Red Alert

Archive for the ‘education’ Category

Students will lose, but still pay

Posted by David Shearer on September 26th, 2011

ACT and National will push voluntary student association bill through parliament this week on the last Members Day. We can expect a good deal of student opposition around the country. Good for them.

Next year, students won’t pay any fees to student associations. That’s inevitable, would you pay your council rates if they were voluntary? Wherever student associations have become voluntary they effectively collapsed.

What happens next?

Well, the university, polytech or institution will step in, charge students a levy, and continue some of the services through subcontracting companies or students to do it for them. It’s already been gazetted (NZ Gazette No. 138). Institutions can charge students for: advocacy and legal advice, careers advice and guidance, counselling services, employment information, financial support and advice, health servieces, childcare facilities, sports and recreation facilities.

In other words, all the stuff that supports students and makes these institutions of learning vital, interesting places.

So, voluntary student association membership will result in … money taken off students compulsorily, leaving them with no power to determine what services are kept. Taxation without representation is one way it can be represented.

The National-Act spin that student associations are the last bastions of compulsory unionism is bollocks … it’s idealogy pure and simple.

We could’ve had a good, enduring Bill with an opt out clause and some rules around accountability of student association spending. I’d spoken a number of times with Heather Roy about some possibilities. She was willing to compromise when she her Bill looked in doubt but held the hard line when she thought she’d get it through.

Too bad, fortunately it won’t last long.

Filed under: Tertiary education, Uncategorized, education, students, youth

61 Comments

Putting Kids First

Posted by Sue Moroney on September 17th, 2011

This week I had the privilege of announcing Labour’s plan to lift achievement in primary schools – or more accurately, years 1-8. We called it “Reaching for the Stars – Whakamaua Nga Whetu” and it spells out the way forward from the debacle that is National’s national standards.

Our policy ensures that parents get plain language information they require on their child’s achievement, progress and next learning steps without schools having the flawed national standards imposed on them. Labour will require schools to use recognised assessment tools and teacher judgement to assess children against the celebrated NZ Curriculum. Simple really – no major drama.

Meanwhile, the Government has resorted to having the Ministry write national standard targets for the non-compliant schools. So much for self-managing schools! As we speak, those school boards are now being threatened with the sack if they return those charters to the Ministry with the words “under duress” on them. This Government seems determined to go to war with the education sector, rather than work with them to get good outcomes. As Labour’s policy shows, its all so unnecessary.

It is telling that Mrs Tolley hasnt been able to work out how to attack our policy. She started off with ” the policy is written by the unions,” but then changed tack later on to say it was a “watered down version of national standards.” Of course, neither is true – but the contradiction in her statements demonstrates how Crosby Textor are struggling to find the attack line on our policy. Which all adds up to it being just more great policy from Labour.

I prefer for our educators and school boards to be focused on providing excellent education for our children, than going to war with the Ministry of Education. Labour’s policy lets them get on with the job, while making sure parents are kept in the loop too. After all, we know that our kids’ education thrives when parents and teachers work in partnership.

Tags: achievement, Anne Tolley, standards
Filed under: Teachers, children, education, students

52 Comments

oh dear another bad day for the nats

Posted by Trevor Mallard on September 7th, 2011

For those without high or even medium-speed broadband, the Hansard is below: (more…)

Tags: Anne Tolley
Filed under: Play of the Day, education

24 Comments

In praise of… the ’school secretary’

Posted by Grant Robertson on September 2nd, 2011

IMG00185-20110902-1101

Actually the title of this post is wrong. The person we used to call “the secretary” at our local school is now rightly given other titles such as Office Administrator or School Administrator. But even those don’t capture the role that they play in the running of schools and the well-being of the staff and students.

This morning I attended the farewell for Anne Young (pictured above) the long time Office Administrator at Cardinal McKeefry School in Wellington. Anne has been the friendly welcoming face of the school for many years, and right from when I met her I always felt welcomed and included when I visited the school. As I looked around the room at her farewell today I saw all kind of representatives from the community for whom Anne is their window to the school- from the bank, the contractors, other schools, parents, staff and of course the kids.

A couple of years ago when NZEI were running their support staff pay campaign I listened to some administrators detail the scope of their work. It was vast, but they all seemed to know that the ultimate reason for them being at work was the kids. At every school I visit the office staff have a great feel for the schools and the needs of children. I have observed them playing the role of counsellor, mentor, friend, shoulder to cry on and general supporters of a range of kids. They know them, keep an eye on them and notice all the ups and downs.

Schools simply could not run without the likes of Anne. From making sure the bills get paid to making sure the kids are looked after, they are a key part of our school communities. The jobs do not pay anything like what they should, so I thank them all for their service. All the best to Anne in her retirement, but also to all the school secretaries/administrators/whatever you are called, thank you for what you do.

Filed under: education, students, wellington

17 Comments

Pickets for the Prime Minister in Botany

Posted by Raymond Huo on August 26th, 2011

Chao-Fu with Chairman of Asian Anti-Crime Group Peter Low

As Prime Minister John Key enjoyed the hospitality at the Pakuranga Country Club yesterday, Labour Candidate for Botany Chao-Fu Wu joined hordes of locals who displayed their strong opposition to Thurston Place College through a picket demonstration.

The community is outraged that proper consultation has not taken place and that plans to build Thurston Place College continued despite the strong community opposition to the development.

Chao-Fu Wu proved to be a people’s candidate yesterday. He was on the front-lines representing the community and joining with them as they tried their best to make John Key understand their concerns.

The community have spoken loud and clear that they believe in a fair and transparent consultation process, yet this isn’t happening. Education Minister Anne Tolley has failed to give an assurance that consultation will be carried out independent to the Ministry of Education.

Chao Fu-Wu told me that while joining locals in the picket line, they told him that their basic democratic rights as citizens have been ignored:

When you put up a fence, you consult your neighbours; that’s basic common-sense and respect. The local resident’s deserve that same respect and have their concerns recognised.

The picket display on Thursday night was a good demonstration of the overwhelming opposition and concern from local residents. The government should not ignore these strong messages from the community.

Tags: Anne Tolley, botany
Filed under: asian, education

101 Comments

A Report on Progress

Posted by Grant Robertson on August 4th, 2011

Anyone tuning into Parliament yesterday afternoon and evening may have had a bit of trouble working out quite what was going on, and a few people have been in touch to ask, so, to coin a phrase, here is a report on progress.

Yesterday was Members Day, which happens every second Wednesday when we consider Private Members, Local and Private Bills ( ie not the government’s legislative programme). We began the day with further consideration by the Committee of the Whole House (what Parliament calls itself when it is debating each clause or part of a bill) of the Royal Society Bill. As those who watch Parliament closely will know this Bill is in my name, but is a Private Bill to update the Royal Society Act to reflect some changes they have made to the way they operate. It is fair to say this Bill has been getting a lot of attention in recent months!

Early in the debate Heather Roy moved that the House report progress on the Bill. This is a provision of standing orders that allows debate on a bill to stop for that day and for the Bill to be set down for further discussion the next day. With the support of National this motion was passed, effectively shutting down debate and seeing us move to the next Bill, the hotly debated Voluntary Student Association Membership Bill in Heather’s name.

What followed was some procedural argy-bargy as to whether and how a motion to report progress can be used. This included a few appearances by the Speaker to clarify points of order. The Speaker acknowledged that the use of the provision was something that needed the attention of the Standing Orders Committee, but gave an interim Speakers Ruling that said that a motion to report progress could only be put as the Committee of the Whole considered a new clause or part. ( I bet you are glad you know that!).

I know the procedural argy-bargy can look a bit unedifying, but it is, and always has been, part and parcel of Parliament. There are a lot of rules and precedents, and as seen today all sides use them from time to time.

In any case we went on to the VSM Bill, and some fairly vigorous exchanges. Labour strongly opposes this legislation, because we believe it is an ideological attempt to kill of student associations, and in fact it actually reduces the choice of student associations to decide their own destiny. For me student associations are like local government. Enrolling as a student makes you part of a community, and the student association is the organisation that helps govern that community. You can read more of Labour’s position here and in our minority report on page 5 of here.

I do not apologise for fighting hard to stop VSM. I really think it will be detrimental to students, and their welfare, and to tertiary institutions. I have always felt if you believe passionately in something you have to be prepared to fight for it.

The House rose with the Committee debating Clause 9, the final clause of the Bill. That means we have not yet completed the Committee stages. One confusion to clear up, completing Committee stages does not mean the Bill has passed. That comes with a Third Reading, a two hour debate that will occur after the Committee stages are completed, and can not be on the same day as the Committee stages are completed.

Hope that helps. The next Members Day is the 17th of August. Tune in for another exciting installment.

Tags: heather roy, Royal Society, VSM
Filed under: education, parliament, students

50 Comments

education leaders speak

Posted by Trevor Mallard on July 27th, 2011

Sir John Graham and John Taylor have a great column in the Herald today.

It is about creating far more respect and dignity among our teaching profession so that it can once again become the desirable and satisfying career which attracted us into it many years ago. It is about reinforcing the importance of inspiring students through their teachers’ passions for the subjects they teach, as well as the thrill of seeing another side of difficult students through their extracurricular talents.

Most importantly, it is about promoting a sea change from excessively boring, mechanistic and assessment-driven teaching, to the celebration of whole subject expertise, the inculcation of good values, and the importance of all round student involvement beyond the classroom.

I’ve worked closely with these guys in the past. They are seen as being at the conservative end of the principal spectrum but both ran very good schools. Respected by staff and students. While there are a few matters of emphasis that we would differ on this is a damn fine column.

I especially agree with their view that subject fragmentation and over assessment together lead to a major problem that we must address.

And yes I’m prepared to take responsibility for more than half of what has happened in education in the past twelve years.

Filed under: Teachers, education

20 Comments

New Zealand’s first tertiary high school

Posted by David Shearer on June 29th, 2011

Met with Stuart Middleton at the Manukau Institute of Technology today, the driver behind NZ’s first tertiary high school where students are simultaneously enrolled at school and MIT. The idea is that they transition from school, where most are about to leave anyway, and pick up a course at MIT. It’s a model that deserves copying.

Mainly because students can see some outcome of their learning – and therefore get really passionate about it – the Tertiary High boasts impressive success. Their latest results for NCEA Level 1 for Maori and Pasifika are below, and remember this is from a group that otherwise were on the path to dropping out of school.

Maori

Nationally – 60.8% at MIT – 80%

Pasifika

Nationally – 54% at MIT – 71%

Pretty good results. We have a 20% drop out rate in NZ - 20% of 16 year olds are no longer at school. The big factor, according to Stuart, seems to be that once kids drop out it’s really difficult to pick them up again. Instead if they move to some other learning, it doesn’t matter which so much, but one that gives a qualification, the chances are incredibly high that they go on to another qualification.

Not rocket science, perhaps, but a scheme that’s based on principles worth instituting into policy.

Filed under: Teachers, Tertiary education, education, students

33 Comments

Of troughs and trotters……

Posted by Maryan Street on June 24th, 2011

On Wednesday evening, the night before examining Murray McCully over the MFAT estimates at select committee, I received the answers to my raft of questions. There is one Annex of which people should avail themselves. It is the spreadsheet of consultants and contractors and is accessible here. Have a look and see for yourself. Page 39 for starters, but there is plenty of interesting reading there.

One name stood out for me – Charles Finny, formerly of the Wellington Chamber of Commerce, now of Saunders Unsworth. Paid $54,135 for work done between 1 November and 24 December 2010. Nice pay rate for 2 months’ work! I’m sure he wouldn’t have had any sick days – oh, that’s right, he’s a bloke. No uterus, no sick days.

Charles Finny’s contract was not put out for tender. Why not? At a rate of $27,000 a month, you’d think that might be tendered. McCully wasn’t aware of the details, he said, but knew Finny had the requisite skills. There are lots more questions to ask here – like, at what threshold does a requirement to tender kick in, etc., etc. McCully had given another gift to one of his mates.

Add that to: $75k contract to former Nat MP, Mark Blumsky for development work in Niue (requisite skills – the man used to be a shoe salesman?); current Nat MP Allan Peachey being made Special Envoy with the permission of the PM no less, to go round the Pacific and talk about education (is that what he was elected by the good people of Tamaki to do?); current Nat MP John Hayes, appointed to chair a committee which disburses money to aid NGOs (a committee he might have to interrogate as Chair of the Foreign Affairs select committee?).

These men might all be good blokes, but how would anyone know? They haven’t been subjected to any form of competition. I thought the Nats liked competition. Nope? They just like extra perks and income. This is taxpayers’ money, not McCully’s personal slush fund.

Filed under: Foreign Affairs, education, overseas aid, parliament, perks, select committee

9 Comments

Further hidden cuts in Budget

Posted by Raymond Huo on June 17th, 2011

I found this interesting quote from Vice-Chancellor of the University of Auckland Stuart McCutcheon in the 2 June, 2011 edition of Uni-news:

The Government’s Budget, delivered on 19 May, continues that trend. The student tuition component of Government funding will rise by 2 per cent but the Consumer Price Index (CPI) is projected to rise by over 3 per cent and our costs typically increase by 1.6 times CPI. This means a reduction, in real terms, of around 3 per cent in our funding, Government constraints on student fees will ensure that we cannot recover the deficit from students. Meanwhile there is no new investment in research, representing a further cut in real terms.

I’m wondering what the Government would say to Vice-Chancellors like Professor Stuart McCutcheon. It appears that ever since the ever-popular National Government took office, it has done nothing (or not enough) to grow our economy. It seems like they continue to make cuts everywhere, particularly when it comes to our young people, who are our future.

Popularity doesn’t equate to leadership. I believe, somewhere, the over hyping of this National Government will come back to haunt it as it’s only interested in holding its office and has failed to champion for the common good of the country.

Tags: Stuart McCutcheon
Filed under: asian, education

13 Comments

Why no consultation Minister Tolley?

Posted by Raymond Huo on June 16th, 2011

The message is loud and clear from the community of Pakuranga – No to Thurston Place College for lack of public consultation!

Written petitions to Parliament, community meetings and online petitions (http://www.stopthurstonplacecollege.com the website I tabled in Parliament yesterday which shows that as of today 1,634 people have signed up to the protest) have all told the Education Minister Anne Tolley one thing: that the local community does not want Thurston Place College built without consultation, yet construction continues with the school set to open in 2012.

Thurston Place College will be a special needs school for year 7 to 13 students and be situated on the site of the former Waimokoia school. It will cater for up to 100 students who are under Child, Youth and Family care and border Pigeon Mountain Primary School and be in close vicinity of Buckland’s Beach Intermediate and Macleans College. Thurston Place College will be very different to Waimokoia school though, which the Government closed against the school’s wishes in 2010, both in size and the nature of the special needs of the students.

Yet the closing down of Waimokoia school was used by Minister Tolley as an excuse not to have public consultation.

In speaking with local community members they have expressed outrage at the lack of consultation and concern for the safety of their children when the new school opens.

Their request is simple: they want construction stopped and consultation to take place.

Yesterday in the House Dr Rajen Prasad and I questioned Ms Tolley on this. Although she confirmed that she’s “not happy with how the process has been handled” she refused to remedy the situation.

Regardless of the position taken by her Ministry that there is “no legal requirement” to consult in this case (a judicial review will determine whether there is or not) is she aware of the significant level of frustration local residents feel at not getting answers to their questions and what actions does she intend to take?

Based on her answers on Wednesday in Parliament, she is not and doesn’t intend to do anything.

This is a major fail Ms Tolley. This is not about NIMBY (not in my backyard). This is about the basic right and respect the local community members are entitled to: consultation!

The community deserves better. I implore the Education Minister to do the right thing. Halt construction on the school immediately and begin consultation with the local community. Consultation should be the Key!

Tags: Anne Tolley, Rajen Prasad
Filed under: asian, education

19 Comments

20 Hours ECE looking shaky

Posted by Sue Moroney on June 9th, 2011

Last week the early childhood education taskforce appointed by Minister Anne Tolley proposed a funding model that unravels Labour’s 20 hours free ECE.
Today in Parliament, Anne Tolley said her Government did not have a policy for 20 hours free ECE – despite promising to keep the policy, its fee controls and subsidies at the last election.
Joining the dots, it doesn’t look to good for access to affordable, quality ECE.
The ECE Taskforce maintains its not ditching 20 hours ECE, but that is just semantics. The fundamental planks of that policy are that it pays for the delivery of the ECE curriculum, Te Wharirki, for 20 hours; it is universally available to all families and providers can only charge optional fees for those 20 hours for extras like lunch, sun-screen etc.
The taskforce recommend that it only part-fund the curriculum for 20 hours, is funded at lower rates to most families and that the fee controls be removed. That is not the 20 hours ECE policy, whatever name they give to it.
Taskforce Chair Michael Mintrom has researched and written extensively on the subject of how to make unpalatable policies acceptable in the field of education and so the taskforce report says all the right things about ECE, but then proposes a funding model that doesnt deliver to that vision.
In defence of the taskforce members, its not their fault. I think they have done the best job they could with bad instructions from the Minister. The terms of reference were basically this – tell the Government how to add more children to the early childhood education sector, without increasing the cost.
One of the Taskforce members, Emeritus Professor Anne Smith, issued a minority report opposing the proposed funding model on the grounds that “it is likely that the level of subsidy would decline markedly for parents currently receiving 20 hours of subsidy a week.”
This Government’s refusal to reverse its unaffordable tax cuts in order to increase investment in ECE put the ECE Taskforce in an untenable situation.
However, that pales in comparison with the untenable situation National will put families in if fees go up even more than they already have for early childhood education.

Filed under: children, education

10 Comments

Honours List

Posted by Trevor Mallard on June 6th, 2011

Used to be on the Cabinet Committee that made the honours decisions. Always interesting. Often ten times as many nominations as slots available.

There was a big call involved in stopping knight and damehoods. In retrospect I don’t think Kiwis were ready for it. Doesn’t bode well for moving to a republic.

Always easy to criticise a list, for those who are there and those who are not. This one is no exception.

But this one has more individuals who I regard as personal friends than any I was involved in as a Minister. Over a dozen. All deserved. Feels a bit weird. And using Facebook to congratulate also different.

Tags: honours list
Filed under: Arts and Culture, business, education, history, sport

23 Comments

The pathway to success

Posted by A Guest Poster on June 2nd, 2011

Dr David Clark is the Labour Candidate for Dunedin North. He has worked in shops, in a factory, as a Presbyterian Minister, as a University Tutor and as an analyst at the New Zealand Treasury. He currently runs a University Hall of Residence.

The pathway to success has just been narrowed.

Yesterday, the Government’s Early Childhood Education taskforce released its report entitled An Agenda for Amazing Children.

The opening pages lay the case for investment in the sector out clearly. Proper funding for early childhood care and education will determine New Zealand’s success or failure as a society and as an economy.

That our society subsequently flourishes (or withers) – according to our commitment to the early years – is not news. I’ve previously outlined the case for quality early childhood education in the Otago Daily Times. Academics in the field have communicated the case clearly and directly. We know the sector needs to be supported to deliver us the future we want for our country.

Trouble is, the terms of reference for the taskforce excluded the possibility of properly funding the sector. In this respect, the group was set up to fail. They were told to work within the constraints of a budget already strangled by $400million in cuts earlier this year.

The essay within the report proposing new funding mechanisms aligns with the current Government’s privatisation agenda. Centres will set fees according to parents’ perceived ‘ability to pay’. Universal availability is gone. Providers will no longer be required to provide 20 hours free quality early childhood education.

The proposed new funding model, and associated justifications, are captured in the extracted table below:

Although the full detail is not fully explained, it appears that providers will be responsible for deciding just which child qualifies for which subsidy. Different rates will apply according to parents’ income, ethnicity and other variables. Where parents’ income is tested, it’s easy to imagine funding anomalies that parallel those connected to university student allowances.

Centre managers may be responsible for making judgments about socio-economic need of parents and children. What was once a welcoming relationship appears set to become something more judgmental. Under this scenario, centre managers will become gatekeepers on the pathway to success.

One manager of centre I spoke to this morning said: “So people will ring to enquire about fees at a centre, and I’ll be expected to say: well it depends whether you’re Maori, European, disabled or other. No thanks!”

The Labour Government’s model provided access to 20 hours free quality early childhood education for all citizens. What is clear with the new model is that this money will be spread far more thinly, and parents will be expected to pay far more. If under twos are included and more hours are to be subsidised, the subsidy will not stretch as far. Barriers to accessing education and care for our children will grow. The pathway to success has been narrowed.

There’s a model linked to the taskforce’s website which shows the panel have given some thought as to the costs for families. But functionality seems to have been removed, and I can’t get it to run any numbers. I hope someone will put in an OIA for the functional model to see which scenarios have been run.

The report correctly identifies that investment in quality early childhood education is one of the best a country can make. I agree. I think we can do better

Tags: ECE
Filed under: children, education

6 Comments

Gifted Awareness Week: A time for questions

Posted by Sue Moroney on June 1st, 2011

In this Government’s constant attempts to paint a crisis in our world-class education system they only ever want to talk about under-achievement.

Gifted Awareness Week (June 13-19) gives us a chance to reflect on the huge diversity of students in our education system.

Gifted students are not always the ones doing fabulously well. They may be the student with behavioural problems, the student who has trouble relating to their peers or the student who is disrupting the class.

Last week I visited the Correspondence School and was told that many gifted students use that service because the school environment doesn’t meet their needs.

It caused me to think about National’s national standards and how much harm the “one size fits all” approach does, not only to those students who are labelled failures but also those who need different challenges than most of their peers.

If a school’s worth is to be judged on how many students they get “over the bar” then not only will the under-achievers lose out, but so will those capable of very high-achievement.

Under that scenario it would be “human nature” for schools to direct their biggest effort into those who are just failing to reach the standard to get them “over the bar” and this could come at the expense of the others.

I would appreciate some feedback from those who have some experience with gifted children – either as family or in a professional capacity. What do you think?

Filed under: Uncategorized, children, education, family

99 Comments

Tackling inequality

Posted by A Guest Poster on May 17th, 2011

In recent decades, inequalities in New Zealand have grown faster than in most other OECD countries. This trend was halted under the last Labour Government, but other governments have more than made up for it.

Rising inequality is bad for a country that prides itself on its egalitarianism.

Large wealth disparities are bad for nearly everyone. High levels of inequality in society have been linked to higher chances of poor health outcomes, poor education outcomes and anti-social behaviour. These things have both social and economic costs for a country.

Last month I posted for Red Alert on why inequality is bad. But how does one go about tackling inequality?

Increasing GST, and taking the income to give the biggest tax-cuts to the wealthiest people is clearly not the answer. National’s tax ‘switch’ has hurt those at the bottom, and squeezed those in the middle, who are now worse off than they were before. Inequalities are even worse now than the graph above suggests.

The OECD held a forum on tackling inequality at the start of this month. The background paper is instructive.

Aside from asking if who you marry matters, the report also asks what policy-makers can do about the problem of inequality. Answers focus in the area of skills training and education, particularly where they are available for disadvantaged groups. Looks like National’s cuts to education in the early childhood (ECE) and adult and community (ACE) area aren’t the right answer either.

Labour has promised to reverse the ECE and ACE cuts. We’ve also said we’d make the first $5000 of earnings tax free. And we’ll raise the minimum wage to $15. All of these things are useful first steps in tackling inequality.

In line with the OECD view, an economy that provides skills, jobs and opportunity for all New Zealanders has both social and economic benefits.

Hat-tip Jeremy Warner at The Telegraph.

Tags: opportunity
Filed under: Cost of Living, Skills, children, education, inequality, jobs

26 Comments

Key denies cost increases in ECE – Again

Posted by Sue Moroney on May 4th, 2011

Today in question time John Key showed how out of touch he is with the cost increases that he has imposed on NZ families with his early childhood education funding cuts.