            So?

            Yes it does. There has been a gradual decline since 2002. Which part don;t you understand?

        • One Anonymous Bloke 1.1.1.2
          3 May 2016 at 1:02 pm

          The report is self-published, because no honest journal editor will touch it.

        • lurgee 1.1.1.3
          3 May 2016 at 8:32 pm

          PISA is for 15 year olds so has little relevance to a discussion of learning and achievement in primary children.

          I looked at a couple of the TIMMS results listings (on the wikipedia site). In the one’s I checked, New Zealand actually improved its SCORE in the TIMSS rankings, but was overtaken by other countries showing bigger increases. So not quite as clear cut as you suggest. And there might be reasons why these countries show apparent large increases.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trends_in_International_Mathematics_and_Science_Study#All_average_country_scores

          • International Rescue 1.1.1.3.1
            4 May 2016 at 11:34 pm

            You make an interesting point, and I will do some more reading on this. Benchmarking educational outcomes internationally has its challenges, with differing emphases and teaching philosophies. For example in NZ we place a strong emphasis on mathematics for scaling at high school level – this is a rather blunt instrument, and is not followed in all of the OECD countries.

      • Matthew Hooton 1.1.2
        3 May 2016 at 11:40 am

        No one can. That’s the point.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 1.2
      3 May 2016 at 10:18 am

      There wasn’t a decline in the first place: Professor Terry Crooks exposed your Daddy’s lies back in 2007. Please try and keep up.

      Professor Howard Lee also destroyed your Daddy’s credibility on the issue. Why are you so gullible?

      • Phaedrus 1.2.1
        3 May 2016 at 10:44 am

        It’s all smoke and mirrors. Any problems with children’s educational progress is dominated by socio-economic issues – this has been known for a couple of decades at least. The case could be made that the first Labour government (through Peter Fraser) was aware of this, hence the need for state houses, free medical care, milk in schools, and so on. Solve the income and social inequities in society and children’s educational development will follow. Note – avoid the word ‘achievement’ as this is neoliberal jargon used to distract attention from the real issues.

        • Sabine 1.2.1.1
          3 May 2016 at 10:58 am

          Transient kids, living in cars will excel at reading, writing and math. Surely. If they just work harder. Just ask the National Party Brigade in Parliament. I am sure that Paula Bennet will have a handy chart that shows you that being hungry, cold and living outdoors will help form a stellar character and resolve to succeed.

          But I am sure someone earned a 250 million and would argue that the system works it just needs a bit more money and time.

          Wonder how many state houses could have been build with that money and how many children suddenly not living as transient would have gotten themselves some better school grades.

          • Nessalt 1.2.1.1.1
            3 May 2016 at 5:44 pm

            So you are saying poor kids in india have no chance of a university degree. surely a statement as banal as “Transient kids, living in cars will excel at reading, writing and math. Surely. If they just work harder.” is universal in application.

        • International Rescue 1.2.1.2
          3 May 2016 at 11:42 am

          “Any problems with children’s educational progress is dominated by socio-economic issues – this has been known for a couple of decades at least.”

          It’s a small part of the problem. From my experience useless parents is a bigger part. I’ll give you an example. An ECE service in West Auckland provides a free pick up service for children attending their centre. The families get 20 hours free ECE per family, paid for the Gvt. The centre provides healthy snacks and lunch. Despite this, many of the families can’t be arsed getting their kids ready on time. No doubt you’ll have a trendy left wing excuse.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 1.2.1.2.1
            3 May 2016 at 12:08 pm

            ^^^ a witless fool who can’t recognise the symptoms of poverty even when they’re staring him right in the face.

            Mind you, this is the same hatemonger who says poor people are to blame for poverty. Who believes and parrots his Daddy’s zombie arguments without a single original contribution to the discussion at any level.

            Hey, fuckwit, OECD, GINI, lost wealth and potential. I shall keep rubbing your face in them.

            Phaedrus and Sabine are right, and you are wrong, and you have nothing to support your rote-learned drivel.

            • International Rescue 1.2.1.2.1.1
              3 May 2016 at 1:23 pm

              OAB you have so far confused poverty with inequality and wealth with income. I feel sorry for you, I really do.

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                3 May 2016 at 1:34 pm

                Rote learned drivel, and quoting proven liars: your entire playbook.

          • framu 1.2.1.2.2
            3 May 2016 at 12:33 pm

            ” Despite this, many of the families can’t be arsed getting their kids ready on time”

            no doubt you can prove that this is the cause

            • International Rescue 1.2.1.2.2.1
              3 May 2016 at 1:35 pm

              Yes, I can.

            • greywarshark 1.2.1.2.2.2
              3 May 2016 at 2:34 pm

              Why is International Rescue dominating this blog week after week when I look at the comments list? It’s one of the weaknesses of this place, giving such a free rein to people who just purvey their cant, their superiority and disdain for the beaten down.

              Parents who can’t get their kids ready on time, are most likely to be people whose lives have fallen apart and just do what they can manage on any particular day. They will be nearly into clinical depression – when you can’t even get out of your bed. There is no joy in life for them, and they have little to give their children.

              International Rescue doesn’t add anything to my daily stock of joy. Why do commenters allow such obvious trolls to dominate and put themselves forward as deserving or worth discussion?

              • International Rescue …
                3 May 2016 at 4:12 pm

                Sigh. I am simply engaging in discussion. I you don’t like it, don’t read it. But censorship is so 1950’s soviet.

                • greywarshark …
                  4 May 2016 at 3:36 pm

                  IR not D
                  Freedom is so today’s neo liberal obfuscation.

                  • International Rescue …
                    5 May 2016 at 1:43 pm

                    Freedom is not an obfuscation. But then I’m guessing many left wingers would be happier to live on their knees than die on their feet.

              • Observer (Tokoroa) …
                3 May 2016 at 5:45 pm

                . To: Greywarshark

                You raise a good point! This could be a first class Blog, if it had a modest filtering system.

                Trolls to the dust bin. Others to the pages of the Topic

                • greywarshark …
                  4 May 2016 at 3:34 pm

                  Observer Tokoroa
                  I have a strange feeling that your remark is tongue in cheek. You usually seem to be a RW leaner. So sorry I don’t take you seriously. But then again I have learned to be wary of kind people offering sweeties. Oh to be an innocent child again and not have to look under the mat for the real dirt.

          • Gangnam Style 1.2.1.2.3
            3 May 2016 at 7:02 pm

            I dunno, but not knowing your child has a learning disability for 5 or so years seems like ‘crap parenting’ to me, going by your own logic that is. I know how my children are doing by listening to them read & doing maths with them, but that’s just because I like to be involved in that kind of thing.

            • International Rescue 1.2.1.2.3.1
              4 May 2016 at 11:25 pm

              No, we knew. But we expected and trusted professionals to know more than we did. You also don’t understand learning difficulties. Children with them are often very bright, and capable of compensating for several years. My son was very much in that category.

          • D'Esterre 1.2.1.2.4
            3 May 2016 at 11:05 pm

            International rescue: ” From my experience useless parents is a bigger part. I’ll give you an example…..”

            Here you are adducing anecdote as if it were evidence. It won’t do, you know. I’ve noted other commentators who think of themselves as right-wing doing the same thing. It’s very sloppy and damages your credibility.

            • lprent 1.2.1.2.4.1
              3 May 2016 at 11:26 pm

              I’ve noted other commentators who think of themselves as right-wing doing the same thing.

              Consequence of having a large ego coupled with a vast inferiority complex. You get an insecure braggart who is afraid to learn from the written experience of others, preferring instead to explain the world in a series of largely fictional self-aggrandising anecdotes.

              They have been common in social media ever since I started using modems a lot about 1985/6.

              • greywarshark …
                4 May 2016 at 3:48 pm

                lprent
                If these RW blokes/esses have been common since about 1985/6 and still around it is because they are winning the propaganda war. We have been going down the toilet since then and need to cut their crap and feed it to the plants after suitably treating it.

                At present, untreated, it’s slowly poisoning the blog. Few do the deep thinking we are all capable of, their time is frittered away in tit for tat word games. We would all do better playing scrabble till the trolls withered away from lack of stimulus. Bad for numbers on the blog though but you wouldn’t be so distracted as to care more about that I know.

                I’ll start with a warm up question. Last night I decided that the words remuneration and renumeration get muddled for me and others and looked it up. So there are words worthy of clarity and one that is very topical now. In fact always!
                edited

            • International Rescue 1.2.1.2.4.2
              4 May 2016 at 11:38 pm

              I didn’t claim it was evidence. I made it very clear it was ‘from my experience’. Our experiences inform our opinions to greater or lesser degree.

      • Pat 1.2.2
        3 May 2016 at 11:10 am

        he is not gullible…he is simply a shill

      • International Rescue 1.2.3
        3 May 2016 at 11:24 am

        http://www.educationreview.co.nz/news/new-news-feed-issue/maths-report-raises-more-questions-than-answers/#.VyfhXxV97eQ
        “The report highlighted international studies such as PISA and TIMSS (Trends in Mathematics and Science Study) and NEMP (New Zealand’s National Education Monitoring Project) which have all shown a gradual decline in New Zealand students’ mathematics performance since 2002.”

      • International Rescue 1.2.4
        3 May 2016 at 11:43 am

        See post above.

      • lprent 1.2.5
        3 May 2016 at 12:24 pm

        He has a bad case of Key arselicker syndrome? Because all he ever eats is shit excreted by his hero, he has lost the facility for critical judgement.

        That is my diagnosis.

      • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 1.2.6
        3 May 2016 at 2:03 pm

        I’ve always wanted to say this: who’s you daddy?

    • dv 1.3
      3 May 2016 at 10:40 am

      IR are the Nat Stds reliable and valid?

      • International Rescue 1.3.1
        3 May 2016 at 11:27 am

        They are relatively new, so will have wrinkles. But over time they get more and more useful. As a parent I need to know how my child is faring compared to his and her peers. It is ridiculous that that information was withheld by the teaching profession/politicians for so long.

        • Dv 1.3.1.1
          3 May 2016 at 12:00 pm

          If you want to know how your child is faring compared to other the std MUST be reliable and valid.
          There have been 6 years, so there must be some measure of the reliability and validity, other wise the measurements don’t have much meaning so you really don’t know.
          I suspect a lot of the teachers objections were around those issues.
          But if you are happy to use a faulty measure then so be it on your kids.

          • International Rescue 1.3.1.1.1
            3 May 2016 at 1:21 pm

            Are you of the view the measures are not reliable? That’s not why my children’s teachers are telling us. Fundamentally if you agree with being able to compare a child’s progress with their peers it is worth working with the data. From most conversations I have had with teachers they support it.

            • dv 1.3.1.1.1.1
              3 May 2016 at 1:28 pm

              Nope I don’t know if they are reliable and valid.
              Can you point me to any studies that show that they are reliable and valid.

              With out reliability and validity you actually don’t know if the measures are measuring the progress.

              So please point me to some studies.

              • dv …
                3 May 2016 at 3:07 pm

                Had a couple of hours to find the studies on reliability and validity of Nstds.
                Nothing yet!!!

                • International Rescue …
                  3 May 2016 at 4:14 pm

                  I’m not sure what you’re looking for. I’m not aware of any studies done so far, it’s possibly too early to say. My feedback is based on what my children’s teaches say. They have no problem with the reliability of the Nstds, or of its implementation.

                  • dv …
                    3 May 2016 at 4:24 pm

                    That is exactly the point. There are no studies.

                    So you are saying the evaluations will be the consistent for pupils all thru the country, from year to year based of the responses of several teachers.

                    Yet you have also said several teachers missed your child learning disability.- so teachers judgements can be faulty. (I think the Nats cut the special help as well)

                    You have not commented on Validity, where the test measure what it says it does.

            • Sacha 1.3.1.1.1.2
              3 May 2016 at 1:38 pm

              Most teachers want to know what each student needs help with the most, not how they compare with one another. Putting so much effort into measuring does nothing to improve achievement.

              • International Rescue …
                3 May 2016 at 1:48 pm

                This isn’t about teachers, it;s about PARENTS!!!!! Parents want to know how their children are performing. I spent 5 years listening to teachers telling me my son was doing fine when he wasn’t, and their incompetence at not being able to diagnose a learning difficulty cost him dearly. Don;t tell me about what teachers want.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  3 May 2016 at 1:51 pm

                  Your son’s handicap is you.

                  • International Rescue …
                    3 May 2016 at 1:55 pm

                    My son doesn’t have a handicap. He has a learning difficulty that none of his first 5 teachers diagnosed. And then one great teacher did. In her first week of teaching my son.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      3 May 2016 at 1:59 pm

                      The poor little guy: handicapped by his father’s cretinhood and hostility towards his teachers.

                    • International Rescue …
                      3 May 2016 at 2:01 pm

                      Actually, no. My intolerance of poor teachers is shared by any good parent.

                      Are you proud of this OAB – http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/77825339/Teachers-union-protected-Robert-Burrett-claim

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      3 May 2016 at 2:16 pm

                      Why would I be proud of some principal who seems to have learned right wing responsibility avoidance techniques?

                    • International Rescue …
                      3 May 2016 at 4:08 pm

                      “Why would I be proud of some principal who seems to have learned right wing responsibility avoidance techniques?”

                      And the union, who sheltered this scum for so long?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      3 May 2016 at 4:21 pm

                      The allegation suits your agenda, certainly. Your son will wear the scars of your cretinous hatreds.

                    • International Rescue …
                      3 May 2016 at 4:23 pm

                      “The allegation suits your agenda, certainly.”

                      Allegation??? No, OAB, you can’t hide from this one. The union protected this ratbag, as they do with many others.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      3 May 2016 at 4:31 pm

                      No, the principal blamed the union, whose job it is to advocate, not investigate. The false narrative suits your agenda, because you are motivated by hate. That’s also why your son is handicapped.

                    • International Rescue …
                      3 May 2016 at 4:47 pm

                      “No, the principal blamed the union, whose job it is to advocate, not investigate. ”

                      1. It was the board Chair, not the Principal.
                      2. The union surely have a duty of care if they are confronted with these cases. This guy wasn’t just an abuser, he was a useless teacher! “They were quite evasive and defensive of the guy, and it frustrated us to a high level,” Parry said. “Of course a person has rights and has to be protected, but they were really trying to make things confusing and difficult, they weren’t really engaging in the problems we had.”

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      3 May 2016 at 7:56 pm

                      Oops, my bad, it was the board chair: even less credibility that the principal and far more likely to embody National Party values.

                      Mike Sabin and Graham Capill spring to mind, and that’s before we consider the fact that your Daddy made it easier for child sex traffickers to launder money.

              • Rodel …
                3 May 2016 at 2:29 pm

                Sacha…..”Putting so much effort into measuring does nothing to improve achievement.”. Couldn’t agree more.

                I’ve said it before but this quote, ‘You don’t fatten a pig by weighing it every day.’purportedly said by an unknown farmer in the USA its relevant to your comment.

                • International Rescue …
                  3 May 2016 at 4:09 pm

                  ‘You don’t fatten a pig by weighing it every day.’

                  No, but you know whether it’s getting enough feed.

                  • Sacha …
                    3 May 2016 at 4:24 pm

                    Teachers already know which children need help. They do not have the time or resources to do it because it’s swallowed up by testing.

                    • International Rescue …
                      3 May 2016 at 4:36 pm

                      Sorry, but that isn’t true. Many children slip through the cracks, not because of lack of resources but because the whole onus is on the teacher. NS empowers others with data to track a childs progress.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      3 May 2016 at 5:13 pm

                      Not it, they, and no, they don’t, because they are notional. You have zero comprehension of the inherent conflict of interest, or you are ignoring it because your Daddy hasn’t given you your lines yet.

                      And yet there it is, inherent. Conflictual.

                    • Sacha …
                      3 May 2016 at 9:29 pm

                      True about the cracks, yes. The system has never dealt well with the bottom 20%.

            • D'Esterre 1.3.1.1.1.3
              4 May 2016 at 10:28 am

              International rescue: ” That’s not why my children’s teachers are telling us. Fundamentally if you agree with being able to compare a child’s progress with their peers it is worth working with the data. From most conversations I have had with teachers they support it.”

              There you go again. Your own experience is anecdote, not evidence. Enough already! The evidence, it seems, doesn’t support what you’re asserting. So: evidence trumps anecdote again. With which state of affairs we evidence nerds are quietly satisfied.

              • International Rescue …
                4 May 2016 at 11:45 pm

                “There you go again. Your own experience is anecdote, not evidence.”
                So?

                “The evidence, it seems, doesn’t support what you’re asserting.”
                Yes, it does.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 1.3.1.2
          3 May 2016 at 12:44 pm

          A cretin doesn’t realise that the same teachers he vilifies do all the testing, and even if he did realise, is too stupid to note the inevitable consequences.

        • mpledger 1.3.1.3
          3 May 2016 at 2:01 pm

          National Standards don’t compare children against peers. National Standards compares children against standards – that’s the whole point.

          PAT and e-astle compare children against the performance of kids at their cohort level. PAT has been around for at least 40 years because I remember doing them as a kid. This data wasn’t withheld – it was just put in a parent friendly format e.g. Johnny needs to work harder etc. Rather than Johhny is at stanine 3.

          • International Rescue 1.3.1.3.1
            3 May 2016 at 4:06 pm

            “National Standards don’t compare children against peers. National Standards compares children against standards – that’s the whole point.”

            Sort of. The standards take into account expectations at certain levels of achievement. These expectations are based to some degree on the national data set, and can then be used by parents to compare their children to other children. That’s what parents do.

            “This data wasn’t withheld – it was just put in a parent friendly format e.g. Johnny needs to work harder etc. ”
            Which means SFA. I want to know more than just a teachers opinion about my child, thanks.

            • dv 1.3.1.3.1.1
              3 May 2016 at 4:09 pm

              Sort of. The standards take into account expectations at certain levels of achievement.

              ONLY IF the data is RELIABLE and VALID

              And the report- Nat Standard or what ever,is STILL reliant on the teacher judgement.

              • International Rescue …
                3 May 2016 at 4:21 pm

                I have no reason to believe the data is not reliable or valid. Do you? And I trust most teachers judgement. Most.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  3 May 2016 at 4:34 pm

                  What a tangled web you’ve woven. One in five teachers has the ability to cut through your son’s patriarchal handicap, and you trust most of them who aren’t unionists.

                  What a cretin.

                  • International Rescue …
                    3 May 2016 at 4:49 pm

                    5 teachers failed my son and my family. But I hold no grudge. The union, who protects child abusers and poor teachers, however, are a waste of space.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      3 May 2016 at 4:50 pm

                      You failed your son. Choke on it.

                    • International Rescue …
                      3 May 2016 at 4:55 pm

                      My sons doing great! We paid for a wonderful tutor for him, and he is about to start tertiary study in July.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      3 May 2016 at 5:04 pm

                      Let’s hope academia can reverse the pernicious handicap he inherited from you.

                    • joe90 …
                      3 May 2016 at 5:42 pm

                      union, who protects child abusers

                      Do you have any evidence of the NZEI being aware of a teacher behaving inappropriately around children?.

                    • International Rescue …
                      4 May 2016 at 11:21 pm

                      “Do you have any evidence of the NZEI being aware of a teacher behaving inappropriately around children?.”

                      That’s not exactly what I said, but you’d need to read the whole case. As a taster, this from the Herald:

                      “Pukenui School tried to fire Burrett for incompetency – alleging he was drunk, unkempt and inept – but a teacher’s union got involved and the case ended in a mediation hearing and confidential Board of Trustees payout in 2001.”

                      That’s not specifically about the abuse allegation, but they knew this guy was ratbag from way back.

                • Dv …
                  3 May 2016 at 4:53 pm

                  I don’t KNOW it is reliable or valid.
                  Good to see trusting teachers judgement.
                  BUT what happens if the judgements are based on non valid assessments.

                  ANDOAB your comments about his child are out of line.

                  • International Rescue …
                    3 May 2016 at 4:58 pm

                    Teachers make assessments all the time, irrespective of NS. We simply have taken these for granted because they are a normal part of teaching. NCEA involves substantial (and I would ague highly subjective) assessing.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke …
                    3 May 2016 at 5:06 pm

                    He uses his child as a human shield, to pimp his dogma, and I have a particular contempt for that flavour of dishonesty.

        • Draco T Bastard 1.3.1.4
          3 May 2016 at 11:38 pm

          They are relatively new, so will have wrinkles.

          Nope. They’re neither national nor standard and thus are completely invalid. It’s been that way ever since National dreamed them up. National Standards are, and always will be, a complete and utter waste of time and money.

          In fact, they”re even worse than that:
          http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/8134232/Exams-culture-fuelling-teenage-mental-health-problems.html
          http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/over-focus-on-exams-causing-mental-health-problems-and-self-harm-among-pupils-study-finds-10368815.html

          They’re actually causing significant psychological damage to your children.

          As a parent I need to know how my child is faring compared to his and her peers.

          No, actually you don’t:

          No Contest stands as the definitive critique of competition. Contrary to accepted wisdom, competition is not basic to human nature; it poisons our relationships and holds us back from doing our best. In this new edition, Alfie Kohn argues that the race to win turns all of us into losers.

          It is ridiculous that that information was withheld by the teaching profession/politicians for so long.

          It wasn’t ever withheld.

          • dv 1.3.1.4.1
            4 May 2016 at 8:06 am

            Nope. They’re neither national nor standard and thus are completely invalid.

            Yes good description.

            And that is why I have been going on about reliability and validity

          • International Rescue 1.3.1.4.2
            4 May 2016 at 11:43 pm

            “They’re actually causing significant psychological damage to your children.”

            This is more of this leftist ‘no-one wins or loses’ claptrap. My children suffer no psychological damage by their parents being informed how they are tracking. None.

            “No, actually you don’t:”

            Yes, I do. And that’s for me to decide.

            “Contrary to accepted wisdom, competition is not basic to human nature;”

            Sigh. Never coached sports have you? Never spent any time with a group of young people in a car rally or a quiz night? Competition is ingrained into human nature as part of our evolution. But you miss the entire point. NS is not about competition, it is about comparison.

            • Draco T Bastard 1.3.1.4.2.1
              5 May 2016 at 1:35 am

              My children suffer no psychological damage by their parents being informed how they are tracking. None.

              You wouldn’t know would you? The only way to find out would be to take them to the psychologist and have them ask. I suspect that the result will surprise you.

              The other option is that you could accept the results of the studies that show children are harmed by all the testing. But you wouldn’t do that as the results go against your unsubstantiated beliefs.

              Never spent any time with a group of young people in a car rally or a quiz night?

              Yes I have but, more importantly, I remember being a child and being forcefully subjected to competition.

              NS is not about competition, it is about comparison.

              And the reason for the comparison is…?

              Yeah, that’s what i thought.

              • International Rescue …
                5 May 2016 at 12:53 pm

                “You wouldn’t know would you?”

                Yep, I’d know.

                “The other option is that you could accept the results of the studies that show children are harmed by all the testing. ”
                Testing is part of all learning, whether it’s maths or learning to juggle a football. It’s also part of life, something education should be preparing our kids for.

                Those opposed to testing in schools are either weak minded, or wanting to somehow hide results from parents.

                “Yes I have but, more importantly, I remember being a child and being forcefully subjected to competition.”

                Poor you. I remember as a child loving and embracing the competition, and that’s why I observe in the kids I’m involved with today.

                “And the reason for the comparison is…?”

                To determine progress. You know, the way we compare our economy with others, our business environment, our sporting teams. I know, let’s stop measuring unemployment. I mean, no-one really needs to know that, do they?

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  5 May 2016 at 4:21 pm

                  Those opposed to testing in schools are either weak minded, or wanting to somehow hide results from parents.

                  A third option (why do Wingnuts love binary false dichotomies so much?) is that they have observed that the best results* are derived from teaching, not testing.

                  That is one of the reasons Finnish education, for example, has blossomed. Meanwhile, NZ’s PISA scores, which used to be stellar, are not so much. Why is the Wingnut motto, “Per ardua, ad cloacum”?

                  *as judged by international measures such as PISA.

                  • International Rescue …
                    5 May 2016 at 4:30 pm

                    Testing is part of teaching. Always has been. Even Finland uses it, despite your misrepresentation.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      5 May 2016 at 4:52 pm

                      My assertion is that the best results are obtained from teaching rather than testing, and that this is one of the fundamental advantages of the ‘Finnish’* education model: it allows teachers to teach; it applies pedagogical rather than political imperatives.

                      Meanwhile, in NZ, the Right’s hatred of unions forces it into imposing political imperatives upon the MoE that have nothing to do with pedagogy. We see it in right wing invective against academia, in the pretence that “academics are just like lawyers”, for example, or the Right’s shameful betrayal of Margaret Thatcher’s principled stand on the Greenhouse Effect – her only worthwhile contribution to politics.

                      Attacking education, all for politics. Shame on them.

                      *I expect they observed it rather than invented it per se.

                    • International Rescue …
                      5 May 2016 at 10:16 pm

                      “My assertion is that the best results are obtained from teaching rather than testing, and that this is one of the fundamental advantages of the ‘Finnish’* education model: it allows teachers to teach; it applies pedagogical rather than political imperatives.”

                      You reasoning implies teachers cannot do both. They can, and have been for decades.

                • dv …
                  5 May 2016 at 4:24 pm

                  To determine progress.

                  BUT BUT BUT ONLY if the measure is reliable and valid!!!!

                  • International Rescue …
                    5 May 2016 at 4:33 pm

                    That’s always been the case. Do you have any reason to believe the current system delivers measure less reliable or valid than the previous one?

    • ianmac 1.4
      3 May 2016 at 11:09 am

      Here you are International. Take comfort from this guru.
      “National Standards is invaluable in that it places a level of responsibility on the system, it places it on the school and it places it on the teachers.

      It does what should have been done decades ago but wasn’t because the unions who run the system can’t stand accountability and always argue that whatever is wrong is only fixed by more money.”

      Mike Hosking is as well informed as you International so it must be so.
      Though, to be fair, teachers have had data on success and failures of children for decades. It is just that politicians use kids as playthings without sound evidence to support the plan or the result.

      • International Rescue 1.4.1
        3 May 2016 at 11:26 am

        He’s right on the money. Unions opposed NS because they don’t like accountability. But parents love them.

        • mac1 1.4.1.1
          3 May 2016 at 11:49 am

          International rescue, did you mean that parents love unions? 🙂

          Any hard evidence that unions opposed NS because they are afraid of accountability?

          Have you ever sat as a teacher at meet the parents evenings and not understood what a high level of accountability can mean? Have you ever as a teacher been visited by Inspectors? Have you ever been involved in yearly reviews of your performance, and had to write reports to parents, HODs and principals?

          Have you ever as a teacher had to undergo constant review out there in the community, as you meet former students, parents of former students, and people who have talked to these two groups?

          It is still happening to me, and I’m four years retired from teaching.

          “Gidday, Mr Mac1, do you remember me?”

          I still teach guitar and every year my accountability includes a public concert where my students show what they have learned, along with comparison to other teachers and their students on other instruments.

          Every year I am rehired by a manager who attends that concert and who is in contact with the parents.

          Unions and teachers don’t appreciate accountability, International Rescue? Pffffft!

          • One Anonymous Bloke 1.4.1.1.1
            3 May 2016 at 12:18 pm

            He has no conception of any of this because he believes his Daddy’s malicious lies.

          • International Rescue 1.4.1.1.2
            3 May 2016 at 1:15 pm

            You seem to view my support for NS as an attack on teachers. Nothing could be further from the truth. In my experience as a parent I have met wonderful and terrible teachers, thankfully many more of the former than the latter.

            • mac1 1.4.1.1.2.1
              3 May 2016 at 1:35 pm

              Nope, I saw it as an attack on unions and teachers, especially teachers who belong to unions, as most do. Unions are not faceless entities; they are the membership. To attack unions for not wanting accountability is an attack on those teachers who belong to them.

              Many right wing union bashers, of whom you seem to be one, don’t like teachers’s unions especially, since they are still strong unions with a high membership.

              Then comes the disconnect. How can I, as a parent, and as member of society, not like teachers because any shred of honesty would prevent me from that sort of blanket condemnation, but still get at unions that I hate with an intensity because they oppose what I stand for- individualism, not collectivism etc.

              So, I’ll say “I have met wonderful and terrible teachers”, and have a bob both ways.

              And then not address the issue that teachers do know about accountability, which was, after all, my point.

              • mac1 …
                3 May 2016 at 1:38 pm

                And for my evidence that you conflate teachers, unions and accountability, here is what you wrote- “Unions opposed NS because they don’t like accountability. “

                • International Rescue …
                  3 May 2016 at 1:50 pm

                  THEY. UNIONS. Most teachers I meet are happy to be held accountable. Their unions don’t like it.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke …
                    3 May 2016 at 1:56 pm

                    The cretin thinks National Standards are about teacher accountability. They aren’t, and even if they were, he cannot address the fact that the teachers themselves assess the students, which utterly and completely undermines the false intent.

                    What a moron.

                    • International Rescue …
                      3 May 2016 at 1:59 pm

                      NS are about teacher accountability. They are also about informing parents. As a parent a teachers assessment is only as good as the teacher. As poor teachers are protected by useless union, I’ll take NS thanks.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      3 May 2016 at 2:03 pm

                      You cannot address the substance of the argument. The teachers themselves assess the students.

                      This conflict of interest is beyond your feeble imagination.

                      Edit: teacher accountability was around for long before your Daddy started lying to Parliament and the nation about it, and you don’t even know that. What do you think professional development entails, cretin?

                    • mpledger …
                      3 May 2016 at 2:07 pm

                      IR – you don’t seem to understand that teachers rate the students.

                      So teachers are “held to account” by the very ratings that they bestow.

                    • mac1 …
                      3 May 2016 at 5:31 pm

                      Reply to international rescue, when you write, “As poor teachers are protected by useless union, I’ll take NS thanks.”

                      To use your own logic against yourself, these same teachers of whom you say there are many admirable people are the ones who are protecting inadequate teachers? So, how do you explain that? You can’t have it both ways.

                      You got lost when you come up against your own built-in belief that teachers are good but unions are not good.

                      The only way you seem to be able to solve your difficulty is to blame the unions, and bring into existence this amorphous, nebulous creation of your belief system that somehow teachers are not the union, but are the unfortunate, unwilling, naive dupes of union stirrers, haters, anti-social, foreign-dominated, agents of deep conspiracy who probably are anti-American………. but definitely opposed to apple pie and New Zealand as the way I want it.

                      Teachers’ unions comprise teachers. Get it? They are the union. What they believe is what the union believes. Not the other way around.

                      It’s the right wing ‘dupes’ version of history and society, be it ‘commies’, unions, peaceniks, greenies, or whoever…….

                      And you say we are deluded?

                    • International Rescue …
                      4 May 2016 at 11:05 pm

                      “IR – you don’t seem to understand that teachers rate the students.

                      So teachers are “held to account” by the very ratings that they bestow.”

                      Duh, yes I know. And those ‘ratings’ (wrong term) are subject to the standards and to peer review.

                    • International Rescue …
                      4 May 2016 at 11:14 pm

                      “To use your own logic against yourself, these same teachers of whom you say there are many admirable people are the ones who are protecting inadequate teachers? So, how do you explain that? You can’t have it both ways.”

                      Teachers are not ‘the’ unions. Teachers are in a union, although an increasing number choose not to be. The NZEI and PPTA have independent Boards. To work for the NZEI a teaching qualification or experience is NOT a prerequisite.

                  • mac1 …
                    3 May 2016 at 5:11 pm

                    “They” are the fucking union. I have been to enough teacher union meetings to know that.

                    You have this strange explanation to explain your dichotomy. Teachers are good. Teachers don’t like National standards. Must be the union’s fault. Those nasty machinating union stirrers who subvert ordinary decent teachers and come out with policy and thinking that is different from their natural lords and masters.

                    international rescue, you’ve obviously never been to a teacher union meeting to understand that teachers don’t get duped by scheming union ‘bosses’.

                    Only in the moistest of your dreams. mate.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      3 May 2016 at 8:03 pm

                      His wet dreams are of authoritarian followers, just like his dry dreams and his day-dreams and his entire waking life. His son will be lucky to escape the handicap of such a witless entitled father.

                    • International Rescue …
                      4 May 2016 at 11:16 pm

                      ““They” are the fucking union. I have been to enough teacher union meetings to know that.”

                      That shows a serious lack of critical thinking. Not all teachers are union members, so how can a collective ‘they’ be the union? Simply, ‘they’ aren’t.

              • International Rescue …
                3 May 2016 at 1:46 pm

                “To attack unions for not wanting accountability is an attack on those teachers who belong to them.”

                Rubbish.

                “And then not address the issue that teachers do know about accountability, which was, after all, my point.”

                I didn’t say they didn’t. I said UNIONS don’t like accountability.

                Here’s my point. Teacher unions protect poor teachers, at the expense of good teachers. They protect child molesters and other odious individuals. Their stance towards teachers in Partnership Schools is nothing short of bullying. Thankfully the unions are dying out but not before time.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  3 May 2016 at 1:49 pm

                  Yes, all you’ve got is rote learned hatred. You can’t even make up your own lies.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 1.4.1.1.2.2
              3 May 2016 at 1:39 pm

              But instead of listening to them, you parrot right wing lie-factories at us instead. What a shithead.

        • Colonial Viper 1.4.1.2
          3 May 2016 at 12:01 pm

          He’s right on the money. Unions opposed NS because they don’t like accountability. But parents love them.

          Why would you want to make teachers accountable for National Standards measurements that detract from successfully teaching children?

          Isn’t that totally stupid?

          Or is that just you?

          • International Rescue 1.4.1.2.1
            3 May 2016 at 1:18 pm

            That’s a joke, right? Are you suggesting providing parents with nationally recognised standards is not appropriate?

            • One Anonymous Bloke 1.4.1.2.1.1
              3 May 2016 at 1:33 pm

              That isn’t what he said, illiterate trash.

              detract from successfully teaching children

              That’s what he said. You have no chance of comprehending it.

            • Kelly-Ned 1.4.1.2.1.2
              3 May 2016 at 2:41 pm

              They are not nationally anything.
              Nothing more than junk data. And yes I very much am in a position to know.

        • framu 1.4.1.3
          3 May 2016 at 12:37 pm

          is this going to be another thread where you just throw your weight about and stomp around the place ?

        • Muttonbird 1.4.1.4
          3 May 2016 at 7:53 pm

          Unions opposed NS because they don’t like accountability. But parents love them.

          -International Idiot

          No, we don’t.

          Have you ever tried to read a child’s school report polluted with NS acronyms?

          NS hides more than it reveals, which is oh so typical of this government and the damage it is doing to our once supportive society.

          • International Rescue 1.4.1.4.1
            4 May 2016 at 11:26 pm

            “Have you ever tried to read a child’s school report polluted with NS acronyms?”

            Yep, no problem. Far better than some of the whitewash we had prior.

      • logie97 1.4.2
        3 May 2016 at 12:21 pm

        ianmac, Ithought I would risk reading Hosking to see if he had any insight – Nah, just another union / teacher bash masquerading as opinion.
        Teachers have found NS restricting rather than assisting teaching. Partly because of the time taken in reporting on them, putting gobbledygook ministry talk, into plain language rather than energy into classroom programmes.

        International Rescue, for your benefit.
        Maths assessment – teachers use amongst other diagnostics, GLOSS, which is an integral part of NUMP – introduced at the turn of the century
        Reading – Prose inventories/Probe/Star, – you may have heard of Marie Clay and her running records – been around for decades and very precise diagnostics of reading behaviours.
        Writing – asTTle and its forerunner, in depth analysis or writing behaviours across all genre.
        All the above in existence and used long before National Standards.

        Hosking trots out the “best teachers”. Unfortunately, he cannot define what “best teachers” actually means, but if you throw money at them then they will perform better. Actually, doubling the salaries would probably not make any difference, except that a teacher might then be tempted to pay another teacher to work (jobshare) with them.

        The real issue here is work load – let teachers teach.

        Boards of trustees govern (and that means the community who elected them there need to have some responsibilities put back on them – deliver a well fed, rested and happy child to the school gates, to allow the classroom to function).

        • ianmac 1.4.2.1
          3 May 2016 at 2:56 pm

          By the way the Teacher’s Union is an Institute. The NZEI is made up of the teachers who run it. This myth that these teachers somehow want to avoid accountability is insulting and just plain wrong.
          For decades teachers have used very specific assessment tools to assist the learning needs of their pupils. The blanket and unreliable NS have clouded the issue and the Long Tail still exists after 6 long years of political interference.
          Be interesting to know what the problem was for IR’s child. Teachers are not psychologists so would welcome ready access to specialists which this Government abolished.

          • International Rescue 1.4.2.1.1
            3 May 2016 at 4:17 pm

            NS have been part of arresting the decline in standards. Check the data.

    • Kelly-Ned 1.5
      3 May 2016 at 2:40 pm

      Utter rubbish. Nothing has changed. Just lots of teachers wasting time on useless and meaningless measures.

      • International Rescue 1.5.1
        3 May 2016 at 4:16 pm

        Actually measuring the progress of children is fairly important wouldn’t you think?

          • International Rescue 1.5.1.1.1
            3 May 2016 at 4:40 pm

            I really hope you don’t have children, or any influence over them.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 1.5.1.1.1.1
              3 May 2016 at 4:49 pm

              Your hopes are as false as your beliefs, which is a huge part of your son’s handicap.

        • dv 1.5.1.2
          3 May 2016 at 4:26 pm

          Actually measuring the progress of children is fairly important wouldn’t you think?

          YES, so there should be studies on the reliability and Validity of the assessments.

          • International Rescue 1.5.1.2.1
            3 May 2016 at 4:37 pm

            I’m sure there will be.

            • Dv 1.5.1.2.1.1
              3 May 2016 at 4:45 pm

              Glad you are so trusting
              I don’t know of any – may be some else who reads this site knows, ianmac?

              But don’t you think it is remiss that such an important change doesn’t have basic statistical support?

              • International Rescue …
                3 May 2016 at 4:52 pm

                You mean like the numeracy project? That abject failure that was foisted onto my children that now has more children in Kumon etc than ever before?

                The support for NS comes from parents who want to know how their children are doing. We understand the data will take time, but the longer they are in place, the better they will be.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 1.5.1.2.1.2
              3 May 2016 at 4:46 pm

              There already have been. Notional standards aren’t standards because they are notional.

              The only reason you argue in their favour is that your Daddy suggested them, and the only reason he suggested them is to support the privatisation of public schools, and introduce an education model that flies in the face of international best practice.

              You are too stupid to grasp these simple truths.

              • International Rescue …
                3 May 2016 at 4:53 pm

                Actually benchmarking educational progress has been around a long time.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  3 May 2016 at 5:15 pm

                  So have racism, slavery, money laundering, and other right wing behaviours, and your point is?

                  • Chuck …
                    3 May 2016 at 5:31 pm

                    OAB your blind hatred for anything or anyone to do with National or John Key has you confused.

                    “So have racism, slavery, money laundering, and other right wing behaviours, and your point is?” – has nothing to do with being right wing…or left wing…bad people are bad people regardless of where they are in the political spectrum.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      3 May 2016 at 5:41 pm

                      I don’t think of the world in terms of good and bad: I think of it in shades of ignorance, sloth, and stupidity.

                    • McFlock …
                      3 May 2016 at 5:53 pm

                      ayup – shift change at tory propaganda central, I see 🙂

            • Instauration 1.5.1.2.1.3
              3 May 2016 at 9:58 pm

              International Rescue has an ALGO that restricts posts after 16:58 (business hours only)
              Take joy in your sons achievements – help him set realistic goals and nurture him toward them.
              Forget this “relativity ; – as good as others – better than others” shit.
              Else you will likely impart to him the lie of there being value in winning – and the consequent burden of losing – which, by definition is prevalent.
              Else he will likely perpetuate this tyranny upon his spawn.

              • International Rescue …
                4 May 2016 at 11:36 pm

                Thanks for your comments. Just let me say the comparisons are not for his benefit so much as ours. NS enables us to determine whether he (and his sister) are on the right track. Whether they are about where they should be or not. Both of my children have shown great aptitude in some areas, and needed help in others. I guess that’s just like most kids?

    • save NZ 1.6
      3 May 2016 at 3:28 pm

      Clearly National Standards are a sensitive issue for the government with all the pro government propaganda trolls jumping onto this one to defend them.

    • Guerilla Surgeon 1.7
      3 May 2016 at 3:53 pm

      That’s assuming that the teachers haven’t been gaming the system. Give people a system and they will game it. Particularly in high decile schools.

      • International Rescue 1.7.1
        3 May 2016 at 4:20 pm

        You’re likely to get some very defensive responses to that from some here GS. Probably accuse you of denigrating teachers.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 1.7.1.1
          3 May 2016 at 4:28 pm

          A far more likely explanation for any apparent “gaming” is confirmation bias. That’s why professional development depends in part upon peer review and Notional Standards, um, don’t.

          You’d understand that if you weren’t a gullible fuckwit.

          • International Rescue 1.7.1.1.1
            3 May 2016 at 4:42 pm

            Is their peer review in National Standards OAB? Is there peer review in standards assessment? You really have no clue, do you.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 1.7.1.1.1.1
              3 May 2016 at 5:32 pm

              If you are claiming that there is, it is up to you to support your assertion with evidence. Meanwhile, according to the Ministry of Education:

              Teachers will use the information they have gathered to form an overall judgment about a student’s progress and achievement in relation to the National Standards.

              Where they mention peers they are referring to other students.

              They rely heavily on “teacher judgment” – hence the obvious (to everyone except your Daddy and his parrots) reference to conflicts of interest.

              I have observed that some right wingers think mentioning conflicts of interest constitutes a personal attack. I’m picking you’re one of those.

              • Rolfcopter …
                3 May 2016 at 8:24 pm

                Go do some reading Fucktard, all teacher judgements are peer reviewed, and not against other students… against the standard

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  3 May 2016 at 8:36 pm

                  No, you are making the claim: substantiate it: show me the peer-reviewed research, published in a journal of record.

                  The fact, dupe, is that as the MoE explains, teachers judge their own students and their assessments carry the most weight. Teachers are of course subject to peer review, and your Daddy’s low standards have nothing whatsoever to do with it.

                  • weka …
                    3 May 2016 at 10:08 pm

                    OAB, can you please rethink your use of the word ‘cretin’ as a tool of abuse? It’s ableist and perpetuates stigma against people with intellecutal disabilities.

                    I’m also pretty shocked at the misuse of the disability of child and reframing it to use against a relative. No-one has the right to use another person’s disability in that way.

                    http://disabledfeminists.com/2009/10/10/ableist-word-profile-cretin/

                    http://smallbutkindamighty.com/2014/08/19/five-things-consider-using-ableist-language/

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      4 May 2016 at 8:46 am

                      What about the child’s parent using their alleged disability to attack teachers? Did that shock you?

                    • weka …
                      4 May 2016 at 9:55 am

                      Come on OAB, you are better than this. Whatever your opponent was doing shouldn’t distance you from reconsidering your own actions in the context of disability politics. I’ll have a reread later to look at what IR was doing, but last night I started reading this thread and couldn’t get past the repeated ableist language.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      4 May 2016 at 6:36 pm

                      What if there’s evidence that IR’s alleged son’s alleged disability is his father?

                      Hate speech has to be distributed somehow, after all. IR parrots zombie hate speech: do you think he doesn’t bring his hatreds into his home?

                      He is the biggest handicap his children will ever face. If my observations offend I sincerely hope so.

                    • weka …
                      4 May 2016 at 7:15 pm

                      Do you know what ableism is? Do you care?

                      Do you teach your kids to promote discrimination against disabled people?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      4 May 2016 at 7:21 pm

                      Yes, and yes and no. Perhaps you can suggest another way to characterise wingnut reckons.

                  • weka …
                    9 May 2016 at 9:51 pm

                    “Perhaps you can suggest another way to characterise wingnut reckons.”

                    Myself I find it hard not to use certain words that describe stupidity because I like cursing and such and love that kind of language for its expressiveness. It is a challenge.

                    Interestingly, and pertinently, many of the synonyms for stupid come from words that used to be medical language for a disability and then became pejoratives and thus contribute to stigma. One of the big problems with using those words now is that they are words associated with some of the most vulnerable people in society, esp those with intellectual disabilities or those with mental health issues.

                    I just had a look in the dictionary and there are a lot of words to use for stupid. Some of them are obviously going to be ableist. But it always amazes me how some I think are so far removed from their original usage as to be not offensive and yet there are people who are still offended because they live with the reality of the pejorative (often a family member or friend has the disability). But after putting those words aside, there are still plenty left.

                    Fool is good*.

                    Obtusity (yes, it’s a noun!)

                    Wooden-headed

                    Vapid.

                    Fatuous.

                    Asinine.

                    Gormless.

                    *there is then also the issue about attacking a person instead of their argument 😉

              • International Rescue …
                4 May 2016 at 11:03 pm

                Sorry for the delay.

                “An Overall Teacher Judgment (OTJ) is a judgment made about a student’s progress and achievement in relation to the National Standards and/or Ngā Whanaketanga Rumaki Māori. An OTJ should be based on a variety of evidence teachers already collect, such as the student’s work, peer and self-assessment, everyday classroom observation, and assessment activities (both formal and informal). This involves drawing on and applying the evidence gathered up to a particular point in time in order to make an overall judgment about a student’s progress and achievement.”
                http://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/National-Standards/Key-information/Questions-and-answers

                The OTJ is very much subject to peer review and assessment.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  5 May 2016 at 9:26 am

                  MoE’s description of how OTJs are arrived at demonstrates that peer-review is not a part of the process.

                  While IR will continue to clutch at his false beliefs like a security blankie, others can read it, and make up their own minds.

                  • International Rescue …
                    5 May 2016 at 12:55 pm

                    The NZ Curriculum reference clearly states there is. You’ve been proven wrong. Again. Still confusing inequality and poverty??

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      5 May 2016 at 3:17 pm

                      The NZ Curriculum doesn’t clearly state anything of the sort: if you think the passage you quoted supports your opinion, you’re wrong.

                      Feel free to link to the proof that OTJ assessments are subject to peer review.

                      The link I provided has a picture to help you understand the process, and even that didn’t help you. Clutch at your security blankie.

                      An overall teacher judgment (OTJ) involves drawing on and applying the evidence gathered up to a particular point in time, in order to make an overall judgment about a student’s progress and achievement.

                      No single source of information can accurately summarise a student’s achievement or progress. A range of approaches is necessary in order to compile a comprehensive picture of the areas of progress, areas requiring attention, and what a student’s unique progress looks like. Using a range of approaches also allows the student to participate throughout the assessment process, building their assessment capability. Because of this, to assess a student in relation to National Standards, teachers need to bring together a range of evidence in order to form an overall teacher judgment.

                      Overall teacher judgments of achievement and progress involve combining information from a variety of sources, using a range of approaches. Evidence may be gathered in the following three ways:

                      Observing the process a student uses to complete a learning task. Conversing with the student to find out what they know, understand and can do. Gathering results from formal assessments, including standardised tools. This gathering of information from a range of sources increases the dependability of the OTJ. The diagram above explains in more detail.

                      Any point of the triangle provides an approach to gathering evidence of learning. The use of a range of evidence accumulated over the year builds dependability in progress and achievement decisions. An OTJ can be made when the teacher reviews all of the evidence in relation to a National Standard, rather than relying on a single source of evidence.

                      When using an assessment tool
                      When using assessment tools teachers should:

                      understand the purpose of the assessment
                      know the curriculum content well enough to clearly understand what is being assessed and that it is being assessed appropriately
                      consider the difficulty of the assessment so that it fairly matches the level of the student
                      know how to select an assessment tool, administer it and interpret the outcomes
                      support students to understand what is being assessed and why
                      know how to respond to assessment outcomes in a way that benefits student learning.
                      Visit the Assessment tool selector to review a range of assessment tools.

                    • International Rescue …
                      5 May 2016 at 4:20 pm

                      “The NZ Curriculum doesn’t clearly state anything of the sort: if you think the passage you quoted supports your opinion, you’re wrong.”

                      I realise you have some kind of reading/comprehension difficulty, so I’ll give you more evidence:

                      “Engaging in some form of peer review (moderation) enables teachers to check their …”
                      “Collegial support and informal discussion were most frequently
                      mentioned, along with gathering multiple sources of evidence to formulate judgements. ”
                      “Moderation is more than informal conversations with colleagues (Hipkins, 2010); indeed it involves deep philosophical discussions in which the tensions between assessment, pedagogical and content knowledge are deconstructed and reconstructed in new ways so that teacher understanding is extended. ”
                      “Furthermore, Reid (2007, p. 144) argues that “engaging in assessment moderation appears to help teachers resolve formative and summative assessment tensions and strengthen links between pedagogy, curriculum and assessment”. Teachers as learners can consider their learning as an interactive social activity as well as one which is individually located. Engaging in some form of peer review (moderation) enables teachers to check their interpretations with other colleagues, to debate understandings New Zealand teachers’ overall teacher judgements (OTJs) 72 Assessment Matters 4 : 2012 about such matters as curriculum, learning and assessment, and to have their views deepened, challenged or confirmed. Professional conversations within moderation processes are the basis of potential deep learning and shared understandings of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. In turn, these clearer understandings help teachers in their instructional and assessment processes to assist students to “develop the capacity to monitor the quality of their own work during its actual production” (Sadler, 2009, p. 45), thus linking assessment with improved learning and teaching.
                      http://www.nzcer.org.nz/system/files/AM2012_4_053.pdf

                      This was from 2010, when the system was just getting underway! You know what you could do, OAB? Ask a teacher. There we go, get off your keyboard and engage with the real world. You’re bound to learn something.

                    • International Rescue …
                      5 May 2016 at 4:28 pm

                      Here’s more OAB:

                      “How do teachers ensure judgments are soundly based?
                      Moderation and collegial support were the methods used by most teachers. ”

                      http://www.educationgroup.co.nz/uploads/Publications/How%20do%20teachers%20make%20overall%20teacher%20judgements%201910.pdf

                      This article even mentions that teachers were asking for more PD time (that’s Professional Development for ignoramuses like you) to develop their ability at moderation/peer review. That you claim doesn’t exist!

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      5 May 2016 at 4:28 pm

                      Too funny: your cite supports my position: from the conclusion (otherwise known as “the guts”) of Poskitt & Mitchell 2012

                      The actualisation of improved learning, teaching and assessment from the implementation of National Standards may be possible if highly valid and reliable data are generated and used to inform professional and student learning. However, as seen in this study, such ideals are challenging to achieve when teachers are surrounded by uncertainty and confusion about the meaning of, and process for deriving, OTJs.

                      QED.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      5 May 2016 at 4:33 pm

                      Here’s more OAB…

                      Meanwhile, on Earth, what I actually said was:

                      professional development depends in part upon peer review and Notional Standards, um, don’t

                      IR has now cited the MoE and Poskitt & Mitchell 2012, who both confirmed my initial statement.

                      QED again: IR has limited English comprehension skills.

                    • International Rescue …
                      5 May 2016 at 4:35 pm

                      “Too funny: your cite supports my position: from the conclusion (otherwise known as “the guts”) of Poskitt & Mitchell 2012”

                      Where does that say there is no peer review?

                      Figures out the difference between poverty and inequality?

                    • International Rescue …
                      5 May 2016 at 4:39 pm

                      “professional development depends in part upon peer review and Notional Standards, um, don’t”

                      You have been challenging claims that peer review is part of the process. Here’s one of your direct quotes:

                      “MoE’s description of how OTJs are arrived at demonstrates that peer-review is not a part of the process.

                      While IR will continue to clutch at his false beliefs like a security blankie, others can read it, and make up their own minds.”

                      I’ve proven you wrong. Again.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      5 May 2016 at 5:45 pm

                      Where does that say there is no peer review?

                      It’s conclusions support that conclusion.

                      With specific reference to the OTJ, the cited material supports the conclusion that the OTJ for any individual student is not peer-reviewed.

                      The point of all this esoterica is that the notional standards model is flawed because it contains inherent conflicts of interest, International experience is that this is by no means a theoretical problem.

                      The consequent damage to children can be seen in the relative PISA scores between countries.

                    • International Rescue …
                      5 May 2016 at 10:02 pm

                      “It’s conclusions support that conclusion.”

                      No it doesn’t. And my subsequent references prove that there is. You’re running away from your original claims, and thus isn’t the first time.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      6 May 2016 at 7:27 am

                      That isn’t what ‘subsequent’ means – what is it with you and English? 😆

                      I do not resile from a single one of my original claims.

                    • International Rescue …
                      6 May 2016 at 12:03 pm

                      “I do not resile from a single one of my original claims.”

                      Well you’e running pretty fast from your comments about peer review! You making quite a habit of it actually.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      6 May 2016 at 12:08 pm

                      As the links you provided demonstrate, Notional Standards are not subject to peer review, and neither are OTJs.

                      I wonder how many other English words you’re clueless about the meaning of. Thinking “subsequent” means “before” could seriously affect your understanding of a whole bunch of things. No wonder you think your links make your case: you’re semi-literate.

                    • International Rescue …
                      7 May 2016 at 8:33 pm

                      “As the links you provided demonstrate, Notional Standards are not subject to peer review, and neither are OTJs.”

                      The links showed very clearly they are. I ca’t be responsible for your lack of comprehension.

        • mac1 1.7.1.2
          3 May 2016 at 5:37 pm

          Nah, I’d just say that this is more an insight into Guerrilla Surgeon’s personal ethics than a sustainable attack on teachers.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 1.7.1.2.1
            4 May 2016 at 7:13 pm

            There is no sustainable attack on teachers: the right loses the civil wars it wages against intelligence.

    • Draco T Bastard 1.8
      3 May 2016 at 4:23 pm

      What a load of bollocks.

  2. TC 2
    3 May 2016 at 10:39 am

    Its set the scene for further ideological funding and dog whistling so job done.

    It was never about positive educational outcomes.

    All those pesky facts and evidence showed before it was rolled out it was all about politics not kids learning.

    Its another of Nationals legacies; farking over one of the best education systems in the world to enrich their mates.

  3. Stephen 3
    3 May 2016 at 11:05 am

    My fear has always been that behind National Standards comes national testing. The standards are so woolly and so up to teacher judgement to be nearly irrelevant. So to make the standards, “standard” along comes national testing!

    • TC 3.1
      3 May 2016 at 11:54 am

      Consider the results being used to punish under achieving schools with further funding cuts and eventual closure or transfer to private interests.

      • Molly 3.1.1
        3 May 2016 at 2:54 pm

        … and being used to introduce performance related pay for teachers. That has been the typical use of them in the US.

        National Standards has never been about improving educational learning environments or outcomes.

        Funding to pay for National Standards was cut from support services. Remedial reading programmes are now paid out of the operating budget of schools, not a specialised fund. High needs students – even if they are identified – have less access to support services, and those services, if they are provided are under constant review.

    • mpledger 3.2
      3 May 2016 at 2:34 pm

      I don’t think national testing will be possible in NZ – it’s just so expensive – mostly in wages. And by the time the results come back they are out of date – the kids have moved on.

      There are hilarious tales in the US about what the markers get up to …
      Making the Grades: My Misadventures in the Standardized Testing Industry
      http://www.amazon.com/Making-Grades-Misadventures-Standardized-Industry/dp/098170915X

      And it’s all really funny until you remember that it’s kid’s lives, thier teachers and schools that are being held “accountable” for the marks that are given so randomly.

  4. Bill 4
    3 May 2016 at 12:31 pm

    National Standards were never about providing education per se. What they were and are about is applying measurable criteria to a system that can then be moneytised so that the system can be privatised.

    On that front, is it a failure or a success?

    • Nessalt 4.1
      3 May 2016 at 5:42 pm

      Success. having the means to accurately identify failure is a valuable tool. not something that should be derided for pointing out flaws in the most vulnerable sector of our nation.

  5. Robert Glennie 5
    3 May 2016 at 12:55 pm

    National Standards, like N.C.E.A. I have never gotten my head around. The pre-N.C.E.A. system worked fine for me – my mediocre marks were simply because I did the bare minimum.

    Can’t blame the system for that.

    • Molly 5.1
      3 May 2016 at 3:01 pm

      Back in the day, our scoring system ensured that 50% of students failed. Marks were scaled accordingly in end-of-year tests.

      Now, think about that.

      If you are testing for knowledge – and everyone knows the material – still 50% would fail. Conversely, if only 30% know the material then 20% of those who don’t will get scaled up to a pass.

      The NCEA is a recognition of adaptive and alternative methods of what is required for ongoing learning. I remember reading once, that a new educational system takes 12 years to become the norm, and it is around 15 now. I have my issues with NCEA but it relates more to the impact of political interference and failure to provide for all students an equal sense of success, but not with the intent to allow for students that can adapt.

      • ianmac 5.1.1
        3 May 2016 at 3:21 pm

        Agree with all you wrote Molly. But the risk with NCEA is that pupils see learning as a set of chunks and many believe that they should stop once they have achieved a pass. They loose sight of the wholeness of learning.

        • Molly 5.1.1.1
          3 May 2016 at 8:37 pm

          That is indeed a problem. It is exacerbated by the assumption that learning is all about eventual “earning”.

          I don’t think that is brought about by the system, but by the society we have raised our children in, during the last three decades.

  6. Mainlander 6
    3 May 2016 at 1:02 pm

    By all accounts nearly all Charter schools appear to be doing well stats wise, maybe that’s a model that needs to be implemented in areas where the state sector is letting the children down.

    • joe90 6.1
      3 May 2016 at 1:14 pm

      nearly all Charter schools appear to be doing well stats wise

      These stats, do they mention that three of the four schools had failed to meet all their obligations?.

      • Sacha 6.1.1
        3 May 2016 at 1:41 pm

        One of them has done really well in the ‘farms owned’ stats.

      • Bob 6.1.2
        3 May 2016 at 2:01 pm

        Did you read the article you linked too?

        “The documents show the areas of non-compliance were roll numbers and student engagement. Vanguard Military School didn’t meet its minimum roll requirements, but said that was because some students left after achieving NCEA early.
        It also didn’t meet engagement targets – having too many suspensions and expulsions – but said as it was a military school it had a hard line policy on behaviour.”
        “Terenga Paraoa had not complied with a well-being survey, which was also required.”
        “All the schools’ achievement targets appeared to have been met, the documents said”

        • joe90 6.1.2.1
          3 May 2016 at 3:52 pm

          Vanguard Military School didn’t meet its minimum roll requirements, but said that was because some students left after achieving NCEA early.

          With over 90% of credits earned at Vanguard Military School in 2014 internally assessed, of course they left early.

          /

          The government data published on the Education Counts website for each of the charter secondary schools reveals the following for “School Leavers with at least NCEA Level 2” for 2014:

          Vanguard Military School 21 out of 35 or 60.0%

          Te Kura Hourua o Whangarei Terenga Paraoa 5 out of 9 or 55.6%

          Te Pumanawa o Te Wairua 1 out of 15 or 6.7%

          These results compare very unfavourably with the national school leaver figure of 77.1% leaving school with at least NCEA Level 2 or higher (School Leaver stats are published by the Ministry on this site under the Find A School application.)

          https://saveourschoolsnz.com/2015/08/14/david-seymours-claim-that-charter-school-ncea-achievement-is-very-high-is-utter-nonsense/

    • Kelly-Ned 6.2
      3 May 2016 at 2:45 pm

      You fail to understand how Charter Schools work.
      The have high exclusion rates – that should be a clue for you. Which kids would you get rid of if you wanted your data to look better?
      Also – are their numbers big enough for the data to be a fair indication of ‘achievement’? I suggest not even close.

  7. Psych nurse 7
    3 May 2016 at 1:04 pm

    Every country has a 20 percent tail in achievement because of the simple fact that 20 percent have an IQ below average just as 20 percent are above average, just the law of nature. We should expect every child to achieve to their potential but in this country we have the hurdles of poverty, alcohol and drug abuse, poor housing, ill health caused by living conditions and the transient lifestyle of the poor in both address and parental partners.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 7.1
      3 May 2016 at 1:13 pm

      What we also have is an entire industry dedicated to obscuring the facts and shifting the blame: it sells legislation in exchange for lucrative business opportunities and calls itself the National Party.

    • adam 7.2
      3 May 2016 at 2:46 pm

      Psych nurse, did you know you used the language of eugenics? IQ tests were created to give justification to sterilisation programmes. They are very far from being scientific. “Law of nature” a rather nasty eugenics term, used to justify many evil acts.

      Then the list at the end is the same list most people were picked for the eugenics programs.

      If you have time a great book is http://www.waragainsttheweak.com/ it has chapter one on line, great read – even if it will give you a few nightmares.

      • ianmac 7.2.1
        3 May 2016 at 3:05 pm

        adam I don’t think Psych Nurse meant anything adverse. It is true that a certain proportion of kids are not very bright and they will have a lifelong struggle to reach a “norm.” Sometimes those same kids might have been pretty good at something less academic but nowadays the focus on NS makes their opportunities fewer and their sense of failure can be crippling.

        It would be impossible for every Kid to be above “normal.” Therefore some will fail regardless of the quality of teaching.

      • Psych nurse 7.2.2
        3 May 2016 at 9:41 pm

        Yes Adam you are right, the measuring of intelligence to determine cognitive functioning is about as valid to our society as National Standards, but the fact remains that about 20 percent fail to achieve in education and they are used to undermine the teaching profession.

  8. Tautoko Mangō Mata 8
    3 May 2016 at 1:47 pm

    National Standards were introduced with the ultimate goal of producing a measure to which performance pay for teachers would be eventually tied. STUPID IDEA.

    • Nessalt 8.1
      3 May 2016 at 5:40 pm

      Looks like it might be a good idea about to save the country millions. teachers simply aren’t performing.

      this is a unique situation where the kids that we all care about are simply being held back by ineffectual teaching. this mantra that individuality and creativity leads to better outcomes is not true and has been a ridiculously expensive experiment in allowing standards to slide.

      It’s difficult be creative when you don’t have the framework of a basic understanding of the rules that bind the world. be it multiplication, communication through a grammatical understanding of the written word or being able to understand and comprehend arguments via that same medium. the most outstanding creative people I know are proficient in at least one of reading, writing and arithmetic. if not all three. they also learnt these skills 30 years ago. not one kid has come through in any interview that has been half as creative as my colleagues and peers.

  9. adam 9
    3 May 2016 at 2:55 pm

    Having read a few of International rescues comments it proves once again propaganda wins over substance.

    It’s obvious from his comments – he has no idea what ERO is and does.

    It’s obvious from his comments – he repeating the spewed propaganda line this government has espoused.

    It’s obvious from his comments – he can’t make any connections between privatisation and the use of dumb statistics to justify ideology dress up as social policy.

    It’s obvious from his comments – has no idea this is a socialist site and his retarded comments are out of touch with socialist thought, and yes you can thank us for a working education system.

    It’s obvious from his comments – his enjoys being obtuse.

    It’s obvious from his comments – does not give a damn about anyone else kids, but his own

    You know somewhere in Africa there is a far right nirvana with your name on it.

    • dv 9.1
      3 May 2016 at 3:03 pm

      The other interesting observation is that IR has a child with learning difficulty\ that it took 5 teacher to pick upon.
      Obviously Nat Stds didn’t do that for him. And yet he is a proponent of Nat Stds .

  10. Keith 10
    3 May 2016 at 3:06 pm

    Just like Nationals promised Ultra fast broadband. Failed to materialise in most of Auckland at least!

  11. ianmac 11
    3 May 2016 at 3:14 pm

    An item by Andrew Dickens has just come on in the Herald. Jolly good.
    “National Standards….
    …..Yes an extra quarter billion has been invested. But remember our population has swelled by 500,000 people in the last decade so that money was needed just to keep pace. When politicians say they’re spending more on health and education remember that they have to because there are more of us.
    They’re playing politics. That’s because they’re politicians….
    …In 2008 John Key said National Standards will lift education. Who bought that? National Standards is only a measuring device. Nothing more. Not an advance in educational techniques…..
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11632795

    • One Anonymous Bloke 11.1
      3 May 2016 at 3:36 pm

      …and the time spent measuring is better invested in teaching. One small step for humankind, but a giant leap for a right winger.

  12. save NZ 12
    3 May 2016 at 3:20 pm

    National standards are a joke. But it is not funny.

    Labeling a 5 year old as a failure because they get Non Achieved?? What sort of idiot dreams up this stuff. Oh yes our idiotic government. Labelling a 5 year old as dumb is not really psychologically a sound thing to do. Likewise a kid that has parents that hot house them and are labeled a genius at 5 when really they are more like a well trained robot, and find out at 12 they are just average and flip out. (Not to mention their parents). More importantly rote learning is something of the past. Kids these days face many challenges and creativity is more important and being able to think outside the box.

    National standards drains the creativity out of children. Creativity is important for innovation and for the changes that kids will inevitably face in the future.

    There is also research into why a country like Singapore which has excellent maths result has few patents and less business starting up. That is because the system labels them early and they start to lack the confidence to actually succeed even if they are good at a subject.

    http://www.newsweek.com/creativity-crisis-74665

    An extract…

    “Back in 1958, Ted Schwarzrock was an 8-year-old third grader when he became one of the “Torrance kids,” a group of nearly 400 Minneapolis children who completed a series of creativity tasks newly designed by professor E. Paul Torrance. Schwarzrock still vividly remembers the moment when a psychologist handed him a fire truck and asked, “How could you improve this toy to make it better and more fun to play with?” He recalls the psychologist being excited by his answers. In fact, the psychologist’s session notes indicate Schwarzrock rattled off 25 improvements, such as adding a removable ladder and springs to the wheels. That wasn’t the only time he impressed the scholars, who judged Schwarzrock to have “unusual visual perspective” and “an ability to synthesize diverse elements into meaningful products.”

    The accepted definition of creativity is production of something original and useful, and that’s what’s reflected in the tests. There is never one right answer. To be creative requires divergent thinking (generating many unique ideas) and then convergent thinking (combining those ideas into the best result).”

    • ianmac 12.1
      3 May 2016 at 3:27 pm

      2+2+ 4. Closed.
      How many different paths could you walk to get from your house to the Supermarket? Open. No one answer.

  13. Heather.Grimwood 13
    3 May 2016 at 5:01 pm

    To SaveNZ at 12: To ” National standards drains the creativity out of children”, I heartily agree, but please include ” and of teachers”.
    My joy in teaching creatively was inhibited hugely in late ’70’s. Earlier, I felt free, having but to know well the basic syllabus , and that the necessity was to develop thinking skills BUT through whatever topic of interest was presently forthcoming.

  14. Chuck 14
    3 May 2016 at 5:08 pm

    Lets be honest here…Teachers union (any union) and the Labour party are joined at the hip. Any policy that comes via a National Government will be resisted at all costs…

    National Standards is a tool to help identify where kids need help, and to put resource around the areas required.

    • mac1 14.1
      3 May 2016 at 6:11 pm

      “Lets be honest here”. Hah! This kind of introduction, through long experience, usually means the opposite.

      Chuck, you obviously don’t know teacher unions to say that they and the Labour Party are joined at the hip. That assertion might explain your world, but it’s not the experience of a teacher of 43 years former experience.

      At times, even mostly, views coincide; but your assertion is just that. It implies collusion. That is a lie. Plain wrong. Fuckwit stuff. You just don’t know.

      • Chuck 14.1.1
        3 May 2016 at 7:15 pm

        NZEI is affiliated to NZ council of trade unions (CTU)…which if Labour is replaced with National and NZ council of trade unions (CTU) with “big business” the howls of outrage will be deafening here.

        Collusion or just views coinciding mostly… is little difference at the end of the day.

        • mac1 14.1.1.1
          3 May 2016 at 7:24 pm

          So, let’s get it straight here, little Chuck. You say NZEI (and there is more than one teacher’s union just by the way) is affiliated to the NZCTU and therefore is joined to Labour at the hip?

          I haven’t heard such breathtaking leaps of logic since the good old anti-communist days of ‘fellow-travellers’, your far-fetched National/big business analogy notwithstanding.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 14.2
      3 May 2016 at 6:21 pm

      No, they aren’t. because of the inherent conflict of interest in the way they are calculated, and the ways in which they fly in the face of international best practice.

      Your Daddy depends upon you finding ways to avoid and deny these simple truths,

    • ianmac 14.3
      3 May 2016 at 8:06 pm

      Chuck, “identify where kids need help, and to put resource around the areas required.”
      So true and that was what was happening for decades, even though we are money/resource poor. NS has deflected the time and energy and money required.

      • Sacha 14.3.1
        3 May 2016 at 9:40 pm

        “National Standards is a tool to help identify where kids need help, and to put resource around the areas required.”

        If only they did either of those things.

    • save NZ 14.4
      4 May 2016 at 12:49 pm

      @ Chuck – I heard the government has just reduced the grants for gifted children. All around schools are having their funding cut in real terms.

      Apart from failed charter schools as a bribe to the Maori party, where is the so called extra ‘resource around the areas required”?

      Also where is the so called increased results from the millions investor in Charter Schools?

  15. Nessalt 15
    3 May 2016 at 5:35 pm

    So are the standards too tough? or is it the teachers inability to teach basic numeracy and literacy?

    It’s either of these. I’ll be interested to see which it may be.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 15.1
      3 May 2016 at 6:03 pm

      Or some third thing, like, for example, as all local and international evidence attests, household income, or pedagogy, you witless parrot.

      • Nessalt 15.1.1
        4 May 2016 at 5:00 pm

        I love this, you are basically saying “you are poor, you are destined to be unintelligible and innumerate”

        Love the blanket all too. makes your entire statement invalid as it’s a patent falsehood.

        but keep spouting your third way, no responsibility or accountability of teachers BS. whatever helps you sleep at night besides your meds, or lack of.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 15.1.1.1
          4 May 2016 at 5:57 pm

          You are mistaken: teachers are already held responsible and kept accountable, and always were, long before notional standards were introduced.

          Perhaps you are unfamiliar with, for example, the ways the Ministry of Education oversees professional development. Your feeble fantasy that it requires zero accountability is, well, a fantasy.

          But then it isn’t really your fantasy, is it? You’ve been swallowing propaganda for so long you’ve abdicated your responsibility for critical thought.

          I’m picking you’ll take umbrage with my contempt for you rather than address the substance of my rebuttal. That’s because your opinions are worthless.

  16. Chuck 16
    3 May 2016 at 6:29 pm

    Good on ya OAB, consign all kids that live in a household who’s income is on the wrong side of the “medium” to failing school.

    All the name calling you take great delight in dishing out is childish at best…

    • joe90 16.1
      3 May 2016 at 6:51 pm

      consign all kids that live in a household who’s income is on the wrong side of the “medium” to failing school

      These other schools you say are succeeding, evidence please.

      • Chuck 16.1.1
        3 May 2016 at 7:21 pm

        joe90 you need to ask OAB your question…back to 15 / 15.1

        • joe90 16.1.1.1
          3 May 2016 at 7:41 pm

          You’re the one intimating kids that live in a household who’s income is on the wrong side of the “medium” are being denied the chance to go to a successful school.

          Again, any evidence to show these other schools are successful?.

          • Chuck 16.1.1.1.1
            3 May 2016 at 8:33 pm

            Read 15.0 from Nessalt then 15.1 from OAB “Or some third thing, like, for example, as all local and international evidence attests, household income, or pedagogy, you witless parrot”.

            My reply was to OAB comment that income dedicates a child’s success or not.

            Which to spell out…I do not agree with on both counts…that “poor kids” cannot succeed just as “rich kids” do not all leave school with A+ results

            To be fair I should have replied to 15.1, but I trust this clears it up for you now joe90.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 16.1.1.1.1.1
              4 May 2016 at 8:34 pm

              I cite household income as being the single most influential factor. A wingnut misrepresents that as the only factor.

              Why do wingnuts tell so many lies? I think it’s because they’re stupid and dishonest: money launderers and dupes.

              • Muttonbird …
                4 May 2016 at 8:43 pm

                Not sure they are stupid, just greedy.

                Wingnuts do not consider society and community, only themselves. That’s the big difference as far as I can see.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  4 May 2016 at 9:44 pm

                  Co-operation is more profitable than self-interest: even their greed is incompetent.

        • joe90 16.1.2.1
          4 May 2016 at 12:23 pm

          The ERO audits school policys and procedures, not student success.

          That the reporting on student progress is left to the schools themselves is a tui moment.
          /

          Work is currently underway to present the performance of the Partnership Schools | Kura Hourua sector and that of individual schools in an easy-to-understand format. In the meantime, please refer to each school’s quarterly and annual reports below.

          http://partnershipschools.education.govt.nz/pskh/quarterly-reports/

    • One Anonymous Bloke 16.2
      3 May 2016 at 8:22 pm

      Is that what happens in Finland, Chuck? Perhaps you missed my argument that we regard their pedagogy as a benchmark for best practice, given its achievements.

      Or perhaps you are simply parroting your Daddy’s effluent.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 16.3
      4 May 2016 at 6:05 pm

      The problem with your comment is that it validates my contempt. By advocating that New Zealand goes back to following best pedagogical practice – as measured by real world results, not right wing propaganda, I am simply applying common sense.

      I’ve witnessed how good pedagogy affects learning. You’ve got your tongue up your Daddy and your every opinion is tainted by that.

      • Chuck 16.3.1
        4 May 2016 at 6:33 pm

        OAB you must be one really stressed out person…with a fetish for Daddy’s and tongues in places they do not belong (I am counting at least 6 references in the past 24hours alone!!).

        Take the good you see and try to apply it in a positive way…”I’ve witnessed how good pedagogy affects learning”.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 16.3.1.1
          4 May 2016 at 6:54 pm

          Taking umbrage with my contempt for you rather than addressing the substance of my rebuttal merely illustrates that your opinions are as worthless as Nessalt’s. See my comment at 15.1.1.1

          As for your tongue, it serves another.

          • Chuck 16.3.1.1.1
            4 May 2016 at 7:52 pm

            Unlike you, I do not have contempt for you OAB.

            Your opinions are yours to make…no more no less. Your form suggests entering into any meaningful conversation / rebuttal will only lead to more x rated fetish suggestions.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 16.3.1.1.1.1
              4 May 2016 at 9:48 pm

              Results, best practice, common sense. Deny them for your Daddy.

  17. millsy 17
    3 May 2016 at 8:25 pm

    National Standards = privatisation and commodification of education.

  18. Old Tony 18
    3 May 2016 at 9:44 pm

    Looking at the above posts its clear why OAB wants to be anonymous. What a thoroughly unpleasant individual.

    [lprent: *sigh* You mean that he/she is just as pseudonymous as you are? Let me point out that I really don’t give a shit. However if you want to use that particular argument, then I will boot you off the site for some time.

    I really don’t like cleaning up after stupid self-referential politeness arseholes who use it to start flamewars. I tend to demonstrate why I don’t like it. Amongst other reasons because it is usually the first step in some idiotic wanker trying to emulate Mrs Grundy and attempting to set the rules on our site. Read the policy and avoid my ire. ]

    • One Anonymous Bloke 18.1
      3 May 2016 at 9:49 pm

      Look in the mirror, I’ll be right there.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 18.2
      4 May 2016 at 6:07 pm

      PS: toerag Tony assumes that I’m less abrasive to wingnut trash in person. He’s wrong.

  19. Philj 19
    3 May 2016 at 10:10 pm

    Save me from International Rescue! Pete George and Cc deniers comes to mind. IR clearly has a mission to railroad the thread. His script is so predictable and tedious. Fast forward. Is IR being paid as this seems to be the only rational?