Leader David Seymour said it was “ideology over evidence … and payoffs to union backers as the government seeks to massacre partnership schools despite their popularity and success”.
The government had no clear alternative, Mr Seymour said.
“They know that Māori and Pacific achievement is abysmal, a stain on the promise of opportunity for all, but they are so focused on helping the ‘sector,’ read unions, that they have forgotten about the kids.”
Note to David Seymour. None of the education sector unions are affiliated to the Labour Party or make donations to the Labour Party.
And his claims of charter school success need to be considered carefully.
There is an international study suggesting that only one in five charter schools performed better than its state equivalent and two in five performed worse.
And in 2015 charter schools received $888,000 more than they would if their funding were strictly based on their enrolments thanks to the provision of generous guaranteed minimum roles. In some cases charter schools were paid $27,000 per annum per child compared to $7,000 per annum per child for the state equivalent. And not all of the extra money was used for education purposes.
And there has been major concern about education standards in charter schools. One prospective Manawatu charter school wanted to teach creationism.
Our education system has always been very successful and very cost effective. Sure it has its problems. But failure of kids to achieve are primarily to do with the ravages of child poverty, not our education system.
As for chartered school success well it appears this was a result of it interpreting data in a different way to state schools and once the same method was used chartered schools did not do so well.
National are pushing this though because within the Labour Party there are some who have expressed support for charter schools, notably Kelvin Davis and Willie Jackson. Kelvin wants two existing schools to be able to operate as special character schools and I am sure as long as they qualify this will happen.
Willie complained about a system that marginalised those tamariki, mostly Maori, who don’t fit in. But there are state system alternatives, for instance the Hoani Waititi Kura which is a designated character school under the Education Act and which offers high quality education to Maori without the baggage that a charter school would bring.
The schools and the models are there. They just need better resourcing not experimentation with libertarian models tried in nations with worse education standards than ours. And for the Government to do something about child poverty. Like get rid of it.
David Seymour has organised a public protest this afternoon against the closure of charter schools. I suspect the turnout will be in accordance with a political party polling at 0.1%.
Amazing how much attention Seymour gets.
Perhaps you should email him for some tips.
I think the trick is to offer policies that wealthy corporations love.
Which wealthy corporations love Seymour’s utterings ?
On tax, charter schools, and economic theory? I think you’d be hard pressed to find one that didn’t. (Well, maybe some of them dislike charter schools specifically… they are THAT terrible)
I don’t know, i think holograms are fascinating.
I’m a great believer in ‘termination for convenience’, if only for the fact that it will drive Libertarians into an even bigger rage than they currently maintain at the ‘theft’ of their precious taxes and the idea that they might have to obey inconvenient laws.
The record for the longest tantrum sustained by a Libertarian is up for grabs.
Perhaps Seymour should learn to spell
Not a great look from the man who is championing these schools.
I expect he went to State schools during a time when spelling wasn’t a requirement.
He went to Auckland Grammar, a state school but one which is mostly out of bounds to all but the wealthy (has the highest ‘voluntary’ donation of any state school – $1050 p.a. in 2014 – and buying a house in the enrolment zone adds over $250k to a house price, all else being equal)
I don’t know about Seymour, but a good sporting record tends to make state schools a little more ‘flexible’ when it comes to enforcing zoning.
I’ve heard him speak. He’s as dense as mincemeat.
Yup, was thinking the same thing.
“It is a travesty that some of our kids are dropping out of mainstream education and are finding that alternative education is their only chance. ”
And yet that has always happened. It happened when I was a child in the 1960’s and a teen in the 1970’s. The state system serves many well, but it is not, and never has been, capable of a one size fits all solution, otherwise there would be no demand for the alternatives on offer. In 2015, “93% of the students enrolled in partnership schools were priority learners”. (http://www.partnershipschools.education.govt.nz/news/partnership-schools-and-pr/). For those children, parents and their wider family communities have spoken, and their choice should be respected.
“In some cases charter schools were paid $27,000 per annum per child compared to $7,000 per annum per child for the state equivalent. And not all of the extra money was used for education purposes.”
“In some cases”? Here’s the reality:
“South Auckland Middle School (SAMS) began in 2014 with only a four month lead-in and $1.1 million to cover all establishment costs. A comparative state school startup would have been approximately $27 million and an 18 month staffed lead-in. SAMS has flown since day one and currently has 180 students and approximately 70 on wait-lists. We teach the New Zealand curriculum, have had a very stable student body with minimum transience, and in 2016 showed an 18% improvement for our Year 7 and 8 students in their national standards, in contrast to the national pattern. At SAMS, 93% of our students are Māori or Pasifika. It received its 1% retention payments (Labour education spokesperson Chris Hipkins calls them bonuses) for 2014 and 2015.
Middle School West Auckland (MSWA) began in 2015. Again after being given only four months lead-in and, somehow, less money for establishment – despite the original maximum roll being listed at twice that of SAMS. Two state schools establishing through the same period, also for Year 7 – 10, were Rototuna (Hamilton), costing approximately $40m, and Ormiston Junior High, costing approximately $91m (currently listed as having 150 students). ”
https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/18-05-2017/charter-schools-the-case-for/
Partnership Schools provide their own buildings. Some provide free uniforms. They are virtually all not-for-profit. And they cost a hell of a lot less per pupil than this school https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/101223266/no-kids-and-no-fulltime-staff–but-tuturumuri-school-in-wairarapa-remains-open, who the NZEI are happy to keep open with no pupils!
The real “travesty” is that a viable alternative for these children is being taken away for no other reason than a mean spirited ideology and a nod and wink to teacher unions.
For anyone seriously interested in cutting through the ideological opposition to these schools, I recommend the spinoff piece above.
Special character schools, or termination for convenience. Those are your choices. Time you got over it and moved on, that’s just the way things are.
…and there you have it. Compassion and concern for students the state system failed.
Special character schools, exactly. Riding roughshod over Libertarians having a massive tantrum. Bonus.
Total failure to comprehend the relationship between household income and educational achievement: stupid and dishonest.
…or, this could be strike 3 for Chris Hipkins. Bigger bonus.
“Total failure to comprehend the relationship between household income and educational achievement:”
Irony alert…Anon pretends to care for the disadvantaged, but supports the end of an initiative that has proven results in their favour.
Special character schools. Special. Speh – shull.
The things you consider proven belie your agenda, and you must be very “special” indeed if you think I can’t read the OP:
Oh dear. They told lies. Termination for convenience it is.
“…once the same method was used chartered schools did not do so well.”
No lies Anon, perhaps just you’re failure to understand. Partnership/Charter schools do best for those less advantaged. The ones I assumed you spoke for.
“That the percentage of high-performing charter schools is growing is good news. The results point to large strides in some locations and with some of our most needy students. Charters serving minority students in poverty, students in poverty and English language learners are posting stronger results both against their 2009 record and against their current TPS counterparts in closing the learning gap for these students.”
http://credo.stanford.edu/documents/NCSS%202013%20Final%20Draft.pdf
Rimmer.
Sounds more like bestiness to me.
Cite? Relevance?
Their performance has been on average less than a similar State school. For much more money.
Now that we are allowed to see their results as OIA requests finally come to light. Charter schools results have been much worse than claimed.
Read about the loss of community and disadvantaged kids let down, by the majority of US charter schools. New Orleans being a particularly good example of the failure of “alternative” schools.
Only a blind ideologue, like Hornet, or the lunatic fringe in ACT, can’t see the failure of the charter school model.
More lies. PS’s are funded on the same basis as state schools. You know this. You lie to cover up an ideological bias that simply means children failed by the state system will return to that system. Well done.
They are not funded the same as state schools. They have minimum enrolement funding – state schools don’t have that.
“They are not funded the same as state schools. They have minimum enrolement funding – state schools don’t have that.”
They are funded the same. But (PS’s) don’t have building provided by the MoE. PS’s often provide uniforms, and in the cases I have cited don’t request donations.
The real “travesty” is that a viable alternative for these children is being taken away for no other reason than a mean spirited ideology and a nod and wink to teacher unions.
More accurately, it’s being taken away because it was a ridiculously expensive way of improving things for a tiny fraction of the people who need it, implemented as a matter of ideology and to allow National to pretend that poverty has nothing to do with educational outcomes. Those are excellent reasons for taking it away and replacing it with something that isn’t shit.
“it’s being taken away because it was a ridiculously expensive way of improving things for a tiny fraction of the people who need it”
False. Clearly you didn’t read the content I posted. It is a highly cost effective way. Far more cost effective than paying $250,000 each year to keep a school open with no pupils.
“Far more cost effective than paying $250,000 each year to keep a school open with no pupils.”
Citation needed. Where is this school with no pupils?
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/101223266/no-kids-and-no-fulltime-staff–but-tuturumuri-school-in-wairarapa-remains-open
All charter schools are less expensive than a public school that has no pupils therefore charter schools are cheaper than all public schools …
I think there is a problem with your reasoning.
I’m simply pointing out the hypocrisy of some of the comparisons being made. In you’re own post you obliquely referred to “some cases” where “charter schools were paid $27,000 per annum per child compared to $7,000 per annum per child for the state equivalent”, yet you gave no references or context. It isn’t my reasoning that is the problem, it’s the quality of the arguments put forward by those supporting the closure of these childrens schools.
Far more cost effective than paying $250,000 each year to keep a school open with no pupils.
I think we can both agree that charter schools probably do meet this measure of cost-effectiveness(!), however it’s not a very practical or realistic measure. Unlike charter schools, the public system has to ensure that people in rural areas have schools available, and if there are no pupils right now but there will be next year, well shutting down a school and then opening a new one later is pretty expensive – way more expensive than paying to keep the school in existence.
Also: note that part about the public system having obligations to the public. Unlike private schools, the public system can’t cherry-pick its preferred pupils and then excrete the less-satisfactory pickings for someone else to take care of. Meeting those obligations is pretty fucking expensive, which is yet another reason Rimmer-sorry-Seymour is a disingenuous sack of shit.
“Unlike private schools, the public system can’t cherry-pick its preferred pupils and then excrete the less-satisfactory pickings for someone else to take care of. ”
You couldn’t be more wrong.
“In partnership schools, 75% of students must be priority learners, meaning they come from Māori or Pasifika backgrounds, low socio-economic areas or have a special educational need.
And sure enough, partnership schools are reaching the children they were designed to help. In 2015, not 75%, but 93% of the students enrolled in partnership schools were priority learners.”
http://www.partnershipschools.education.govt.nz/news/partnership-schools-and-pr/
And? My claim isn’t contradicted by anything in your comment.
Lots to unpick …
The state system serves many well, but it is not, and never has been, capable of a one size fits all solution, otherwise there would be no demand for the alternatives on offer.
The legislation allows all sorts of different options. The failure has been imagination and funding, not the existence of an alternative. Besides why does the alternative have to be a libertarian right wing model?
In 2015, “93% of the students enrolled in partnership schools were priority learners”. (http://www.partnershipschools.education.govt.nz/news/partnership-schools-and-pr/). For those children, parents and their wider family communities have spoken, and their choice should be respected.
The schools can continue. There will be some basic standards reached. Why should a deunionised teacher workforce be equated with a better system?
In some cases charter schools were paid $27,000 per annum per child compared to $7,000 per annum per child for the state equivalent. And not all of the extra money was used for education purposes.”
“In some cases”? Here’s the reality …
The funding for charter schools per kid is higher than state schools per kid. In some cases egregiously so. Quoting other examples to me and saying the figures are different does not refute my original statement.
Besides the spinoff article you rely on was written by someone associated with charter schools.
Partnership Schools provide their own buildings. Some provide free uniforms. They are virtually all not-for-profit. And they cost a hell of a lot less per pupil than this school https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/101223266/no-kids-and-no-fulltime-staff–but-tuturumuri-school-in-wairarapa-remains-open, who the NZEI are happy to keep open with no pupils!
They are less expensive than a school that has no pupils. Thanks for that.
“Besides the spinoff article you rely on was written by someone associated with charter schools.”
Indeed. Someone who clearly has an excellent grasp on the facts.
“The failure has been imagination and funding, not the existence of an alternative. Besides why does the alternative have to be a libertarian right wing model?”
The failure is not with funding – the state system has failed some children for decades, and has been funded well for decades. The model is neither libertarian or right wing. Most PS’s are not-for-profit. If you oppose non-state delivery of education, you’ll need to take on a very large slice of the ECE sector, and all the other non-state providers across the primary and post primary sectors.
“They are less expensive than a school that has no pupils.”
You mean per pupil. Nobody is running a functional school for 250,000 per year. Probably Tuturumuri school rebates most of that anyway.
“Probably Tuturumuri school rebates most of that anyway.”
Those are it’s annual operating costs, directly funded by the MoE.
“There are no fulltime staff or pupils at the rural Wairarapa school, but it remains open, with the Ministry of Education continuing to pay its annual operating costs of about $250,000.”
Tuturumuri School is still receiving this funding along with approximately 60 per cent of a part-time release teacher’s salary.”
“No further contributions to staff salaries are being made. If the board does not employ a principal or further teachers, then no additional salaries will be paid.”
According to the school’s website, it has a part-time caretaker, release teacher and part-time office administrator.”
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/101223266/no-kids-and-no-fulltime-staff–but-tuturumuri-school-in-wairarapa-remains-open
Sure thing its costs add up to exactly $250,000 pa and it prepays all its bills each year that seems convincing.
…and yet it has no pupils.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-5zEb1oS9A
It has enrollments “pending”, which is why they kept it open.
If “pending” means a few months, it could well be more expensive to shutter the school, fire everyone, and try and restart it a few months later. And meanwhile, who’d do all that admin work?
“It has enrollments “pending”, ”
Just a matter of days ago, Jacinda Ardern and Peeni Henare were photographed with Dominic Elliot, a student of Middle School West Auckland (https://www.facebook.com/Middle-School-West-Auckland-664746236980176/). The PM was happy to be photographed giving out awards, knowing that her government is about to shut Dominic’s school.
Middle School West Auckland teaches the NZ curriculum. All teachers are registered. The school provides free education, including uniforms, stationery and field trips. The school does not request donations.
At the time of their October 2015 ERO review, they had 113 students (http://www.ero.govt.nz/review-reports/middle-school-west-auckland-16-12-2015/). The school is now close to full…there are only limited spaces available. Not ‘enrolments pending’.
Just so we are clear what point are you trying to make here? Is it that enrollment numbers can fluctuate quite rapidly over only a few years time.
I think it’s that school buildings and staff can be completely relocated from Marlborough to Auckland over the summer holidays.
The point? The government is going to close a thriving school and keep one open that has no pupils.
and? What is your point about that?
The PM was happy to be photographed giving out awards, knowing that her government is about to shut Dominic’s school.
I expect that’s because her government being about to close his school is something you pulled out of your arse, which she can very much be excused for not having paid much attention to.
Middle School West Auckland teaches the NZ curriculum. All teachers are registered.
Should be a doddle switching over to being a special-character school in the public system then. No need to close at all, unless private ownership of the school is more important to the people running it than poor Dominic is. Or unless you couldn’t run the school on the funding available to a public-sector school, but that can’t possibly be the case, right? You heard from the SpinOff that these taxpayer-funded private schools aren’t better funded than public schools.
“I expect that’s because her government being about to close his school is something you pulled out of your arse,”
No, it isn’t. There is no pathway in law for the schools to remain open, and Hipkins has said they will close.
“You heard from the SpinOff that these taxpayer-funded private schools aren’t better funded than public schools.”
All public and integrated schools are taxpayer funded. So what? A huge number of ECE providers are ‘private’, yet receive taxpayer funds. So what? Do you know any of this stuff, or are you just arguing from ideology?
There is no reason to shut Partnership schools, none. None of the parents or children want them closed, the Deputy PM has said he will resign if some close. This is nothing more than an ideological sop to the NZEI, and anyone else who fears alternative education.
“School will have to change funding model” != “School will be closed.” Chris Hipkins might have an opinion on which of the two should happen, but Hipkins isn’t “her government” and there’s no reason for Jacinda Ardern to pretend that he is when she visits a school.
All public and integrated schools are taxpayer funded. So what? A huge number of ECE providers are ‘private’, yet receive taxpayer funds. So what?
Yes, the government already subsidises private education providers. That’s a bad thing and the government shouldn’t be doing it, any more than it should subsidise bars or supermarkets. Contracting out provision of schools to private companies, on the other hand, is a step way beyond that and is nothing more than an attempt by libertarian ideologues to undermine the public provision of schools. Anyone who claims to expect a centre-left government to participate in that needs to tone down the meds or review the honesty of their comments.
This is nothing more than an ideological sop to the NZEI, and anyone else who fears alternative education.
Hilarious. The left pioneered alternative education, and the right certainly hated all the alternative schools that were set up. Feel free to set up alternative schools within the public system, but if you want to start a private alternative school as a business, you’re in the private sector, not the public sector, and you should fund yourself accordingly. “Alternative” has nothing to do with it.
The state system doesn’t serve all perfectly well. They need to add another size to the one size solution they think they have.
Maybe all state schools should institute at least one class which gets the kids to line up like soldiers and have disciplinary measures in line with the military approach. Some kids like being put into a box where they are treated like automatons and have the thinking done for them. It’s all part of flexible approaches don’t you know.
Some kids would respond best to being staked to the ground and having ‘education’ shoved down their throats too. That also would need real flexibility.
There are lots of contradictions in those who are all keen for there to be sensitive, sympathetic approaches to schooling and helping needy kids and those having problems in the school system. Yet they want the kids ‘dealt to’.
Naturally they are also the mob who like the one size fits all in other aspects of society; i.e. boot the crap out of beneficiaries and those who have trouble coping with the problems of life to make them ‘fit in.’
One of the ways that we could handle the education system is to introduce the idea of wholistic education for some kids. They would work at their schooling from a kitchen setting. They would do some cooking, make some scones, salads, sit down and eat it.
Then go and do some book learning, act out what they have learned, tell the others one interesting thing they have found out about the subject they are studying. Demonstrate they know how to use a book library, then look to see what wikipedia says about it.
Choose a subject for the morning they all learn something about, each with a number that gets worked down so they all get choosing rights. Pool their facts together and list them and add one more fact that they have got from their father or mother as homework, try to get parents slightly interested and helpful. A way of getting curiosity going, mixing in with action.
Get them doing seasonal work, for pay, and give them a class while they eat their lunch, based on what they are doing, how important it is to food production, and economic activity. Make everything interesting and meaningful, and give them work experience all the way so they are soon self-sustaining without having to rely on rackety relations or be dragged down by peersl.
Now that would be better and have longer term positives more than staking them to the ground and forcing education down their throats eh!
Answer to Pete, above.
Some schools run according to this kind of old-fashioned discipline and hierarchical structure; some don’t. Some state schools incorporate military academies, which mostly enrol kids who have dropped out or been expelled from school and are being given a second chance. Ironically, this got harder and harder to fund under the last govt, who kept cutting back on all sorts of special ed and targeted funding. My school used to run an academy, but had to stop about 6 or 7 years ago.
There is lots of variety in the state and integrated system. Even within an individual school, it’s rare to find a “one size fits all” approach.
Pete,
Add in a course on “The teachings of F Hayek and their role in a modern feudal society” and you’d have a perfect incubator for future right-wing politicians.
There may be a place for them – but their adoption by the far-right suggests that less functional and more lucrative models have been chosen.
US experience is generally negative.
https://www.mathematica-mpr.com/our-publications-and-findings/projects/charter-schools-are-they-effective
But there are exceptions – more details
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED526353
Hi Stuart – thanks for at least being open minded. I would just note from your source that you said was ‘generally negative’ above these comments:
“Impacts on measures of both student and parent satisfaction were positive and statistically significant.” and…
“Impacts were most positive among schools in large, urban areas and among those serving the most disadvantaged students.”
I have a son with a serious learning difficulty who the state system utterly failed. Not because of a lack of money, but because of a lack of will and imagination. I have no connection whatsoever with Partnership Schools, but I will join those fighting against this disgraceful pandering to ideology, including some fairly prominent Labour Party figures.
Opponents like to reference overseas experience, so I will finish with this:
“Black students in poverty who attend charter schools gain an additional 29 days of learning in reading and 36 days in math per year over their [traditional public school] counterparts (see Figure 30). This shows the impact of charter schooling is especially beneficial for black students who in poverty.”
Quoted from a Credo Report at https://www.forbes.com/sites/modeledbehavior/2015/01/11/charter-success/#7392f9aa2dbf.
Isn’t it ironic that much of the opposition to Partnership Schools comes from those who purport to speak for the disadvantaged, yet allow ideology to stand in the way of their progress.
I’m trying to understand the various contradictory threads of this “personal responsibility” tapestry.
Parents have to take some responsibility for their children, unless those children are at school. That’s how the story goes, yes?
Charter schools, and indeed private schools in general, have everywhere caused a lowering of standards and drop in funding to the State system.
Dropping the overall standard of education in all countries they are allowed.
The rich no longer care because they can opt out. The rest of us cannot afford the, so called, “choices”.
As for helping disadvantaged children. I taught at a decile one school. The will, imagination and dedication is certainly there. The staff time, and funding is not.
Both neo-liberal managerial paradigms of constant measuring and control, and lack of staff/funding made giving children the help they needed Impossible.
We could have done a huge amount for a lot of children, with a fraction of the funding per student gifted to the local charter school.
BTW. I never saw any teachers, in that school, leave before 6 pm.
“Charter schools, and indeed private schools in general, have everywhere caused a lowering of standards and drop in funding to the State system.”
Cite? There is ample evidence that Partnership/Charter schools are improving educational outcomes for children, specifically those from lower socio-economic backgrounds. And as Partnership Schools receive the same funding per child as would a state school, your claim about funding is complete nonsense.
Both your statements are wrong. As even a quick Google will show you.
State schools do not get 1.5 million for a Whaka. Can’t even get $4500 for a metalwork lathe.
I can improve my outcomes if I got to pick and choose my students.
Cite?
I’ve provided plenty for my claims. You have provided none for yours.
Read back through the standard. And my blog.
I have written several articles on this, plus a university paper. Researching Hundreds of citations and objective evidence.
Don’t feel like going through this again with yet another right wing twit who can’t be bothered to find out the facts.
Because reality doesn’t confirm to his idealogy.
That doesn’t cut it. And bragging about your supposed knowledge, when you haven’t backed a single claim you have made, doesn’t either.
The quasi military school in Whangarei, did pay over a million for a Whaka. While Tiki High tech dep. were struggling to get funds for basic equipment. Fact.
Not to mention Tiki high having to pick up the pieces, when kids were deemed too “disruptive” for the “Academy”.
Sorry reality does not confirm to your cherry picking confirmation bias..
Cite?
Hornet, I don’t know the details of your son’s case, so I won’t comment specifically on that. I do know that teachers in state schools have been expected to do more and more with less and less, though. Special ed funding has been cut back year after year and is only available in limited amounts if a student meets very specific criteria. Meanwhile, back in the classroom, teachers are expected to create and deliver individualised learning programmes to a significant number of kids, with no extra resourcing to allow for smaller classes or teacher aides.
Kids who qualify for reader-writers in exams are entitled to be able to use them for internal assessment work and for school based exams, but there is no resourcing provided – somehow teachers and schools are just meant to magic up the person power.
I guess I’m trying to say that what a parent may see as “lack of will and imagination” can be seen from another perspective as a result of practical limitations. Again, you may be absolutely right about your son’s particular experience, but it’s also possible that in fighting for his needs to be met at a school level, you weren’t necessarily seeing what was behind what you perceived as lack of commitment from the school.
I didn’t blame the school, at least not in the sense of the people. But state education cannot cater for everyone, hence the demand for other alternatives. Partnership schools are providing a cost effective alternative for children who were failing in the state system. The problem is not resources – I have provided links to historical funding comparisons that show education spending has kept up with both GDP growth and is ahead of increases in other government spending.
Spending on educational bureaucracy and control has kept up with GDP rises.
Fixed it for you.
You do know, that per capita GDP increase in New Zealand has been close to zero, or negative, depending on the measure.
In other words educational spending has not kept up with the flood of extra people, with unfettered immigration.
Again, claims without substantiation.
https://www.stats.govt.nz/
This site is your Friend.
So you are asked for evidence and you send me the Dept of Stats website? In other words you cannot support your claim. OK. Let me help you:
https://tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/gdp-per-capita
Now stop telling lies.
http://kjt-kt.blogspot.co.nz/2014/07/the-real-aims-of-nationals-education.html
http://kjt-kt.blogspot.co.nz/2012/10/why-do-they-want-our-schools.html
Now I understand. You are a bitter little man with zero empathy for those less well off. And a time waster.
Now I understand. You are a bitter little man with zero empathy for those less well off. And a time waster.
Oh look, pointless abuse.
Far from pointless. Have you read this guys blog?
I’m a teacher of sorts Hornet – and I’ve got a few folk to thrive outside the institutional norm (got one into Princeton & another into LSE). I also taught a friend’s daughter – she’d dipped out on school c and thought she was useless. Didn’t think much of it, but after about six weeks she turned around and decided to be a primary teacher – which she is now, and happy.
I’m unfashionably fond of things like lifelong and community based learning, which makes me a poor fit for NZ. But I’ve also taught for a bunch of private academies, and I’m sad to say their focus isn’t where I think it needs to be. I followed the write ups of some of the early successful charter schools in the states, but what became the general model seems to me to have lost its way a bit.
I’d be happier with something along the lines of what Greywarshark suggested – holistic, organic, low on bullshit. But neither side seems to me to have the pragmatic focus I strive for in my teaching:
This war we are waging is already lost
The cause of the fighting has long been a ghost
Malice and habit have now won the day
The honours we fought for are lost in the fray – Procul Harem
That is very apt from PH and thanks for the pat – on the head.
Thanks Stuart. I have repeatedly stated my support for state schools. I attended three excellent state schools in the ’60’s and ’70’s, as did my partner. But even then they did not suit everyone. The popularity of integrated, private and other special character schools is a testament to that.
There’s a trope that’s pretty big in Asia, which is the tale of Mencius’s Mum.
A bit of a tiger mother she was, and I’m not so keen on her idea that students should be practicing calligraphy until they can do it in the dark.
But the thing she got right was changing schools where her child was not prospering – she did this three times before she found the right circumstances. People experience schools differently, and if one’s child is not prospering at one they should be looking for an alternative.
Mencius went on to become a leading Confucian scholar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mencius
Not a patch on Lao Tzu or Confucius in my opinion, but the Chinese like him, and he was fully successful in terms of his society in his lifetime.
Schools which are more regimented and hidebound than State schools?
What is the relevance? When have I tied personal responsibility into this discussion?
When you claimed that your child’s failure was the school’s fault. Or was it the union’s? I bet you blame the unions.
I will requote what I said:
“I have a son with a serious learning difficulty who the state system utterly failed. Not because of a lack of money, but because of a lack of will and imagination.”
I did not blame the school. I did not blame the unions.
My child’s failure was a symptom of a system that cannot deliver for everyone. The state system is fine for a majority of pupils (it was for me), but not for all. That is why so many choose to educate their children in alternatives.
The state system failed to recognise my sons difficulties early enough…it was only by our vigilance and our ability to afford private diagnosis and care that our son recovered. Many other children are not so fortunate.
Ah yes. Luck. Make sure you mention that if he ever exhibits attribution bias, there’s a dear.
It is luck. Pity you don’t support less fortunate children receiving the same opportunities.
The spectacle of you humping a strawman just doesn’t appeal to me that much. Ciao.
It’s not a straw man. It’s an accurate description of your ambivalence to those in need.
You think charter schools are the answer. Evidence from places they are being tried, shows the opposite.
Looking at evidence has never been a right wing strong point, however.
The evidence shows Charter Schools work for the more disadvantaged. I have already posted from the Credo Survey, and the evidence is now building in NZ.
… and half the time, we don’t know if the ones that are “doing better” are juking the stats somehow.
What evidence? Cite the evidence. That is certainly not the findings of the Credo study, or of the progress of PS’s in NZ.
The evidence around the world. You’ve even had some of it in replies to you. there’s some in the post.
You simply don’t want to believe that evidence because it goes against your delusional ideology.
The failure was that of policies that stopped central funding for higher needs or different education methods. Access to adequate funding remains an issue today.
Many parents don’t worry about this funding until their children hit the blank wall of under resourcing in their own lives.
“My child’s failure was a symptom of a system that cannot deliver for everyone. “
Your child struggled because access to change or resources has been limited for many years.
A more effective long-term and comprehensive policy, would provide any school with the additional resources and funding needed to cater to any child at any public school.
This has the benefit of providing the child with the support needed within their own neighbourhood, and allows them to find peers and friends locally.
The understanding and skills of all teachers and schools will be built on, and will – over time – provide a better educational culture for all.
Children who don’t have individual advocates, or who have not had their difficulties identified will also benefit.
Overall, the financial cost will be less, and the learning environment will be improved.
“Access to adequate funding remains an issue today.”
No, that’s a cop out, along with “Your child struggled because access to change or resources has been limited for many years. ”
The state system has never succeeded with all children. The state system is very well funded, and works well for most. It never has, and never will, be the best option for all.
The State system is extremely well funded.
In what fantasy world. Certainly not at the school level.
Another one on planet Key.
It is well funded.
https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/statistics/indicators/main/resource/total_investment_in_education
/facepalm
Budget 2017: Schools win funding increase – but less than inflation
Which is, of course, a funding decrease.
And the year before that it was frozen.
And then there’s your logic fail. The actual investment in education is not the same as the funding actually needed.
The funding actually needed is infinite if you work in the sector. Just like health. You can ask for the moon and still not have enough. But the simple truth is that the funding provided has kept pace with GDP growth and ahead of other spending priorities for government. The problem is not money, it is that the state system has never, and will never, be able to cater to all children.
Partnership Schools receive the same funding as state schools, employ qualified teachers, and yet seem to be able to provide uniforms, meals and trips without needing donations. Perhaps the state schools have something to learn from them.
No, it really hasn’t and to keep up it has to keep up with inflation and population growth. That has nothing to do with GDP.
So, cuts for education the entire time National was in power so that rich people could have tax cuts.
Yes it really is the money and the state really can cater to all children. The private sector can’t because it really doesn’t have either the will or the resources to do so.
Charter schools have, so far, received far more funding as has pointed out to you.
“No, it really hasn’t and to keep up it has to keep up with inflation and population growth.”
Yes, it really has, and I have provided the stats to prove that.
Hornet – I think you are falling into the old fallacy that NZ funds its Education system highly – which, overall, it does. OECD figures have said so for many years.
But this is a half-truth, which constitutes a lie. Look into those OECD figures more closely, and you will find that too high a proportion goes to Tertiary Education – not so much Universities, as a plethora of dodgy, often private, tertiary bums-on-seats style institutions. Our pre-school, primary and secondary systems are left underfunded, NOT well-funded. Look into it more deeply for yourself.
It is galling to then see generous funding misdirected to costly new initiatives like these Charter Schools when such initiatives, with decent funding and good will from Govt, could be easily and more cheaply be initiated within a better-resourced state system.
Instead, the state system is being run-down and slowly choked, while privatisers like Seymour get new toys to play and pretend with.
“It is galling to then see generous funding misdirected to costly new initiatives like these Charter Schools when such initiatives, with decent funding and good will from Govt, could be easily and more cheaply be initiated within a better-resourced state system.”
Goodwill will also be required from NZEI to allow initiatives such as Charter Schools into the state system.
“while privatisers like Seymour get new toys to play and pretend with.”
That’s a big call to make… because his ideology is different to yours, he is pretending to care?
…and I believe only one of the PS’s is ‘for profit’, so this ‘privateers’ meme is total nonsense.
Its called. “Getting a foothold”.
Just as they did in New Orleans.
“It is galling to then see generous funding misdirected to costly new initiatives like these Charter Schools when such initiatives, with decent funding and good will from Govt, could be easily and more cheaply be initiated within a better-resourced state system.”
My point is simply that if that were the case, the funding applied to Partnership Schools (which others have claimed was appropriated from state schools) would have produced successes, when it produced failures. Partnership Schools are standing in the breach for some children, and successfully.
So “successfully” that the Government had to hide their “success” by exempting them from the OIA.
Meanwhile, A State high school that was doing well with non academic kids, has closed their trades academy, and cut down teacher aid hours, due to lack of funding. At the same time as they are taking the kids expelled from the Charter school.
“So “successfully” that the Government had to hide their “success” by exempting them from the OIA.”
They are not hidden. Their results are publically available, both at their own websites and at ERO. The fact you need to spread such misinformation suggests to me you either know very little or you have skin in the game.
+1
As the Fins say (and the teachers’ unions advocate for):
“Whatever it takes”.
Excellent solutions Molly. If we all were to work in the interests of our children it would benefit everyone. Other countries such as Finland have excellent public education systems because they invest in them. Reggio Emillia in Italy has excellent childcare systems which cater well for children with special needs – they call them “children with special rights to education”. Such children have an extra teacher who works with all the children to ensure that the child with special rights is included. I think its a question of attitudes and if we believe that all children have a right to education and some may have special rights that need to be catered for I think we could have an education system that does cater for everyone.
I’m late coming back to this conversation thread, but I agree with you. We all have the responsibility to ensure that each child has access to an education system that meets their requirements, and one of the beneficial long term effects of that access at every school, means that society becomes well informed about diversity from primary age onwards.
I’m reluctant to discuss that broader view to people who are advocating for better education for their child/ren because their issues are often overwhelming and stop them looking at the best outcome for all children, the local community and the wider society.
National and “Hornet” want education to be delivered by the private sector. That is why we have charter schools, because they want to close down the public school system and return to charities and businesses running schools.
Closing charter schools is nothing more than a power play by the teacher unions to remove a perceived threat. And Hipkens is their lackey in cabinet who is charged with making this happen.
The decision to close these chooks has nothing to do with educational outcomes and what is best for the children who attend these schools. Disrupting the education of around a thousand charter school children to bolster union power is obviously of no concern to Hipkens and his union masters.
Elsewhere the public service is happy to work with private providers to solve difficult issues. The difference between the rest of the public service and education comes down to union power.
Maori make up the bulk of charter school children. Kelvin Davies and Willie Jackson have in the past acknowledged the significant contribution charter schools make to addressing their educational challenges. I expect them to fight Hipken’s move within cabinet.
The decision to open these schools had nothing to do with educational outcomes. FIFY.
You greedy privatisers don’t seem to realise how transparent you are.
Virtually all of the PS’s are not-for-profit. I doubt ‘greedy privatisers’ would be very interested.
“Virtually”. Well that’s a relief 🙄
I wonder how the government’s bid to get our property back from the Ngā Parirau Mātauranga Charitable Trust is going.
Don’t know. I’m still waiting for you to admit you got the greedy privatisers bit wrong.
Hold your breath while you wait.
Oh on past form I’m not expecting you to be able to actually justify your claims. But one day…
“Virtually” – you justified it yourself.
Not for profit can be a nice little earner for a family, a partnership, even a newly minted church with tax advantages.
…and a cat’s paw.
Do you have any examples to tell us about? Or are you just making this up?
Yes I have seen information about this, and am not as full of certainty as you are based on your own experience and some very likely biased information from the private schools sector. But you can look this up yourself instead of aggressively coming after me. Have you got shares in one of these schools?
“But you can look this up yourself instead of aggressively coming after me.”
You made a claim that implied these schools are nice little earners for families etc. I’m asking you to prove it.
“Have you got shares in one of these schools?”
No. I have no connection to any partnership school whatsoever.
No.
Charter schools in New Zealand, labelled as ‘Partnership Schools’ or Kura Hourua, receive government funding similar to state schools but are subject to fewer rules and regulations from the Ministry of Education.[1]
They are free and open for any students to attend.
Charter schools have the autonomy to set their own curriculum, qualifications, pay rates for teachers, school-hours and school terms.
The schools may be operated by sponsors such as Māori Iwi, not-for-profit organisations, businesses or existing education providers.[1]…
2006
Partnership School support
It has also been announced an independent Partnership School support entity, E Tipu E Rea, has been established to support new, existing, and prospective charter school sponsors and will receive a conditional funding grant.
Mr Seymour said this would bring New Zealand into line with international charter school models. “England has the New Schools Network, New York has the New York Charter School Centre, and New Zealand now has E Tipu E Rea.
“E Tipu E Rea will join other independent entities such as the New Zealand School Trustees Association in providing support services to the New Zealand school system. It will seek most of its funding from private sources.”
The Board will be chaired by former CEO of EY Australasia Rob McLeod. [Maori financial high flyer]
Board members include:
– Former Maori Party Co-Leader Dame Tariana Turia
– Dame Jenny Gibbs [fairly wealthy woman with interest in Maori advancement]
– Former All Black La’auli Savae Michael Jones MNZM [sports hero and seen as high flyer]
– Bruce Ritchie MNZM [Mr Bruce Ritchie has been the principal of Massey High School in Auckland since 1994. [He] has established University of Auckland mentoring programmes for Pacific and Maori students and a Pasifika literacy programme. He instigated a restorative justice programme at the school.
https://www.dpmc.govt.nz/queens-birthday-honours-2015-citations-members-new-zealand-order-merit#ritchieb%5D
– Ken Rapson [Mt Roskill Grammar School Principal –
24/2/2006 Ken Rapson, principal of Mount Roskill Grammar School, has been appointed Director of the Schools Partnership Office at The University of Auckland.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/ED0602/S00071.htm%5D
E Tipu E Rea will support:
– An increased number of high quality applicants to set up Partnership Schools
– All new Partnership Schools to be set up in a way that maximises their ability to succeed
– Existing Partnership Schools to continuously develop and perform at a high level
– High performing Partnership Schools to scale or replicate their practice through new schools or by stimulating others
– Public awareness and understanding of the role and work of Partnership Schools in New Zealand
The $500,000 funding grant will be drawn from a contingency established in 2015.
More information on E Tipu E Rea and its board members can be viewed on its website. Background information can be found on the Ministry of Education website.[15][16]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_schools_in_New_Zealand#Operation_of_charter_schools
This Partnership School project seems to have a strong University of Auckland connection – just noting.
“…receive government funding similar to state schools but are subject to fewer rules and regulations from the Ministry of Education.[1]”
Correct. But they are subject to the same, if not more, scrutiny.
“Charter schools have the autonomy to set their own curriculum, qualifications, pay rates for teachers, school-hours and school terms.”
Yes, that’s the bit the NZEI don’t like!
“The schools may be operated by sponsors such as Māori Iwi, not-for-profit organisations, businesses or existing education providers.”
The ‘ownership’ of the existing PS’s is telling, particularly the high level of Maori involvement. My understanding is that Maori are heavily overrepresented in the failings of the state system, and stand to gain the most from the PS approach.
Direct observation of the Charter school, that I see every day doesn’t count with Hornet, , obviously.
I see the founders doing very well out of it.
While I also see State school Teachers buying their students lunch.
Evidence. Not anecdotes.
Observation is not evidence?
“Observation is not evidence?”
Anecdotes are not evidence.
Like the founders new BMW’s, you mean?
In America they have not-for-profit charter schools but all that happens is that the NFP-charter contracts out all it’s educational needs to for profit organisations – often run by the same people running the NFP e.g. they rent property from themselves for extortionate rates.
The US system has not been perfect, but then neither is their state system. The issue is whether the Partnership Schools concept can deliver favourable results. It can.. And does.
Not for long. Soon they’ll either follow the pathway to integration or close. Can you hear that? That is the sound of inevitability.
😆
…until they are reopened by a future, more compassionate, government.
Endlessly repeating bullshit does not make it true.
…as said by someone who endlessly repeats bulllshit.
From 2006 to 2013 things were humming quietly and then in 2013 there was the story about an early adopter that seemed more interested in real estate than the children and their education. Maximising the benefit to the people in the organisation was a driver at first it seems.
One of the first charters school started in New Zealand was in serious trouble within two weeks of starting, a secret Government report stated. The school in Whangaruru had about 20% of its students missing shortly after opening. There was strong disagreement between the two related business managers who ran the school. The school does not have a principal.
The school, which receives 500% more funding than a state school, spent half its income buying a farm. The Ministry of Education carried out a secret inquiry and immediately installed its own manager. One of the two original managers left hurriedly.
Problems first arose in 2013 when it was claimed that the school had been set up in a paddock using portaloos for toilets. It was reported that drugs were a problem in the school and some students had been removed to an unknown place. The school has only one teacher with a current practicing certificate. The original management has now been replaced by an executive manager from Child, Youth and Family.
The school receives $27,000 per student compared to $6,000 per student in a state school.[13][14]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_schools_in_New_Zealand
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/75177381/hekia-parata-to-close-failing-whangaruru-charter-school
Labour acting education spokeswoman Jenny Salesa said taxpayers were the losers in this, along with students in nearby state schools who didn’t receive the same funding as the charter school.
“Much of the taxpayer funding used to establish this school was spent buying an 81-hectare farm. It’s now up to Hekia Parata to recoup this money and put it back into educating kids,” she said.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/75177381/hekia-parata-to-close-failing-whangaruru-charter-school
September 2017
http://educationcentral.co.nz/microsoft-datacom-and-theatre-company-sign-up-to-new-charter-school/
It is one of four new partnership schools announced today by Education Under-Secretary and Act Party leader David Seymour. The others are in Gisborne, Christchurch and Mangere, where an existing charter school run by Labour candidate Willie Jackson’s wife Tania Rangiheuea will open a new high school.
However all four schools will not open until 2019 and could be torpedoed if Labour wins this month’s election. Labour education spokesman Chris Hipkins said Labour would not go ahead with opening any new charter schools.
Seems Seymour may look like a clown but knows how to set up a bear trap for Labour with Maori, as they will be dissatisfied if the agreed schools are closed as Hipkins as announced.
It seems that the essence should be squeezed out of these schools and the dross eliminated, with oversight and hands-on training to further the visions of the school and being prepared to use non-standard methods to get further with this group which should be socialised into society with opportunity to enter it. That would mean that if Maori, they don’t learn only in Te Reo, but presumably would know it thoroughly, and learn other languages to enable them to be people of the world with wider attitudes than pervade NZ nationally at present.
http://partnershipschools.education.govt.nz/news/:
http://partnershipschools.education.govt.nz/news/new-partnership-school-takes-on-national-e-velocity-programme/ 28/9/2017
Sales pitch from Briar Lipson, The NZ Initiative 22 Sept 2017 I think? – doesn’t say
http://partnershipschools.education.govt.nz/news/partnership-schools-and-pr/
Source: https://nzinitiative.org.nz/insights/opinion/partnership-schools-and-pre-election-policies/
Do you want education privatised?
Public displays of discontent are traditionally a forum for the Left. Marching suits have been the domain of Bishop Brian Tamaki. If those students feel as strongly about their schools as we’ve been led to believe they do, I can’t see them handing their uniforms back quietly.
The propaganda will skew to: ‘Meet John, he used to be top in his class in Maths, he’s just been arrested for selling tinnies.’
Those people are passionate about their hybrid schools, they’re not just going to roll over.
Any school that’s succeeding can be integrated into the special character model. it’s not like there’s been a decree that all charter schools are going to simply close.
Hmmm, yeah. The minister said ‘It is my preference to close them down’.
I can save the ministry $1000’s and rubber stamp 2 right now. The one Willie started and the one educating Kelvin’s whanau.
If it’s what’s best for the kids, boot em. If it’s what’s good for grown-ups, we need to check our priorities.
Hmmm yeah, he said they can either become special character schools or be subject to termination for convenience.
So those schools that can offer something will be retained, although they won’t be run by private companies and/or trusts any more.
As for what’s best for the kids, we already know that: by international standards Finnish schools get the best outcomes in the world, and they operate under a philosophy of “whatever it takes”: teachers are empowered to help students learn in whatever way is good for the students, and they’re funded appropriately.
The motivation behind National’s education policy has everything to do with privatisation and nothing to do with pedagogy.
Yep, if the motivation is privitisation, no thanks. What a fantastic service we have in St Johns and what a greed driven fiasco of an ambulance service many Americans tolerate.
I wonder if Finland’s mono-culture has a bearing on the educational success their system enjoys. Our diversity lends weight to a ‘One size does not fit all’ argument. It seems to be a discussion we have in other areas eg: jails.
No more, “mono-culture” than NZ.
State schools in Finland have much more freedom to use diverse educational approaches than NZ, since the managerial model was introduced with “tomorrows schools”.
Note Finland does not allow “private” schools. Which means the wealthy cannot opt out, and have a vested interest in the success of their local school.
“Whatever it takes”. That’s the system the teachers want (and their unions advocate for): the opposite of “one size fits all”.
Can you point to the ‘pathway’ (to use the weasel words so far deployed by the government) in any legislation that actually provides for that transition?
Yes.
See the Education Amendment Bill for further details.
That is not a pathway, and you know it. It is a shotgun.
Well then I expect you have some weeping and wailing to do, while I laugh at you.
It’s not me you’re laughing at. It’s the children Jacinda Ardern gives awards to and then shuts their school. It’s the children who the state system failed, and who PS’s have given hope. They are the ones you are laughing at.
😆
The ones who went to the charter school in Whangarei, with new hope for their education.
Only to be dumped back into Tiki High as too difficult. Those kids?
You have no fucking idea. Hornet!
And the children who have attended state schools which have failed and been bailed out by our money?
Which State school was that?
Only failures I have seen in State schools have been entirely caused by right wing ideology, and the poverty it has caused. As they fucked up a once excellent system.
Our money.
I thought right wingers didn’t pay taxes. Theft isn’t it? or something?
“Which State school was that?”
https://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/local-papers/hutt-news/69872509/Statutory-manager-appointed-at-Wainuiomata-High-School
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11904812
Stop making excuses for failure.
As I said. Right wing managerial fuckery, fucking up schools.
School “boards” FFS.
No, just incompetence within the state system. Most likely by people like you!
“School “boards” FFS.”
Yes, isn’t it shocking that the community should have a say in how it’s local school runs! Of course this all be left to ivory tower ‘educationalists’, who are then able to educate our little darlings as THEY see fit. I’m picking you don’t like being accountable.
The community having a say.
Laugh.
I wish.
Nationals commissars’ were sent in to run the, so called, failing schools, very against the wishes of the community.
Boards have little power and parents /Teachers even less.
Right wing Governments jerk the whole system around at whim, imposing controls based on the idea that Teachers are solely motivated by self interest. Like them..
“The community having a say.”
Yes, indeed.
“Nationals commissars’ were sent in to run the, so called, failing schools, very against the wishes of the community.”
Cite?
“Boards have little power and parents /Teachers even less.”
Cite?
“Right wing Governments jerk the whole system around at whim, imposing controls based on the idea that Teachers are solely motivated by self interest. Like them..”
The current system of school boards is now decades old, and has been in place under governments of all stripes. I understand the desire of some (like you) to remove parental and community involvement, but you lost that debate years ago.
Accountable?
No. I leave lack of personal responsibility to right wingers.
Who want me to take responsibility off them for my Teaching, but want to take away all control, over how I do it.
“Accountable?”
So you’re a teacher? Obviously you are one of the ones who fear the choice Partnership Schools provide. I understand your opposition now.
Hornet
You are so emotional, I feel that you are getting a good deal and see others also getting on well and want the gravy train to never stop. If you are keen, and keep trying you will probably find a good alternative that keeps to the same standards and budgets as ordinary state schools, just shaped to suit the kids.
You sound a bit OTT. You remind me of the impassioned cries in the Simpsons:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bir449_wK3A
This might be how the kids feel about it all and how they might improve on their parents I hope:
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EV0ozgSrFM0
Sorry for being emotional. I have grave concerns for children who the state system has failed, and yet who some here are happy to see integrated back into that system for no other than ideological reasons.
” I feel that you are getting a good deal and see others also getting on well and want the gravy train to never stop.”
There is no gravy train. Virtually of the existing PS’s are not for profit. There are no complaints for the children, from the parents, or from their communities. The only complaints are from those who don’t want them to work for reasons of vested interest. Like the NZEI.
Bullshit. Projection again.
Hornet thinks that Teachers are only out for themselves. Like him and his mates.
I can assure you, that anyone just out for themselves, would not be Teaching.
I have no vested interest apart from a deep concern for the type of children I used to Teach.
“Hornet thinks that Teachers are only out for themselves. ”
No, I don’t. But it is clear there are some teachers who fear parents exercising choice. And parental involvement on school boards. And anything other than a system that has failed so many children. That’s your profile.
“Think of the children” is getting a bit tired from those who obviously are not.
Thinking of the children, would not have resulted in spending much needed money on ideological brain farts from the lunatic fringe. Like Seymour.
Or his less lunatic backers who see yet another way of bludging off tax payers. While pretending to educate children.
“Thinking of the children, would not have resulted in spending much needed money ”
Their education costs the same at a PS, and delivers better results. You know that.
Thinking of the children would not allow untrained amateurs to Teach children in charter schools.
When private schools, for the wealthy, poach the best of trained Teachers from the State system.
Of course, well meaning self appointed amateurs are good enough for poor kids. Where they can be bullied, regimented and rote learned into co-operation.
It does not cost the same. We have already established that. Except in your delusions.
And their results, where they have been better than State schools, have been the result of cherry picking students as we well know, from the ones that appear back at the State school.
That is why Charter schools are so resistant to having to follow the same rules as State schools. Can’t make a profit then. Which is, of course the ultimate aim. Despite all your bleeding heart bullshit.
The legislation being put forward but Minister Hipkins. The process is that he and his ministry will work with each Charter school on a case-by-case basis to determine what should happen with that school. If they are doing what they say (actually helping children) then they will become a character school. This will happen based on that schools individual circumstances to ensure that they are able to continue their good work.
Of course there cannot be a one size fits all process as we have to take into account the needs of the children, something the right wing idealogs don’t seem to want to take into account at all
The best way to take into account the needs of the children is to leave these schools alone.
Except currently they have no accountability, which leads to possibility of corruption and a waste of our tax-payer money. Or we could make a slight tweak to the back-room systems to ensure they are fully accountable like any state school so we know that they are providing bang for their buck.
There is no need for the schools that are performing to stop performing on the front-end when dealing with the actual kids, unless the charter school isn’t actually interested in helping children. The same could be said for anyone that supports specific schools; if you care about the children then you will support that schools transition; if you only care about the way it is set up to help fraudulent behaviour, then you will continue to complain.
“Except currently they have no accountability, ”
That is another falsehood. PS’s are vitally accountable, and in fact endure even greater scrutiny than most state schools.
But are not able to be scutinised by the public, and we only have biased politicians word on their behaviour
“But are not able to be scutinised by the public…,”
You mean other than by their public reports, ERO Reviews, etc etc.
Yeah right.
You have obviously never worked in a school.
Which school taught you to read graphs? Whichever it was, you need to go back and re-learn!
Which school taught you to ignore overwhelming evidence?
Which is why NACT have to privatize education by degrees.
Most of the public have enough sense to know that the evidence, and experience, shows that privatizing public goods, like education, power etc, always results in paying more for less.
You are delusional if you think Seymours, and National’s funders are interested in quality education for children. Instead of making a killing out of tax funded privatised education. Just as they did with asset sales.
“The commercial application of this extortion scheme is straightforward. In shock-doctrine-like fashion, the corporate community that typically lobbies against higher taxes to fund schools makes a business opportunity out of schools’ subsequent budget crises”.
And so you let down your guard, and your sick ideology spews forth.
Privatised/non-state education has existed, and successfully, for centuries. It precedes state involvement.
I have caught you out lying about education spending, and you don’t like it. Tough. Your opposition to partnership schools has no evidential basis whatsoever. Your hatred of alternatives to state capture is a sad indictment on your willingness to sacrifice children at the altar of your ideology.
your willingness to sacrifice children at the altar of your ideology.
Pure projection. You can always tell what right wingers intend by the things they accuse their detractors of.
(not to mention persistent pointless abuse of an author)
“Pure projection. ”
No, it’s not.
We know the past under the state system, for these children – it was failure.
We know the present, under the PS model – it is success.
The difference is putting children second, behind ideology that sees state school as fit for every purpose.
Ad Nauseam should be your new handle when you come back after the ban you will inevitably receive again.
“I have caught you out lying about education spending”
In your dreams.
It is obvious in every Primary and Secondary school in the country, that they have less funding per pupil.
When we have to cut programs, cut help for disadvantaged kids, havn’t got the funding for Teacher aids we used to have, haven’t got resources we had previously and infrastructure is neglected.
Of course we have less funding.
We have to cater for the huge influx of children who have English as a second language and an even bigger influx of itinerant and impoverished kids caused by the right wings “better future”. Which should have been funded, but isn’t!
No lack of funding for National’s control teams, administration and charter schools, though.
““I have caught you out lying about education spending”
In your dreams.”
No, on this thread.
“It is obvious in every Primary and Secondary school in the country, that they have less funding per pupil.”
‘It is obvious’. Are you serious? Why should I believe you? Come up with some evidence, not your ill tempered and uninformed anecdotes.
For those who care about the facts, and want to look past KJT’s propaganda: http://www.partnershipschools.education.govt.nz/pskh/what-are-partnership-schools/funding-model/.
“The funding model for Partnership Schools is intended to give sponsors flexibility to manage their resources; provide a broadly similar level of funding to that for schools and students in the state system; be transparent; and allow the Crown to manage fiscal risk. ”
“The model is based on funding for state schools.”
http://www.education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Ministry/Initiatives/Partnership-schools/FundingForPartnershipSchools.pdf
I’m surprised by the level of author abuse you’re getting away with here, Hornet/Ad Nauseam.
“I’m surprised by the level of author abuse you’re getting away with here, Hornet/Ad Nauseam.”
Good attempt to shut down debate, but I’m targeting the argument, not the contributor. And you crying about author abuse has got to be the irony of the week.
Sure, by repeatedly calling them a liar. I’m not trying to shut down your witless chunter, I think you look like a complete tool: in case there was any doubt that advocacy of charter schools is the mark of an ignorant fool, you’ve dispelled it completely.
Carry on by all means.
Kids protesting the closing of their school in Queen st this afternoon (Despite the weather)
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/02/protesters-supporting-charter-schools-gather-in-auckland.html
Perhaps Hipkins should get off his ass and actually go to a charter school and get educated on what the kids who he is impacting think.
Did someone not tell these students their school is safe if the owner registers as a special character school? Probably not. I suspect they were just told the government is trying to shut your school.
It’s pretty dishonest of Seymour but no surprise there.
By the way, 150 people represents 6% of ACT’s total current support of 2500 voters.
ACT is in palliative care right now. Seymour’s performance seems to be asking for it to be euthanised.
“Did someone not tell these students their school is safe if the owner registers as a special character school? ”
I don’t know – but they seem to like it how things are now and dont want it to change.
If the owners were truely in it for the kids they would notice no change whatsoever.
I believe you are wrong on this one.
He/she is. Otherwise there would be no reason for the government to threaten to shut the down.
Yawn. There’s no shut down, just a restructuring of how government funding (your money!) is spent, which the owners must accept if they are to continue for the benefit of their kids.
“There’s no shut down, just a restructuring of how government funding (your money!) is spent…”
It isn’t that simple, and I suspect you know that. There is currently no pathway to integration. There is no legislative framework. The ‘pathway’ the PM spoke about is a myth, a lie, a fantasy. Take your pick.
I agree. The poor little kids will just have to find schooling somewhere else.
The owners may have to sell up to a willing property developer to ensure everybody wins in this neoliberal orgy of profiteering.
How many of the PS’s are ‘for profit’? Do you even know? Meanwhile, as you engage your fantasies, the children attending the PS’s (who no-one even cares about, and who the state system had failed!), are the victims in your petty little play.
…the children attending the PS’s (who no-one even cares about, and who the state system had failed!), are the victims in your petty little play.
1. That children were going to be victims of this “petty little play” was clear from the moment NACT announced it 6 years ago, so spare us the breast-beating about it now.
2. Poverty is the biggest factor in educational under-achievement, not school type. These kids were mostly “failed” by successive governments refusing to deal with poverty (refusing to even recognise it in the Key government’s case), only rarely by the public education system. You guys won’t get any respect on these threads if you keep pretending there’s no elephant in the room.
3. If you’re so concerned about children being short-changed by the education system, consider what happens to the children excreted as waste by partnership schools who don’t want those children negatively affecting their key performance indicators. Who gets to clean up the private school’s mess in that case? The public education system. But wait! Aren’t you supposed to be outraged at the public education system having “failed” these kids? It’s a suspiciously specific outrage, isn’t it…
4. Won’t someone think of the children!? Er, they have. They’ve suggested these schools could negotiate a path to becoming special-character schools in the public system. So, if the children are the important thing here, let’s see how many of the schools’ owners will take that path. I’m picking the think-of-the-children blather will cease around that point.
I’ll bet you the best performing of those schools will be ushered into the integrated system without any issue whatsoever. Further I’ll bet you the government will encourage a variety of other special character schools wanting to open. Just not that online shit.
O.k. then oracle of wisdom and all knowledge, how do you think this should play out? Where are the poor wee kids going to go for schooling & education? What will happen with the assets? Feel free to engage into wishful thinking and guessing, because that seems to come naturally to you. Did I spot you in the ‘large crowd’ of protestors [sic]?
Personally I don’t get why the current pathways in the Education Act for special character schools wouldn’t be used or adopted when the act is altered to get rid of partnership schools, but whatevs.
The solution is simple. Retain the existing PS’s as is. They are doing a better job with this select group of children than the state schools ever did.
Except they are not. Or they would not need to send their difficult kids back to the High school I used to Teach at.
And that is supposed to be one of the best performing Charter schools.
The “pathway’ has been there for years.
It has been taken by many failing private schools, E.g. Whanganui Collegiate and the entire Catholic school system, when they found they could not compete with State schools.
The pathway for failed state schools is of course to have more state money thrown at them, aye.
Failure in State schools I have seen, is entirely because of the hidebound, financially focused performance, over-measured, micromanaged model, forced on them by the same people who advocate charter schools.
I wonder why?
“Failure in State schools I have seen, is entirely because of the hidebound, financially focused performance, over-measured, micromanaged model, forced on them by the same people who advocate charter schools.”
Rubbish. Although it is ironic you want to have more children subject to something you describe that way.
We had a New New Zealand curriculum which allowed for flexibility, student focused learning and variety, informed by research and evidence.
Just as it was being introduced, National dumped it, and came up with “National standards”. A total reduction and dumbing down of schooling.
Bullshit ideology from the same idiots who are introducing charter schools.
Same as the US. De-fund and mess with State schools to make private schooling look better.
See 10.1.2.1
The pathway the PM spoke of will be passed into law when the Education Act is amended, as the Bill before Parliament makes clear.
Nice attempt to lie and smear though.
The government have announced these schools must change or close. There is no pathway. Discussions with PS’s have been lip-service, at best.
Hornet: no pathway to integration
OAB: *links to the pathway*
Hornet: *moves the goalposts*
Policy:
“OAB: *links to the pathway*”
No you didn’t. What you claim is a pathway is like a shotgun wedding. That’s not a pathway.
They have to be accountable, not profit making, have the same funding as State schools, and take all children who apply, just like State schools.
I can see why that could be a problem
“They have to be accountable…”
They are.
“, not profit making”
Most aren’t.
“have the same funding as State schools”
They do.
“, and take all children who apply, just like State schools. ”
Actually state schools don’t have to take all children who apply. Another claim you have wrong.
“I can see why that could be a problem”
Yes, your lies.
“By the way, 150 people represents 6% of ACT’s total current support of 2500 voters.”
…and 0.01% of the population of Auckland. Not such a great turn out for this right-wing cause.
What a fizzer..”Organised by David Seymour”. Political showboating is the last thing their cause needs.
We want to know if they work for kids, who gives a rats about David and his pet political pony.
When a committee of senior students start pitching compelling arguments, Mums and Dads will notice.
What a fizzer? At least he’s protesting something he believes in.
Unlike labour MPs who protested the tpp and will now sign it.
True. But I am not a fan of “third way” Labour, either.
Seymour, at least, believes in his own bullshit. And is honest about it.
Unlike National. Who if they were honest about their aims, would have a popular vote in the same ball park as Seymour.
Do you think education should be delivered by the private sector and public schools closed down?
Labour are doing this because they are run by the Unions. Will Kelvin Davis resign as promised? Labour just undoes all National ideas and policy for the sake of it also, and at thirty six percent of the vote, and not a word on this pre election, they have no mandate. Our celebrity PM doesn’t care, it’s all about hiding behind her empty, glam image. Big vote loser though, and so much for compassion for the children. Let’s undo this, Nats. Act is toast and Seymour is a progressive in spades.
Is this stuff spat out by an algorithm? That would be far less depressing than confirmation that an actual human was writing it…
It’s much worse: a human programmed to spout this nonsense. Welcome to Dystopia.
“not a word on this pre election, they have no mandate.”
Are you on drugs?
Although all NZ1st pre-election policy has been removed from their webpage, The Wayback Engine shows that they promised to:
Tanz voted for NZ1st. 🙄
Labour, NZF and the Greens, all promised to remove National’s regressive education policies.
Before the election.
A majority of voters.
Though I do have a problem with the idea that any Government can ram through policies, such as asset sales, or the TPPA, when 80% oppose them. Winning the parliamentary popularity contest does not bestow dictatorship rights. Except in the minds of “authoritarian followers”. “Mandate” LOL.
If I was the Minister of Education I would put the money paid out to Charter schools into the State schools.
I found it abhorrent that we had a Government that paid private authoritarian military schools significantly more than state schools, to satisfy the philosophical fantasies of the Act Party and to ensure a vote to prop up their Government.[ One that did not govern in the interests of all New Zealanders, we do not need them.]
Surely Acts philosophy should expect these entrepreneurial charter schools to fund themselves !
“If I was the Minister of Education I would put the money paid out to Charter schools into the State schools.”
So that those state schools can continue to fail those pupils?
“I found it abhorrent that we had a Government that paid private authoritarian military schools significantly more than state schools,”
They didn’t. Perhaps if you checked your facts first, you might draw more accurate conclusions.
Except they do. And lied about it.
PS’s receive the same funding as state schools. You are the one who is lying.
Bullshit.
State schools cannot afford 1.5 million dollar boats. When they have less than 100 students.
http://www.partnershipschools.education.govt.nz/pskh/what-are-partnership-schools
“Partnership Schools are funded by the state on a per-student basis. However, unlike regular state schools, whose relationship with the Crown is based on regulation, these schools are accountable to the Crown through a binding, legally enforceable, fixed-term contract to meet specific, measurable educational performance goals.”
Liar liar.
Which they have NOT been held to, because NACT cannot admit their failure to meet expectations.
Economical with the truth. Just like National.
Cite?
I’m calling you out because you lied about the GDP data.
https://thestandard.org.nz/the-problem-with-charter-schools/#comment-1447079
Really?
Can’t you tell the difference between GDP per capita and overall GDP.
Hint. One has risen fast because of immigration and house price inflation.
The other has been almost stagnant.
You are a fool. My link was to GDP per capita.
Bit disingenuous don’t you think?
Isn’t it total GDP, you RNJ’s like to quote, when talking about the “rock star” economy?
“Bit disingenuous don’t you think?
Isn’t it total GDP, you RNJ’s like to quote, when talking about the “rock star” economy?”
I’ll spell it out, because you are being dishonest.
Here’s what YOU claimed:
“You do know, that per capita GDP increase in New Zealand has been close to zero, or negative, depending on the measure.”
https://thestandard.org.nz/the-problem-with-charter-schools/#comment-1446855
Here’s the proof you were wrong:
https://tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/gdp-per-capita.
0.6. Near enough to zero, as I said.
Take out stimulus from natural disasters, it is minus.
More ad homs.
But that’s what we expect from the right wing.
“0.6. Near enough to zero, as I said.”
Here, I’ll post it again for you.
https://tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/gdp-per-capita
Educational spending has kept up with both GDP growth and is ahead of increases in other government spending. You got this wrong. Like almost everything else you’ve claimed.
Gdp now. Not GDP per capita. Make up your mind.
“Gdp now. Not GDP per capita. Make up your mind.”
I have reposted my original quote. Which was about GDP
You then raised GDP per capita. And you got it wrong.
What really pisses me off about this right wing ideological wankery, is the number of kids we could have got into well paid trades from the State school with less money.
1.5 million pays for fifty people a year trained as plumbers, Electricians, Builders and Engineers, by a State school trades academy, for a decade.. In which time the students could have built a dozen Whaka. And houses and boats.
Or Teacher aids, assistance for 43 classes.
If I was the Minister of Education I would put the money paid out to Charter schools into the State schools.
I found it abhorrent that we had a Government that paid private authoritarian military schools significantly more than state schools, to satisfy the philosophical fantasies of the Act Party to ensure a vote to prop up a Government that did not govern in the interests of all New Zealanders.
Surely Acts philosophy should expect these entrepreneurial charter schools to fund themselves !
Personally charter or special character schools are the same but anyway semantics but unions are fully involved in supporting the labour party. While they make no financial contributions they do however regularly campaign for labour policies up to the election. Their website is full of campaigns.
Semantics I guess
At least you have admitted they produce the same outcomes. Where they differ is in the pocketing by charter school owners of state cash under the banner of efficiency. This profit money equates to the extra amount these school cost you the taxpayer compared to integrated schools.
I’d have thought you’d be unhappy with that.
“Where they differ is in the pocketing by charter school owners of state cash under the banner of efficiency.”
More lies. Virtually all PS’s are not-for-profit.
I doubt it.
In any case the move by the government is simply ensuring all PS’s are not for profit. That is after all what Kiwi education is all about.
“I doubt it.”
You mean you don’t even know! For heavens sake, do you even realise there are many non-state providers, many ‘for-profit’, in other sectors of the NZ education system? Do you know a large swathe of the ECE sector is delivered this way?
Do some homework before wasting peoples time.
Sure, but they get funded by the government accordingly. A private school gets very little of your money for instance. Charter schools are wholly funded by you so oversight must be applied.
ECE is another thing altogether and still a fraught industry. In my opinion kids should be going to kindy from age 3 to 5 for 3 to 4 hours a day and that’s it. Not the 8 to 10 hours a day from age 1 we see now at places like “Kidicorp”, etc.
Why don’t you do some homework instead?
So you now concede most PS’s are not for profit?
It is called, getting a foot in the door, as Charter schools did in the USA.
Yes. And the performance of the private ECE, and “bums on seats” education pathway to residency, tertiary sector is under a huge cloud, right now.
I’ve watched the standards of our once excellent Universities and Tech’s drop over the years as the private profit model, has been applied to.both private and State institutions.
We don’t need it in primary and secondary school.
Do I really have to spell this out?
Non-state players have been delivering education for longer than state players. There is no ‘cloud’.
“There is no cloud”.
Are we in the same country?
You’re wasting your time, KJT.
Acrophobic,Maninthemiddle,Groundhog,Mordecai,3stepstotherightHornet is here to advocate in bad faith, not discuss.Yes. But I understand the sector, you don’t.
As far as I can see, you understand 1 or 2 charter schools which are doing well and are using them to say that ‘virtually all’ charter schools are ok. GIven that any ‘good’ charter schools can continue to operate as character schools there is no issue, other than you wanting them to stay privately owned which just leads to options for abuse of the funding system, even if it is not at the moment. Character schools give the same outputs but with better accountability.
“As far as I can see, you understand 1 or 2 charter schools which are doing well and are using them to say that ‘virtually all’ charter schools are ok. ”
Not so. I have referred to at least four partnership schools that I can recall.
“GIven that any ‘good’ charter schools can continue to operate as character schools there is no issue, other than you wanting them to stay privately owned which just leads to options for abuse of the funding system, even if it is not at the moment”
With respect, that view is naieve. PS’s work because they have been afforded the flexibility to do things differently for at risk children. And special character schools can be ‘privately owned’, so I’m not sure of your point. Ownership is irrelevant to me in the greater scheme of things. My concern is for children who the state system have failed.
SO the answer is for the state system to be able to more flexible – which examples have been given to show it actually is flexible enough when funded properly. I know you think Charter Schools are funded the same, but there are plenty of examples that show that is not 100% the truth.
It seems to me that the charter schools doing well will be able to continue to do well within the system, as long as the system is allowed to actually do what it is meant to do; educate our children. When the system is forced to do something different then it fails.
“SO the answer is for the state system to be able to more flexible…”
Regrettably, that just isn’t possible. The state system is, virtually by definition, not flexible enough. That is not it’s fault, per se, it is simply the outcome of trying to educate a large number of children in a common system. Hence the popularity of alternatives.
You obviously have not trained as an educator, or studied education in any depth. So, what actually, do you understand about the sector?
Went to school?
“Went to school?”
Yes. And learned to spot liars. Particularly those who claim some kind of academic advantage, but can’t read GDP data.
https://thestandard.org.nz/the-problem-with-charter-schools/#comment-1447079
Hornet, the inflexibility of the system is put there by politicians trying to score political points with constituents who don’t understand how to actually educate children. If we let teachers teach we would have less issues and the system would work
Ad homs now.
Run out of evidence?
“Hornet, the inflexibility of the system is put there by politicians trying to score political points with constituents who don’t understand how to actually educate children.”
No, it is inherent in any system involving mass education. State schooling works well for some, but not for all, and that has always been the case.
“Run out of evidence?”
The ‘evidence’ you posted was a bitter piece from your own blog, and a claim about GDP that I busted! If you were seriously knowledgeable about this subject I would engage with you as I have with others. But lies and spamming are the best you have.
Charter schools have done well because they have extra funding, of which there is ample proof, and they are able to dump awkward kids back into the State system.
I could do better in a State school given the same rules.
Which they have been able to hide, with the connivance of the Government, exempting them from the OIA.
Accurate piece from my blog, including citations, which I doubt you bothered to read.
“Charter schools have done well…”
…yes, they have.
” because they have extra funding, ”
More lies.
“Accurate piece from my blog, including citations, which I doubt you bothered to read.”
Your blog piece(s) are ideological handwringing. Nothing more.
Having read Hornets comments, I am not sure we are in the same universe as them
You_Fool…can I engage with you seriously. I have no ideological bias, in fact I previously had serious doubts about partnership schools. But I have seen the results, and they are impressive. I also understand the opposition, and I will engage with it civilly if that is reciprocated. But when people like KJT simply troll the discussion repeating the false NZEI mantra about funding etc, then I know opponents are really worried about their own interests, and not those of the children this sector is benefitting.
So why do you think that character schools are worse at providing the supposed outcomes of (some) charter schools?
Do you not think it a good idea to ensure that all schools are accountable (which charter schools are currently not)?
“So why do you think that character schools are worse at providing the supposed outcomes of (some) charter schools?”
Character schools can do an excellent job, but they run differently. PS’s were set up with a specific group in mind, and they have been very successful with that group. The governments drive to remove them is pure ideology. There is no evidence based support for it at all.
“Do you not think it a good idea to ensure that all schools are accountable (which charter schools are currently not)?”
Yes, and they are. In fact PS’s are under far greater scrutiny, simply because of the political hyperbole they are the victims of.
Hornet.
I have seen the results of Charter schools. And know some of the disadvantaged kids, they have unceremoniously dumped back to the State school, so they can massage their results. .
And I know the State school I was teaching at was getting much better results with much less resources. Even constrained by the current inflexibility enforced on State schools.
I have also seen the evidence and results around the world, of the privatization of schools movement.
All your bullshit has been thoroughly debunked many time both here and elsewhere. So much so, that many of us are getting sick of the endless cherry picking and ignoring of ample evidence, by charter school supporters.
Charter Schools were a product of ideology in the first place, so bringing up ideology has no bearing on the matter at all.
I understand your passion on this, but I still think you are blinded by the schools that are doing well, and cannot see the problem that exists further afield, or the fact that the schools were not needed in the first place. The children will not be hurt by the transition, and programs that help will continue to be funded. The difference is that they will be fully accountable, financially and in the quality of education they provide, as long as the people running the schools want that outcome.
I also note earlier outbursts against teacher unions, which seem to me to be part of your blindness. Teachers, strangely enough, know a lot about how to teach. I am a big supporter of letting them do just that, and the results will be much better than the current system of trying to limit their ability to do their job (that they trained for) by trying to have things work the way that non-teachers seem to think it should happen. We don’t tell engineers how to build bridges (or at least no one expects the engineers to listen).
My conclusion is this – no amount of debate will change your mind as you are obviously driven by ideology, despite you saying you are not, and this is shown by you jumping on the thought that all charter schools will be shut down, or forced to stop doing what they are doing, and that all charter schools are good. You also seem to have an irrational hatred of the teachers unions further up the thread, and I think that is also leading into your ideological position
Hornet.
You prefer to follow those who want to, eventually, make a profit out of education, instead of Teachers, who would not be in their underpaid, over managed and overworked profession, without some level of dedication to their students.
BTW. I have been out of Teaching for 9 years now. Working for a much better paid corporate position.
The kids were fine. And I could handle the low pay. I can’t handle the restrictions the Government puts on how and what you can teach, and the resources available, something I have never had in my other jobs, along with reams of bullshit paperwork, designed to justify the existence of administrators.
I know of a state school which tried to do what some say isn’t done – cater for all kids. – one shop with a wide variety of programmes and approaches to meet the needs of those all over the spectrum.
They took a teacher out of an ‘ordinary’ class to set up programmes aimed at the slower kids and trained a team of aides to help with mentoring etc. Kids identified and put into thoughtful programmes with thorough data kept of results.
The success was such that the school became a ‘magnet’ school, attracting kids from all over the district whose parents wanted their kids to get the sort of approaches and help provided. As the result of that the Ministry of Ed made a grant in recognition of the success of the programme shown by the data over some years. This was to provide staffing for the proven need. Naturally the programme was extended and great results were continued. And just as naturally after two years the Ministry cut its grant and the school had to go to outfits like Pub Charities to try to get funds to carry on the programme. Kids from far and wide were still being attracted.
Shortly after there was a man in Parliament who persistently raved on about state schools not having the flexibility to do what was needed to be done for kids and so charter schools were needed. The fact that he was in Government and had the power to actually give schools more flexibility seemed beyond him. Well that was somewhere beyond his ideology determination to have charter schools. (That’s just one reason to do with charter schools I think John Banks is scum.)
The will to help kids with learning is here. The will to have the best schooling to do that is here. The will to have all kids do well at school is here.
What is here too are ideologies, politics, agendas and egos. What is here to be bombarded by, seduced by, bullied by, misled by, used and abused by are parents who have their own concerns.
Concerns which sees them fodder for fear tactics. Fearful and already driven to ‘white flight’ and ‘might flight’ to ‘safe’ schools. (‘Might’ meaning wanting to be seen to have power by being part of a desirable school.)
The great paradox is the wonderful people of Epsom in their Acts of magnanimity have given to poor downtrodden, lower classes the gift of charter schools. Like the gentry bringing bags of sugar, coloured beads and muskets for the natives. And the caterwaulers so against seperate development for Maori have ushered in a new legion of Maori schools.
Te hoiho rakau is it?
The wooden horse: sell schooling off under the pretext of helping all those who are ‘failing’ in the unresponsive state system.
The ultimate admission of failure isn’t saying “we don’t have the will and imagination to do anything about the failure.” The ultimate failure was in not having the guts to just say “We’re privatising schooling.”
For all of our great education of the past not allowing us to see ideologies, politics, agendas, egos, bullying, seduction and abuse or the keenness of some to let them have their way the strategy of ‘helping those who have failed’ was sure fire winner. And the United States with it’s great charter school scheme was bound to suck in the intellectually destitute. The United State with its grand history of underachievement in public elementary education who looked to New Zealand for enlightenment, they’d be the ones to follow.
The main sadness is that the Government is not stronger in numbers and fabric. What is needed is a Minister of Education who does what the right here always want. They don’t want the fairy or snowflake namby pamby stuff, they want bold, and certain and strong.
We need a Minister of Education who gets up and simply says “Charter schools are over, get fucked, shut up. The discussion is about creating the best state school system in the world which is the best because of what it does for its kids. We have the will, we have the determination, we have the imagination.”
A great, rousing post, Pete.
Exactly.
A couple of problems Pete,
1) State schools producing drones for the capitalists.
2) Maori did indeed get separate development, and long may it last! It seems though, that the labour party will go with business as usual, and stomp on Maori as a byproduct of whose version of capitalism is better.
3) We still have capitalism, so it’s just window dressing.
Teachers would love to get away from the “producing drones” model. Makes for a much more satisfying job for one.
Schools have been forced by Government ideology to have a 3 R’s focus and little else.
One reason why I am not teaching.
Before the government moves away from charter schools, I would like to see them do a paper on the demographics of the parents of the pupils.
My fear is not so much on the present (although I am concerned when schools have to be primarily supporting a corporation) but on the next iterations.
Anecdotally, I believe that the rich are sending their kids to private schools and at the same time (through their support of a neoliberal ideology), casting other kids to a lesser-quality, or no, education.
In a generation or two more of this we will go back to Dickensian times, with the rich holding all the wealth & power, and the rest just serfs with enough education to keep the books or press the button on a machine, and no way for their descendants to change their lot in life.
Coming back to my demographic study idea, I suspect that charter schools are something “They” want your and my kids to have, while their own kids get a decent education somewhere else. Could be as simple as checking how many of the kids/grandkids of the previous NACT government attend a charter school.
Exactly.
We are already getting closer to the UK. Where the majority of those in professions have gone to Private schools (Called public schools in the UK. Good example of euphemisms).
The children of National do not go to Charter schools though. They are for indoctrinating brown kids, to be compliant cheap labour.
National’s children go to a private school, where they are offered a variety of programs that State schools have not been able to afford since the 70’s. As well as the connections to the old boy network.
Meanwhile paths to better and second chance education such as community education, and tertiary education for the unemployed, are removed. So the great unwashed, cannot challenge the children of the idle rich for the top jobs.
It’s a bugger National didn’t get in and take Act with them. I’m sure David Seymour had his sights on turning his electorate schools into charter ones.
Not Epsom. Regimented charter schools are only for poor brown people.
His electorate go to private schools.
I’m going to end my part in this because I feel I’ve made my point. But I will leave the discussion with two references.
https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/18-05-2017/charter-schools-the-case-for/
https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/18-05-2017/charter-schools-the-case-against/
The first is written by Alwyn Poole, who runs Partnership Schools, and is a passionate advocate.
The second is by Lynda Stuart, the president of the teacher’s union NZEI.
I’ll leave it at that.
You have shown yourself up for an ignorant fool.
No wonder why Seymour’s party cannot fill a telephone booth.
Charter schools are part of right-wing ideology relating to privatisation and social engineering, a model that has failed dismally in other jurisdictions around the world…