Hard News: It is your right and duty to vote
464 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 … 19 Newer→ Last
-
School board nominations open 15 March and voting has to be done by 7 May. I think there is some school flexibility in there.Unlike for standards.
Aha, that's what I must have thinking of.
Craig, let's assume you are right, and everyone who ticked National for their party vote was totally down with Tolley's policy. How many of them were voting for this legislation to go through under urgency ?
-
Stephen - the school probably reports like that because that is what the parents have asked for. I would guess that is also a high decile school.
Most schools in my experience have very good reporting to parents. The best was my son's primary school whereby twice a year on the child's birthday and six months later, there was an opportunity after school to talk to the class teacher in detail (for up to an hour) about your child - strengths, weaknesses and how home and school could work together to improve things.
Have you seen the proposed reporting template to parents in the new scheme? From what I have seen it's a plunket type graph and some comments about the assessment, and a suggestion about an activity you can do at home. That's all.
-
But acting as if some vicious con has been pulled on parents -- please...
I understand the con part was dropped at the select hearings on the Bill...
-
Craig, let's assume you are right, and everyone who ticked National for their party vote was totally down with Tolley's policy. How many of them were voting for this legislation to go through under urgency ?
Come on now: to suggest that the government doesn't have a mandate for national standards is ridicolous. They did campaign for them and of course it's not like each individual policy is voted for separately, but we can hardly claim that this one was introduced by stealth.
I'm with you on the urgency thing, the rules of the house need to be amended on that score, but it's a separate issue.
-
Lucy:
I desperately want to kick things,
You could kick the kids.....
-
I would guess that is also a high decile school.
It was indeed, Dec 9. Her earlier reports from another, Dec 5 school in another town had been far more comprehensible, but I thought there had been a change -- I didn't realise that they weren't standardised. Interesting.
-
Also, presumably the pressure for national standards came from parents/voters in the first place, so it's going to be a fractious issue within school communities.
Not really. It stems from an apparent lack of achievement by some students at Level 2 NCEA which is deemed to be the minimum standard required for active participation in our work force. At least that was what was explained to us at a ministry meeting. Who had Tolley's ear on this I'm not sure but it became National Party policy in the last election. I'm pretty sure parental pressure had little to do with it but once it was out there it kind of grew legs. It pissed me off then and still does because of the implication that teachers as a profession are not doing their job. But I think I've said all this before so I'll stop. Anyway 2 days to go.
-
That's interesting, Tony. Thanks.
-
I'm not that worried about the school reports comments...a indication of progress is fine with perhaps some detail if Things are going particularly badly. The practical dialogue happens at the parent/teacher meetings.
And every parent attends those...don't they...
-
Stephen - all schools are required to do legally is report to their school community. Entirely up to schools themselves, from the board down, what and how.
-
Craig, let's assume you are right, and everyone who ticked National for their party vote was totally down with Tolley's policy. How many of them were voting for this legislation to go through under urgency ?
I know we're getting into what's colloquially known in media circles as the silly season, but really... Personally, I'm not a fan of urgency unless there's some actual urgency involved (like passing budget legislation and appropriations to keep the government solvent), but even then I understand you've actually got to have the assent of a majority of the House. You might well feel the rationale sucks donkey dick, but there's nothing.
Still eagerly awaiting your factual, informed assessment of the merits of the reform.
I think you're more in the mood for Photoshopped pix of Tolley rogering a kitten.
-
I think you're more in the mood for Photoshopped pix of Tolley rogering a kitten.
No, I'm not. Since you obviously read the policy and support it, I'd like to know how and why. Alternatively, you could just hide behind a wall of snark like you *always* do at this point of a conversation.
-
Alternatively, you could just hide behind a wall of snark like you *always* do at this point of a conversation.
You guys know I love you all, right? So my fairly neutral reading is that Gio and Sacha and Craig could all do with hopping off the Snark Pony on this one, okay? Because it's getting pretty tiresome.
-
The fallacy with Tolley arguing that she has a 'mandate' (her words) to bring in this policy in wake of the election is that I doubt that very many voters were thinking of this particular election promise of last year. Nowhere, on the ballot, is there a proviso that says, " I will vote for you buggers because of this particular election promise" nor " I will vote for you buggers, except for this particular issue".
You could say that about every single thing that the government does or doesn't do. We don't vote for policies, we vote for MPs and parties as a whole. As Craig points out, this isn't testing by stealth.
Promised at the election or not, it's just crappy policy. Lets play that ball rather than claiming it's not democratic.
-
You guys know I love you all, right? So my fairly neutral reading is that Gio and Sacha and Craig could all do with hopping off the Snark Pony on this one, okay?
Sorry, Miss, but so long as Craig has accused Sacha (and by extension, everybody else) not to have read the policy and to be opposed to it on ideological grounds, and since more than one commenter as since then bothered to explaine in detail why they are against the policy, what's wrong exactly with asking that he return the favour? If that qualifies as snark, then I think we're setting the bar a little low.
-
If that qualifies as snark, then I think we're setting the bar a little low.
I'm looking at in the context of a couple of other threads here lately, how high the base aggravation level has been, and thinking that this might be a good time to just let one go. There is a constructive discussion going on here, but it's not the one you guys are having.
I'm not demanding anything (except that you never call me 'miss' again, just suggesting that you think about it.
-
Well, so long as Craig has in fact a factual argument in favour of national standards, wouldn't it be valuable for the discussion if we could hear it, instead of being told that we would reject it on principle anyway? I'm a little puzzled.
-
Uh, I believe I actually agree with both Giovanni and Craig that national standards is hardly a surprise foisted on the electorate.
My (rather too economical perhaps) point was more that the likely result is hardly in keeping with "ambition" unless we're prepared to ignore the overseas evidence.
And that this might be something practical one could raise with any National or Act voters, in response to someone asking what could be done. I wasn't advocating foaming at the mouth about it.
I've had some very sad news, so am not likely to be following this conversation further today.
Oh, and I do respect Emma's expertise on this.
-
Very sorry to hear that, Sacha.
-
Sorry if I've got this wrong, but am I to understand that we're pro someone biffing a statue at Berlusconi and breaking his nose & teeth?
What the hell? Yelling witty abuse yes, throwing statues and actually inflicting damage, no.
Poor form.
-
Here is a link to the National Standards.
My sister works in a low-decile school. The children tend to start with very little language let alone reading/writing/maths skills and quite often moving house/country so is difficult for them to settle or learn.
The teachers there already know that very few of these children will meet the proposed standards at the set age levels. So how do they cram the missing elements of 5 years of learning into 1 year or is the whole cohort just dismissed as failures? Many of these children will gain the knowledge set after two years of school that most high-decile school children have at entry level.
-
Sorry if I've got this wrong, but am I to understand that we're pro someone biffing a statue at Berlusconi and breaking his nose & teeth?
Trust me, yo don't know the guy. I'm as anti-Tory as they come, but would hate for something like that to happen to John Key outside of a proper insurrection.
(Although come to think of it, the egg in young Prebble's face... but hey, no actual damage inflicted there.)
-
You could say that about every single thing that the government does or doesn't do.
I realise that. It is just that the 'mandate' is Tolley's primary defence when she is faced with any criticism.
-
I know we're getting into what's colloquially known in media circles as the silly season, but really...
Tolley's got a major issue in terms of buy-in from the people who are charged with delivering this policy, and I think a major factor was the abuse of urgency. Nobody was able to comment on the legislation, let alone moderate it, because this process was explicitly denied.
On the mandate thing, I'm down with governments implementing their publicised policies, but National's 2008 Education Policy isn't exactly brimming with detail. Interestingly, it supports the policy with a footnote to John Hattie - who is currently calling for the implementation to be put on hold in favour of a trial, as the Herald notes.
This is yet another example of a feral and arrogant National minister who wants to rule by decree, and to hell with consultation. As a parent with school-aged kids, I am well aware of the issues faced by schools*. And none of them are going to be addressed by diverting scare resources into an unnecessary discredited experiment that wasn't even implemented with due democratic process.
* BTW, I'm happy with the level of assessment and reporting of my kids, and if I have any questions then I front up to the teacher interview and ask for a clarification. Here we have an example of the bully state circumventing individual initiative. But hey, made for some pithy campaigning soundbites, didn't it ?
-
Sorry if I've got this wrong, but am I to understand that we're pro someone biffing a statue at Berlusconi and breaking his nose & teeth?
As Gio said, you don't know the guy.
He's a crook and a thug. And apart from anything else, he has exploited the system to defeat all legitimate attempts to bring him to account -- up to and including changing laws to save himself from criminal prosecution, and persecuting judges. There does come a time when more direct action has some appeal.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.