Auckland Grammar School has refused to implement NCEA.
Many primary schools have refused to implement National Standards.
On the Auckland Grammar issue Education Minister Anne Tolley declined to be interviewed, instead releasing a written statement that she had full confidence in the NCEA qualification.
On the primary schools that refused to implement National Standards Anne Tolley had plenty to say such as, the opposition is driven by unions, teachers and principals afraid of accountability, afraid to change, if these schools break the law she has the ultimate power to replace Boards of Trustees with a commissioner, Principals are manipulating Boards of Trustees, etc.
Auckland Grammar Principal John Morris said, “We are confident the change is in the best interests of all our boys”.
Rebel primary school principals say their refusal to implement National Standards is in the best interests of their pupils.
Putting aside the NCEA v Cambridge let’s focus on the behaviour of the Minister.
If Anne Tolley is to display any measure of consistency in her approach she will now;
- Persecute the principal and teachers of AGS through the media
- Threaten to sack the Board of Trustees and replace them with a commissioner.
- Mount a campaign to inform parents of AGS that NCEA is the best system.
If Auckland Grammar School is allowed to bend the rules without consequence, primary schools who don’t want to implement National Standards should be afforded the same the same courtesy.
Auckland Grammar School has refused to implement NCEA.
Many primary schools have refused to implement National Standards.
On the Auckland Grammar issue Education Minister Anne Tolley declined to be interviewed, instead releasing a written statement that she had full confidence in the NCEA qualification.
On the primary schools that refused to implement National Standards Anne Tolley had plenty to say such as, the opposition is driven by unions, teachers and principals afraid of accountabilty, afraid to change, if these schools break the law she has the ultimate power to replace Boards of Trustees with a comissioner.
Auckland Grammar Principal John Morris said, “We are confident the change is in the best interests of all our boys”.
Rebel primary school principals say their refusal to implement National Standards is in the best interests of their pupils.
Putting aside the NCEA v Cambridge debate or the National Standards debate, why is Anne Tolley’s response so inconsistent?
If she is to display any measure of consistency in her approach she will now;
- Persecute the principal and teachers of AGS through the media
- Threaten to sack the Board of Trustees and replace them with a comissioner.
- Mount a campaign to inform parents of AGS that NCEA is the best system.
If Auckland Grammar School is allowed to bend the rules without consequence, primary schools who don’t want to implement National Standards should be allowed the same the same courtesy.
But if they challenge Auckland Grammar they might miss out on some future donations. Can’t do that!!
Don’t you mean Is Anne Tolley scared of Auckland Grammar <b<?
Not achieved.
Isn’t it interesting…
When a large number of Primary Principals refused (over 300 and still refusing) to introduce National Standards, Tolley used all the media power of the government at her disposal, threatened us individually and collectively, rubbished us as being poor principals, threatened the Boards of Trustees who supported this stance with sacking, and if possible i think she would have like to reintroduce tar and fethering!!!!
Auckland Grammar Board states they will break the law, and the Tolley is very very silent…..
WHY??
(Dont need to answer we all know the reasons!!! More Nat voters at Grammar who can afford large Party donations I suspect)
Note that there is a letter from a school teacher Ms van Boheemen who is teaching NCEA after 4 years with Cambridge.
She says she was appalled at the poor knowledge of many NCEA Level 2 Maths students – who had gained passes in NCEA Level 1.
This should be debated.
It should be debated Evan and we need to understand what level is required by NCEA level 1 and had they achieved that level.
I can remember doing logarithms and using those sine cosine tables and everything in 4th and 5th form. That was also the last time I ever used them.
Unfortunately we rarely get debate we get stands taken. For example John Morris isnt debating he is taking a stance and damn the rules, just as those who disapprove of NS have done.
As long as aprents get sound bites or the equivalent of a PR statement from a particular point of view what chance do they have of truly deciding what is best for their kids?
There are clearly benefits in IGCSE. As a male I can vouch for the fact that I would prefer to have one exam at the end of a course rather than have constant assessments. The IGCSE are more internationally accepted in that there are schools all round the world offering them, which cannot be said of NCEA.
On the other hand do we want to produce children who can pass exams or ones that can use their imagination. Perhaps the NCEA give students more scope fro creativity. Even Cambridge is looking to make their courses more in tune with modern thinking, more skills based and less content driven.
Students today require very different skills to cope with the world than when I was at school and yet the school system is still very similar. Information can easily be found on the Internet, the skill is finding the right information.
Perhaps it is time to have a rethink on what we are trying to achieve in schools. Is there more to life and schools than academic qualifications?
Interesting to see that the NZ Herald Editorial endorses the position of Kelvin.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10700741
Andy says above “as a male I can vouch for the fact that I would prefer to have one exam at the end of a course rather than have constant assessments.”
(a) This would seem to be personal preference. Why does he preface this with “as a male”.
(b) Andy says what he prefers, but does that mean as a student he should get what he prefers? What about the student that prefers no exams at all? SURELY .. the system should be prescribing whatever encourages CONTINUOUS learning!! What is advantageous about such a big bang approach?
Prefaced with ‘as a male’ because John Morris referred to the IGCSEs as suiting boys better than NCEA.
I don’t think I was supporting IGCSE, but I was pointing out there are advantages. I do believe in having an education system that encourages continuous learning and, as Tracey said, this is an opportunity for debate on what we offer students.
Since when was education determined according to what boys found “easiest”?
I see Mrs Tolley has called the unions hypocrites citing their inconsistent stance between NS and AGS. However she doesnt admit to her own hypocrisy fr the same reasons. She will withdraw support from schools not supporting NS but not from AGS for refusing to offer it wholly or genuinely.
I see a takanini school charges $25 per child for “donation”. AGS charges $900,. HOW do epople think those children get the same opportunity to quality educational resources???
I cant help but think that AGS ought to be getting funding to help it help its students to excel under NCEA rather than fighting to return to an outdated system of educating. Mr. Morris appears to be advocating that if something is too hard change to something easier. I cannot believe that is what the future of NZ needs.