by Catherine Delahunty
With a nod to Letterman. Anne Tolley, take note:
1. They could label some children as losers and failures.
2. They are narrowly focused and won’t support the diversity of children including Maori, Pasifika and other children, particularly those with disabilities.
3. The Government is refusing to allow a pilot to show how they will improve literacy and numeracy and the overseas evidence is not reassuring.
4. The standards compare schools and could lead to league tables which will undermine vulnerable schools and communities.
5. Teachers already know which children need help and they need the resources to help them.
6. Children and teachers will be labelled failures leading to teachers avoiding taking on the tough classes.
7. They are a rush job and are being imposed without proper consultation.
8. Leading educational academics don’t support them e.g. Professor John Hattie, Professor Terry Crooks, Professor Ivan Snook.
9. Assessment and reporting tools already exist.
10. If the public system is perceived as failing then we are softened up for privatisation.
What do you think? How about numbers 11, 12, 20?
Published in Parliament | Society & Culture by Catherine Delahunty on Thu, February 4th, 2010
More posts by Catherine Delahunty | more about Catherine Delahunty
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
He’s a nasty little man.
Like or Dislike:
6 
3 (+3)
Oops, guess that isn’t a problem, unless she as the Minister and/or the policy she is pushing survive long enough to seriously disadvantage lots of students and their parents and teachers and brand them as failures forever.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
Key/Lee – Key/Tolley.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
6 
17 (-11)
12. They tell teachers that their employment and remuneration are dependent on the results that children get, and then they say that the teachers will teach a broad curriculum, and will not “teach to the test”.
Like or Dislike:
13 
2 (+11)
The bad schools with bad teachers …
Do you know of any, wat?
Really?
Like or Dislike:
2 
2 (0)
I’m going to cut and paste my comment over from the other (push poll) thread…
I have 3 kids. My first never did well at skoll. She actually has ADD (not ADHD, she was one of the quiet ones), as a first parent am I to know how much a 7 year old is supposed to know? No I don’t, I have nothing to compare with. The school reports were meaningless tick boxes and platitudes. We had concerns, but were constantly told in parent-teacher interviews that ‘all is OK’. Bollocks! When we finally did nail it down, far too many years had passed. Proper reporting would have revealed her issues way earlier.
My other two are at the other end of the scale, waaay up at the top of the learning tree.
it’s interesting to note that the same teacher that allowed my slower child to coast along at the bottom, has also allowed my star second child to coast along at the top, i.e her stellar performance in junior class was, frankly, crap by the time she (has just last year) finished senior class. others in her year did the same.
My boy starts senior class today, there’s a fair chance he’s even brighter than his sister. Unfortunately the same teacher is STILL there. I’m on the BOT but what can we do? Nothing because there is no way to quantify a good teacher from a poor one.
Achievement of national standards does not interest me as much as the RATE of achievement. I’d like to see a kids grades graphed and to maintain, or steepen, the slope.
If the rest of the class are rising, but Johnny isn’t, then he needs some individual resourcing.
If he AND his mates drop off, then the teacher is the problem.
I look forward to NRS.
Now to answer the 10..
1 Real world calling… some people are loosing and are failures. They know it, the teachers know it. The parents don’t. As stated above, I have one, she could have been helped a lot more if I had known.
2 ERO just assessed our school. They asked about our reporting of Maori achievement. I told them to get stuffed! I’m all for achievement reporting, but I absolutely refuse to tolerate race-based reporting.
We have an autistic child at school. I am prepared to report on his progress… astoundingly they weren’t interested! Racist reporting is where it’s at.
3 pilot? why bother, just get on with it and review it later.
4 Why shouldn’t a crappy school be exposed? They should then get assistance, that’s what matters.
5 GOOD teachers, yes you are right. Poor teachers don’t.
6 Poor teachers should be exposed and assisted. The bad ones gotten rid of. No teacher is good at all subjects, they should teach their strengths and have the honesty/integrity to ask assistance for their weaknesses. If I was teaching I’d be really interested to see where my strengths and weaknesses were. Constant self improvement.
8 “Those that can, do. Those that can’t, teach. Those that REALLY CAN’T become academics” Am I being too cynical?
9 Really? How come as a parent and BOT member I and my fellows are in the dark? We may know what’s happening in our school… but how is our school compared to others? Wouldn’t have a clue! The only reference we get is by asking the secondary schools our leavers move on to how our kids fit into the 3rd form cf other 3rd formers. It’s a bit late by then don’t you think?
10 If the public system is failing… I guess this is a great way to find out, what are you scared of? And if it is… lets fix it! If private produces better education who the heck would be opposed to that?
How about sticking to green issues.
Like or Dislike:
3 
3 (0)
wat dabney,
are you suggesting that there will be no national standards and national curricula (or curriculae) in a non-state monopoly on education.?
excuse the brief question folks.. i have a very painful dose of rsi throughout one arm and the other arm says be brief..
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
greenfly,
Yes, actually. The local “college” is a byword for poor standards and poor behaviour. Pity the children who don’t manage to escape it on the ballot of a decent alternative.
Why do you think people spend vast amounts of money moving to catchment areas for particular schools?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
samiam said: How about sticking to green issues.
Um, isn’t edumakashun a Green issue?
If kids don’t learn the skills to critique politics on the basis of ecological sustainability and social justice, won’t the kids grow up to vote for National or Labour and condemn future generations to their myth that the world has infinite natural resources for the exploitation of all (but because it doesn’t in reality, the Devil of capitalism takes the hindmost)?
Like or Dislike:
2 
3 (-1)
tomfarmer – you’ve got a talking arm !?
Respect!
Wat – you know your local school is below par?
Astonishing! We’re being told such things can’t be known unless we embrace national standards!
People move catchments to chase a better school, you say?
That will please you, no doubt, being a great promoter of people exercising their choice and free will.
Surely, given that everybody can choose, those who stay simple don’t choose to go?
I’m for staying and improving the school, strengthening my community and supporting those children whose parents choose to stay.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
Yeah! Like, if the parents’ gang decides to run its own school for kids of gang-members, which happens to be a school where the ‘teachers’ sit around and drink and play pool while the kids hang out smoking, the parents should be funded by the government for that!
Wat, all sane, sensible voucher systems include something a lot like a required curriculum, and an ERO that reviews the schools. Govt-funded private institutions need supervision. Didn’t you notice that the “consumer-choice”-driven voucher system was a disaster in NZ when they tried at the tertiary level, with vast keenness for govt-funded courses that trained you to be a scuba dive instructor which included field trips to Fiji?
Like or Dislike:
4 
1 (+3)
Did the scuba courses include instruction in democratic process from Commodore Bainimarama?
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
Yeah, why bother testing something that’s going to cost a few hundred million before you do it. Testing’s for wusses.
Like or Dislike:
6 
1 (+5)
Yes. You certainly are. Most of the teachers I know are experts in their fields, battle-hardened through daily exposure to challenge and presently under attack. What is it you think they can’t do?
Like or Dislike:
5 
1 (+4)
Samiam
You have stated it all more succinctly than I could have and I totally endorse your comments.
The toad realises the green mistake and so is now throwing in red herrings. Fortunately he’s the fool and we can read him like a book.
Like or Dislike:
0 
3 (-3)
icehawk,
You mean there may be more establishments like the UK’s Summerhill?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summerhill_School
Great!
Such diversity is a wonderful and precious thing and is crushed by the state dictating a single national curriculum and standards.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
3 
19 (-16)
Perhaps that should be Top Ten Falacies about National Standards
1. They could label some children as losers and failures.
Assessment can be nearly identical to current assessment.
2. They are narrowly focused and won’t support the diversity of children including Maori, Pasifika and other children, particularly those with disabilities.
They are simply a measure of literacy and numeracy. Diversity will still be supported in the same way it is now.
3. The Government is refusing to allow a pilot to show how they will improve literacy and numeracy and the overseas evidence is not reassuring.
UK had a completely different scheme, which while overly prescriptive, still led to some improvements in literacy. Better measurement and communication with parents is PROVEN to increase learning.
4. The standards compare schools and could lead to league tables which will undermine vulnerable schools and communities.
Parents already choose schools based on ERO reports. Bad schools currently go down hill (our nearest school has 6 empty classrooms out of 8 and is rumoured to be closing). With extra resources budgeted to turn around poorly performing schools, they are LESS likely to close than before.
5. Teachers already know which children need help and they need the resources to help them.
Wrong. I know of a number of children that teachers have missed, particualrly problems with hearing, sight, dyslexia problems – that have gone unnoticed for long periods.
Some schools have good resources to help underachievement, while other schools need MORE help but get LESS. Currently there is no measurement of how much help a school needs, so it is dished out without knowing actual relative needs.
6. Children and teachers will be labelled failures leading to teachers avoiding taking on the tough classes.
Teachers currently take on tough classes who fail. Teachers are far more professional than you assume. NS can identify the tough classes or problem areas that need more resources, more teacher training, or additional specialist teachers (all of which are to be increased form current levels under National Standards))
7. They are a rush job and are being imposed without proper consultation.
All that needs to happen is for national assessments to replace local assessments. They can be tuned and tweaked as time goes on, just like what happens with current assessments.
8. Leading educational academics don’t support them e.g. Professor John Hattie, Professor Terry Crooks, Professor Ivan Snook.
And other educational academics say they have some very good points. In fact Professor John Hattie has also decribed National Standards as a quote “wonderful opportunity” – it’s all in how they are implemented and used.
9. Assessment and reporting tools already exist.
So that means there’s very little difference to what happens now, except everyone will use the SAME assessment and reporting tools.(instead of making up dozens of different ones, and teachers having to relearn every time they change schools).
10. If the public system is perceived as failing then we are softened up for privatisation.
What’s wrong with some privatisation. Currently private schools generally do a VERY good job, and free up funding so there is more money per child in public schools than there would be with no private schools.
Imagine how streched public schools would be if in addition, they had to also teach all the private students with little extra budget.
Private schools are effectively a huge education tax on the rich.
Like or Dislike:
2 
3 (-1)
We agree then National is out to smash a union – and of course introduce teacher competition for bulk funding of pay. Others will try and defend national standards as something of value of their own but …
Of course you got the 30% figure from Key who used it from an ERO report which merely mentioned a problem in year 1 and 2 where they noted that an issue related to 30% of teachers at that level.
“ERO found that about 70 percent of teachers made good use of a range of effective reading and writing teaching practices in Years 1 and 2 classes. Effective teachers were more likely to inquire into ways of improving their teaching, and work collaboratively with other staff to share good practice. These teachers had a sense of urgency about developing the child as a reader and writer. Their teaching was evidentially based, deliberate and gave children opportunities to practise new skills and knowledge during the instructional classroom programme.
In contrast, the remaining 30 percent of teachers had little or no sense of how critical it was for children to develop confidence and independence in early reading and writing. These teachers had minimal understanding of effective reading and writing teaching, set inappropriately low expectations and did not seek opportunities to extend their own confidence in using a wider range of teaching practices. In these classrooms learning opportunities to motivate, engage or extend children were limited.”
The figure only applies to this context. And it speaks to what the ERO does it identifies systemic problems and school problems and then allows focus on them so they can be resolved.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Toad. Edjamukashun is a social issue. What is being discussed here is standards, what you are talking about is curriculum. They aren’t the same
It is acknowledged that the current system is producing failures. I want the NRS to identify them sooner and do something about it. If it treads on the toes of lousy teachers, so be it.
Greenfly… I was stabbing at academics, not teachers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
3 (-3)
I have a question. You are pushing for ‘green’ only issues for discussion on Frogblog. What of topical issues that impact indirectly on the environment? Do you not see a connection between education and environment and if not, how do you view Enviroschools, for example, or Fruit in Schools or school garden projects or the tuck shop isues?
No connection?
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
Greenfly,
great medicine, ta! You reckon with the right coach we could get the talka into ventriloquy?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
There are so many things wrong with the National Standards proposal for primary schools that I’m impressed with Cath’s succint and to-the-point criticisms.
To the parents in the room:
curriculum development and assessment are very closely linked, in fact the Exams and Assessments Unit used to keep track of the old District Inspectors’ reports (precursor to the ERO), as well as administering our national exams (5th-7th form). After all, you have to know what is expected to be known before you can tell if anyone has learnt it yet!
I realise I’m quoting ancient history, for anyone who was involved in the policy loops in those days will instantly recognise the acronyms are well out of date; but it’s an interesting feature of public service that while the nomenclature is updated, a lot of the machinery still grinds the same way.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Greenfly… I want schools to produce confident, articulate, independent thinking, empathetic, people.
I’m sure we all do.
It just winds me up that the Green party could do so much better for our nation by sticking to green issues, gathering green support, getting green votes , getting into government (gasp) and ….
wait for it….
creating a sustainable future.
You can’t fight every fight, the environment needs us. It really does.
The other stuff is a distraction and a turn-off to those who might otherwise support.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
samiam – your aspirations for education match mine.
I agree that ‘we’ can’t fight every fight, that sometimes we
should keep our opinions to ourselves and when we do speak, talk ‘green’.
However, there are many ‘over-laps’, where seemingly non-green issues connect to and influence green ones. It’s often difficult to know which they are. Nevertheless, your advice is a good rule of thumb for Greens, MP and rank’n'file. Difficult though, for the green political animals who revel in the absurdities of politics and love to talk about that madness.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
I’m a little reluctant to add something to Samiam’s articulation and greenfly’s empathy, but find myself seeing creating a sustainable future. as the goal of greens endeavor.
And I’m saying that because today I was struck by the big corporation, Kraft’s, announcement of installing its whole fleet of refrigerated and air-conditioned vehicles with new machinery to drive 50 percent more efficiency to freight haul with diesel-hybrid combos. Saving money, too. And they, like samiam, said for a more sustainable future.
What could that have to do with drivers of those vehicles or indeed the teamster unions? Persuasion, their persuasion upon the management. I think so. Especially these days when some of those guys/gals and families are sharper* than their managers. Not, I would add, competitively — so as to take advantage — but collaboratively. Jobs are the deal. Given the context and bigger picture choices – American reliance on the ME and/or China – independence, self-reliance etc those guys are the framers and sustainers of their own future.
* not a green-type issue (yet .?) but a drivers’ dialogue has recently saved a company from one sizeable derivatives-based financial scam. Which had been designed to closedown the company. And its jobs. All of its jobs.
I was pleased to see greenfly point to “overlaps” – mebbe I can align to it best by declaring a longheld belief in education. But generalist, more than specialist.
Specialism it appears to me is a way of losing ourselves. Over-reliance, over-capacitied. If national educational standards would contribute to that or worsen community dependence on those things then I’m agin. If, OTOH, they serve to aid sustainable individual and community self-reliance then I’d be for.
Mebbe someone could suggest a time when enzed had either position. For those like me in need of guidance.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)