??????? If I was sending my kids to a charter primary school, I would want the prospective school to ‘subscribe’ to National Standards at least for the three ‘R’s', or some other appropriate measurement system.
Only reasons they are against them ,is that they didn’t think about it first.Some time i think the NZ education system is in an antideluvian time warp.Wonder if the Charter schools turn out to be a winner,what the opponets of the experiment will say then.Or is it like the Watersiders mind block,as in Auckland ,only one way the entrenched way.
For those wanting to know why Charter Schools would be exempt from National Standards, I have another question: if these schools are subject to the same regulations as public schools then why are they a magic bullet to the education problem? If the charter schools have to abide by the same regulations as public schools then this reduces flexibility and therefore the ability of parents to choose between different models of education. Essentially the parents will just be picking the same model of education, but provided privately. In that case any difference in performance is likely to be due to the makeup of the student body and their social background.
Yeah it’s the same model, but it’s run privately by hopefully competent and dedicated people, who are not backed and protected by unions and just want to educate kids and get paid well for it. Am I wrong?
immigant – “it’s the same model, but it’s run privately by hopefully competent and dedicated people, who are not backed and protected by unions and just want to educate kids and get paid well for it.”
Psycho Milt – “Because National Standards is about provoking a fight with the teacher unions”
Can people not have a difference of opinion without being assumed to hold nasty and/or evil ulterior motives? To suggest that teachers unions do not care about educating kids or that those advocating national standards just want to pick a fight seems unfair. One or both of them may be wrong but I believe both genuinely want what is best for children’s education and believe that what they advocate is not inconsistent with children’s best interests.
“it’s run privately by hopefully competent and dedicated people”
As opposed to public schools which are run by layabouts and incompetents. It’s quite remerkable then that we rank so highly and well above the OECD average for educational achievement. Those useless teachers must be doing something right.
David Farrar says:- “All the groups which campaigned against national standards are against charter schools which would be exempt from national standards.”
Yes it’s ironical, but coincidental and meaningless. Mind you, I’d be interested to find out by which method a charter schools’ effectiveness can/will be measured to guage their overall merit, or lack thereof. Tricky. Like measuring teachers really….ironically.
Weihana says:- “Can people not have a difference of opinion without being assumed to hold nasty and/or evil ulterior motives?”
I think it was Gandalf who said, “The untrustworthy are ever distrustful….” Might have been referring to Denethor, but I may be wrong.
As pointed out above, I would think that it is more ‘ironic’ that the people who are insisting on introducing National Standards are at the same time introducing schools that are exempt from National Standards.
Perhaps the other irony is that Charter schools (or a very similar model) already exist and are in the main successful.
State intergrated schools benefit from govt funding yet are self governing and manage themselves well and from what I know are required to adhere to national standards.
My guess (and it is only a guess) is that the charter schools would be exempt from the “National Standards” because their charters would (surely) include performance measures that were to be met. Such measures would presumably be at least equal to (and probably superior to (tougher than) ) National Standards.
Just a guess, and just my 2c worth…..
Because National Standards is about provoking a fight with the teacher unions, so there’s no need for them in privatised schools.
Ohh gee wizz, that put everything into perspective Mr Milt
And here I thought it was because we needed an education system where a child’s progress could be gauged accurately and underacheiving teachers could be held to account, but it turns out its all about the filthy Nats wanting a scrap. Fffwoaah!!!
There is a civil service attitude, teachers included, that is self serving. The Labour party has became a party of the civil servants. I support any ‘school initiative’ that works to produce good outcomes for kids. And it seems the teachers have a real problem with that.
My young son had a reading problem apparently. But we weren’t told that because the school did not want to pay for the remedial reading. We were lied to originally. But that’s not the point of this story.
“Too many kids and not enough budget for this ?” we said when we did find out. “Not a problem. We will pay for it happily ourselves.”
“You shouldn’t have to pay for it.” They said. The look of horror on the faces of the headmaster and the other teachers was a mystery to us. But we figured it out later.
Within days the extra tuition mysteriously became available.
What we learned later was that some other struggling kid had been ditched from the programme to make a space. Presumably some kid with less organised parents.
These complete bastards, ditched that poor kid, to maintain their belief in the fiction of a free education system, and their control of it.
The real question is… what damn business does the state have in eduction at all…? What does it have to do with rights protection…? nothing…so it should get out and leave it to we the people via the market…like all goods and services should be.