Hard News: Dunce Dunce Revolution
181 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 Newer→ Last
-
Even the DomPost is coming around to the idea that perhaps the new policy is a big mistake:
However, there is also the risk the Government's strategy will strangle the education of children. Being able to read, write and calculate is vital, but so too are other areas of the curriculum.
British research suggests that putting too much emphasis on literacy and numeracy, and on the achievement of national standards in those areas, can see other parts of the curriculum squeezed into oblivion.
A nation of spellers who can add up but have little grasp of science, small exposure to the arts and only the occasional foray into physical education while at primary school, is not going to enjoy success either.
Defining success for pupils, schools and teachers in terms that are too narrow would be a mistake, and the Government and its advisers will need to work hard to ensure that does not happen.
This, however, in the context of an editorial whose basic claim is that teachers and principals organisations are not allowed to criticise the policy. Because you cannot spell "Dominion Post" without "bloody stupid".
-
The rest of that editorial is appalling 'listen to daddy' bollocks from the headline onwards.
Nobody wants to see New Zealand children fail. The problem is that there is no agreement on what needs to be done to make sure they succeed.
Well, there's agreement among professional educationalists but let's not weight their expertise any higher than talkback trolls, pimply Treasury neolibs or the chattering classes of the provinces, shall we.
Prime Minster John Key and Education Minister Anne Tolley believe it is by concentrating on literacy and numeracy.
...
There are sound reasons for their certainty. According to Mr Key, as many as one-in-five pupils are being left behind.Uh huh. And diverting resources into more testing does what to fix that exactly? We already know it's poor Maori and Pasifika boys who are failing. They need extra help, not extra tests. But I'm sure daddy knows best.
Defining success for pupils, schools and teachers in terms that are too narrow would be a mistake, and the Government and its advisers will need to work hard to ensure that does not happen.
Just where the balance point comes is a matter for debate, and it is only when the changes announced by Mr Key have been in place for a reasonable period that a sensible assessment can be made.
There's no 'debate' or 'balance point' to be had when the decision has already been taken. It's lying to suggest otherwise. Good to see the Dom speaking power to truth again.
One couldn't just assess the existing evidence before repeating mistakes already made elsewhere. That would be.. intelligent and grown up. And good stewardship of both public money and the future of our nation's knowledge.
But whatever daddy and his dim helper have lined up must be better for us. They both went to school after all so I'm sure they know everything about it. All there in black and white, innit.
-
This, however, in the context of an editorial whose basic claim is that teachers and principals organisations are not allowed to criticise the policy.
Because what would practitioners know? What would "so called experts" know?
The only people who know are the people who know, because this is common sense, they tell you.
Because you cannot spell "Dominion Post" without "bloody stupid".
It's good to have you as a resident translator!
-
You don't question an order of your commander in chief, dammit! Seriously, how do they get away with that drivel?
Then again, compared to previous offerings on this subject, this last piece was positively Socratic.
It's good to have you as a resident translator!
Actually, what you cannot spell it without is "dim notions", but I didn't want to sound too clever.
-
The problem:
Nobody wants...
The solution:
balance... reasonable... sensible...
Nobody could disagree with something so reasonable and sensible.
-
Can't be arsed finding whichever thread was about ACC, so here's a good piece from Tapu Misa about Owen Woodhouse's views. Kind of an antidote to poor journalism, though I have no idea why it's filed in their "personal finance" section.
Sir Owen held that as we all benefit from risky activities, we should all bear the cost equally.
"Just as a modern society benefits from productive work of its citizens, so should society accept responsibility for those willing to work but prevented from doing so by physical incapacity. And since we all persist in following community activities which year by year exact a predictable and inevitable price in bodily injury, so should we all share in sustaining those who become the random but statistically necessary victims. The inherent cost of those community purposes should be borne on the basis of equity by the community."
...As for private insurers being able to provide cover for lower premiums than ACC, "I am not merely a sceptic," he said. "It cannot happen."
-
The Actoids lose out on castrating Councils, it seems.
Local Government Minister Rodney Hide has backed off from law changes to stop councils getting involved in social policies, such as pensioner housing, and force them to focus on core activities.
...Labour's local government spokesman, George Hawkins, was not surprised by Mr Hide's change of heart.
"Common sense says councils play a major role in the community ... This was a case of Rodney diving into a pool without any water in it," said Mr Hawkins, a former Mayor of Papakura.
-
Local Government Minister Rodney Hide has backed off from law changes to stop councils getting involved in social policies, such as pensioner housing, and force them to focus on core activities.
And what, prey, are those core services?.
In Auckland;
Sewers = Watercare
Water = Metrowater
Power = Vector
Waste disposal = Wastecare
Road Maintenance = Auckland Road Maintenance Alliance
Public Transport = Maxx
I won't go on. My point is that all they seem to do is write cheques with our money and run the Library. There is one other thing they do and that is to stop you doing anything until you give them more money (Planning and Building). My recent experience of this has shown me that the consideration given to the general community with regard to the effects of building consents is minimal at best.
And don't get me started about tree protection grrrr... -
My point is that all they seem to do is write cheques with our money and run the Library.
The volume of activities farmed out to Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) is something to look for when the shape of the new Auckland Council is revealed in about a week.
They are designed to be less directly accountable to your elected local representatives, which has pros and cons. In the case of the confirmed Transport CCO, that may mean they are more open to being directed from Wellington about things like the priority of road-building over public transport, even if that clashes with Auckland's long-term land use planning.
However, I should clarify that MAXX is a customer service brand, while transport activities are provided by a mixture of ARTA, the seven local Councils, Ontrack, NZTA and many private sector contractors.
-
many private sector contractors.
Which was my point. It has been many years since the council actually employed the people that do the work. Instead we have private companies and their associated management and ownership overhead which takes funds away from the core activities that we have a council for. We no longer have "Council Workers" you know, road sweepers and garbage collectors, the Water and Power board Workers.
Instead we have some kind of mysterious bureaucratic middle management structure that just seems to be self perpetuating without any apparent purpose and the "Core Activities" have become cash cows for the private sector. -
@Russell
Be aware that up here in Scotland we did not go down the route the system in England and Wales did. No SATS, no Foundation Schools, no League Tables (in the same way). This is one of the reasons we moved up here from London. Unfortunately we could not arrange to do so quite in time and the eldest had to engage with the hyper competitive world of 'getting into a secondary school'. It is to her great credit that she aced it and got into a very good school*.
*Good defined by the competition to get into it and its history. The rate of substance, particularly cocaine, abuse in the upper school indicates it burns out a lot of students along the way. We are glad we got out.
-
This is quite funny.
Today's NZ Herald editorial backing national standards and telling everyone to shut up blithely ignores all the arguments made in Sunday's Herald on Sunday editorial.
HoS:
This is all of a piece with modern management philosophy, with its emphasis on key performance indicators and measurable outcomes. But when even those charged with measuring educational achievement question the new standards, it's worth sitting up and listening.
Professor John Hattie, who has won international recognition for his work on student achievement, says the Government's new standards regime looks like a backwards step. Hattie's 15-year study on assessment, published last year, was described as education's "Holy Grail" in the authoritative Times Educational Supplement in Britain and was praised by Anne Tolley. But he has condemned the planned changes as "going back 50 years" and expressed concern that they will force teachers to teach children according to their school year, rather than their ability level.
Herald:
The policy looks sound, it has public support and primary teachers ought to get behind it.
Eh?
-
The policy looks sound, it has public support
Could somebody find this member of the public and give them a sound slap?
I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that either this Government thinks we are all stupid (Of course we can make ACC cheaper, all we have to do is allow insurance companies to take profit) or they are.
"You have heard of the Heisenberg uncertainty principal haven't you?" (to be said with the same disdain reserved for those that soil your furniture) "Children do not have intelligence until you measure it" -
David Harris, the creator of Pegasus Mail, wrote the following in 2002. It's more relevant than ever.
New Zealand is in real danger of becoming a McDonalds nation - nothing more than a bland plastic replica of suburban USA - simply because we can't seem to believe that we are as good as we are, or that our own culture and expertise have the value they do. As long as we remain focused on the trap of being "Little America", we're ignoring our greatest strengths: our individuality, our number-8-wire approach to finding novel
solutions to problems, and an inherent humanity that believes that there might be more or better reasons for doing something than just the bucks in the bank. -
Today's NZ Herald editorial backing national standards and telling everyone to shut up blithely ignores all the arguments made in Sunday's Herald on Sunday editorial.
Interestingly the very same editorial was in the Hawkes Bay Today. Probably put in all APN newspapers. So much for local content.
The thing that pissed me off was this.
In fact, the Ministry of Education has held meetings with schools and parents since May. Schools should be well prepared.
Yes we knew in May what was going to happen. The detail has only just been released and at present is only on the Ministry website so timelines for implementation will be tighter than what the editorial is saying. Our assessment procedures are sound, it's fitting them into the straightjacket of the proposed reporting formats that will be the problem.
-
"If they do nothing other than teach our children to read and write and do maths and be good socialised New Zealand people then they've done a really good job."
Minister Anne Tolley on new school standards
An excellent first step to creating some mindless sheeple.
I'm sure our dear leaders wouldn't want that would they??????Jokes aside that's got to be one of the most moronic NZ political statements of the past 20 years.
-
@Russell,
Agree on the Herald confusion - this editorial from July 1st is very much an attack on the education sector.
And as you've pointed out - they seem to take two different points of views almost simultaneously on the validity of the standards based approach.
The choice line from the July editorial is:
Parents like league tables. They are helpful when it comes to choosing a school. They are also helpful in keeping the pressure on all schools to perform to the best of their ability. If the profession dislikes that pressure, or considers it unhelpful to educational effort, its customers disagree. And ultimately the customer, even of public education, is always right.
Yes - they're not parents and we're not part of learning communities anymore - teachers are client service operators, and our students are merely purchasers of discrete items.
So tomorrow we will be playing touch rugby for the morning, followed by a 2 hour lunch break, and then a siesta with an option to read a book if they want.
-
Yes we knew in May what was going to happen.
A commenter on Red Alert suggested it has already been actioned. Haven't seen that verified anywhere yet.
The advisors got the chop months ago (end of term 2!)- its not a new thing - just another cut they made with stealth - they had to do it earlier because of contract obligations I suspect- its just taken this long to get out.
-
I think it reflects who the National Standards are aimed at when you look at these two sections on the Min of Ed website.
http://www.minedu.govt.nz/Educators.aspx
This details on National Standards consultation are remarkably sparse, particularly when compared to...
This is probably due to the website being updated... I'd hope. Because as a teacher if I'm responsible for implementing these standards, I'd like as much info as possible.
*edit*
I stand corrected - info for teachers is found online here. And it's pretty comprehensive.
-
And ultimately the customer, even of public education, is always right.
Yes - they're not parents and we're not part of learning communities anymore - teachers are client service operators, and our students are merely purchasers of discrete items.
Even in its own terms it's an inadequate position.
"The customer" includes not only the parents but (obviously, you'd think) the student and the whole society and economy that we all have interests in. How to balance those various interests is what different political parties disagree on. And it's not as simple as the current Minister is.
-
The original consultation about setting up the details in the standards was pretty poor as well if I remember rightly. It's now removed from the Min of Ed site - but it took place very quickly - over 6 weeks I think.
According to Tolley, 10,000 people attended or wrote submissions - that was in August - and in the two months since they've digested all of those submissions and put together these standards. Yeah right.
It was pretty much a foregone conclusion, National said they would do it during the election campaign - but I wonder how it's going to roll out over the next couple of years. Will more young teachers leave the profession, or head off overseas to teach? I can see a large number of parents still not understanding what the plunket style graphs actually mean- and I can see a whole lof of principals spending a hell of a lot of time sifting through even more data.
None of which has anything to do with teaching and learning.
I'm a teacher who can't play the guitar - but this video says it quite nicely.
-
Excellent video Tim, thanks
-
I have a little tale which may amuse some. Yesterday we had our triannual ERO visit. Prior to their visit, they tell what their focus will be. At first, it was how we cater for Maori children. And then it changed to literacy. Okay, think we. No worries. Whatever. And then they came, had a lovely time, and we sat down at the end of the day for them to report their initial findings to us. There was much compliemtary discourse about our literacy programme. Fine, think we. And then, and this is relevant to this discussion in so many ways, they proceeded to question us about numeracy and reading. We pricked up our ears. Had we thought of a numeracy programme to complement the literacy going on? Why was there not a books area? Yes, what they were basically saying was " There has been a change in direction lately. In accordance with Head Bitch Tolley's manifesto, we are now focusing on the 3 R's in early childhood education. You thought we hadn't started on you yet. Surprise!" Well, that's not actually what they said. But that's what I heard. And that's what they meant. And they were right. We were surprised, and not in a happy way, that already we are firmly in the sights of the Evil Empire Inc.
-
Whatever happened to play?
-
Ouch, Jackie. I'm having similar thoughts about others run over by Teh Tolleybus.
In Canterbury, as well as primary advisors not in the numeracy and literacy (and there's been a HUGE push in numeracy via 'the numeracy programme' over the last 6 years) losing thieir jobs, our very good early childhood advisors- the whole team- have been axed.
The ministry isn't funding the service for the first six months of next year, and the university is unwilling to keep them on in the meantime.
In the absence of a clear rationale, it's easy to believe that the signal being sent is: we want to see a bunch of competitive (private-provider) bids for this service- if we offer it back up for tender.
It's a real shame for early childhood education in Chch. They are an ace team.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.