Hartevelt on Tolley
April 10th, 2011 at 3:00 pm by David FarrarJohn Hartevelt writes in the SST:
THEY USED to mock Anne Tolley. They used to laugh at her rambling, head-scratching monologues and wonder at how she had made it to such an important job. They used to say she was not up to it and that she would surely get the flick from her boss, John Key.
But the joke is not so funny any more. Anne Tolley has turned in to this government’s great survivor.
She has seen off four Labour Party pretenders to her job and, after two years of battening down the hatches, the minister of education is finally on the front foot.
Besides dispatching Chris Carter, Trevor Mallard, Darren Hughes and the short-term acting spokesman, David Shearer, Tolley has also witnessed the backs of arch union leader critics Kate Gainsford and Frances Nelson.
She has stared down endless and noisy criticism of her flagship national standards to the point that she is confident enough to show up at this weekend’s meeting of the Principals’ Federation and tell them all about a controversial new policy she’s pushing to fast-track teachers into the job. …
Once she has managed to consistently avoid gaffes that make her look stupid, Tolley’s ordinariness becomes an asset. The barbs from the intelligentsia then start to rebound and become political assets to Tolley. National Party voters like nothing better than straight-up sheilas sticking it up the namby-pamby commentariat.
That’s why they reckon Tolley is such a hit in the airport lounges. Her supporters say she often gets parents walking up to her without hesitation to talk about her national standards and to puzzle with her about why people hate on her so much.
The campaign against Tolley was so nasty and personal, that having endured it she got sympathy. You had union leaders on television sneering at her, and making it clear they would rather destroy her than work with her, and the average punter didn’t like that.
Related posts:
- NZEI says Tolley should have attended US conference, not dealt with earthquake
- Trevett on Tolley
- Tolley terminates food police
- A battle too important to concede
April 10th, 2011 at 3:25 pm
They certainly did used to mock Tolley. John H was among the biggest knockers.
In November last year he rated Tolley 4.5 out of 10 for performance. The only three Ministers he rated lower were Hide, te Heu Heu and Pansy Wong.
Now, suddenly Tolley is a “hit”. She must be because her supporters say so and they are never wrong or prone to exaggeration.
Is this election year, perhaps? Is the leftwing media once more getting into line behind the rightwing National Party?
And why doesn’t Farrar cover his tracks better?
Wait for the next exciting episode…….
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 3:39 pm
She has been a great surviver and John Key saw something in her that most of us did not. I am glad the perception is that she has succeeded. She looks and sounds like a parent that cares for children. Now that she is more on top of things and her confidence has grown so has our confidence in her.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 3:43 pm
The above message was a paid announcement on behalf of the National Party.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 3:46 pm
Quite frankly, this is pathetic journalism. Tolley’s successes? “Seeing off four Labour spokespersons” and “seeing the back” of two union leaders, whose respective 2-year terms both expired? Wow! The really sad point here is the need felt by DPF to publicise precisely the type of writing that Fairfax wants to promote and at the end of a week when the same organisation dealt a fatal blow to the NZPA. This must be an example of the “compelling” content that Fairfax wants to focus on. No doubt Nathan Beaumont, formerly the Education reporter at the Dom Post and now in Tolley’s press office, will owe his former colleague a favour or two for this timely piece, on a weekend when the NZ Herald, in contrast, carried the story of the NZ Pincipals’ Federation passing a vote of No Confidence in the same Minister.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 3:49 pm
In two years the Labour Party has had 4 yes 4 spokespeople. Mallard was the surprising failure – he looked like a teachers’ union thug. Obviously that didn’t work so they tried Hughes – a slightly softer touch but it is too early to say whether he would have succeeded. Personal issues over-came him. Carter is similar but Shearer well we will see.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 4:03 pm
Anne Tolley is a survivor – first criterion for political success.
Labour supporters are sounding more and more like the real conservatives. Keep everything the way it is. Ignore technology etc and keep NZPA even though it passed its use-by years ago. No national standards because teachers don’t want any change. Keep belly dancing classes on the taxpayers dollar even when we are faced with catastrophic events. Have trained teachers changing nappies in day care.
And so it goes on and on. Thank god the unions and Labour don’t run the country.
Although after listening to Q&A this morning I decided I’d be better out for a walk in the fresh air than listen to such a nauseating torrent of know-all negativity as Left-wingers Kelly and Johanssen dished up. Neither of them has to make the hard decisions of course and both able to sneer and mock in that awful middle-class way. Those gratingly cosy chuckles as they nodded and agreed with each other. And what a peacock Johnssen is with his carelly coiffed hair and artfully undone buttons. Yuk.
Give me a decent cooking show anytime.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 4:12 pm
Ladies and gentlemen, once again I invite you to google “Bill Courtney” “NZEI” and “concerned parent”.
Or you could always try “union stooge”.
Whaleoil blogged yesterday that only two journos bothered to turn up for the Principals’ conference. One of them was from Radio NZ which doesn’t count. Even the RNZ reporter was saying in his reports that this sorry bunch was losing the battle.
And if their friends are saying that, then the war is over.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 4:33 pm
Bill Courtney,
Your writing style in those comments show nothing more than the ungraciousness of a poor loser.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 4:45 pm
Yes, The Standard put the boot into her unmercifully.
While she’s not the the best performer in the house, she’s pretty dogged & determined. Even coming up against big guns like Mallard she held her nerve & didn’t let it phase her. And for that she has earn respect.
Talking about the house, I recalled the face-off between Katherine Rich & then Education Minister Chris Charter. Now they were entertaining.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 5:05 pm
It appears that ignorance is a strength and that it is perfectly reasonable that a person who cannot engage intelligently with the professional concerns of teachers should be celebrated as a survivor.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 5:14 pm
rimu,
Except that Tolley is not ignorant and it was the teachers who refused to engage other than on the grounds of their choosing – i.e. they would not negotiate with Govt, but instead try to subvert their policies (National Standards – obfuscation and delay, followed with some petulant refusal to follow policy as legally mandated by Govt.)
So if we reflect on the actions of the teachers, their unions and a number of BoTs what we see is that they are learning from their kids [behavioural characteristics] when really they should be teaching them.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 5:34 pm
Jon Johannsen on Q&A. ‘We don’t have an education policy – we have National Standards”. No we are still mocking Tolley she has done nothing for school children and been party to savage cuts in ECE. Her latest idea is to have teacher aides train for 6 weeks to lift achievement in high risk areas – this at the same time as the school support staff negotiations are taking place under an almost nil pay rise climate when they currently, most of the, earn little more than the minimum wage. We are mocking her because apart from surviving she has done little else worth her Ministerial wage.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 5:54 pm
National Standards are ridiculous. Worst idea ever.
Which is entirely besides the point. I hate National, but if a *democratically elected and legitimate* National-led Government sets out a new, legal education policy, I implement it.
I get annoyed at the uppity teachers who somehow think they don’t have to implement policy. Imagine if the NZDF said “nah we don’t like this new White Paper, churr, we’ll buy some tanks yup!”
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 5:54 pm
If she would get rid of the NCEA assessments from hell, and especially the new level 1 internals, I would praise her. But I guess the liberal bureaucrats in the Ministry of Education would find a new assessment they could get paid to create.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 6:30 pm
Hartevelt has finally discerned what has been obvious for over a year.
Some in the media really wanted to see her gone — as did some of the teachers and principals.
I hope that my grandchildren will grow up in schools where their progress will be monitored, where corrective action will be taken, where their parents will be told the truth about their progress — as opposed to the ‘we must keep it Positive! Positive! Positive!’ lying that successive years of teachers told me and parents of my era — and that no more kids leave school unable to read and write properly.
I guess that’s why people go and queue up to shake Anne Tolley’s hand at airports.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 6:44 pm
bhudson,
I don’t think you realise the long history behind the Fairfax support of Tolley and National Standards. There have been numerous one-sided editorials and so-called “exclusives” to back the statement that they are biased in favour of NS and against anyone that calls the policy into question. But Tolley’s office has also actively used that bias. The “exclusive” release of the ERO report into teaching reading and writing in December 2009 and the set up of the Karori Normal principal in February 2010 are two simple examples where the Dom Post featured but there are many more. The Karori Normal story was about a school newsletter that went out on Wednesday afternoon with a NZPF survey attached. By Saturday morning, it had turned into a lead story on p. 2 – the political page – and included quotes from e-mails obtained under the OIA. The OIA request had taken only a few hours to respond to. Remarkable! You try getting anything out of Anne Tolley’s office anywhere near that fast.
But when John Key admitted in February this year, in front of Julia Gillard, that the implementation of NS had not gone well and that the first year was effectively a trial, the Dom Post completely ignored the story! Sorry bhudson, but this nonsense has gone on for too long.
As for the comments from BeaB and bigjeanie – the usual suspects – I’m afraid BeaB that I have not voted Labour since 1987 – times were very different back then, weren’t they? And bigjeanie has never accepted the fact that some of us can actually think for ourselves and make decisions – and write submissions – of our own volition and not be union stooges.
As for the real state of play out there? I had an e-mail on Friday from one BoT chair that wanted my view on something before her board votes on the BTAC (Boards Taking Action Coalition) resolution and I am speaking to another BoT on Tuesday night.
Believe me, this is far from over…
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 7:01 pm
…the average punter didn’t like that.
And? So what?
If the “average punter” has seen a few sound bites on the news and feels the Minister of Ed is obviously a kindred spirit in her dislike of smart-alec teachers who think they know better about education just because they’re… er, professional educators, how is that relevant to her performance as Minister of Education? (Which seems to be widely regarded as dismal by people working in the field.)
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 7:18 pm
Bill Courtney,
This is a matter of perspective. Or how you choose to read what is in the media. My perception is that almost all of the media arraigned against Tolley & NS, not in favour.
I had a child at KNS at the time and, again, my perception differs from yours. Rather than a set up (or a media beat up) the portrayal was of school that was being managed well from a learning standpoint but which had administrative problems (meaning money management.) I think you are trying to use that example to illustrate something that it wasn’t.
Bill, to the extent that that is true is not a reflection of NS as much as it is of the action teachers, their unions, and BoT/administrative supporters slowing down progress of the inevitable. Thanks for watering down the value to me and my child for the first year!
Oh it is over alright Bill. And the sooner you and your fellow agitators accept that reality, the better off my and others’ children will be.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 7:30 pm
Anne Tolley is certainly a surprise package. I thought a year ago she was definitely out of her mind. However, I think she has managed to come through the worst of it. This is due mainly to the fact that the so called oposition have not been able to get any traction or momentum against her. When you have 4 different spokespeople they start to ring hollow. After all if they knew what they were doing then numbers 2,3 & 4 would have been appointed in the first place. As for the PPTA, NZEI & Principals Federation, well I think they overestimated public sympathy for their pay and conditions. Their strikes (PPTA) came across as petty and self-serving. Kate Gainsford came across like a hyena on P. Lots of foaming at the mouth and irrational thought processes. It will interesting to see how educational issues fare during the election campaign.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 7:33 pm
bhudson,
The Karori Normal story I was referring to was solely about NS. Your memory may need a jolt. Try this quote:
“Letters obtained under the Official Information Act show some Karori Normal parents have complained to Education Minister Anne Tolley about the survey being sent to homes.
There is no objectivity in the survey and little more in the school deciding to send it to parents,” a parent wrote. “What can be done to remove this principal?” Dom Post, Saturday 20 Feb 2010.
That’s a beat up, bhudson.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 7:42 pm
Bill, why do you consider it a “set up” when one of your ilk is simply called out for what they have chosen to do? Would you prefer newspapers don’t expose your lot’s activities? Best defence against being reported for doing something wrong is to not do something wrong. This was obviously wrong.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 7:45 pm
Bill,
KNS was placed under MoE administrative management [I think the term may be Statutory Management] a couple of years ago – I assumed that was your reference. I apologise for hitting the wrong point.
On your point though. The link… http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3351967/Head-sorry-on-standards-survey
That’s no beat up – it is (for once) legitimate reporting of a fundamentally flawed survey sent out by a school whose principal was a member of the national executive of a group opposed to NS, with the survey written with an intent to elicit responses to support the position of the group she was a member of the national executive of.
Her “misunderstanding” would seem to be very similar to that of Barry Hart’s as reported today in the case of name suppression that wasn’t.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 7:46 pm
Here are some more quotes from the KNS story to give everyone some balance:
“Karori Normal principal Diane Leggett, a member of the national executive of primary teachers’ union NZEI, which opposes the standards, said she did not mean to offend anyone by sending out the material.
and:
“Mrs Leggett told The Dominion Post that she assumed the Principals Federation survey would be unbiased and sent it out without checking it. “It was an error on my part. I would not have sent it out if I knew it was so obviously biased. I should have checked it first.”
and:
Mrs Tolley said that, instead of stirring up trouble and upsetting parents, principals should be focusing on implementing national standards. “It’s extremely disappointing that the Principals Federation is continuing to scaremonger and spread misinformation.”
School Trustees Association president Lorraine Kerr was concerned about the validity of the survey, particularly the “leading” nature of the questions. They were “politically motivated” and designed to elicit answers that suited the federation’s view.
“There is also significant risk that details of any such survey arriving in a school newsletter will be viewed by [parents] as having the board’s approval. The reality is that the board has legal obligations to ensure the national standards are implemented.”
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 9:09 pm
Ha ha. ” Your lot’s activities” are being called into question Bill. Funny how nefarious that sounds when I understood you to be in the “lot” of those parents concerned and active about their children’s education with firsthand knowledge of how Standards based policies have rooted the English educational system.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 9:24 pm
As for the STA. I would query the credibility of The New Zealand School Trustees Association as at this time last year it had failed to fulfill basic financial reporting requirements and constitutional obligations.
Incorporated societies must file a yearly annual financial return with the Registrar of Incorporated Societies. This is accessible by the public. When I looked at the societies and trusts website this time last year it showed that the NZSTA last filed an annual return in 2006.
The NZSTA was in the news in Feb 2010 for emailing school boards (its members) in February and June with advice that school boards face getting sacked if they refuse to implement the education policy National Standards. The Association quickly denied accusations of bullying with President Lorraine Kerr saying the email was intended to clarify boards’ obligations in introducing the standards. A similar email was forwarded to member boards in June following the survey.
Two core functions outlined in the NZSTA constitution are:
A) To advocate on behalf of member boards in relation to policies and practices with possible implications for school governance.
C) To transmit the views of members to those bodies responsible for the development and implementation of education policy.
I would question why the president and executive come out with statements of support of the policy to the media when ZSTA members had never been widely canvassed for their opinion of National Standards and evidence suggested at least one third of members had serious reservations about the policy. I imagine you can testify to that Bill.
The nouns: ‘stooge’ and ‘quango’ come to mind.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 9:27 pm
Wait a minute – that wouldn’t be the same Ms Watson quoted in the rest of the KNS story?
The principal continued:
“We were asked by a parent from Khandallah School to forward it to parents in our community and I did this in good faith. Again, I apologise for any inconvenience and/or misjudgment on my part.”
The petition, organised by Johnsonville woman Monique Watson, was seeking to get the standards delayed until parents’ concerns were satisfied. She planned to send it to every primary school in the country.”
And Mr Courtney – you were involved at Khandallah school.
It’s all very strange.
Tell you what – I’m a concerned parent too. I’m concerned that people like you don’t want us to know exactly how our children are doing at school. If they are behind, tell us. Then tell us the plan for helping them catch up. But the time is gone when schools can say they’ll catch up when they are ready. Or that they all learn at different rates – then when they’re thirteen you find out it’s too late.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 9:32 pm
Monique,
Firstly – as a parent and/or member of a BoT, Bill can, at best, have secondhand knowledge of how NS is impacting education standards – he is neither the teacher teaching and reporting NS, nor the student being taught. I would have thought that distinction to be self evident.
As for NZSTA communications, I would have thought the BoT’s would have welcomed clear guidance on their obligations under legislation – it could really be quite detrimental to them to try to take action that is countrary to their legislated obligations.
I guess some just can’t comprehend notions of gratitude or graciousness
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 9:53 pm
bigjeanie,
Don’t be silly. You’ve played the “..people like you don’t want us to know” card many times before and it doesn’t stick. You have never faced up to the fact that NS is dependent solely on teacher judgement, so if you and your school are doing NS then you will be fine. Apparently, you went on record some time back as saying the new reports were hundreds of times better etc. But wait! There are no new “system” reports, so anything you got from your school was entirely due to their actions and not Mrs Tolley and her new system!
Anyway, back to the thread. The Dom Post journo confused the two petitions in this story, as Monique’s petition was not the subject of this story. I stand by my view that the whole apology and story combined IS the beat up. This would never have made a story in any other newspaper but in the Wellington political scene it was used to create the pressure and extract the apology.
If you want a set up, then look at the TV3 story last year when Peter Witana was invited across to Donna Donnelly’s school to sort out a tiff they were having about NS. And guess what was waiting for them in the school carpark? Yes, Duncan Garner and a TV3 camera crew. What an amazing coincidence that they just happened to be in the Far North that afternoon and just happened to be passsing by?? And what happened to the host principal? By sheer coincidence, she gets appointed to Mrs Tolley’s NS Sector Advisory Group. I wonder who she’s representing??
As for representation, Monique refers to the complete failure of NZSTA to ascertain the views of member boards before taking the generally supportive stance that they have on NS. Not surprisingly, they receive about 65% of their revenue from the government. I wonder why they haven’t asked BoTs what we actually think of the policy??
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 9:59 pm
Well, I’m sure as shit not going to apologise for having my opinion and concerns on a policy that may negatively impact on my children as they move through the educational system. I’ve done my research. Have you? Or are you happy just relying on emotive statements. I suggest you google The Cambridge Primary Review for starters.
Vote:To me the strange thing would be to turn around and find my child was failing. Talk about an abdication of responsibility from parents to teachers.
April 10th, 2011 at 10:04 pm
“As for representation, Monique refers to the complete failure of NZSTA to ascertain the views of member boards before taking the generally supportive stance that they have on NS.”
Bill, it is not the BoT’s position to get involved in any politcal stoush on NS – it is their legislated obligation to implement legally mandated policies of the Ministry. NZSTA were well within their remit to remind BoT’s of their obligations.
(as an aside to that, it is interesting how you see an issue with what NZSTA did but not with what the KNS principal did, given her position on the national exec of a group opposed to NS.)
As for the Witana interview, as I recall, the pretext for that we reports of bullying of schools over NS positions. And what did Witana do? He went and displayed exactly those sorts of behaviours in front of, and to, the tv reporter – an absolute ‘own goal.’
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 10:20 pm
See how quickly they turn nasty?
For the very first time – through Standards – schools must report in plain language to parents on exactly how their child is doing.
As a result, our school did. And the reports are so much better. Fact.
Now, you can look for conspiracy theories all over the place. But unions playing the victim is an age-old tactic. In the real world, the behaviour of some principals and NZEI has been abysmal. They have ruined their own arguments. Even their apologists must recognize that.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 10:25 pm
bhudson,
My main point about the BoT / NZSTA position is that, when I asked the NZSTA President why they had never canvassed member board views on this contentious policy, her reply was: “Fair question.” Then later she said:
“Now that we have invested some time and effort in providing what we consider to be a balanced view of the proposals (e.g. through a series of discussion pieces in STANews) we are in the process of designing a survey to find out what the considered opinions of our member boards actually are. We already know from informal sources, including conversations with member boards, principals and teachers, and other sector groups, that opinion is generally fairly evenly divided. Although those who oppose this policy are doing so very loudly, they appear to be about one third of the sector – boards, principals, teachers, and others. Another third appear to be actively in favour of the policy, with the final one third having no strong opinion either way, but keeping an open mind on it.” But, the survey never saw the light of day…
So, my point to her was really, why take such a supportive stance when you have not undertaken a full survey and, even by her own admission, the anecdotal views were evenly spread?
The point of this quote, is to underline, yet again, that poor policy development and system implementation are at the heart of this whole problem. School BoTs are governors of their schools – they are not just there to tick boxes and rubber stamp what the Principal does. School boards and their representative bodies are actively involved in consultation on many issues affecting schools and education – but they weren’t on this one! If this had been better handled by someone who just sat down and talked things through, we may not be where we are today!
And if you’re really happy with how things are, I’d be amazed. Honestly, this whole exercise has been a shambles.
Last, my views of the impact of standards-based reform are based heavily on research and the views of the four leading academics who wrote to Anne Tolley. You are quite right in saying that I cannot have a comprehensive overview of the impact across the system. But I can read what those who do have to say on this. And it’s not good…
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 10:26 pm
Bill Courtney
Anyone who wants to die in a ditch over something as anodyne as NS is either barking or politically motivated.
It’s like unions banging on about hobby night classes. For years, many schools enjoyed a nice wee earner and while I paid for my own hobbies, I also had to pay for anyone who pursued their hobby at evening class. Now the money is properly being used for literacy, numeracy and pre-employment skills.
The Early Childhood sector went berserk over 100% of their staff having to be trained teachers and now go berserk when it’s reduced to 80% – after an inexcusable blow-out in the amount of funding under Labour.
One day, if you are not careful, you’ll find yourself a lone voice still banging on about NS while schools have got on quietly with implementing them – and working to make them better.
And the Nats will probably still be the govt because the Left keeps picking stupid fights.
Vote:April 10th, 2011 at 10:35 pm
Bill,
Your point on an NZSTA survey which never appeared is a red herring. It is not for BoT’s to intervene in whether or not NS is to be implemented. While BoTs do not exist to rubber stamp decisions of principals, they are legally obliged to implement policies legally mandated through the Ministry of Education. NS is such policy.
Perhaps the survey was abandoned because it would achieve nothing relevant to BoT obligations and to have run it in the first place might have given an expectation otherwise. In any case, whether it had been issued or not, it has no bearing on the validity of either NS policy or NZSTA reminding BoT’s of their obligations.
Vote:April 11th, 2011 at 7:18 am
Ahem.
I thought it was a series of embarrassing events in Hataitai that saw Darren Hughes off, not anything done by Anne “We must do something! National Standards are something! We must do national standards! Whatever t.f. those are!” Tolley…
Vote:April 11th, 2011 at 7:37 am
David,
The average punter likes MPs that don’t lie through their teeth and are prepared to admit when they’ve made a mistake. Such a person is not Anne Tolley. She repeatedly said that average secondary teacher pay was $71,000. That was a blatant lie. The starting salary for a secondary teacher with four years training is $45,000. If teachers pass an annual appraisal based on professional performance standards, they can earn $68,000. Tolley knows all of this but for whatever reason, she prefers to lie. And with your approval, it seems. I don’t take what Tolley says seriously – why should I? She’s proven herself to be dishonest and untrustworthy.
Vote:April 11th, 2011 at 7:53 am
Me, I like her. Oh, and Crusher as well. Why?
1. Schools and teachers need to be more accountable for their outcomes – its OUR kids they are teaching, and I expect standards to be high, thats why Im paying so much friggen tax. Yes, in hindsight (and they should have known this) they should have trialled this with a few well run schools first, that was a complete screw up. That said, its policy, its not optional. The BoT Im on came down hard on the merest suggestion from the Principal and DP that they would delay. And the feedback from parents in our last survey was overwhelmingly in favour – 87%. Go figure.
2. Because she gets what accountability means, so few do. We dont talk about it anymore, its a dirty word. You do it, its yours, you own it, not walk away. She has stuck to it in the face of some really nasty vitriol, including being called nothing short of Hitler, by a brain dead moron of a teacher who should be sacked for that alone. If the Minister called a teacher something like that???
3. Because she isnt intimidated by bully boy tactics. And that takes real nuts. Good for her. When the left dont like something or someone, it always turns personal and nasty, and that absolutely appalls and disgusts me. I expect more from my kids – 10, 8 and 6 – than that.
And as for Crusher, thats a set of cahonies that Goofy would kill for. If he only knew what they were.
Vote:April 11th, 2011 at 8:29 am
And Ross hopes – again – we don’t check the facts.
He claims Ms Tolley was lying for repeatedly claiming that the average secondary teacher earns $71,000.
So a quick glance at the MoE website tells us this:
Between March 2000 and March 2010, overall average teacher pay (salary plus allowances) in state and state integrated schools increased as follows.
Secondary teachers’ average pay increased 45.4%, from $47,764 to $71,110.
Vote:Primary teachers’ overall pay increased 52.2%, from $42,228 to $66,951.
Area school teachers’ overall pay increased 50.9%, from $45,936 to $68,535.
The overall average increase was 49.6%, from $44,524 to $68,767.
April 11th, 2011 at 8:35 am
When she goes to a meeting and reads a children’s book to the teachers rather than address the issues then it’s no surprise that there are teachers who don’t think much of her.
Vote:April 11th, 2011 at 8:47 am
hmmokrightitis (44) Says:
1. Schools and teachers need to be more accountable for their outcomes.
If you put into place a testing system that is highly punative on the teachers and their school but don’t put in place proper sercurity and proper checking then you run into people who will cheat. And while some of those cheaters will be out for themselves, there will be others who see that closing down schools, bussing kids all over the place, disrupting friendships and communities are good reasons to try and keep a school together. And when the Education departments get the results they want then they are not so keen to investigate anomolous results.
From USAToday
Vote:When test scores seem too good to believe
http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2011-03-06-school-testing_N.htm
April 11th, 2011 at 8:49 am
“It appears that ignorance is a strength and that it is perfectly reasonable that a person who cannot engage intelligently with the professional concerns of teachers should be celebrated as a survivor.”
Teachers are in a union. By definition they aren’t “professionals”. I’ve never seen a teacher’s concern that at its heart wasn’t part of a union campaign to increase wages or increase member numbers. Education reform will start when the unions stop.
Vote:April 11th, 2011 at 10:09 am
Bill Courtney
Anyone who wants to die in a ditch over something as anodyne as NS is either barking or politically motivated.
~~~~~~~~~~
If you read the stuff out of America and England about high stakes testing of standards, then you can see why a lot of people, including parents, don’t want a bar of it – teaching to the test, reducing teaching of other subjects, reduced p.e. time, reduced break time and all the effects of Campbell’s law in high stakes testing.
Since passing the tests is highly correlated with socio-economic status, all this stuff impacts less on the richer kids because they pass without having to go to such extremes and so they have time to do the “good” educational stuff – the open-ended, critical thinking type stuff. It impacts the poorer kids who actually need a curriculum rich environment, to supplement what they get at home, rather than get the very narrow curriculum that high-stakes testing enforces.
Vote:April 11th, 2011 at 11:01 am
Funny thing is, that’s exactly what teachers were saying right at the start of this spectacular balls-up.
Farrar talks about things getting personal, but which moron called teachers “disconnected from reality”? And who treated teachers in an offensively patronising manner? That’s right, National’s leader and Minister of Education, respectively.
Another lie promoted by those two was that one in five kids leave (secondary school) unable to read or write (sometimes with various weasel qualifications, actually making the statement objectively meaningless).
Vote:April 11th, 2011 at 11:44 am
mpledger
NS are NOT tests. Schools use the same testing they have always used.
I actually think it is a shame there is no exit test from primary because after 8 years of taxpayer funding, we ought to be able to see what these schools have achieved, especially in literacy, and not have to wait until NCEA and then blame the high schools!
It is misleading in the extreme to compare with the UK or the US as the NS we have here have been so watered down they cannot harm anyone. And, I repeat, are not tests.
It would be good if the teaching unions treated us like adults and didn’t dilute their argument with such twaddle – and personal insults.
Luc Hansen
Vote:Teaching unions always say there should have been a pilot or a trial period. Preferably lasting for years until the next govt comes in with the next bright idea.
April 11th, 2011 at 6:30 pm
If success is measured in dogged determination to stick to a theory despite the overwhelming professional advice and international evidence demonstrating how ineffective that idea may be then Tolley has success in spades in much the same way that an ostrich has sucess in looking like a bush when it buries its head in the sand.
I am not a fan of unions any more than the next bloke but Tolley has not produced a shred of evidence apart from “we have the mandate” to back up her claims on national standards. Her constant attacks on an education system that sits at the very upper end of the OECD rankings at both primary and secondary levels you have to start asking the questions about who is advising her. Clearly the ministry are luke warm on National Standards, the headmasters and teachers are against the concept so who apart from Tolley and one or two of her advisers are supporting this idea.
National standards in my view apply a linear progression to learning that simply does not match the reality of the way children learn. those of us with children figured this out a long time ago.
The next thing that we know is that there is a substantive correlation between decile rating of schools and childrens acheivement and surely the money being thrown at this National standards regime would return better results if it was invested in assisting those schools that are currently poorly resourced
Vote:April 11th, 2011 at 8:44 pm
BeaB
Examples, please?
I won’t hold my breath.
Vote: