The youth of today
I visited Parliament a couple of times on school trips as a child, but nothing as cool as this Hanmer Primary School story ever happened to me:
Hanmer School teacher Katie Wenborn said the Year 7 and 8 students were eating lunch on [Parliament] lawn when a woman began talking about the [human rights in China] protest.
“The children were asking questions and (were) into it and she said `Would you like to come and do a peaceful protest with us?’
“The kids eyes were just the widest they’ve ever been.”
The 13 children, all of the school’s Year 7 and Year 8 roll, donned T-shirts and waved flags during the hour-long event.
“They really became part of it. They saw action. It was an amazing experience for them,” said Wenborn.
But, then came the real lesson in politics. The students who had intended to go to see the house debate were denied entry to the Parliamentary gallery after joining the protest. They were “eventually allowed into the gallery but had to leave before questions relating to the protest were discussed.”
Our education system has certainly improved. For my school trips to Parliament there were no MPs or protesters, just a viewing session of the library and old pictures hanging on the wall.
August 7th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
“The kids eyes were just the widest they’ve ever been.�
So are mine.
I’m horrified by the incident as described, no matter what the merits of the protest 11 and 12 year old children should not be being encouraged/allowed by their teachers to take part in political protests during school time and without their parents consent.
Perhaps your apparent endorsement of this indoctrination of children is tongue in cheek? Or do you approve of such indoctrination no matter what it’s nature? Would you also be approving if it had been a National Front rally?
August 7th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Adults using children for political ends is despicable. I wonder if Frog would be quite so enthusiastic if the kids were invited to join a National Front protest?
Just as bad as kids being labelled with one religion or another…..
August 7th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
(Just read the comment above - sorry for the repetition)
The point stands…
August 7th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Well said Blue Peter, sadly it seems that the left are prepared to use kids in this way.
I can also imagine the brain washing they receive on a daily basis re climate change.
August 7th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Fair enough points. But why weren’t they allowed in?
August 7th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Shocking display of opportunism by Keith locke but I would expect nothing else from him
What I find most amazing is he sees nothing wrong with it
if my kids had been there there would of been merry hell to pay
August 7th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
Well said AndrewW, BP, BB and Panda. Two disgraceful incidents (Sue Bradford swearing being the other) promoted as good on frogblog in as many days.
August 7th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
BTW my kids are allowed their own opinions but year 7 and 8 are to young to fully understand the issues
August 7th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Wowsers. The children, the report says, discussed the issues with the rally organiser and, with the support of the teacher, who after all has parent status during school events (and I’ll bet there were parents there as well), chose to experience some real life activism. From people who claim to be repelled by ‘too many rules’ and a ‘nanny state’, Mr Dennis, panda, big bro and Blue Peter sure are …wowsers!!!
August 7th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Sorry…and Andrew! btw, it wasn’t a National Front rally. Get a grip!
August 7th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
The children were asked, ‘Who would like to do a peaceful protest with us?”
Relax.
August 7th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
Greenfly, I guess by your own political philosophy your comments make perfect sense; The State’s represenatives have ALL the rights of the parent when they want them, including educating them to the correct political view, rather than, in the case of teachers, being paid to care for and educate the children in their care according to the curriculum.
And apparently by your philosophy, children have all the rights of adults: “The children were asked, ‘Who would like to do a peaceful protest with us?â€? ”
By your logic if they had been asked “Who would like to go to a strip show” the childrens curiousity in finding out what a strip show was would be adequate justification to you to approve their attendance.
August 7th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
Andrew, you’re stretching it (and you broke it on the way). The teacher and the parents in attendance wouldn’t have said yes to an invitation to a strip club and you know it. The curriculum you mention, is broad enough, thankfully, for teachers/parents to make good, creative, sensible, innovative decisions about many issues that might present themselves in an ‘out of classroom’ situation like this. Take a moment to settle your thoughts and keep it real.
August 7th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Greenfly, You felt it neccessary to point out that “The children were asked, ‘Who would like to do a peaceful protest with us?â€? ”
I assumed that you considered that the children being asked was relevant, otherwise why point it out? Now you seem to be saying it wasn’t.
Instead you’re arguing that what the adults present thought was appropriate is what’s important, so presumably if it had been an invitation to a National Front rally, or a Destiny Church protest and enough of the teachers and parents belonged to or approved of these organisations you think that the childrens attendance would be acceptable.
Otherwise what you’re saying is that political indoctrination under these circumstances is OK but only if it’s indoctrination that YOU approve of, Me, and I bet the other commenters who are appauled by this event, are saying that NO indoctrination by political activists should be acceptable without parental approval.
August 7th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
human rights are NOT political. human rights are for everyone. including children. what is wrong with you people? indoctrinating them with what? the kindness and decency (that you obviously don’t have and won’t pass on to your children) to stand up for human rights?
Don’t say you think that human rights violations are China is propaganda. The entire world knows! torture, killings, organ harvesting, forced abortions and sterilizations, media censorship, NO freedom of speech, NO freedom of religion or political views, NO access to lawyer, arbitrary detainment with out charge, “re-education” through labour (is what it says - akin to concerntration camps that were in Europe) the list GOES ON… a case of Genocide against Falun Gong is being taken to the International Criminal Court. Many would say without doubt the Chinese government is responsible for Genocide in Tibet also.
How much of that would you stand by and watch? PLEASE!
You guys would have been in that bunker with the Boks I bet. shameful. Get back under your rocks. Despicable human beings.
The children were asked and it was they who wanted to participate. I trust them to make their own decisions on this kind of thing.
August 7th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
kids are never too young to learn about their human rights and the rights of others. it’s telling that we haven’t figured out that human rights should be taught as founding concept to all people from a very early age. their rights and others rights. not a hard concept. though one that would seriously benefit society.
August 7th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
I’ll pop in next week and see if they would like to go off to visit a cathedral and spend 10 minutes in peaceful and silent prayer in such reverent surroundings. It will be an interesting experience, and I’m sure I can outline the field trip in such a way that their eyes will light up in anticipation of this most excellent adventure.
As for visiting parliament, perhaps once we can be sure Sue Bradford can mind her language and learn to respect boundaries set by the speaker of the house. I wouldn’t want kids to have to grow up faster than necessary.
I saw Jeanette start a speech using the F word too, with kids present. Do the Greens think it hip or something?
August 7th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
You guys would have been in that bunker with the Boks I bet. shameful. Get back under your rocks.
Oh really “Despicable human beings”
gee I guess the greens are not all love and peace after all
I repeat my first post
What I find most amazing is you see nothing wrong with it
You stupid blinked greens just don’t get it !!!
so I will spell it out in simple big Letters for you
YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO INCLUDE SCHOOL CHILDREN IN YOUR PROTESTS,
THEY ARE 10 YEARS OLD AND HAVE NO ABALITY TO MAKE AN INFORMED CHOICE
you have every right to carry out your tinpot protests (”I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” )
but children I repeat children have the right to make up their own minds as they mature
If my children had been there I would have taken legal action against the school and the green party
August 8th, 2008 at 1:13 am
I almost completely agree with the points on human rights in China, but that isn’t the point. Panda and Zen have got it.
After all, why not let NZ First get some kids to lead protesting against immigration, I’m sure kids could be spun a tale about immigrants of different cultures, not fitting in. We could get Labour to lead a protest about trade union “rights”, we could get ACT to tell kids about how IRD mistreats many suspicious taxpayers and how the government wastes money, we could get kids protesting Iran about how it funds Islamist terrorists and get them protesting the USA about Guantanamo Bay.
I’d argue that kids should be taught that initiating force against anyone is wrong, and that everyone should interact on a voluntary basis except in self defence - the state should too - I could argue it is the most fundamentally moral position, the Greens would probably call it libertarian propaganda. The Commissioner for Children wants to nationalise children, so it’s no wonder the Greens think other people’s children are ripe for plucking for whatever cause they want to associate them with.
August 8th, 2008 at 9:17 am
Ash and Greenfly:
No-one is saying the issue of human rights is not valid. I also feel the human rights abuses in China are unacceptable. But that is only one political view.
The issue is getting the children into a political protest, whatever the cause, without parental consent.
We aren’t putting down the validity of the protest topic.
August 8th, 2008 at 9:20 am
Here’s Dear Leaders School Program
http://tinyurl.com/6dupbh
August 8th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Oh, piffle.
The job of the teachers was to limit the kids options to ensure that they weren’t permitted to choose anything overly harmful to them. It isn’t to keep them locked up safe in a box never doing anything.
LibertyScott, Zen, etc: if you were there speaking outside parliament when a school showed up I have no doubt that the teachers would have let interested kids listen to you. That’s what visiting a political place is about: letting the kids see/hear the politics. I’m sure they wouldn’t let the kids listen to the National Front - do expect some common sense.
The teachers didn’t plan to take the kids on a Green protest: they planned to take them to parliament and show them politics in the wild. It sounds to me like a resounding success with a lot of learning involved.
Panda, if you think your kids have no ability at age 10 to make informed choices then I pity them. I first wrote to my MP at age 11 (and before you assume some brainwashing, it was over an issue about which my parents and teachers were decidedly uninterested). My kids make plenty of informed choices and they’re well under 10. And they make some uninformed choices (like the rest of us sometimes). And there are some things I don’t let them choose. But pragmatism and respect are the two key rules to raising kids.
August 8th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
Once upon a time teachers could take kids out and do stuff. These days they can’t stir without filling in paperwork about who, where, what, etc, etc and have to comply with a lot of regulation before the kids get to do anything.
It’s interesting that those who decry regulation in principle are often the keenest to apply it in practice. I’m fascinated to see ZenTiger, LibertyScott, MrDennis & AndrewW all championing the risk-averse, beaurocratic, don’t-let-the-teachers-do-anything-without-written-consent-from-everyb ody approach.
You can either hem the teachers in with regulation, or trust them to do their jobs. Those are your ONLY options if you send your kids to school.
(BTW: If you don’t like those options then I suggest you vote Green as the Greens Education Policy involves providing extra resources for those who are home-schooling - unlike National or Act).
August 8th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
…homeschooling is worst of all options…
August 8th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Homeschooling puts parents in charge. Exactly where both Conservatives and Libertarians want them to be. The only people opposed to it are the socialists, as it means they can’t indoctrinate the children themselves…
August 8th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
icehawk: “It’s interesting that those who decry regulation in principle are often the keenest to apply it in practice. I’m fascinated to see ZenTiger, LibertyScott, MrDennis & AndrewW all championing the risk-averse, beaurocratic, don’t-let-the-teachers-do-anything-without-written-consent-from-ever yb ody approach.”
Good point.
August 8th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Id rather have children taught by professional and trained teachers in an environment that can ensure they have a comprehensive education than at home by a, most likley, totally unqualified parent whom just installs their own opinons and ignorances on the child.
A child does not belong to the parent! A child is their own person and should be given every oportunity to make out of life and themselves what they desire. and to accheive this it is important they are provided with a comprehensive education and wide spanning spread of opinions. A parent has absolutly no right to indoctrinate a child with their own ignorances and bigorties!
August 8th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
“A parent has absolutly no right to indoctrinate a child with their own ignorances and bigorties!”
But they have a duty to allow the State to indoctrinate them with their “approved” ignorances and bigotries…
August 9th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
they have a duty to expose the child to a wide range of opinions and information so the child can develop as they choose and construct their own opinions about things in their life, idealy this is what schools would do, despite them not doing this to anywhere near the extent I would like they are stil far more likley to do so than parents.
August 9th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
“they have a duty to…”
Ultimately they have a duty to raise their child. It is easy for anyone else to say “they have a duty to expose the child to a wide range of opinions” or “they have a duty to teach the child this because it is correct” or “they have a duty to do…” whatever. At the end of the day it is the parents’ choice how they feel is best to raise their child. Even the opinion (that we both share) that it is good to expose children to a range of views is just another opinion.
Once you think the state can dictate to parents how to raise their children in any way, you have started down a dangerous track.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
I am indeed aware of the potential abuse of dictating to parents what their children should and should not be exposed to and as one with a large distrust for state that rings all the more true.
My issue is that I beleive for New Zealand to enjoy the greatist prosperity the newer generations must now be able to think for themselves as much as possible. If the curiculim is set by a large body of teachers and educational academics then the potential for abuse by state becomes minisucle. I dont have a problem with a trained education professional teaching their child the curiculum, my problem lies with a non-professional whom likley has very limited real knowledge of the areas concerned teaching thier children areas they dont understand fully and what areas they choose, in doing so severly inhibiting the mental development of the child.
Education should be the gateway to feids of opportunity for the child; not just the few stalks of grain that a parent may choose to provide.
Our current education system is absolutly terrible in this respect and that is in large a factor that causes our current social ills. having said that, our regulated system, has a much smaller potential of cutting off opportunities and learning than homeschooling does, even if it doesint offer the extremly high opportunities that being educated by a genuinely unbiased, knowledgable and interested parent may offer, over all I see it to be far less dangerous in terms of potential.
Frog, how about a post/discussion on ways to improove the education system so as to provide the greatist opportunities, or even a discusion on what the aim should be?
August 9th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Sapient,
I agree with most of your last post. However, you claim:
“Education should be the gateway to feids of opportunity … Our current education system is absolutly terrible in this respect and that is in large a factor that causes our current social ills.”
Can you please be more specific and elighten us with examples of how the current education is so terrible? I’m not saying the system is perfect, but I don’t think it is too bad???
August 9th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
our current education system teaches students what to think rather than how to think, as a result the educaton system is more effective at teaching students to memorise the contents of text books rather than teaching them to accualy understand the concepts at hand and question the facts.
Having said that, the way most teachers teach math does teach students to manipulate the concepts to some degree, even if it is to no greater depth than substituting numbers. If we could get students to accually question the concepts and work out for themselves how the concepts function then we could have a much more inquisitive population with a far greater understanding of the issues.
The levels that are taught at school are also an issue; subjects now taught in seventh form are extremly simple and could relativly easily be moved down afew years if the rate of learning and meathods of learning were modified. I just exited the system relativly recently and I attended the best school in the central north island in the highist stream, even there the education standards were extremly poor. One of the best teachers I had ever had, one whom had a great understanding of the subject he taught left due to disillusionment with the state of teaching in our schools and latter returned as a student counseller, which was how i learnt of why he left, lol.
If we taught civics in school; if we taught how our political system works and how society and the agreements between individuals that make up the social contract functions and mutually benifits us then prehap the population may be more politicaly, environmentaly and economicly interested than just tax cuts. If we taught civics prehaps the level of anomie in the populatin would be substantially reduced and so to would crime.
Further more, with a more interested and understanding population we would likley have more tertiary education, resulting in a higher skilled population and higher wages with less encironmental impacts.
August 9th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
I could rant on about text language in exams and people unable to do basic math but with my spelling im not exactly in a posistion to talk. lol
August 9th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Well said Sapient.
August 11th, 2008 at 10:27 am
I have just found out that the situation as described by frog was not strictly accurate.
All the students involved in the protest actually had parents on the trip that gave their consent. Those that did not only observed.
Having been informed about this I would like to retract any comments that could be construed as a criticism of how Mrs Wenborn handled this situation. I now believe she acted entirely appropriately.
I would like to apologise to Mrs Wenborn for jumping to conclusions before posting.