PPTA responds on charter schools boycott

November 18th, 2013 at 3:11 pm by David Farrar

A guest post from the in response to my post strongly critical of their boycott of staff and pupils at .

Thanks for the chance to respond to your post about PPTA’s ban on working with charter schools.  Here are some points that I doubt will satisfy many of your readers, but I think need to be on the record.

  1.  “I love how the union dictates to teachers.”  Absolutely not. PPTA is democratic, and 90% of secondary teachers choose to join. The policy of bans was agreed on at National Conference where 150 teachers representing their regions, including Northland of course, decide significant policy. A union’s power comes from collective action; we have to be democratic for this to work.

  2. “It’s about control.” Again, not at all. Teachers need to be involved in and engaged with in regards to significant decisions for the education sector – we don’t expect to get our own way always, but we need to have genuine engagement. This process didn’t do that at all – neither from the charter school working group, the select committee process, the authorisation board, nor the applicants.

  3. “It’s not about the kids.” Here’s the great irony – students are being encouraged to leave the local schools to go to the new charters, but then they will be sent back to those same schools for most of the NCEA teaching which is how the charters will be assessed. If, as the charter school operators believe, the local public schools are so bad, why would they use them for delivering the curriculum to their students?

  4. “Listen up dumb parents, we know what is best… we do not think you should have a choice of where to send your children…” I think most people would accept that choice is not an absolute good – i.e. there needs to be a balance struck between choice and efficient use of resources, fairness and other good things too, right? Our view is that there is that there was about the right balance prior to the introduction of charters – our highly devolved school system is pretty much unique and allows for a lot of variety. And, this may grate, but choice between schools as a driver for improving school systems just doesn’t work – even the OECD and Treasury recognise this.  Ideally, schools would be able to offer lots of choices and variety of experiences at each local school, meaning that different cultural backgrounds, interests, skills etc…would be catered for and developed, while also getting the benefits of mixing with different people, economies of scale and so forth.

  5. “Fewer resources for the schools and, ultimately, the threat of lost jobs for PPTA members”.  This isn’t a concern for the reason you think, it relates to the previous point. Schools that lose teachers generally end up narrowing the curriculum. This disadvantages the students that are left. We had a simple solution to the ‘threat’ of lost jobs for PPTA members, which was to offer membership to staff in charter schools, like NZEI are doing. Our position was that we couldn’t do that –as it would be very difficult for us to advocate for closing schools that we had members in.

  6. “Boycotts are reminiscent of the apartheid era…” Indeed, and they contributed to changing an invidious system. This isn’t a boycott against Maori schools and students, it applies equally to all five schools and is mischievous to imply otherwise.  Every teacher in Whangarei and Northland is a teacher of Maori students. Political change is brought about in many different ways; for unions, denying our labour is one of the ultimate and strongest tools to bring about change that we have. We don’t use it lightly.

  7. And anyway, what’s the story with these schools that were supposed to “compete on an equal footing with the state education system – thus driving up standards for all through competition” using the resources and teachers of the state system?  This is like Jet Star over-selling some flights and running short on pilots, and demanding that AirNZ lends them pilots to cover them. We didn’t ask for the market system in education and don’t want it – the charter school proponents did. They can’t have it both ways. 

My view remains that it is one thing for the PPTA to say they are against charter schools, to lobby against them, to advocate people vote against the Government that introduced them.

But to go beyond political action, to a boycott of staff and students at these schools that is designed to damage the educational opportunities of those families who think a charter school may help their (probably) struggling kid, is misguided and wrong. It is using kids as pawns with a philosophy of the ends justify the means.

Tags: ,

113 Responses to “PPTA responds on charter schools boycott”

  1. nickb (3,658 comments) says:

    I think most people would accept that choice is not an absolute good

    Fascists. The PPTA is a union thuggery movement, this post only reinforces it.

    Remember readers – PPTA is for the teachers, not the parents, not the community, and certainly not for the children.

    Most parents I know are strongly in favour of greater choice with charter schools. If you don’t like them, don’t send your kids to one, morons

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 43 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. gazzmaniac (2,317 comments) says:

    DPF – You still haven’t retracted the Apartheid comment.

    Pretty rich considering your comments about a Labour MP calling something Fascist the day before.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 36 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Cunningham (811 comments) says:

    Give them credit for at least coming on here but where is the most important point answered – what are they doing to try and improve the massive tail of underachievement? Pretty hard for them to refute the suggestion that it’s ‘not about the kids’ when they are in fact doing (seemingly) very little to help those children.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. doggone7 (677 comments) says:

    Parents are in favour of choice and five charter schools might give some parents a choice. It must seem strange to onlookers that some want the choice of sending their chid to a charter school and an ordinary state high school at the same time.

    Those ordinary state schools they should be escaping, according to people on here, because it’s staffed by scumbag, fascist PPTA unionist thugs. What’s up with that? Surely it cannot be that the people with the wisdom to want to exercise their choice and opt out, who thus prove they have the best interests of their kids at heart, are making a judgement that there is some value in having their kids attend an ‘ordinary’ school. Of course all of that implying that some teachers in some high schools might actually be able to do a good job. Well fancy that!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. srylands (385 comments) says:

    “…as it would be very difficult for us to advocate for closing schools that we had members in.”

    This statement is revealing. It says that the PPTA will never support the closure of ANY school. This tells me that they are interested in their members – not the interests of the kids. Because clsoing some schools would DEFINITELY be in the interests of the kids.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Hamish_NZ (39 comments) says:

    The PPTA fail to explain why they think engaging in illegal strike action is okay.
    Obviously good faith in their eyes is only a requirement for employers.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Colville (2,059 comments) says:

    What happens if the teachers contracted to the charter schools try and join the PPTA?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. davidp (3,540 comments) says:

    It must be hard for PPTA teachers to prevent bullying in schools when they are the worst offenders.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    And, this may grate, but choice between schools as a driver for improving school systems just doesn’t work – even the OECD and Treasury recognise this.

    If the PPTA really believed this they would simply wait for the system to fail. Concern for the welfare of the students would normally be a defense, but they lose the right to use it given their explicit policy of harming the educational opportunities for kids that go to charter schools.

    And anyway, what’s the story with these schools that were supposed to “compete on an equal footing with the state education system – thus driving up standards for all through competition” using the resources and teachers of the state system?

    And anyway, what’s the story with these schools that were supposed to “compete on an equal footing with the state education system – thus driving up standards for all through competition” competing with the state education system on an equal footing?

    FYP.

    PPTA: positively shitting itself over the mere possibility that charter schools succeed in improving the educational outcome for disadvantaged students. Class act.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Paulus (2,493 comments) says:

    Remember the PPTA mottos – “only we know what is best for the children of New Zealand” – what the hell do the parents have to do with it – it is our role.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Albert_Ross (245 comments) says:

    All of these are points that could be overcome, or worked through, if PPTA did not actually want charter schools to fail and actively seek to bring that about – in other words, hoping, and working, for children’s educational outcomes to be made worse.

    What sort of person wants and actively seeks that outcome?

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. davidp (3,540 comments) says:

    >And, this may grate, but choice between schools as a driver for improving school systems just doesn’t work – even the OECD and Treasury recognise this.

    What sort of burbling economic incoherence is this? Try the statement with any other activity and you’ll realise just how little sense it makes.

    It is like saying competition between Android, Apple, and Microsoft for phone and tablet operating systems is bad and doesn’t improve software quality. So the government should just make one a monopoly.

    Or saying that having two supermarkets in an area won’t improve the quality, and we’d be better off having both of them run by the government with customers being restricting to visiting only the one closest to them.

    These PPTA guys actually make me start to hate teachers. On the face of it, an individual teacher might appear to be a nice person. But if that was the case, why would they joint a thug organisation that bullies parents, non-union teachers, and children who go to non-government schools?

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. simo (150 comments) says:

    The lefties are struggling against the tide of civilisation which has taken a different tack into self determination and responsibility for ones own actions. The social media and global IT connection has pretty much found out we are all the same and really do want betterment, first world living conditions, and live in communities and a world of positivity. On another tack, the world has found out the global warming farce is the left’s way of extorting the civilised world, a wealth transfer of monumental proportions which is now grinding its way into irrelevancy. The desperation is showing as they try to brainwash generations of children and young adults into believing they are the messiah to all the 3rd worlds problems and can spread the wealth around. Well some parts of this planet are just uninhabitable due to circumstances beyond the humanities control. However, the UN encourages any peoples who live in 3rd world conditions to climb on the bandwagon to create the critical mass for this wealth transfer. And hey there is a common denominator called climate and it effects everyone, so what better mechanism to ramp up this transfer. Some would call this genius, but they have been found out when they decided that climate change was a better definition than global warming because warming the planet just wasn’t! Should be game over……but in strides MSM with a solution, lets Gobbelise (Josef that is) the masses, keep telling the lies and eventually the unbelievers will believe, game over again…..global connection via social media has harpooned them again. The PPTA is how this message is being delivered, they see their powerbase eroding, they will try to shutdown any attempts to silence the propaganda to the masses. Heads up – PPTA the masses have just given you the middle finger get used to it!

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. fisho (15 comments) says:

    I don’t quite understand their logic (or their math).

    You can’t just create students out of thin air, or reduce numbers either. So surely even though more schools are going to exist (albeit a small number at this stage), there will still be around the same number of teaching jobs…In the same areas…Just some will be at charter schools.

    I’m sure teachers who are confident of their ability to teach will have nothing to worry about. So that leaves who….those who are not skilled, dynamic, forward thinking etc.

    So do we really want folks like this teaching our kids. Unionism seems to me to be a celebration of mediocrity…Not very kiwi if you ask me.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Bill Ted (79 comments) says:

    My favourite part is about how they’re democratic because they have 150 teachers who vote for their regions. Speaking from experience (well my wife’s), PPTA delegates are among the most feral breed of diehard protectionists in this country. They’re also generally the worst teachers on the payroll. Lazy, angry and incompetent. They don’t represent teachers. They represent their own entrenchment.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. unaha-closp (1,111 comments) says:

    Pt 6. It will be interesting to see how well you back this up with a good enforcement policy.

    We are all looking forward to the day when 50 Maori kids turn up for school and the PPTA turns them away. We can’t expect the school will do your dirty work for you – hope you turn up in nice red shirts. Golden moments in NZ telly await us all.

    Pt 7. They can have it both ways, because they are the government enacting the will of the people. NZ is a pretty benign country, we do not force anybody to work for the government. If people do choose to work for the government we have only one real requirement – that they do their job. Police are there to police, nurses to nurse and teachers to teach. You are not employed to be social policy wonks, if you want to pursue that career might we suggest you do so elsewhere.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    PPTA are nothing but feral socialists with agendas that would make even the most rabid communist cringe. They have poisoned the minds of young children with their doctrine for many years, now parents are getting the chance to get decent educations for their children, teachers realise their dominant position in left-wing social engineering is threatened. Thank God, the less association with these evil unionists many parents need, the better for all concerned.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Ross12 (1,144 comments) says:

    The thing about this issue with schools in Northland I don’t understand is that the Charter School people must have spoken to the State school principal / board of trustees involved before they put up their proposal to Govt. as I assume to have a couple of subjects taught at that school was part of that proposal. That is all the parties involved were happy ( there maybe some payment to the State school).
    Then the PPTA gets wind of it , well after any agreement was reached and they scream from the roof tops. What the PPTA are really trying to say is ” We must have CONTROL”

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. big bruv (13,210 comments) says:

    DPF

    Why do you give these lying lowlife the time of day?

    They are scum, they are not concerned about our kids at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. doggone7 (677 comments) says:

    Kimble

    Who are the “disadvantaged students” you mention?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. edhunter (491 comments) says:

    does this mean 90% of secondary school teachers vote Labour/Green?
    Is it easier to to be part of the mob?
    What pressure/abuse to the 10% who aren’t members put up with?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. wat dabney (3,655 comments) says:

    Our view is that there is that there was about the right balance prior to the introduction of charters

    I though that was just brilliant.

    These shameless and deplorable rent-seekers happen to believe that their current lucrative monopoly is ‘about the right balance.’

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. bc (1,332 comments) says:

    It’s interesting how the commentators are doing exactly what they criticise the PPTA of doing – putting ideology before common sense. For some people their hatred of unions is so strong that they will never be able to have a rational viewpoint.
    Oh the irony!

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. nasska (10,611 comments) says:

    The PPTA present as little other than arrogant socialists determined to set the conditions & outcomes of their employment by holding the education of the kids hostage to their demands.

    The country’s meatworkers’ unions are more professional with their negotiations.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. bc (1,332 comments) says:

    Thanks nasska for providing the perfect example of what I was talking about!

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. wat dabney (3,655 comments) says:

    bc,

    I think it’s sweet that you believe rent-seekers when they tell you they need to enforce their monopoly for your own good.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. JC (906 comments) says:

    The illiteracy rate in this country is around 40% for Europeans aged 15-65, well over 60% for Maori and over 70% for PI.. thats the accumulation over time of all those kids who comprised the bottom 20% at public schools plus migration.

    Now, after WW2 through to about the late 70s you could get a job without a good education, after all manufacturing was 50% of GDP (now 10%) and there were plenty involved in the farming and support industries.

    Like it or not productivity, robotics, automation etc has slaughtered those old jobs and the new jobs going on will require literacy and numeracy of a much higher order.. job applicants will mostly need pretty good English as well to interact in the service industries.

    So this spat with the education unions and the long tail of underachievement isn’t political at all.. its about survival in a competitive and increasingly educated world and the inexorable relationship of failure at school with unemployment, inequality, poor productivity, crime and general social problems.

    If the state system can’t and wont own and fix the 20% failure rate then charter schools and/or other innovative ideas must.

    JC

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. nasska (10,611 comments) says:

    bc

    If the teachers wish to organise themselves into unions & use the muscle thus created to ride roughshod over everyone they are within their rights to do so.

    All I ask is that we are spared the claptrap about teaching being a “profession” & the pupils’ education being their paramount concern. Even the Cooks & Stewards on the Rail Ferries forty years ago admitted that socialist ideology & money were the drivers behind their continuous spats with their employers.

    The PPTA should be so honest.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. bc (1,332 comments) says:

    Awww, thanks for the love wat.
    I do believe it is important to think critically about an issue, rather than just do a “Redbaiter” and call people socialists.
    I’m guessing that’s what you meant.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Michael (894 comments) says:

    Notice how the PPTA response only uses the words “kids” and “children” when quoting David’s critical comments? Not one rebuttal to why teachers would seek to limit children’s opportunities because they go to a Charter School. I can’t find any good reason or acceptable rationale for the non-contact rule, and it appears neither can the PPTA.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. orewa1 (428 comments) says:

    Unusual that the response “from the PPTA” seems to be unsigned. This is unconventional. Somehow it feels less credible as a result.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. doggone7 (677 comments) says:

    JC :

    The illiteracy rate in this country is around 40% for Europeans aged 15-65. So when 46,000 gather at Eden Park for a big rugby game more than 18,400 of us are illiterate?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. bc (1,332 comments) says:

    Those rates do seem high JC. Where do they come from?
    NZQA state that 88% of school leavers last year have level 1 literacy and numeracy.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. transmogrifier (520 comments) says:

    The boycott is bullshit and one of the reasons I’m glad I was never a PPTA member when I taught in NZ. When I come back, I won’t be either.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. transmogrifier (520 comments) says:

    One thing I will disagree with the KB readers on: most of my colleagues who were in the PPTA (that is, almost all of them) take teaching seriously and keep politics out of the classroom. Now you could argue that political bias is an inescapable component of the curriculum (it is, somewhat), but that’s not the fault of the teachers.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. John Boscawen (146 comments) says:

    I was pleased to learn last week that union opposition hadn’t stopped teachers applying for jobs in them ( or for that matter pupils enrolling).

    South Auckland Middle School, based in Mahia Road Manurewa had applications from 105 teachers for positions, and the sponsors are absolutely delighted by the calibre and quality of the teachers who they have appointed. All registered, incidentally.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    Most parents I know are strongly in favour of greater choice with charter schools. If you don’t like them, don’t send your kids to one, morons

    It must be so hard to be completely at odds with one’s own philosophy. I want a fair deal for tax payers! I want more choice in schools! I want my tax spent wisely! I want more choice in schools! I want lower rates! I want more choice in schools! I want less Government and bureaucracy! I want more choice in schools! I want better teachers! I want more choice in schools! I want better trained teachers! I want more choice in schools!

    Wow, talk about blowing the budget.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    Excellent, and a comment from John Boscawen to boot! Now, he can explain how one simulatenously lowers the burden of Government whilst increasing the choice of schools… …I’m sure.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Johnboy (14,876 comments) says:

    I suspect that most teachers join the PPTA as they are afraid that if they don’t they will get a hard time from the creeps that are in it. Charter schools hopefully will break the stranglehold the unionists have on the teaching profession. That is what the PPTA fear most.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    Sine when did the Act party have such an interest in Maori education?

    Anyone smell a rat?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. flash2846 (164 comments) says:

    The PPTA has just over 18000 members nationwide. They cannot represent the views of most New Zealanders and shouldn’t purport to.
    Speaking of unions in general: Unions in NZ have over 390,000 members contributing well over 140 million dollars each year to union bosses. I wonder where that money goes.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    Sine when did the Act party have such an interest in Maori education?

    Since they realised that they have fewer than the expected number of uneducated people on their membership list. Maybe they put 2+2 together…

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. srylands (385 comments) says:

    “Sine when did the Act party have such an interest in Maori education?

    Anyone smell a rat?”

    No, not me. Because I am not a paranoid conspiracy freak. I am interested in real public policy solutions.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. John Boscawen (146 comments) says:

    To Samuel Smith at 9.10pm:

    Since it was founded in 1994. Along with Pacific Islanders and all other New Zealanders who don’t have the choice that some have. It is one of the reasons I joined ACT in 1995. Raising educational standards through choice and competition was a founding principle of ACT.

    ACT’s first Education Spokesperson was Dame Iritana Tawhiwhirangi. founder of the Kohanga Movement.

    In Parliament from 1996 our Education Spokesperson was Donna Awatere-Huata. Donna promoted the TIE scheme, Targeted Educational Entitement, which gave greater choice to some from poorer demographic backgrounds. Labour scrapped it in 1999 when they came to power.

    In the last month I have had the privilege of listening to presentations from all five partnership school sponsors and they are all impressive.

    However to achieve what can be truly done we need to have 100 partnership schools following the next election, not five.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. nickb (3,658 comments) says:

    Mr Boscawen, thanks for your great comments on here. It’s a shame you are not still in Parliament, our country desperately needs thinkers like yourself.

    SS, you ungracious twat. You are the most ignorant poster in the history of KB

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. CharlieBrown (889 comments) says:

    As its pointless to argue rationally with the PPTA on this here is a point they can understand…. go have sex and travel… or in more simple terms fuck off. You’re actions on this are fascist.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    I’m sad :( that he didn’t respond to tell me just how spending millions on bureaucracy, new systems and policies (and flashy presentations) that aren’t actually specifically targetted towards the “long tail” actually achieves anything apart from spending oodles of tax money.

    I guess I’ll just stick with my completely unfounded hypothesis that more schools == more costs. Unless you start closing some of them of course. Better start with those nasty union controlled ones. But then if you close some you don’t have as much choice, do you? Boy, I’m confused. How could this possibly work? I guess great thinkers just sit at a level above my lowly, state-educated butt.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. bc (1,332 comments) says:

    Say what? John Boscawen actually mentions Donna Awatere-Huata!
    The same Donna Awatere-Huata who was charged by the Serious Fraud Office and then convicted of fraud for stealing $80, 000 from the Pipi Foundation, a government funded charity. Yep ACT’s Education Spokesperson stole taxpayers money to pay for a stomach stapling operation no less. Money for the education of children.
    Ye gods John. What were you thinking. Or is this an attempt to rewrite ACT’s history?

    And then nickb thanks John for his great comment and obviously blissfully ignorant of the history of a disgraceful ACT politician, calls someone else ignorant. Priceless.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    You’re actions on this are fascist.

    Have you read DPF’s previous post on the use of the word and are you taking the proverbial?

    PS You want fewer apostrophes and letters in that sentence. Clearly state-educated by dirty scum unionists as well.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    But then if you close some you don’t have as much choice, do you?

    Closing them doesnt reduce choice. Preventing schools from opening does.

    And that’s the policy your lowly, state-educated butt supports.

    Is it something new, or has it always been so. Tell us. Exactly when DID you start hating children?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Colville (2,059 comments) says:

    Sine when did the Act party have such an interest in Maori education?

    Educate them, keep them off the dole, employ them, tax them, the country thrives, less kids are born into the PDB cycle, rich people pay less tax because less people are doing nothing and getting paid for it.

    Of course ACT wants Maori educated dumbarse!

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    bc, rewriting history would be not mentioning her existence at all.

    Obviously.

    But tell us, what DID ACT do about Donna Awatere-Huata? You going to complain about that too?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. bc (1,332 comments) says:

    Itstricky, I was wondering about CharlieBrowns fascist comment too. Makes a diference to stating that PPTA is promoting apartied I suppose!
    And like you I also wonder how John Boscawen can be so enthusiastic about a process that is obviously increasing government expenditure. Doesn’t his party want less government spending?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    Closing them doesnt reduce choice

    I don’t quite understand that at all.

    Exactly when DID you start hating children?

    It’s all about the children! Think of the children! The children, I tell you! The children!

    Hmmmm, thinking of the children, perhaps if I gave the existing schools more money there would be fewer of The Children in one class. Then The Children would get more attention. And The Children would have more resources. And The Children would have better technology. And The Children could get some of those “choices” that come with different teaching programs.

    Or we could just bundle all the money up and throw it a bunch of new bureaucracy, systems, policies, buildings, and procedures. Make the Government bigger, hold big parties and presentations and slap ourselves silly on the backs. Yep that’s it. I got it.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    And like you I also wonder how John Boscawen can be so enthusiastic about a process that is obviously increasing government expenditure. Doesn’t his party want less government spending?

    It must be hard to overlook one part of your ideology to push another. Who knows what it might make you forget…

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. bc (1,332 comments) says:

    Oh come on Kimble. John not only left out Donna’s utterly despicable theft of taxpayers money from a childrens educational charity, but then wrote a comment making her sound like a saint. If that is not rewriting history, I don’t know what is.
    Talk about defending the indefensible.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    rich people pay less tax because less people are doing nothing and getting paid for it.

    I can’t quite tell whether that one is a piss-take or not. If not, it’s a new low.

    The Children! Think of The Children! The Children, I tell you! The Children!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    If that is not rewriting history, I don’t know what is.

    You see ACT were trail-blazers in the field of MP race & gender quotas, before Labour.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. bc (1,332 comments) says:

    I wonder how much taxpayers money that could have been spent on education, has instead been spent on John Boscawen and others sitting around listening to charter schools presentations. I wonder if John would care to tell us?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    If that is not rewriting history, I don’t know what is.

    Then you dont know what is.

    DAH’s fraud had nothing to do with ACTs desired policies.

    She was an ACT member. Even if she lied about everything, the fact she was in ACT and mouthed those platitudes proves Johns point.

    Rewriting history requires changing the facts. If he talked about ACTS history on Maori education and DIDNT mention DAH, then that would be dishonest.

    How is the fraud relevant?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    Exactly my point. Think of what The Children could have done with those sums of money.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    Closing them doesnt reduce choice

    I don’t quite understand that at all.

    To be fair, you have never really thought about it.

    Closing schools would only reduce choice if you also prevented others from opening. As long as others CAN open then people will have choice. Their money will attract new players to the market. Show me one free, open industry where people with money to spend havent had choice?

    The PPTA is not about education. They are about their own monopoly.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. bc (1,332 comments) says:

    It’s the hypocracy Kimble. If you don’t get it, then there is no point discussing further.
    It’s getting late and I got to work tomorrow. Unlike the former ACT members, I don’t get to suckle the taxpayers teat.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    The question was, since when has ACT shown any consideration for Maori education.

    You expect him to say, Never! Because DAH committed fraud?

    She WAS in ACT. That’s the history. No rewriting. Mentioning ACT and Maori education and NOT mentioning DAH would be dishonest. You would expect it from Labour.

    He never said she didnt commit fraud. He didnt mention it at all. Because it is irrelevant. And despite the question being simple and direct, you have FAILED to provide any reasoning as to why the fraud IS relevant.

    Oh, but you whine about Kimble “not getting it”, while shriveling away from your own incompetence in proving there is any IT to GET.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    Closing schools would only reduce choice if you also prevented others from opening. As long as others CAN open then people will have choice

    With the quite happy side-effect of closing all those dirty communist schools and opening highly successful commercial ones, right?

    Their money will attract new players to the market. Show me one free, open industry where people with money to spend havent had choice?

    Aha, and so we have the root. I did not realise that education was actually an industry. An industry were we churn out clones for the work force, as one poster put so eloquently earlier on “so that the rich don’t have to pay so much tax”. An industry where the highest bidder wins, where shares in high performing schools are sold off and investors demand high literacy rates for their investment. Show me one free, open industry where each company (school) doesn’t clip back it’s prices by susbtituting on quality, I dare ask. Show me one free, open industry where each company (school) doesn’t manipulate it’s perception to achieve a higher profit. Show me on free, open industry where… well… I could go on.

    Education is public good. Education is about more than which school has the most number of A++ for the least number of dollars. Tell me – when DID you start hating kids?

    The PPTA is not about education. They are about their own monopoly.

    Surely said with a bit of tongue in cheek after you compared the school system to an industry, right?

    So… let’s say that education *is* industry. You’re got an existing base of 20 retail stores. If you were in charge and you had money to spend on a new retail outfit near an existing one which is undergoing growing demand. Would you:

    (a) Use exisiting company processes, procedures and people to expand your existing store, its products and services; or
    (b) Make up completely new processes and procedures. Spend upteem dollars on defining those procedures and processes as a separate entity and build it from the ground up, shop included.

    How close to the existing retail store would you build your new store? I mean, if you built it too close then your consumer based would be halved and you’d be forced to close your existing store. That would be a waste of money, surely, after everything you spent reinventing the wheel.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    He never said she didnt commit fraud. He didnt mention it at all. Because it is irrelevant.

    Wikipedia (of course it’s not always the truth) would beg to differ on whether it is irrelevant to someone being put forward as a shining example of a wise educator:


    Huata was charged by the Serious Fraud Office and later convicted of fraud after taking $80,000 from the Pipi Foundation, a Government funded charity, she had set up as an MP in 1999. The media reported that “Some of the stolen money was used to pay for Awatere Huata’s stomach stapling operation and some was used to pay state-integrated school fees for the couple’s children.

    …after her sentence was completed in February 2009, she was able to set up a correspondence teaching centre “The Learning Post”.[7] In October 2010 another school she and her husband ran was forced to go into liquidation owing large sums of money. NZQA said that many of the courses were inadequately supported.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. John Boscawen (146 comments) says:

    To bc @10.22pm:

    You are absolutely right. Donna Awatere-Huata proved to be a huge disappointment in that regard. To me and most Act members. She was expelled from the Act caucus, and subsequently convicted and jailed.

    That doesn’t mean she wasn’t passionate about education, and Maori education in particular. She was. As is ACT.

    She saw the dreadful Maori social statistics and believed the best way to address them was through education. A proper education empowers. And far too Maori leave school without being able to properly read and write. As with other lower decile groups.

    I don’t believe she has ever lost her passion for education, and a few years ago she took up a position with John Tamahere’s Waipareira Trust, focusing on education.

    She alone in the 1996-1999 parliament worked tirelessly to show TIE was working and was very successful. The challenge was to substantially extend it to far more pupils. Instead Labour scrapped it.

    The South Auckland Middle School is being sponsored by the Villa Education Trust, run by Alwyn Poole and his family. They currently operate Mt. Hobson Middle School in Remuera for which parents pay $13,000pa.

    They will be operating the exact same philosophy and teaching methods at South Auckland Middle School, and it will not cost the 120 very lucky parents a cent!. They will be funded by the taxpayers, to exactly the same extent as they would be had those 120 pupils gone to a state school. No more and no less.

    They have over 65 enrolments for the 120 places as of last Thursday night. They will have a 1: 15 teacher to student ratio. From what I have seen, I have no doubt they will be outstandingly successful.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. kaykaybee (133 comments) says:

    As many commentators above have stressed the PPTA is about teachers, not students or schools. They regard their workplace as a taxpayer funded fortress. Heaven help anyone who comes along saying they have another model that could help some of those kids the system clearly fails in significant numbers – that is around 20%.
    The clarion call from the union has always been about their school and their workplace, I’ve never heard them advance anything at union level about student education or welfare that wasn’t centred on a relative disadvantage to the teacher.

    Alternative choices in education shouldn’t just be available to those who have money for private – bring on charter schools!

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    They will be operating the exact same philosophy and teaching methods at South Auckland Middle School, and it will not cost the 120 very lucky parents a cent!. They will be funded by the taxpayers, to exactly the same extent as they would be had those 120 pupils gone to a state school

    Lucky them. Now tell me again – why is it that we can’t have the same methods in a state school? It would save alllll that money spent on new processes, procedures, rules, laws, presentations (although it sounds like you enjoyed them thoroughly), salaries and so on.

    They have over 65 enrolments for the 120 places as of last Thursday night. They will have a 1: 15 teacher to student ratio.

    Now tell me again – how is it that they have specifically picked out members of the “long tail” for this new school? How is it that they have targeted *just* the students that need particular help – taken them out of traditional state schools and placed them there?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. yeahnahbro (2 comments) says:

    “Listen up dumb parents, we know what is best… we do not think you should have a choice of where to send your children…”

    This has to be the most retarded argument in this debate. The arrogance of the statement is fucking astounding. Before you spit this line out, suck it up and think about it for a second; there is no, NO, single authority on the best/most appropriate practice for educating children. You can’t just trust teachers, you can’t just trust the government, you can’t just trust private organisations and you can’t just trust parents. Go on, flinch. That last one hurt a bit, didn’t it?

    Everyone here knows a stupid parent. Someone with kids who you pray and hope their intelligence isn’t passed on. You look into the innocent faces of their children and almost will them to surpass their creators – for their own and society’s good. But you know you can’t say anything to the parent because every spawn box/sack seems to think they know best. Even though you *know* you know best. Sucks.

    No one knows best. Government’s push their own political agendas, kids be damned (Nats have a shithouse educational policy record, Lab haven’t been much better – they had “Introduce clear and simple reports” under educational policy up until the last AGM). Unions push their own members’ agendas, parents be damned. Parents push their own ego’s agenda, all be damned. And what authority do teachers have, right? They’re just overpaid babysitters. Fuck the degree (or two) they worked for.

    In fact, I’m gonna question the shit out of my doctor/dentist/car mechanic based on the idea that I know what’s best because I have blood/teeth/a car – that’s all the experience I need.

    tl;dr: If you’re gonna huff and puff the “PPTA/Teachers think they know best!” line, then EAFD. If they come across as being authoritative on the subject its because they studied in that area, that’s their jam – it’s what they do. How fucking hard is that to come to terms with?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. JC (906 comments) says:

    bc,

    The figures are from international study(s) on adult literacy, here’s a part of the 2006 survey with just those 25-65 years, scroll way down to 6.4.

    http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/78815/Adult-Literacy-and-Numeracy-in-NZ-Key-Factors.pdf

    This one is an offshoot which implies the full 16-65 ages and is specific to gender and ethnicity

    http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/30275/Gender-Ethnicty-and-Literacy.pdf

    The figures differ a little from my earlier comment because I was quoting off memory from an earlier study

    JC

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    JC, you stated:

    If the state system can’t and wont own and fix the 20% failure rate then charter schools and/or other innovative ideas must.

    Can you tell me how the specific charter schools that are mentioned by Boschawen above will *actually* target *just* the failing? How it will improve things for them *only* while the state school keeps up with what it does best – the non-failing students? I mean, surely, those 65 enrolled above are failing students in trouble who need help, right? Not other, average, students nicked from the state schools?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    Is it just me, or is there a strong link between Act party MPs and fraud convictions?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. John Boscawen (146 comments) says:

    To Its tricky:

    They haven’t taken them from anywhere. The parents of those who have enrolled their children have made that decision for themselves.

    They have looked at the available alternatives, ie the existing in zone schools, and chosen to try something new. No doubt basing their decisions on a number of issues, which could have included the facilities, the principal, the philosophy, the past achievements of the Villa Education Trust

    ACT is giving choice to those who wouldn’t otherwise have choice.

    Currently if you are not happy with the state provided education system you have a choice to send your children to a private schools. Most of these cost from $10,0000 pa up. Many in excess of $20,000 pa.

    For all but a few parents this is way beyond their means, it certainly is in low decile areas.

    ACT believes we need to offer alternatives. The failure rate amongst low decile schools, and Maori and Pacific Island students has been far to high, for far too long.

    If individual partnership schools fail to deliver, they will be closed. This is one of the key lessons from the US Charter School system. While those that succed will flourish, and no doubt go onto to expand and open other schools in other areas.

    Assuming of course we continue to have a National/Act/Maori government, or Labour have a change of heart and put the interests of students ahead of everything else.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. yeahnahbro (2 comments) says:

    @Boscawen:

    “If individual partnership schools fail to deliver, they will be closed. This is one of the key lessons from the US Charter School system. While those that succed will flourish, and no doubt go onto to expand and open other schools in other areas.”

    Lol for those kids, then. Cause when that school fails, they’re going to be uprooted and sent to a diff school to make friends, learn new systems etc etc all over again. But that’s okay, because choice was the winner on the day right?

    And I thought this was about the kids..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    John. Thank you for your reply. Does not really address either of my questions.

    A. Choice is not equivalent to addressing the ‘long tail’. If you do not lock these school down to only failing students how is it addressing any existing problems? You are just shuffling students around and not tackling problems. May I remind you that the ACT website mentions ‘long tail’ in the first sentence of it’s policy on education.

    B. How is it more efficient use of public money to set up completely new structures, policies and laws over expanding current ones?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. burt (7,793 comments) says:

    The parents of those who have enrolled their children have made that decision for themselves.

    The bastards put the education of their children ahead of union membership numbers. Class traitors !!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    I did not realise that education was actually an industry.

    Once again my opponents poor grasp of the English language has left them making a fool of themselves. Industry often means devotion to a task or an endeavor. It is why a student can be called ‘industrious’ without working in a grimy factory.

    Everything else you write is based on your first moronic assumption and so is completely irrelevant.

    Education is public good.

    Funny you should choose to use that term. A public good is something that is non-excludable AND non-rivalrous. That means that people cannot be excluded from using it, and that their use doesn’t reduce availability of the good to others.

    How about you actually learn what these terms mean before you spend another thousand words advertising how stupid you are?

    Now, if you mean that education has social benefits, then yes it does. But that doesnt mean that the public sector must be the sole provider. I have yet to see any reasoned argument that the social benefits of the education a child would get from a Charter School would be any different or less than the benefit from the child being educated in a public one. I don’t think you will attempt to create one, but I am sure you would only embarrass yourself if you did.

    Charter schools wont replicate public schools. If they did, then they would have no reason to exist and the private costs of setting them up would be lost. Get it? The desire to avoid loss will mean that Charter Schools MUST be different from public ones.

    He never said she didnt commit fraud. He didnt mention it at all. Because it is irrelevant.

    And in response to this you talk about her fraud. Which is irrelevant.

    It is irrelevant because the the question was always about the philosophy of ACT. Not the honesty of individuals in their representation of ACT. DAH was a member of ACT, and even if she was lying to the world about her “true goals”, it still remains a record of historical fact that ACT endorsed those ideals (but never the fraudulent actions).

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. doggone7 (677 comments) says:

    itstricky

    One big mistake you are making is using expressions like ‘long tail’ and ‘targeting’ those who are ‘failing.’

    Some others are using ‘poorer demographic backgrounds’ and ‘disadvantaged’ in their reasons for having charter schools.

    John Boscawen explains what the new system is all about. I will repeat. Parents look at the available alternatives for schooling. They might choose to try something new. Charter schools are one of the ‘something news.’ They are private schools funded by the government to provide more choice. The ACT Party wants there to be viable numbers of Charter Schools so more parents have choices.

    It’s about all kids not just the ones mentioned at the start here. You could think that the sort of parents Mr Boscawen quotes as making a decision to go to a charter school might do that to escape the low decile kids and the low achievers. You might even think their unspoken reason is “white flight.” But it will be their decision. When those who make the decision to move, leave behind the children most difficult to educate, who have parents less interested and involved, you might hear the expression ‘ghetto school.’
    But being there will be the choice of the parents and kids there.

    A looming problem I see, getting back to your ‘long tail’ and your concern about the underachievers and those ‘failing’, is what happens when the National Standards results are published and those ghetto schools are well down on achievement. Will John Boscawen’s mantra “If individual partnership schools fail to deliver, they will be closed” be extended to them? And where will those kids go?

    To make it clear; Charter schools were never meant to be to deal with the long tail of under achievement. Charter schools were never meant to be to help low socio-economic communities. Those were political notions to promote and sugar-coat initial steps in privatising schooling in New Zealand.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    what happens when the National Standards results are published and those ghetto schools are well down on achievement.

    They will be identified as needing to be changed.

    That might mean closed, but it might mean a whole range of other things as well.

    And where will those kids go? To a better school.

    Be clear, the only people talking about kids NOT getting educated is the PPTA.

    Charter schools were never meant to be to help low socio-economic communities.

    Really? Source? Or are you just revealing your own biases?

    And your last line confirms it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. Rightandleft (627 comments) says:

    If charter schools were actually a new programme to help underachieving students there would be a simple way to ensure those were the kids sent to them. They could draw their students by random lottery from a sizable zone, maybe encompassing many state schools’ zones, choosing only from students identified via National Standards or NCEA results as being failed by the current system. They would be entered in this lottery automatically, meaning their parents would not have to do anything to put them in it. That way we eliminate self-selection bias. The kids chosen are given the choice to attend the charter school or stay in their local school, no paperwork needed to make the switch. The charter schools get the same funding and teacher-student ratios as state schools.

    This way we know that if they do succeed it isn’t because they’re creaming off the best students or simply that they have smaller class sizes. If this was really experiment in raising the achievement of the ‘long-tail’ that would be the legitimate, scientific way to go about it. But of course that isn’t what charter schools are about at all. They are about privatising the public system. Of course South Auckland Middle School with its small class sizes and students with motivated parents will do well, better than local state schools. And then ACT supporters will declare that’s because they are free of the union stranglehold when in fact it is down to the reasons I listed above.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. bc (1,332 comments) says:

    That’s a very good point Rightandleft.

    Remember when Parata tried to sell increased class sizes by trying to turn it into an issue of teacher quality? It was a smokescreen to try and make a bitter pill taste sweet. Of course the New Zealand people were smarter than that and they saw right through it.

    It’s hard not to come to the same conclusion here. Trying to turn the whole issue of charter schools into a discussion about addressing the tail of low achievers. Perhaps John might like to answer why parents of low achievers are not directly invited to send their children to a charter school. If charter schools fix the problem of underachievement, then this would be the most sensible option wouldn’t it?

    I’m also curious why when we are told that class size doesn’t mater that a big deal is made of the 1:15 ratio. Does it matter or doesn’t it? Why do private schools market themselves as having small class sizes? It doesn’t matter – right?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    Lets examine how ridiculous your latest complaints are. Lets say Charter Schools take off (and you still havent explained WHY that would be a bad thing), and that only the good students go to them, so that all thats left in the state schools are the bottom 20%. The bottom 20% would only be affected adversely IF the funding per student was cut.

    Are there any plans to do that? No.

    Now, if the Charter Schools banded together and refused to interact with the State Schools….

    Maybe you guys should actually LOOK at the Charter Schools that are being trialed. What do they look like?

    Of course South Auckland Middle School with its small class sizes and students with motivated parents will do well, better than local state schools.

    So those students will do better than the current alternative? Then why are you standing in their way?

    Does it matter or doesn’t it? Why do private schools market themselves as having small class sizes? It doesn’t matter – right?

    Why do private schools market themselves as having small class sizes? I cant image why they would want to advertise that statistic. The promotion of it doesnt make much sense. Maybe it is because…

    People THINK it matters.

    But it doesn’t. Not compared to other things.

    You think the New Zealand people saw through the smokescreen, but they never left it. And you are right in there with them whining about irradiated food and nuclear energy.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. doggone7 (677 comments) says:

    What happens when the National Standards results are published and those ghetto schools are well down on achievement?
    “They will be identified as needing to be changed.That might mean closed, but it might mean a whole range of other things as well.”

    The most certain way to change their results would be to load them with kids from high socio-economic areas.

    Rightandleftwhat identifies the critical pointer to the lie about the establishment of charter schools. If they were being created to help the ‘underachieving tail’ those kids would be identified and schooled there. ‘Underachievers’ were the perfect selling point to give the notion traction.

    The missionary zeal from the member for Epsom to help the disadvantaged in the lower socio-economic areas would be laudable if he hadn’t assisted for so long in seeing the development of the social disparity which now sees him proclaiming the need for charter schools. When he rants and lies about Whangarei in championing the need for charter schools there, his distorted ardency and feigned concern cannot obscure the fact that he presided over the creation of social and educational conditions he condemns as appalling.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    Let me get this straight. You guys are advocating taking all the bad students, with bad parents, and putting them in privately organised Charter Schools. Whether they want to be there or not.

    So a group of families get together to set up a Charter School for their kids who are struggling in the poorly run and staffed local State School. And you would override their intentions and foist other kids upon them. No doubt you will have soldiers follow them around to make sure they continue to provide the service.

    Not a single one of you appears capable of explaining WHY Charter Schools will lead to worse outcomes.

    So fucking what if a bunch of Charter Schools start up that are simply Private School Lite? What does that matter?

    Your opposition to that non-issue, means that you are also standing in the way of Charter Schools deliberately set up to help struggling kids, that COULD have a lottery, or that COULD only accept the worst students.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. Johnboy (14,876 comments) says:

    Shit. It’s amazing the staying power all you one issue bigots have eh bc? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Johnboy (14,876 comments) says:

    Hey bc. Pop back to here:

    Johnboy (11,902) Says:
    November 18th, 2013 at 8:43 pm

    And give me another one…… you sad wee prat! :) :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. bc (1,332 comments) says:

    Kimble, you are either not reading anything that has been said or you are trolling for attention (you’re not kea are you).
    As people like Hattie have pointed out charter schools have minimal (if any) impact on raising student achievement.
    So this is ideology, nothing more nothing less.
    The problem is that this ideological experiment costs money. Money that could have been spent on things that have been proven to raise student achievement.
    Do you understand the concept of opportunity cost, Kimble?
    Also the whole process is not directly targeting the underachievers.
    I don’t think I can put it any simplier for you, Kimble.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. bc (1,332 comments) says:

    What are you going on about johnboy? I don’t think I have made a comment to you. What has rattled your chains?
    Never mind, add another smiley face you sad old git!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. doggone7 (677 comments) says:

    “You guys are advocating taking all the bad students, with bad parents, and putting them in privately organised Charter Schools. Whether they want to be there or not.

    Wouldn’t it be terrible to actually do what Parata, Banks and others purported charter schools were to be about – dealing with the underachievement.

    “…what if a bunch of Charter Schools start up that are simply Private School Lite? What does that matter?”

    No problem. Just let Mr Key, Mr Banks and Ms Parata come out and say, “Our agenda is to privatise schooling. We will begin by starting five charter schools.”

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    Wow, it’s getting nasty. Are you an ACT party member? It’s just that you seem to be viciously defending this and DAH, for some reason.

    Once again my opponents poor grasp of the English language has left them making a fool of themselves.

    Sorry? Here’s your statement:

    Their money will attract new players to the market. Show me one free, open industry where people with money to spend havent had choice?

    You used the noun ‘industry’ in a sentence surrounded by “new players”, “free”, “open”, “money” and “market”. It’s pretty obvious which “industry” you’re referring to. Not ‘industry’ as in ‘endevour’ but ‘industry’ as in ‘manufacturing’.

    You don’t seem to be able to express yourself without resorting to calling me ‘stupid’ or ‘moronic’ so I’d really be careful about who you you excuse of having a poor grip on the language. You seem to be about two steps away from dropping the f-bomb because you’ve lost the plot.

    I have yet to see any reasoned argument that the social benefits of the education a child would get from a Charter School would be any different or less than the benefit from the child being educated in a public one.

    They set their own cirriculum. They set their own holidays. They aren’t subject to the OIA. They can make a profit. Ringing any alarm bells yet? Probably not because you’re market minded. But market minded doesn’t always make for good education.

    It is irrelevant because the the question was always about the philosophy of ACT.

    No, Bosco. put her forward as an example of a female, Maori, educational wise owl. She stole money from an educational institution for cosmetic surgery and to pay for her own kid’s education and then ran a failed educational institution. Not exactly a shining example of anything educational at all.

    You haven’t yet told me why it’s so much more efficient to set up whole new systems of laws, cirricula, buildings, rents, leases, procedures, processes and presentations. I mean, how many millions are we talking? How many millions that could just be spent on special programs for the ‘long tail’?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    d7

    Fantastic post, great wind up and home run :)

    That was the direction I was headed but John seems to have done a home runner himself so it’s a shame we didn’t get to ask him the question…

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    You used the noun ‘industry’ in a sentence surrounded by “new players”, “free”, “open”, “money” and “market”.

    Human endeavor. Get over it.

    You loaded what I said with a ton of connotations and then fought against those. You werent even fighting a strawman.

    The only reason you have latched on to that ONE WORD is that you know you would come up short addressing everything else in the sentence.

    They set their own cirriculum.

    Perhaps, within reason. I am fairly sure this will be picked up as a falsehood.

    They set their own holidays.

    Some may, I dont know. What does it matter?

    They aren’t subject to the OIA.

    So what?

    They can make a profit.

    So?

    You may not have noticed the quality of goods and services being produced en masse every day by people who “can make a profit”.

    Ringing any alarm bells yet?

    Of course not. Because none of those are necessarily bad things.

    Are you arguing that the Charter Schools will be WORSE than state schools? Or just listing ways they may be different and hoping that scary words like “profit” will make your case for you?

    But market minded doesn’t always make for good education.

    Neither does a state run system.

    What are you REALLY afraid of?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    You guys are such absolutist ideologues.

    You oppose Charter Schools because some MAY be run at a profit, and some MAY not be populated only with under-achieving students. And to hell with everything else!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    So fucking what if a bunch of Charter Schools start up that are simply Private School Lite? What does that matter?

    Hey look, you did finally resort to the f-word!

    Because they’re wasting our money. Spend it on existing schools, existing programmes, existing students. Don’t duplicate costs for something that seems to be completely ideologically driven.

    And before you say “reference” and “your opinion” you can tell it is ideologically driven because there’s no plan, at all, for targeting underachievers. All a big front.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    If you think that “profit” & “education” go together like pie you are far more down the free market delusion road than I thought.

    I still don’t have a rational reason as to why setting up completely new systems worth millions is more efficient than putting programmes into existing schools, nor how Bankso actually intends to use this to address underachieving. Comments?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    Because they’re wasting our money.

    So they will cost more, or deliver worse results, or both? Come out and say it!

    What reason do you have for thinking they will be necessarily worse? You mustnt have one, because you have written thousands of words and never come close to presenting it.

    Why will Charter Schools be more expensive?
    Why will they be worse at teaching children?

    Spend it on existing schools, existing programmes, existing students.

    HA! Existing students? These ARE existing students! But that is your mindset in a nutshell.

    Those kids going to Charter Schools aren’t really students. They are the enemy. Huh? You share the mindset of the PPTA, it seems.

    Is the government building these new Charter Schools? No.
    Is the government paying for the development of new systems? No.

    So whose money is being wasted on “duplication”?

    I bet you would oppose the closure of all small schools in favour of huge mega-schools. But you’d have to display rank hypocrisy to do it, as that is where the REAL duplication is.

    If you think that “profit” & “education” go together …

    Like profit and anything else you want more of and better.

    So where are these profit-driven hell-hole schools? Those private school parents pay $100k for?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    So they will cost more, or deliver worse results, or both? Come out and say it!

    I would like to know exactly why they will deliver better results for under-achievers. I would like to know what the plan is. Until I see either of those things, they are a waste of money on an experiment.

    They are the enemy. Huh? You share the mindset of the PPTA, it seems.

    You’re going red in the face at the mention of the word ‘union’ again. Calm down.

    Is the government building these new Charter Schools? No.
    Is the government paying for the development of new systems? No.

    They will be partly publically funded, right? Besides that every meeting, consultation, presentation, law change, communication…just wasted money everywhere. Strange thing for ACT to be promoting – this excessive public spending.

    BTW, where are the comments about how they plan to target underachievers?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    I would like to know exactly why they will deliver better results for under-achievers.

    Lets take your worst case scenario, all the smart kids abandon state schools and go to charter schools. Would that mean the state schools could focus on those remaining students? Yes. They could restructure the curriculum to best suit there needs.

    And that’s the worst that will happen.

    What would actually happen is that some Charter Schools will be set up by good people dedicated to helping kids who are struggling. Can those people do that under the old system? No. Fuck them.

    They will be partly publically funded, right?

    Ah, but thats not good enough. You have to show how they will do the job (educating children, remember them?) at more cost than if the student stayed in State School.

    And complaining about the cost of consulting on government policy is the last resort of the defeated ideologue.

    BTW, where are the comments about how they plan to target underachievers?

    And this is how your ideology blinds you. “They” who are “they”? You mean the government, right? They have their system. Its called the state school system. Charter Schools give members of the PUBLIC the opportunity to help their fellow citizens.

    I still can’t believe you said “existing students”! Will you drive at slower speeds near Charter Schools or should those free-marketeer, five-year old fascists look out for themselves?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. Anodos (107 comments) says:

    itstricky and co – why not do what a lot of people are doing. Go and see the schools. If getting information that way is too much trouble – send an email and ask the questions – they all have their emails listed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    Until I see either of those things, they are a waste of money on an experiment.

    So the results of the experiment dont matter? You simply cannot imagine a world where Charter Schools succeed!

    That’s not a light allegation, it is fairly damning. That the results dont matter means that there is no way FACTS could change your mind.

    You could be looking at an education system that is 10 times better than the current system, that’s the envy of the world, that everyone else recognises as the optimal solution, and you would STILL say its a bad thing because a percentage of students attend Charter Schools.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    send an email and ask the questions

    But they arent covered by the OIA, so your emails will be instantly deleted.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. HB (287 comments) says:

    “They aren’t subject to the OIA.”

    Kimble: “So what?”

    Personally, I think it is wrong that something funded by the taxpayer is not covered by the OIA. Why?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. HB (287 comments) says:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/academies-increase-divisions-between-the-rich-and-poor-study-finds-segregation-made-worse-by-a-wider-choice-of-schooling-8797105.html

    interesting story.

    I have heard from many I know from England what an absolute disaster the ‘academy schools’ have been.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    Lets take your worst case scenario, all the smart kids abandon state schools and go to charter schools. Would that mean the state schools could focus on those remaining students? Yes. They could restructure the curriculum to best suit there needs.

    ‘their’ (only did that because you knocked my English earlier).

    But Banks et al. proposition was that state schools were only failing underachieving students. Would they be happy for something like the above to happen? Leave the failing students were, apparently, they’re not being dealt with properly? The problems aren’t to do with the cirriculum, the teachers or the unions.

    If the problems were to do with the cirriculum (and I can understand how an adjusted cirriculum for addressing *just* underacheiving students might be useful) then why not set up charter schools with specific cirriculae for *just* underacheiving students?

    If the problems were to do with the teachers, then charters wouldn’t be talking about sharing with existing teachers, or hiring current state teachers (and being proud of it, too)

    And so we come to the unions. Number (1) difference – teachers hired by unions, teachers not hired by unions. Nothing to do with underachievers nor the cirriculum.

    If the above did happen, then charter schools would be trumpted as a raging success – even though all they had done would be to shuffle kids around to get a hold of the A++ ones.

    And complaining about the cost of consulting on government policy is the last resort of the defeated ideologue.

    Really? New leases, new buildings, extra laws, cirriculum adjustments, process adjustments, public funds going to new entities. You think this is peanuts? Think about how much would have been saved if we didn’t have to do any of that and just focused on The Children, The Children, OMG, Think of The Children.

    How could it possibly be cheaper and more efficient to duplicate all of these things? Let’s step away from the whole ‘public good’ thing and step into your arena of the ‘industry’ and the ‘business man’. Is this efficient use of your company’s money for the outcomes – the outcomes being – shuffling some kids from (a) to (b).

    ACT must think that they’re on to a big winner to steadfasty ignore their feeling on Government spending.

    I still can’t believe you said “existing students”!

    Meh. Not what I meant. Stop trying to make up for the fact that you used “free” “open” “market” “money” “industry” in with “schools”

    So the results of the experiment dont matter? You simply cannot imagine a world where Charter Schools succeed!

    Pretty much. Because it’s a flawed experiment. Call my summation a logical, scientific approach. You might remember this from your communist-driven state high schooling.

    We have this thing called a hypothesis – call it a test. I would like to test whether, if I take a random sample of underachieving students from school (a), put them into school (b) with cirriculum (c) and teacher (d) and see if the results I acheive match or better those of another control group of underachieving students in school (a) with cirriculum (e) and teacher (f).

    But your man Banks doesn’t have anything like that. No hypothesis. Nothing mentioning of the word “underachieving”, nothing mentioning the word “test”. Nothing except “let’s open more schools and the rest will sort itself out”

    Call it a glimpse into the -real- reasons for introducing charter schools.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    You could be looking at an education system that is 10 times better than the current system, that’s the envy of the world

    I thought our system was the envy of the world already. That is indeed what we’ve been told recently. Claims of charter schools being 10 times better are obviously completely irrational, subjective and countered by article X which is then refuted under article Y, blah blah blah blah.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    Personally, I think it is wrong that something funded by the taxpayer is not covered by the OIA. Why?

    Me too. Didn’t mention that earlier on as he was on a bit of a ramble – but – less rigour on charter schools in this area and others? Why?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    HB – yes interesting article. And with no formal definition of exactly what these new systems are charged with targeting you can only expect the same thing to happen.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    Personally, I think it is wrong that something funded by the taxpayer is not covered by the OIA. Why?

    You may want to have a look at the list of things funded by the taxpayer that arent covered by the OIA. Its quite long.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    Would they be happy for something like the above to happen?

    You mean, would the advocate of a freer education system be happy if the freedom they fought for was dismantled? What do you think?

    You next few paragraphs can be summed up in this sentence: ‘If charter schools are a good idea, why cant they be done by the government?’

    But for you its a rhetorical question. You actual position is that it SHOULD be done by the government. But you cant seem to explain why.

    And so we come to the unions.

    And so you come to the unions. I didnt mention them outside of referring to the PPTA’s abhorrent behaviour in Northland.

    Really? New leases, new buildings, extra laws…

    Why did you quote me talking about your complaint about consultation and then counter with something completely unrelated?

    How could it possibly be cheaper and more efficient to duplicate all of these things?

    How could it be cheaper and more efficient to duplicate the R&D departments of Google AND Apple? Why not just have one?

    Your argument is one used by EVERY advocate for a government monopoly in ANYTHING.

    Meh. Not what I meant.

    I used the industry in a way that it is often used. You used the term ‘existing students’ which means what? You havent said. I explained the meaning of ‘industry’ to you, but you have yet to clarify what you meant by ‘existing students’. What other conclusion can be drawn other than that you see any child going to a Charter School as a class traitor and no longer deserved of consideration?

    Pretty much.

    Well there you go. Facts dont matter. Real world outcomes dont matter. Reality be damned. All that matters to you is that your ideology trumps the welfare of children. You’re a hero.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. itstricky (1,536 comments) says:

    You mean, would the advocate of a freer education system be happy…

    She said he said that she said that he sells sea shells by the sea shore… oh I give up… are you deliberately trying to confuse me?

    And so you come to the unions. I didnt mention them outside of referring to the PPTA’s abhorrent behaviour in Northland.

    So, you don’t have any other answer?

    Why did you quote me talking about your complaint about consultation and then counter with something completely unrelated?

    Sorry, you don’t have an answer for the particular question, why is it more efficient?

    How could it be cheaper and more efficient to duplicate the R&D departments of Google AND Apple? Why not just have one?

    Your answer is an industry based one, again. Comparing apples with oranges, to coin a phrase. And deliberately confusing me with “she said, he said, she said by the sea shore” yet again. I’m bored. Tell me why it is more efficient and cost-effective for *The Government* to set up two different, competing structures for the same service, again?

    Well there you go. Facts dont matter. Real world outcomes dont matter. Reality be damned. All that matters to you is that your ideology trumps the welfare of children. You’re a hero.

    Thought we were discussing facts until you closed it down so quickly. Where is ACT’s hypothesis? What is ACT’s hypothesis? That’s a pretty simple fact. ACT’s hypothesis on addressing the ‘long tail’ is…

    Waiting…

    Waiting…

    Waiting…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. doggone7 (677 comments) says:

    itstricky

    You’re now picking on poor ACT and suggesting they have a(n) hypothesis. It’s not a(n) hypothesis it’s an agenda. They want parents to have more choice so they are allowing the establishment of state funded private schools. They are calling them Partnership Schools because that makes them sound special and fancy, highlights the fact that state schools are not partnerships between the schools and their communities and also has the advantage of distancing them from criticism and comparison with overseas charter schools. (Although they grab the good news charter schools comparisons.)

    Almost forgot – the other part of the agenda is to privatise schooling in New Zealand. Now you’ve been told you can relax with the certainty that all will be well with education through the country.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    Your answer is an industry based one, again. Comparing apples with oranges

    My example of a concept was a private sector based one. The market has produced more gains in efficiency than any and probably all centrally planned attempts at the same. That is driven by competition. That shows why you can have gains in efficiency even when resources are “wasted” duplicating fixed costs.

    It answered your question succinctly and completely, but had the flaw of requiring you to possess a certain level of cognitive ability.

    If I never talked about the Unions, then your argument against my non-existent declarations about the Unions is a pointless non sequitur.

    If you quote me and then refer to something else entirely unrelated to the quote, the blame for the resulting confusion lies with you.

    I dont give a shit about ACT’s hypothesis. I don’t know what it is, and I don’t care. You want to know that, go ask ACT.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.