The parliamentary library did a paper on National Standards.
Anne Tolley didn’t like it. She forced them to take it down.
That they did is a disgrace and a poor reflection on the speaker who is meant to provide them with protection.
But this millennium the internet works in wonderful ways and the old burn the copies of the papers you don’t like approach is no longer effective. In fact her intemperate outburst has given the analysis a much wider circulation.
Which allows us all to confirm that it is in fact a biased analysis rather than something written by a neutral civil service implementing the policies of the duly elected government of the day that we would expect from our taxes.
From what I have read the paper did no credit to the writer or writers and was an attempt to sabotage Government policy.
The Streisand effect in action:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
Deplorable behaviour from the minister but sadly not surprising.
Oh dear she can’t handle the truth!
Does the person who wrote this papaer have any strong links to the Labour Party? It would not be the first time a civil servant with an axe to grind does not show some bias in the work presented.
As a rule if there is a person with strong links to a political party preparing papers then such work should be peer reviewed to ensure there is no bias. It is in my experience very unusal (but not unknown) for bias to occur within the civil service.
Seems to me that it’s the objectivity of the analysis by the Library that has really upset the ‘bully state’ ministers. Looks like they expect everyone on the payroll to tow the party line. Shades of 1984? Tolley’s new title is the Minister for Re-eduction.
@ Monty – I do not know of any links between the author and the Labour Party.
Monty, if hating National Standards makes you a Labour Party member / fan then Labour must be pretty damn popular
Or could it be that National Standards really is that bad? mmmm?
@Phil Sage – the library is part of the parliamentary service – it is not its role to be apologists for government policy but to examine the evidence provided by experts. I assume they looked at the evidence provided by all leading experts in literacy, numeracy and assessment in NZ. I have. If anything the library was soft on Tolley.
jennifer re “objectivity of the analysis by the Library” – are you certain this is correct?
Why have the writers not put their name to the article?
For my part I would probably place validity on articles written by people that are completely independent of politics in any way. The Library does not meet this test in my view and from all accounts has always appeared to be pro Labour.
That said, I am not saying that they don’t have a point – more that it is far from objective.
So now they are transforming the Parliamentary Library into the National Party Library and Research Unit?
@IDAD – it’s creepy, yet another example of free speech getting squashed in this country
Coming soon to a telescreen near you. A public service announcement from MiniTrue.
Rebecca – That’s a fairly sweeping generalisation about the staff of the Library. Have you got any other examples that you would like to share?
and I think you’ll find that the author of the article is named.
How exactly was it withdrawn? I assume its not an easy process and Ministers can’t just withdraw something if it offends their sensibilities?
@ Rebecca 9.25 Give me two examples please.
Okay as long as you can give me the names of the person/s that wrote this….
rebecca – it’s been published on Kiwiblog and The Standard – in fact have a read of the whole paper here:
http://www.thestandard.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/censored-standards-paper.pdf
The link to the paper is in my post. Rebecca please don’t be lazy. Read the paper. The author’s name is on it.
Sorry didn’t realise that you could click on the link for the article from here – was trying to read the image & thought you had only posted part of the report!
Re the above – my mistake….I shamefully got the Parliamentary Library and the National Library mixed up!
I have seen various posts re speculation that the P/Lib is not longer partisan but haven’t seen proof.
Oh well, it all comes out in the wash. The report makes good points.
In terms of the actual issue – very dodgy that Nats are trying to hide this report (how can it be construed otherwise).
Good God politics in NZ has gone to the dogs. Where’s the honour these days eh?
That is over the top. Just because there is more data and research to show that the standards are hopless than there is to show that they are good, she gets rid of them out of the library? What???!!
Geees. That is bad. She will try and argue her way out of it. She doesn’t like to be wrong.
I have another question: if Labour is re-elected next year will you reverse the NS if they prove to be as bad as you are expecting?
“From what I have read the paper did no credit to the writer or writers and was an attempt to sabotage Government policy.”
By what you have read, do you mean your opinion of the article pdm? or have you read a more detailed analysis elsewhere.
Rebecca, good luck finding someone who has no political influence at all in their writing on policy. There may be those who claim no political leaning, but I bet they cast a vote every three years.
Tehe Tracey – yes bias is all part & parcel of this wonderful thing we call the human condition….meant more overt bias where they are documented as being left (part from voting of course!).
Our country is so small it’s pretty hard to find people with no link, no matter how spurious… 2 degrees of seperation and all that.
Author put name to paper at the bottom. References seem to be from a wider range of primary sources (across political spectrum) and include recognised experts in education. Seems in order to me. I think that because Tolley didn’t appear to listen during the so called consultation process, the problems that she percieved as minor and thought she’d swept aside with a quick round of poorly advertised meetings have now become more obvious to all.
Could those claiming this paper is Labour bias please give some egs of this. It seems objective enough to me.
Just to re-iterate: since the NS are so evil, way off base etc etc, if Labour is re-elected next year will you reverse the NS?
Ooops “reiterate”!
I see that the extreme right wing have reacted negatively to your posting Trevor. I am not convinced that they have read the paper, so wayward is their reaction. Par for the course.
Having read the paper myself ..
I can’t see anything new or threatening in this useful Parliamentary Research paper. John Hattie for one is cited – he has an implementation role. The ERO and the Ministry are cited – does Anne Tolley have a problem with that? Memo to the extreme right wing fundamentalists – look at the footnotes!
The ADVANTAGES of National Standards are stated – for example the ability to assess annually rather than every two years. I’d not read that anywhere else. The point is that Anne Tolley has failed to list many advantages of National Standards. She keeps talking about the 20 per cent tail, and the desire of parents for better information. BOTH of these appear in the report!
The anticipated disadvantages – league tables, labelling of kids, labelling of schools – all have been widely canvassed. The writer is not inventing a thing.
If Anne Tolley was not the objector to the publication leading to its withdrawal – was it someone from the Ministry?
Trevor, please take whatever steps are necessary to ensure circulation or availability of this paper to schools, parents, education advocates. The paper IS a professional effort. I note that the criticisms have all been broad brush, lacking in specifics. Need I say more?
I hear Canterbury doesn’t like these crappy standards either!
Rebecca said:
Oh yes, I’m sure Labour will declare policy based on the questions of a National supporter.
National Standards may be maintained under a Labour Government after they have inspected the damage and approved recommendations.
I hear that National Standards are poorly aligned to the National Curriculum. That would be a good area to sort out!
Has anyone read Fahrenheit 451? The story of a future world where books are banned because they can’t be controlled? Is Mrs Tolley a fan of this by any chance?