If you cant measure it you cant manage it. That is an irrefutable fact of life.

Sure. But it’s also true that measuring something invariably affects the very system you’re making measurements on. The Observer Effect.

So the question is, do the benefits of the testing out-weighs the disadvantages? There is a lot of evidence from a similar programme in the UK that excessive testing causes the schools to focus disproportionately on teaching to the tests, at the expense of a broader education. And more importantly in young kids, the excessive testing and pressure turns them off learning.

For example, it’s known that your can improve you IQ score by studying the type of problems used in IQ tests. So would it be a good idea for schools to spend a lot of time studying those problems and thus improving the IQ of kids? Probably not.

It’s also wrong to characterise opponents of this idea as being against testing/progress indicator. There is already testing, and frankly for primary school kids, if a parent doesn’t know whether their kid is good at reading, math etc, I’ll go out on a limb and say that they are negligent parents. Go along to the parent teacher evening and ask their teacher.

1.Secondary schools are getting year 9′s in that are 3 years behind where they should be. Not just a few – but a growing number. 35% in some schools. ie” 35% are only at year 6 ability to read. (forget writing and maths – they are already too far behind to catch up in those two)

2. Re “Dumbing down” If dumbing down means they can read and write and do basic maths – then maybe the name is wrong!. Maybe it should be called “dumbing up”.

What i cant understand is why – when trying to educate someone – that it is wrong to measure how well they are doing. One wouldn’t take this approach in any other endeavor in life so why do it in the most important development project – education.

Sure – there maybe arguements about the best way to measure (and here the NZEI is grossly negligent in simply refusing to see sense in the idea) – but one must surely measure progress some how.

In fact, NCEA does provide clear standards, and the information is readily available to compare schools on their NCEA success. Newspapers routinely publish this analysis each year.

Tolley has already admitted that, by and large, schools are already providing good reports to parents. That the odd school fails to do this is a failure of that particular school principal, not NCEA, so this (non)issue is a red herring.

I am disappointed by Goff and Mallard in their overall approach. A blanket rejection of standards is extremist and does not reflect the current situation. For example, the NZEI simply advocates for a limited trial before introducing the Tolley standards nationwide. This seems to me an eminently rational, sensible approach, and one Tolley should accept.

The facts are, though, that potentially, the national standards programme proposed by Tolley do two things that are counter, surely, to what most parents want.

The first is that standards “dumb down” the teaching process in that mediocre teachers get a simplified job description – teach to the test. So they know which kids will certainly pass, which kids will certainly fail, and can concentrate on the group who may pass with extra help.

The second is that the results of most kids, overall the 4th best in the OECD even though we are only ranked 21st in education funding, will suffer.

Concerned parents should access both the OECD education reports and the report of the Cambridge Primary Review before supporting a flawed approach – that of a massive change in the way our kids are taught that will, for most, be regressive.

In 2005 he promised that no new entrants class would have more than 15 pupils. This sounds perfect, good on you trev.

My son started new entrants in 2008. 30 kids in his class. What a wank trev.

There is always a line drawn in the sand somewhere, in some form for what is to be expected of children at a certain age. It’s just the interpretation that seems to be confusing. At the moment the teachers understand it, but the parents have bugger all idea. It is my understanding that National Standards help to close the communication gap between the system and the parents.

It was this crazy article that scared the shit out of me of the influences on our education system
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/news/3106418/Expert-ask-baby-before-changing-nappy
So happy, confident, independent children are what we aim for? Isn’t that what we got from Gen Y? Do we need more of that?

So how pray will a decision be made as to which children progress to the next level and then the next level.

And what happens when they leave school Who and how is it decided what advanced education programme

So applying this to say the airline sector Anyone can be a pilot if they believe they ahve the skills.

Anyone can practise brain surgery Come on You have said that standard setting is flawed so you must be definition agree with my conclusions

Dumbarses

Well, malcolm by the same token it is equally too early to declare it an unmitigated disaster that needs to be junked!

Fair call. I was responding more to the prior comments which seem to be assuming that the scheme is obviously a great idea and therefore anyone against it must be against better education. Which is far from proven and similar schemes overseas have not been a success.

You will have to come up with some better rationalising for Trev’s unfocused search for a club to beat National around with.

If the headline writers don’t compete for awards on this one it will go down in history as one of the greatest lost opportunities since record keeping began.

rather than just ‘stuff’..and an opinion..?

britain is a good place to start..

to evaluate ‘national standards’ outcomes..

which have been dismal..

with schools/education being forced onto the grim treadmill/cul-de-sac..

of teaching students to pass exams…

and little else..

phil(whoar.co.nz)

>>NATIONAL LABOUR

>>Education Standards Edukashun Standerds

Only if National had a real leader
It will be something like

With National you will get a slightly less worse education

If it was that easy, we’d have had the perfect education system a 100 years ago.

An ostensibly similar scheme in the UK has been roundly condemned as piss-poor and for turning schools into narrow exam-passing factories and turning kids off education.

NATIONAL LABOUR

Education Standards Edukashun Standerds

NATIONAL