Loading ...And because book burning Tolley got it taken down from the parliamentary website you can see a copy here.
Red Alert
Monday poll – should Tolley have called for research paper to be withdrawn ?
Posted by Kelvin Davis on July 12th, 2010 Loading ...
Even if the paper is wrong no Minister should criticise a parliamentary library paper to that extent. It is meant to be a neutral body it is up to them to review the quality of their own work and remove offending articles.
She can’t stand that her piece of crap is being recognised as such!
I consider the attitude of the Minister completely wrong. The way se was persecuting the Library’s staff and requesting from the Speaker to have the document remove are attitudes form the Middle Age. If she is incapable to realize why National Standards are been criticized and instead of persecuting critics, she should take in consideration any critic or suggestion in order to enrich the debate. At the end of the day, what we should be looking for is for the best available resources for the education of our kids, but it seems that she doesn’t care about that…
By all means criticise it, it’s foundation, it’s research, bring up your own research papers to challenge it, but rally to get it taken down?
Trace.y I don’t think that Tolley can tolerate the presence of any evidence which contradicts her carefully crafted world view.
Well, you know the last bastion of those who cannot justify their arguments is to ban their opponents, or call them names
12 to date voted No. It would be very interesting to see the argument for approving of the withdrawl from the Library.
Ianmac, you mean “yes”. I agree, can some who voted that way explain that viewpoint to us?
I voted “no”, but I believe that the argument for approving the withdrawal is that:
“The paper was a biased piece of factually incorrect rubbish that uncritically endorsed and repeated the views of a tiny out-of-touch faction of the community.”
If that opinion was correct, then sure I could see that as an argument for withdrawal. However, the internal procedures of the library should already have recognised and prevented publication in such a circumstance. And, even if this was the place it would still be gauche for the minister to intervene in such a way; terrible bias would be self-evident and speak for itself.
The very fact, that the minister intervened means that she actually thinks (if she thought at all) that the criticisms in the paper are plausible and difficult for her to argue against.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/draco1337/TOLLEY.jpg
QFT
I can’t believe anyone would vote yes to this, woe is democracy if munters who don’t like something can get it thrown out!
The mechanism used by NACT and the Multinational press is to just keep ranting and if the message is heard often enough then it sticks.
Argument and logic seldom stand up to the persistent battering of organised mind control.
The public are not encouraged nor motivated to put effort into sorting out the wood from the trees.
Subscrition to the ill informed and narrowly focussed thrust if these national standards is suprising, but then many are more interested in furthering their perceived ends of bettering themselves without any social responsibility.
Those protagonists of “National Standards” tend to be aligned to a political dogma rather than have depth of educational background.
The whole business smells of diversion as surely the NACTs would bot be silly enough to attack the State School system with a view to undermining it and so enhance the private schooling potentially.
There are no winners in the “National Standards” debate as valuable resource are being squandered in this sideshow.
Agreed,
Didn’t she say that the first she heard about this paper was when she was informed it was being taken down by a third party..?
Is Labour saying this is a lie..?
NZ on Screen – A Civilised Society (from PPTA web site)
If Anne Tolley truly believes her system will work, why is she afraid of criticism and why does she feel the need to silence it? Surely if National Standards are as good as she says they are then the response to the paper and the proof that it’s “wrong” need not be any more than implementing the policy and showing everyone that it works.
The fact she asks for stuff like this to be removed shows that she knows her policy can’t survive on its own effectiveness.
Jeremy@1:06pm
According to the Herald, she asked for it to be pulled, possibly after they asked her about it.
Herald Article
No she shouldn’t have but here is another example of how the dictator minister of education works. If someone disagrees with her ideas either ignore it or remove it, problem solved! After reading that paper I have to say, as a teacher, that is the best piece of information I have seen in regards to what the national standards are actually about. Very well written.
Let’s not forget this Minister could not act this way without the PM’s agreement. he has such a tight rein on everything she would not be doing this if he weren’t supporting/urging it
rolling my eyes. What else can I do. Except vote no. Read it and it showed both sides but seemed to have more arguments to show it would fail than succeed. Why pull it? She hate being wrong and likes to thow her toys like a child having a tannty. My children do that sometimes when they don’t get their own way but adults? Geees.
Agreed A Mother
Kia ora all – I have been busy for the last few weeks so have now got a case of red alert withdrawal!!
OMG – leave the computer for two weeks and look at the rubbish that is happening around us!!
I listened (tried hard to not roll eyes – honest) to the ‘Minister’ trolley at the NZPF conference in Queenstown. Was prepared to listen (sort of) and not whisper rude words to the people beside me – this went well UNTIL the woman made what I would call a fundemental mistake – when she told 500 principals that their right to free speech was on the line and how dare principals speak to the media (’because my email line is always open and I reply to all emails personally’ – (yeah right – the Ministry does))- basically telling everyone off like a little two year old! Well, as a person of my own right, who did not sign ANYTHING that says I must keep my mouth shut, as someone who works for a community, and as a ‘democratic’ member of NZ – I don’t appreciate being told to ’shut up and put up with’ – her argument was that IRD does not get to question policy – so we should not either. Well, there is a point in that – BUT, no doctor, nurse or health provider would deliver a policy that the professional body (those that actually know what is what) consider dangerous to peoples health – and principals/teachers/educators are the same – when the profession considers this policy to be wrong – with the passion with which it is stating so – then the woman with the power and no actual knowledge or experience herself – should listen. The education community does not get riled up and usually does its compliant bit by following policy – it takes a major policy mistake before the profession unites like this – its rare and the ‘PM’ and his litte pit bull Trolley should have thought it through before poking that sleeping giant.
Keep poking at your peril I would say.
THe point of the above story is that her ‘majesty’ trying to pull the research to suit her (and smile and waves) agenda, along with the attempts to shut down kiwis democratic right to free speech – (look at Ecan) – is just another example of the erosion of our ability to question what is not right and to question the Govt. Shutting out the voices of those who disagree is not democratic – its blatent bullying and a dictatorship in the making. Come on NZ – wake up and see what is really going on.
Hi Paul
Great to have you back 
T
lley is indeed a Wally 