Flavell on PPTA boycott

February 23rd, 2014 at 2:00 pm by David Farrar

Maori Party co-leader says:

Te Ururoa Flavell, Maori Party Co-Leader, has expressed disappointment at the influence of in advising Whangarei Boys High teachers to not teach students who attend Te Kura Hourua Te Kapeha Whetu.

“As I understand it the Board of Trustees at Whangarei Boys High was happy to support Kura Hourua students in specific areas such as the visual arts. That type of cooperation has been modelled in the relationships that many other kura establish with general schools, wananga, polytechnics and other education providers across New Zealand. It represents a dynamic relationship that we should surely be fostering in our communities – that the education and learning of our students impacts on us all,” says Te Ururoa Flavell, Maori Party Co-Leader.

“I recognise that Partnership Schools is a major political issue and teachers have a right to their views on educational policy, but what about the kids? Surely we should be putting the best interests of our young people ahead of our politics.”

That would be nice. Boycotts have no place in our education system.

“I was a teacher for many years and I know that the profession prides itself on putting the interests of our children first, but this flies in the face of those values. I would have thought as teachers, that what matters is that every student experiences success. That’s what Te Kapeha Whetu want. That’s what the Maori Party wants. Come on PPTA – surely there are other ways of making political statements that do not impact so immediately on our kids.”

The PPTA must be gravely concerned that will be successful.

Tags: , ,

72 Responses to “Flavell on PPTA boycott”

  1. OneTrack (3,114 comments) says:

    “The PPTA must be gravely concerned that charter schools will be successful.”

    It is pretty obvious to anybody that that is exactly what they are worried about.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Colville (2,272 comments) says:

    The PPTA is only concerned with not losing its political power, if charter schools work (and they will) the PPTA is awaiting extinction.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    Hang on, isn’t it all about choice? I keep hearing that word used a lot around here.

    Whangarei Boys High offers visual arts. The charter school doesn’t offer visual arts. If the student CHOOSES to take visual arts then it would be sensible to enrol in the school that offers it.

    What’s the point in enrolling in a school that doesn’t offer the subjects you want to do?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Harriet (4,975 comments) says:

    “…..Te Ururoa Flavell, Maori Party Co-Leader, has expressed disappointment at the influence of PPTA in advising Whangarei Boys High teachers to not teach students who attend Te Kura Hourua Te Kapeha Whetu….”

    Christians will be next if they keep taking this line – probably over funding too [and don't say that Christian schools don't accept non-Christians - as they would if there was no public schools system. And children simply need to be Baptised to attend Christian schools.]

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. thor42 (971 comments) says:

    If the teachers refuse to teach these students, **aren’t they breaking their employment contracts**?

    The government MUST act NOW to either force these teachers to teach the students or to dismiss the teachers.
    This is DISCRIMINATION and it has *no place* in New Zealand classrooms.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    Colville, of course charter schools will work. Huge amounts of money ($20000 per student compared to $7000 for state students) have been pumped into charter schools to ensure that they will work.

    Hardly a level playing field.

    (Isn’t it interesting that there hasn’t been any outrage from the usual suspects about the huge sums of taxpayer money been spent on the charter schools?)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 20 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Harriet (4,975 comments) says:

    “….What’s the point in enrolling in a school that doesn’t offer the subjects you want to do?…”

    Sometimes people have to complete their ‘degree of choice’ by enrolling in two uni’s [although mostly post grad] – and it’s not unsual in Christian schools to share resources.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    The PPTA must be gravely concerned that charter schools will be successful.

    Probably because Charter schools get an unfair advantage by “picking n choosing”? Don’t have teachers for a subject? Well let’s lean on the local school then. But, hold on. Weren’t Charter schools supposed to be new paradigms? New ways? New teaching? Don’t seem so – it’s just a case of using a standard state classroom with standard state teachers when it comes down to it. They’ve just proven beyond a doubt with this move that there’s nothing new about Charter schools.

    So, let’s go and sit down with the kids and do some simple basic primary schools facts on this policy’s backside. We take the same teachers; the same subjects; the same pupils and we put them into smaller classes with better funding. It’s more successful. OMG! I never never never would have guessed – never in my wildest dreams.

    So remind me again – why do Charter schools exist?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 20 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. thor42 (971 comments) says:

    @bc – “… isn’t it all about choice?”

    Uh….. what about *sharing*?

    This is making the most of an existing resource. The politics of the teachers at Whangarei Boys High don’t come into it. They are employed to teach and if they don’t want to teach certain children then the government should make them GTFO and get someone in who *does*.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    Hang on, isn’t it all about choice? I keep hearing that word used a lot around here.

    Whangarei Boys High offers visual arts. The charter school doesn’t offer visual arts. If the student CHOOSES to take visual arts then it would be sensible to enrol in the school that offers it.

    What’s the point in enrolling in a school that doesn’t offer the subjects you want to do?

    I’m still chuckling. Precisely.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    thor42. No no no, it’s all about choice. You get choices, choices are only better for parents, not worse.

    ‘sharing’ makes you sound like some sopppy left wing wimpy communist.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. thor42 (971 comments) says:

    @itstricky – “Probably because Charter schools get an unfair advantage by “picking n choosing”?

    http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Spotlight/story?id=3700261&page=1

    Quote – “How do students get a spot in a charter school?

    Charter schools are open to children, regardless of their income, gender, race, or religion. However, students must apply. If the number of applicants exceeds the number of spaces, students may be chosen by lottery. “

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    This is making the most of an existing resource.

    Good idea, thor42. Let’s dump Charter schools, take all the money spent on setting them up and *share* it amongst the existing state schools. I’m sure they could hire Wynton Rufer for a couple of terms to take some dedicated football lessons for talented footballers who’re not achieveing academically.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    thor42 – way off the mark I’m afraid.

    I’m refering to the fact that if a charter school doesn’t have resources to teach ‘visual arts’ for example, in this new found paradigm of education excellence – then they just waltz over the road and get the supposedly normal, boring, useless, deadbeat unionist teachers to do it for them.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    Must be great for the charter school. Enrol the student, pocket the cash (and boy suddenly there is some serious cash if you are a charter school), then send the kid down the road to the state school!!

    What a rort.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. gazzmaniac (2,307 comments) says:

    When I was at high school we used to have kids from the intermediate use the cooking room and teacher for home ec.
    I don’t see how a charter school is any different.

    They are state resources and the state should get to say how they get used, not a militant labour union.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    Easy way out, PPTA must be deregistered, they are self-serving, Labour/Green indoctrinated losers, who only care about their disgusting social engineering, not students’ wellbeing.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    Downticks for pointing out the obvious?
    Oh well, I’m not surprised.
    It must be really hard for the charter school supporters to reconcile the conflicting emotions going on here. On one hand they want less government, so charter schools fits that agenda. But then these charter schools are costing huge amounts of taxpayer money. Oh dear!

    $20000 per student. A student that then wants to end up back in a state school anyway.
    It’s got to be some kind of sick joke at the taxpayers expense, surely?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. thor42 (971 comments) says:

    itstricky and bc – so charter schools don’t work?

    So all of the studies showing that they do are made-up?
    Of course they are. Silly me.
    I should have known that left-wingers have a monopoly on knowledge and wisdom.

    So state-run schools are perfect and nothing else should ever be tried?

    If state schools are the perfect answer, why not close all *private* schools?

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    I don’t see how a charter school is any different.

    So should a state school be allowed to send it’s talented footballers to a charter school for specific lessons, then?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. gazzmaniac (2,307 comments) says:

    bc, itstricky, et al
    Instead of bitching about how bad the charter schools are, why don’t you let the trial run its course and let everyone see for themselves?

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. gazzmaniac (2,307 comments) says:

    So should a state school be allowed to send it’s talented footballers to a charter school for specific lessons, then?

    Maybe, if they think it’ll get a good result. Perhaps a better option might be to send the talented footballers to regional competition to get additional coaching and game time. Funnily enough, that already happens.

    Also – there’s no apostrophe in its in the context you were using it since it’s not an abbreviation of it is.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    Thor, buddy, you changed the subject. Can we change it back again? How come Charter schools get to pick and choose which subjects they offer and use the local, non-Charter, teachers across the road if they don’t have something in their portfolio? Can a state school send their students to a Charter school for subjects they don’t teach?

    Does this not then mean that Charter schools are effectively state schools, just with a different name?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    gazz – because – if you create smaller schools and give them greater funding then they do have a better chance of succeeding. And you and I both (if we passed basic High School maths) know that ain’t going to scale up.

    Please forgive me for my failure of basic High School English. Clearly I went to a state school.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    So should a state school be allowed to send it’s talented footballers to a charter school for specific lessons, then?

    Maybe, if they think it’ll get a good result.

    So what’s the difference between a state school and a charter school then?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    You are deliberately missing the point thor42. Neither myself or its tricky have said that charter schools don’t work.
    Although since you have mentioned it, the jury is still out about their effectiveness. Parata likes to quote John Hattie a lot, but she cherry picks the data that fits her agenda. Hattie has pointed out that a charter school by itself has a minimal effect in raising student achievement.

    Have you heard about opportunity cost thor42?
    Imagine if thehuge amounts of money that have spend on charter schools was used instead on the things that do improve student achievement.
    But that doesn’t fit an ideological political agenda.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. gazzmaniac (2,307 comments) says:

    itstricky
    Why don’t you quote all of that paragraph and keep my quote in context?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. thor42 (971 comments) says:

    @bc – $20,000 per student for charter schools eh?

    Check this out –
    http://www.minedu.govt.nz/theMinistry/EducationInitiatives/PartnershipSchools/~/media/MinEdu/Files/TheMinistry/FundingForPartnershipSchools.pdf

    That file shows that the *property* funding for a 500-student secondary school is $977K, and the *per-student* funding per annum is $4,671 for primary schools and $5,357 for secondary schools.

    Nice try, making up numbers. Are the MoE telling lies?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. thor42 (971 comments) says:

    @bc – “But that doesn’t fit an ideological political agenda.”

    Oh, and state schools (and teacher colleges) *don’t* have an “ideological political agenda”?

    Such hypocrisy. An agenda is fine for them but not for anyone else.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    I note that you deliberately ignored everything else I said in that post thor42. It must really hurt to know that there are heaps of other things that have a stronger effect on raising student achievement than charter schools. Oh well, no doubt you will continue to ignore that fact.

    Oh and by the way, the $20000 per student has already been thrashed out in the cut and thrust of politics. Parata hasn’t denied it, she just rabbited on something about “different formulas” blah blah, in the way that that Parata has of sounding like she is saying a lot but in fact saying very little.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Colville (2,272 comments) says:

    What is the big deal about one school sending pupils to another for classes?
    They were doing that 30 years ago when I was at high school.

    Oh wait! Back then one of those schools wasn’t an Evil charter school!

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Colville (2,272 comments) says:

    Bc
    Be a good boy and give us a link to that will you?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    What ideological political agenda do state schools and teachers colleges have thor42? I’m not aware of one.
    Maybe you can enlighten us with your insider knowledge…

    Or is it just a case of making stuff up?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    Link to what Colville? The $20000 per student for charter schools compared to $7000 for state schools?

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11203597

    Note the part in the article that states the obvious (so obvious that thor42 deliberately ignores it):
    “As if those discoveries were not disturbing enough, when the first charter schools opened this month we found two of them, in Northland, trying to send their pupils to nearby state schools for some subjects. That was not in the plan. If a charter school is going to take money for pupils’ complete education, then “subcontract” part of its obligation to state schools, what is the point? The taxpayer could cut out the middle man.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. thor42 (971 comments) says:

    “… as Mr Hipkins calculates, the charter school in question has received funding of $19,664 a student…”

    Ahh….. so *that’s* where the figure comes from.
    So we are supposed to trust Mr Hipkins. Yeah, right.
    Tui ad coming right up.

    @bc – “What ideological political agenda do state schools and teachers colleges have thor42? I’m not aware of one.
    Maybe you can enlighten us with your insider knowledge…

    Or is it just a case of making stuff up?”

    The left-wing ideological agenda, dear bc.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    Actually it gets worse. Looks like some charter schools are being funded at $40000 per student!

    The Government is in the gun over student funding for planned charter schools.

    Labour MP Chris Hipkins is concerned at per-student funding rates he says charter schools are in line to receive.

    “Some are being funded up to $40,000 per student in the first year – about five times the average rate of funding per student for state schools.”

    But Education Minister Hekia Parata is happy with the funding arrangements saying they have been based on rates applying to decile three schools.
    “Smaller schools cost us more, whether they are partnership schools or state schools or state integrated schools.”

    http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/21399709/parata-defends-charter-school-cost/

    If it was a small state school costing $40000 per school instead of a charter school it would be closed down.
    So why is there no outrage from this site I wonder? (It’s rhetorical, I know exactly why – waste of taxpayers money is perfectly fine as long as it fits my ideological agenda)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    “So we are supposed to trust Mr Hipkins. Yeah, right. Tui ad coming right up.”

    Parata has not disputed the amounts thor42. But good try.

    “The left-wing ideological agenda, dear bc.”

    Ahh right, so you are just making stuff up. I thought so.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. gump (1,650 comments) says:

    @bc

    “Hang on, isn’t it all about choice? I keep hearing that word used a lot around here.

    Whangarei Boys High offers visual arts. The charter school doesn’t offer visual arts. If the student CHOOSES to take visual arts then it would be sensible to enrol in the school that offers it.

    What’s the point in enrolling in a school that doesn’t offer the subjects you want to do?”

    —————————

    I think the problem here is that the PPTA is making the choice on behalf of the students at the charter school.

    Part of me thinks that if the PPTA wants to openly discriminate against brown kids, then should be allowed to do so. It’s a PR blunder that they can’t undo.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    gazz, I’m not sure why I cut it out. I just didn’t get understand your reference to the local regionals. Sorry. Please feel free to explain it further if you desire.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    What ideological political agenda do state schools and teachers colleges have thor42? I’m not aware of one.

    I think he’s referring to the fact that people who choose to be teacher probably value things in life that he doesn’t. That is often confused for “having an agenda”. Sometimes comes from people who have a lack of empathy.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. chrisdiack (19 comments) says:

    bc:

    The weird Herald editorial is wrong on the funding and wrong on educational co-operation.

    New State Schools get the establishment grant plus they get all the capital funding provided (land and buildings)

    If you look at the total cost of education between a State School and a Partnership School is it mathematically impossible for the partnership school to cost more.

    More PPTA misinformation.

    The truth is the unions are putting politics ahead of child welfare.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. big bruv (13,929 comments) says:

    ““I was a teacher for many years and I know that the profession prides itself on putting the interests of our children first”

    That comment is a blatant lie.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    What is the big deal about one school sending pupils to another for classes?
    They were doing that 30 years ago when I was at high school.

    Oh wait! Back then one of those schools wasn’t an Evil charter school!

    Aha, but they didn’t set up a whole, new, brank spanking school with millions of dollars, just so you could do Woodwork 100 metres down the road, did they?

    I am surprised the Taxpayers people don’t scream up and down about this.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    That comment is a blatant lie.

    What do you do for a job, again?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    It’s not the PPTA putting out the figures chrisdiack.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. chrisdiack (19 comments) says:

    itstricky:

    Wrong. Schools be they State, Integrated, Private or Partnership should be free to co-operate if that is in the mutual interests of their learners.

    Not have these decisions made by bullying unions in Wellington,

    And your wrong on the numbers: the taxpayer doesn’t pay to set up a new brand spanking school. That’s the point. If State yes. But Partnership Schools | Kura Hourua are not provided land and buildings.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. uncle_tom (14 comments) says:

    @ chrisdiack “Schools be they State, Integrated, Private or Partnership should be free to co-operate if that is in the mutual interests of their learners.”
    Private schools? Really? You sound like a socialist. Private schools should be free do as they please and if co-operation may impact their bottom line then they should also be free not to co-operate.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. chrisdiack (19 comments) says:

    bc:

    Actually it was Tom Haig of the PPTA who gave Labour the line. Its wrong. Its because he does not fully understand the funding model. He thinks because the Ministry have a maintenance and repair programme called “money for buildings” as a part of the operational funding of State Schools that they are provided funding as if they were re-purchasing their land and buildings.

    He makes the jump to say that PSKH which receive broadly similar operational funding as state schools are therefore funded to purchase.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    Wrong. Schools be they State, Integrated, Private or Partnership should be free to co-operate if that is in the mutual interests of their learners.

    Fine. Now enlighten me, if Charter schools send their students to State schools for subjects and State schools can do vice versa, just what is the difference between the two?

    And your wrong on the numbers: the taxpayer doesn’t pay to set up a new brand spanking school

    So Charter schools have no cost then? And they will scale out as effectively as State schools?

    BTW, you want “you’re” not “your”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    Looking at some comments on this thread, it is obvious respective unions are shit scared to compete against Charter schools, getting rather desperate as they see their positions of privilege being removed, through their total and complete actions of incompetence. It would not surprise one to see Snake Kelly enforcing its vile left-wing opinion in support of its leeching union brothers/sisters.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    Don’t listen to wissy Hipkins, he is another Labour education spokesman pulled from the weird bin . . . they seem to have a preference for these misfits.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Colville (2,272 comments) says:

    Aha, but they didn’t set up a whole, new, brank spanking school with millions of dollars, just so you could do Woodwork 100 metres down the road, did they?

    Actually they pretty much did. The year I started highschool (in 4th form) was the first year that my school had a full roll, 3rds – 7ths, the school was bright and shiney new, and they were still sending kids across town on the bus to get classes.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    Do you ever have anything constructive to say igm? 516 comments and I bet there isn’t one that actually adds anything to the debate.
    I’m almost wanting redbaiter back. At least his endless rants were amusing.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. chrisdiack (19 comments) says:

    itstricky:

    I suspect in the secondary space with some non core subjects it might make sense for schools to co-operate. Most likely given the size and resources of state secondary schools it will be more likely that PSKH students access this at the State School.

    The schools concerned should come to a mutually agreeable arrangement that suits the learners and the educators.

    Schools have difference learning cultures.

    Most educators want to see students enjoying the learning process and building skills and knowledge. I suspect in time even the unionists will see that PSKH are but one tool or way of achieving that; they will be right for some learners at some stages of their growth and development. Others will prosper at State Schools. There will also be students who go between schools and school types.

    Its about given parents and learners more choice.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. flash2846 (287 comments) says:

    Charter schools work and that’s abundantly obvious. If there is a little extra cost (that’s IF there is) it will be more than made up for by the success of the students including the lack of jail time for some.
    For the PPTA and some teachers to take this position it is unacceptable. Name them, shame them, then sack them. I reckon this would cull a big percentage of lousy teachers.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    bc: Go take some more lessons from ross69, you make a good pair, obviously being failed academic losers.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. chrisdiack (19 comments) says:

    itstricky:

    PSKH can grow if there is parental demand. Obviously if you take the establishment grant and divide by number of students that succeed in a PSKH over the 18yr life of the contract they get cheaper on a per head basis.

    If they are not succeeding they can and should be shut.

    However they will always be cheaper because the taxpayer is not providing the land and buildings.

    Some State Schools are small because of changes in demographics; some because parents believe there are better options.

    New State Schools are often opened with a higher capacity than is actually enrolled, because the Ministry is planning for future roll growth.

    It is true that most new State Schools open larger than the PSKH but again PSKH get no land and buildings.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. NK (1,244 comments) says:

    Hang on, isn’t it all about choice? I keep hearing that word used a lot around here.

    Whangarei Boys High offers visual arts. The charter school doesn’t offer visual arts. If the student CHOOSES to take visual arts then it would be sensible to enrol in the school that offers it.

    What’s the point in enrolling in a school that doesn’t offer the subjects you want to do?

    Yes, and the Board of Trustees of WBHS chose to accept students from Kura Hourua, which should have been the end of the matter. But then the union thugs stepped in using their $100,000 per annum salary and decided choice was a bad thing. And guess who suffers out of this: The children.

    You make me want to chunder all over my keyboard.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. doggone7 (808 comments) says:

    I’m surprised the parents would choose WBHS. John Charter School Banks has raved about the leftist scumbag unionist teachers failing the Maori youth of Whangarei. He can’t have it both ways. The local high schools and the teachers are suddenly okay? The pupils of the charter schools were pawns in a political game before the WBHS got involved in the discussion.

    Te Ururoa Flavell has got the cheek to say Charter Schools is a major political issue and rave about kids. Maybe if he and his mob had put educational issues and the best interests of our young people ahead of politics years earlier he situation of everyone being screwed over by the ACT Party would not have happened.

    Flavell is staring down the barrel of his own failures and trying to blame someone else. Yes, let’s blame the teachers.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    Think of the children!!
    Oh wait, I am. You see NK once you have recovered from your upset stomach you might want to think about this issue a bit more.

    Because here’s the thing. Up to $40000 per student of taxpayers money is being spend on charter schools. That’s five times more than a state school ($7000).
    Call me crazy, but I would rather prefer that all that money be spent on things that have actually been shown to raise student achievement rather an ideological experiment. Radical I know!

    A while ago John Boscawen was on this site saying it was a pleasure listening to all the submissions from the charter school applicants. Yes I bet the lunches were nice too.
    (Followed by sycophantic replies thanking John for all his hard work!!!)

    Reading all that and then thinking of all that taxpayers money being paid to Boscawen and his team spending months listening to flash powerpoint presentations, rather than going directly into initiatives that actually raise student achievement – now that is something to lose your lunch over.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. NK (1,244 comments) says:

    Doggone – NZ has a shocking failure rate from the underachievers in education. That has been a constant for 20-30 years. The other constant over that time has been union thugs and an education system controlled by bureaucrats in Wellington. And you blame Act for this? That just shows your blinkers are well and truly on. If the left genuinely “cared” about these poor kids they would offer them choice as a means to achievement and success. But you don’t. Instead you just confine them to years of misery.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. NK (1,244 comments) says:

    Ha ha, nice on bc. You could say the same about the large salaries going to union thugs and bullies instead of being re-directed to the schools and/or the teachers. But you don’t mention that. Gee, I wonder why.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    flash2846: “Charter schools work and that’s abundantly obvious.”

    No that’s not abundantly obvious. For every study praising charter schools, there is another one highlighting their failures.
    DPF only publishes extracts from the favourable ones. You need to research more.

    This is because it is not the charter school itself that raises student achievement (or any other kind of school).
    Put your ideology to one side and now think about this: Wouldn’t it be nice if all that money was spent instead on things that actually do raise student achievement?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    Because NK, unions don’t get their funds from taxpayers. They get it from their members.
    This is about good use of taxpayers money. Stick with the issue.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Harriet (4,975 comments) says:

    “…..Put your ideology to one side and now think about this: Wouldn’t it be nice if all that money was spent instead on things that actually do raise student achievement?…’

    “…For every study praising charter schools, there is another one highlighting their failures….”

    But bc – studies in Australia point to the fact that ALL THE EXTRA MONEY THAT STUDENTS AT PRIVATE SCHOOLS get spent on them in extra tuition ect is redundant by the time they get to university – as they then have to do all the work themselves. As all they really get for the extra money is higher results at school.

    If you think then that the privat& charter schools don’t need tax payer’s money – then it can also be said that neither do the State schools need anymore of it!!!

    But then parents don’t really send their kids to private schools soley for the academic achievments but for personal development – something that charter schools more than likely will install into their students. And something the public schools have failed miserably at.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. flash2846 (287 comments) says:

    bc – I have no set ideology and I have read cases both for and against charter schools. What my reasonably well educated brain can clearly see is that just about every opinionated author who is against charter schools is indeed governed by failed ideology; whereas every honest researcher provides substantiated facts that support charter schools.
    If it is not a fact, it does not exist.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    PPTA – don’t play nicely with others, chucked their toys out the cot, picked up the ball and ran away. Spoiled little shits.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. doggone7 (808 comments) says:

    NK: “NZ has a shocking failure rate from the underachievers in education. That has been a constant for 20-30 years….”

    Who are these underachievers? Is it possible to describe the group as having characteristics which have been ‘constant’ over the past 20-30 years? Does the group have similarities to the underachievers overseas?

    I would think my blinkers are no more in use than those of the people who see a real problem and come up with the ACT solution – privatise it and things will be dramatically better. Or those who blindly accept the blinkered view of the myopic.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    chrisdiack

    All nice comments. But you haven’t yet told me, yet, what the difference between Charter and State schools is, if they should be and are able to share classes? Where’s the difference? What’s the difference? How are they different? Difference?

    Wow – the whole 3rd party paying for the buildings thing – well that’s a revolution in education practice. Do you know if we could do the same thing for State schools? I mean it would be advantageous to State schools to have that particular benefit wouldn’t it? Then they could spend more money on education practise, more on teacher’s salaries etc if they could do the same thing.

    Hey, you also forgot to tell me how much Charter schools cost? And what the difference is between a Charter and a State school?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    Actually they pretty much did. The year I started highschool (in 4th form) was the first year that my school had a full roll, 3rds – 7ths

    I think you’ve completely misunderstood me. Sure, you had a new High School because the population increased. And either your school shipped kids else where or they shipped to yours.

    But… the Government didn’t build a new school next door just so that you could do Woodwork, did they? That is the equivalent here. Not the population increase. If you create two schools in the same population, then one or the other must close.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. chrisdiack (19 comments) says:

    Itstricky

    Oh dear you are slow off the mark.

    No new PSKH are built. Unlikely new State Schools which get land and buildings

    The difference is in school culture and leadership. These make a learning difference. Attending an optional or non core or specialised class still means that learner is largely subject to the learning environment of the PSKH.

    Other differences might be school year, school day, and school work on the weekends.

    Thats the point really – more variety and choice for parents and learners.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    Oh dear you are slow off the mark.

    http://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/facetious

    Okay call me slow again but I don’t understand your argument about the land and buildings. Why is it relevant whether any have been built or not? Simple question. Is the funding of buildings or land something that only a Charter school can ascertain? In fact is any extramural funding something that only a charter school can obtain?

    The difference is in school culture and leadership.

    How is that something that is confined to only Charter schools? Every school lives and dies by the same thing. And every one of them is different. There isn’t a magical stash of super cultured super leaders anywhere that only Charter schools can call upon. The last I heard they were even hiring State teachers. And before you tell me how good a leader Wynton Rufer is please tell me his educational credentials.

    Days, years and weekends? I struggle to understand how that would have any impact on any child’s education. And it’s open to abuse.

    So… How.much does this all cost us?

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