by frog
The National Standards debate is heating up, so time for an update.
There was a weird Nielsen poll published by the NZ Herald this morning. Among its results:
Those in favour of national standards:
YES – 73.2%
NO – 13.8%
DON’T KNOW – 13%The effect of national standards on your child:
GOOD – 53.9%
BAD – 36.5%
NONE – 9.5%
That makes no sense at all. If the poll has any validity, it means a significant number of people support National Standards despite believing they will have a bad effect on their children. Must be all those bad parents who want their children to fail!
The response to this question is even more strange:
Do you understand how the new system works?
FULLY – 11.9%
PARTIALLY – 61.8%
NOT AT ALL – 26.2%
That’s an incredible indictment of Minister Tolley’s competence in selling the policy. Only slightly more than one person in 10 claims to fully understand it – despite it being a flagship National Party policy which has been vigorously promoted over the last 18 months.
Yet over 70% supposedly still support it. Go figure!
The NZ Herald also ran a lengthy story from an interview with Professor John Hattie, generally regarded as a conservative educational academic, who has worked closely with both the previous and current Governments on education policy and is cited by Tolley as providing the inspiration for the Government’s National Standards policy:
Hattie replies that he supports the concept of standards-based learning but not the system the Government has introduced – in fact, given the chance, he’d scrap it and start again…
Hattie’s first point is that, despite sweeping claims of failure by Key and Education Minister Anne Tolley, the New Zealand school system is in good shape, especially compared with the rest of the world.
National standards, he argues, are usually the catchcry of countries where the education system is in serious trouble. They have been introduced in the US, Britain and Australia but none of these countries have been able to show any overall improvement in student achievement.
Ouch! The full story is worth a read.
Tolley could do worse than heed Hattie’s advice. Scrap the current shambles and start again.
Published in Economy, Work, & Welfare | Society & Culture by frog on Sat, February 6th, 2010
Tags: anne tolley, John Hatie, national standards
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
7 
42 (-35)
If you cannot see the inconsistencies in the responses to the poll, maybe the education system failed you too.
11.9% of respondents fully understand it. And a far greater number of respondents think it will be bad for their children than oppose it or don’t know whether to support or oppose it.
Citing some evidence would be useful when you post here bro. Unfortunately, your prejudices usually preclude you from considering the evidence.
BTW, I don’t have a problem with the concept of National Standards in primary and intermediate schools. I just think the way Tolley has set it up – imposed, no trial, no negotiation with NZEI, condemned by the academic educationalist she purportedly relies on – is bound to fail.
And our children will be poorer for that.
Like or Dislike:
10 
4 (+6)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
8 
32 (-24)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
9 
30 (-21)
The teachers have analysed Tolley’s regime, and find it wanting. What you do not seem to understand is that through the frequent interactions between parents and the primary and intermediate teachers of their children, more and more parents will eventually come to understand the inadequacies of it too.
BluePeter: Your peter went blue because you pull it too much. Your 9:18 PM comment adds nothing to the debate. It’s people like you who give the rest of us wankers a bad name.
Anyway, back to the topic of Tolley and her notional standards…
Like or Dislike:
9 
4 (+5)
BluePeter has his pecker up from the weakest of all possible polls, showing that he’s merely crowing. Toad calls him on it, correctly.
Big Bro calls it ‘Game Over’, same as he did for the ‘Smacking Bill’.
“Must try harder”.
Like or Dislike:
7 
3 (+4)
Tolley is of no consequence.
Like or Dislike:
6 
3 (+3)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
3 
18 (-15)
So far as the teachers are concerned, I would say Chopper Tolley has well and truly cooked her goose. And, while Chopper has so little regard for teachers, Clueless has so little regard for his own staff he’s on record referring to them as “muppets”.
What a team!
Like or Dislike:
4 
3 (+1)
I too found the first two incongruous. Support it but think it will be bad? Huh?
But the third is easy, I won’t claim to fully understand it untill I see it up and running. Aren’t we all like that?
I have to agree with BB that the union’s raison d’être is working terms and conditions and pay. NOT teaching standards. They will protect a poor teacher as vigorously as a great one.
What I’d like to see from the Greenz is some suggestions, given we are going to get NRS anyway, as to their take on a GOOD set of standards and reporting.
As the poll says, parents WANT it, so let’s make it good!
Like or Dislike:
3 
3 (0)
Like or Dislike:
5 
1 (+4)
samiam – your plan is a good one and that most likely to be the case – a good system of standards – Key will doubtless make the compromise.
The view of the union is slanted, naturally, but it is the teachers who really know – are you hearing their views?
The National Party’s proposal is not genuine, as described by them. They are setting the ground for bulk funding, vouchers, rezoning and so on. To pretend otherwise is deceitful. Bill English has always been determined to have his way with Education. At face to face discussions with educationalists, his plans don’t cut it, but he’s stuck to his line, against best advice. Teachers know this and recognise that the present move are the same old English erosion.
Like or Dislike:
5 
3 (+2)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
5 
20 (-15)
BluePeter said: Why does anyone think that 10-30% of teachers being near useless is in any way acceptable?
I don’t think it is acceptable. I doubt even NZEI, who you and Tolley both seem hell-bent on demonising, think it is acceptable.
But can you explain how National Standards (the Tolley version specifically, rather than standards-based learning in a generic sense)is going to improve their teaching ability.
Like or Dislike:
5 
3 (+2)
Like or Dislike:
11 
2 (+9)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
4 
15 (-11)
My education was largely stuffed by a couple of bad teachers at a critical time, personally I have little faith in the education system and I am quite concerned for my kids, especially when the get to our dead beat high school.
Like or Dislike:
6 
1 (+5)
Here’s what schools don’t teach kids:
1. Anything about money.
2. How businesses work, so that they enter the game with no knowledge of how it’s played.
3. Basic psychology, so that even if they understand the game, they can be effectively gamed. Obviously, psychology would be very useful in raising kids.
4. Parenting, other than what they learned by living (courtesy of parents, teachers, ministers, coaches, police ..) so they repeat all prior mistakes.
5. Collaboration and team effort.
Here’s what they learn.
1. There is only one right answer to each question.
2. Your success is entirely based on your grades and obedience/attendance.
3. There are no new ideas. Everything you know is in books, according to a curriculum approved by committee.
4. Creativity, taking your time and questioning authority and status quo are punishable offenses.
5. Sharing information with others is punishable by expulsion.
6. Ethics are OK to talk about, but in real life, everything’s fair; just don’t get caught.
You can see the result. Roughly 10% of people are “successful” and innovation comes from roughly 1%. 90% of work is meant to make the boss happy, and 10% towards customers, teamwork is unheard of and requires expensive consultants to achieve at a minimal level, and you’re paid almost entirely for your paper certificates and longevity.
Like or Dislike:
7 
2 (+5)
“Why does anyone think that 10-30% of teachers being near useless is in any way acceptable? ”
but he’s simply attempting to rile and is misrepresenting in order to do it. He’s making false claims (10 to 30% of teachers are not ‘near useless’, BluePeter – your lack of knowledge in the area of education exposes you every time you comment on this issue).
Key and Tolley do the same thing.
Like or Dislike:
9 
3 (+6)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
4 
19 (-15)
Failing to understand the simplest aspects of our education system and pushing your view on a public forum regardless of your lack of knowledge, is not commenting.
It’s BluePetering.
Like or Dislike:
7 
5 (+2)
one set of questions, two sets (different) of responders.. ?
does the herald report contemplate this possibility or accept a one-one (and likely expected) output..
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
samiam,
How about ~~fair allocation of progress~~, defined as follows:
– measure kids’ reading age at age 6 and whenever they leave primary school these days
– scatter-plot per-student difference in reading age (Y) vs initial reading age (X)
– fit a line through it
– report the slope of the line
So what the number means is:
. 0: all of the kids make equal amounts of progress, regardless of how they were near the start
. -1: all of the kids come out the same, regardless of how they came in
. >0: school increases the difference between kids
I know of one systemic problem, that changing house is inversely correlated with income, so changing school is probably inversely correlated with income as well, so the rules about kids who change school have to not bias the distribution of slopes.
What do you think of each of:
– the top-level concept
– the measurement procedure
– likely systemic problems and their solvability
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
It’s hard to know how well you’re doing if you don’t measure.
Using different systems of measurement, especially measurements that may serve the teachers but not the students, is not a good idea.
So why are we doing it?
Like or Dislike:
5 
13 (-8)
jc2…
I totally go with graphing the kids and watching the slope of the graph. It’s the rate of learning we need to see maintained or improved. The same graph/slope could then be used to monitor teachers and assist them where needed.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
And are you seriously suggesting that those ’systems of measurement’ serve teachers and not students?
WTF?
Like or Dislike:
6 
2 (+4)
If you want me to adopt a serious tone whilst typing, I’ll certainly give it go.
I am seriously suggesting some forms of measurement, and results reporting, do not serve the students.
Like or Dislike:
5 
9 (-4)
Are you seriously considering that there are many existing forms of measurement that already do?
Like or Dislike:
5 
3 (+2)
your choice of NCEA, the Baccalaureate Internationale, the Cambridge Entrance exams.
Compare and contrast, 100 word essay, to be completed within 30 minutes.
Off you go.
(This is the kind of assessment question our 15-year-olds deal with to some measurable success, at level 1.)
Like or Dislike:
4 
1 (+3)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
2 
14 (-12)
toad says “But can you explain how National Standards (the Tolley version specifically, rather than standards-based learning in a generic sense)is going to improve their teaching ability.”
Because the National Standards package comes with millions of extra funding for additional training AIMED AT those who need it, (who of course can be identified far quicker with national standards, rather than an ERO inspector watching a class or two every three years)
It also has extra funding for kids having problems, and extra funding for specialist teachers for schools with problems.
Like or Dislike:
0 
6 (-6)
If the Government has these vast reserves of money available for training teachers and helping kids with problems, they should begin rolling it out NOW. Our schools need help NOW, as you continue to claim.
National are playing politics with our children’s well being.
Like or Dislike:
5 
1 (+4)
I have never had any problem understanding any of my 3 children’s reports or getting straight answers from their teachers.
peace
W
Like or Dislike:
6 
0 (+6)
greenfly – if two schools both need extra help from the govt, and they are using different assessments, how do you know which one needs the most?
The current system is only a guess.
Using different measurement systems to divy up the funding, or using the same measurement system? Hmmmm. It’s a no-brainer.
All national standards are is the measurement system – the speedo.
We can find out who need a tune-up the most.
Currently we are all using speedometers than read at different levels. Some are not using any measurement.
Like or Dislike:
2 
4 (-2)
The current system is not ‘only a guess’. That’s the most foolish comment from you yet.
As to your ’speedo’ – we already know who needs to be ‘tuned-up’. Your insistence that the teaching communities don’t know the needs of their own schools already, is nonsense, and will remain nonsense, no matter how many times you repeat it.
Aside from that, you are steadfastly ignoring the very real problem that the National Party has created, of alienating the people at the very core of the education system, the teachers, principals and boards.
How Tolley and Key (the liars) can believe that they are doing a service to children by creating a poisoned atmosphere in schools, defies explanation, except when you look at the greater picture to discover the pay-off they expect from the forced implementation of the standards.
And that’s not improved standards of education for children.
Like or Dislike:
4 
1 (+3)
Wonderful! Not often I’m in her company, I have to say.
Like or Dislike:
5 
1 (+4)
greenfly – you don’t have to be the brightest star to realise that lots of schools all desperately need more funds.
With no standard way of judging how much each school needs, it is obviously a partial guess as to if one school needs MORE or LESS help/ resources than another school.
If the current system was working so well, why are some schools doing well and others falling way behind?
Who is creating the poisoned atmosphere?
The rabid union, the people yelling “liars” (you), or the people peddling false information like a $26m propaganda campaign (again you – the publicity campaign was only 1% of this – $0.2m and the $26m was actually ADDITIONAL funds for teacher training).
And you are calling Key a liar when you blatantly mislead.
Like or Dislike:
0 
5 (-5)
C
R
A
P
“If the current system was working so well, why are some schools doing well and others falling way behind?”
I’ve not said the current system is ‘working so well’. There is always need for change, adaptation and improvement, as circumstances in the society around schools is not fixed, it changes over time and schools and teaching must also.
The changes that are needed and in fact already taking place are those which are recognised and agreed upon by those who most understand the issues. Tolley/Key/English’ system is not the most needed, the most suitable and certainly not the most likely to have real effect. The educationalists are telling National loud and clear. National is bluntly pushing their barrow over top of the educationalists. They won’t be cowed, they say, by teacher unions!
I suppose you will offer standardised testing as the cure-all for schools that are ‘falling way behind’.
Your view is simplistic.
Like or Dislike:
4 
1 (+3)
greenfly – you’ve completely changed what I said, made up your own reduiculous statement, then insinuatred that it is my point of view.
Again.
Clearly you don’t understand National Standards at all. They will not cure anything. They are only a measuring device, like a speedo.
It’s what you do with the information that makes the difference.
If all the cars had speedos reading different amounts, and you gave them all accurate speedos, it wouldn’t make them go any better.
But you would have a better – and accurate – idea of how well each one was going.
Like or Dislike:
0 
3 (-3)
C
R
A
P
The ‘lens’ you are using to view the issue of ’schooling’ is a business model. Teachers and associates use a collegial model that is not aided by the kind of ‘one rule to rule them all’ system that you so clearly love.
Children are not production units.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
greenfly – AGAIN, you make up something different to what I’ve said, and argue with it. Effectively you are making up one side of the debate yourself, then argueing against it.
You got one thing right. The statements you make up yourself, are repeatedly, as you say in your words, C R A P
That’s one thing I agree with. But then they are your comments – not mine.
I never said no sense can be made of current tests. What I said was that if everyone uses the SAME tests instead of different ones, your can judge need far more accurately on a national basis.
Having lots of different tests for school achievement, when everyone could easily use the same one, is simply a really silly idea.
Like or Dislike:
0 
4 (-4)
“Who is creating the poisoned atmosphere?”
Anne Tolley (abetted by John Key). Tolley’s complete incompatibility with the teachers and unionists must be sheeted to her own lack of knowledge and ability in the position, but Key is responsible for putting her there and must own some of the blame also. A successful implementation of any initiative for a collegial-centred organisation such as teachers and educationalists, depends on far, far more finesse that either Tolley or Key posess. You might almost think they hoped to fail, for no matter whether the standards are implemented, the Government, at this point in the proceedings, has failed.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Why ever not (do you suppose?)
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
greenfly – the rabid union has threatened to stop teaching children and close 80 schools in Northland – and you say more finesse is needed – but not from them – from the govt.
Pot calling kettle – come in kettle
Like or Dislike:
0 
3 (-3)
greenfly – I think National Standards will be introduced to Maori immersion schools however it’s a bit of a different situation when it’s effectively a second language.
I didn’t realise they weren’t being introduced to private schools. They probably should be, although if I put a cynical hat on I can think of a good reason why they are not.
Private schools effectively are a huge double taxation on the rich. They pay tax for their childrens schooling (probably plus extra for the children of the 40% of people who pay no tax) – then they pay a THIRD time for their private school.
This is brilliant for the government, and in fact for anybody else with kids in the public education system. Rich parents are effectively subsidising our kids schools to quite a large extent.
If National Standards are brought into private schools, rich parents would realise there is very little difference to public and private schools with the same decile rating.
But as I said, that might just be a cynical view.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
But photonz1, it was so important, you said repeatedly, that everyone uses the same tests, the same speedo, for how can we know, how can we know, how each child is progressing compared with every other child. It’s a no brainer you said.
” Having lots of different tests for school achievement, when everyone could easily use the same one, is simply a really silly idea. ”
Guess so.
Sorry to hear that you’ve become cynical.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
greenfly – I think there are big advantages for all schools to use the same tests.
If the parents attitude and input have a larger weight in how successful a child is than the school they are at, then it is paramount that there is very good feedback to parents of how well children are doing.
It’s very easy (and teachers will tell you this) to give “above average” assessment to children who are at the top of a poorly performing class, even if their assessment would be different if compared on a national level.
btw, I’ve always been cynical. That’s why I don’t beleive all the arguements against national standards.
Particularly when we are told by staunch opponents that the world is going to come to an end if we have them, then they finish off with their final arguement – “besides, they’re pointless because they’re almost exactly the same assessment as we are doing now”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Now you are being silly, photonz1.
The argument against National’s ’standards’ isn’t that a standard is wrong, but that this proposal from Key and Tolley (let’s not forget English) is wrong. Wrong in detail, wrong in intent and wrong in the manner in which it is being implemented.
If National wanted to arrive at the best system for assessing student achievement for the purpose of raising standards, they’d have talked with the professionals and hammered out the best method to achieve that. They didn’t. They bulldozed their way through the issues that immediately became apparent. They failed to successfully implement a suitable programme.
It seems that they will continue to ram their preferred system through, just as you are ramming your support here on Frogblog. You’ve certainly failed to impress me with your singleminded approach, just as Tolley, Key and English have failed to bring the education professionals on board, or as they see it and say it, to heel.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
greenfly you say “your singleminded approach”
two words
pot kettle
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Ah! You’re playing the ‘kitchen implements’ card, eh!
I might have to lay down my ‘garden tools’ ace, if you don’t watch out!
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Take your “pick” of sayings greenfly.
I’m just calling a spade a spade.
You can go and rake over the old messages looking to dig up something.
But I’ve got work to do so I’ll fork off.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
paretns at our school just had the decidely unpleasant experience of a press gang of uniformed labour party and unionists bailing them up to get tehm so sign a petition against national standards.
They were breaking up parents conversations in order to push their line, and not letting parents out of school without making them stop and talk. Two rows of them that parents had to pass through to get out.
Some parents I was talking to signed just to get rid of them, but felt very pressured to do so. Not nice stuff.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
photonz1
Stand for the board of Trustees then, I plan to do just that and I have three like minded parents who are going to do the same.
Should we be elected we will ensure that the school does indeed implement the national standards, we also plan to see what we can do about not providing any information to the education board when that information is race based.
I think John Key is gutless on economic issues but on the issue of National Standards he has my full support.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
photonz1 – they were breaking up parents conversations!
Out-friken-rageous!!!!
You must be livid!
Conversations are sacrosanct!
Making parents stop and talk !!
Not since Tiananmen Square!
Bro’s supporting you. Two Authoritarians, standing for the Board.
Exciting times!
Crush the teachers and their Evil Union!
Hang them out to dry!
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Three like-minded parents Bro!
Are they yours?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
‘fly – give photonz1 a break – at least he is talking some sense on the tax thread, albeit not here.
bro ain’t talking any sense anywhere (unless we can divert him onto cricket, upon which he and I tend to be of like minds).
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
greenfly – you;’d have to be incredibly stupid to not realise heavy handed tactics with parents will have the opposite effect of what you want.
I didn’t realise you were in favour of uniformed groups presurising people to sign up to something they don’t really want to.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
photonz1 – Toad’s put the squeeze on me to ease up on you and your standards promotion.
Naturally, I will.
Ever been squeezed by a Toad?
Clammy!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
greenfly – the problem with National Standards is that they seem to have become a proxy political battlefield.
The group of parents I was talking to today at the end of school were all for them. Some had signed the petition just to stop the pestering. I didn’t realise it, but four out of five of us were from out of zone – so ERO reports are already being used as league tables.
Everyone had a story of someone shifting schools, and having problems with being near the top of their previous class, but struggling with their peers at a new school. It was clear some schools were way ahead of others, but the parents of the poorer performing school had no idea.
That’s not good. Especially when experts say parents play a much greater part in a childs education that was previously thought (a greater part than schools)
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
photo – “the problem with National Standards is that they seem to have become a proxy political battlefield.”
Indeed.
Those who introduced them should have done a much better job at describing the benefits and admitting to the perils.
They didn’t. The brought the battle to the schools.
There have been many, many changes made to education over time, most of those changes have been accepted and supported by the education professionals. Not this time.
Photo – can you outline what you believe to be the educationalist’s concerns?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
greenfly says – “They didn’t. The brought the battle to the schools.”
Other way around I think. I didn’t see a group of uniformed government officials haranging parents to sign up to their scheme – making two lines that parents had to walk through with their kids to leave school – stopping every parernt who wasn’t holding one of their leaflets.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It sounds bad, photo. No doubt we’ll read about it in tomorrows paper.
The Government didn’t go the ‘uniformed officials haranging’ way.
The took taxpayer money, $200 000 of it and went for the soft-sell propaganda technique.
When that pap arrives in my mailbox, I’ll be sure to let you know my reaction.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
So the govt misinformation propaganda campaign shrunk did it. The other day you told us it was a $26 million propaganda campaign. Now it’s suddenly shrunk to less than 1% of that.
And YOU throw about accusations of misinformation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
And this, from Massey University Professor, Ivan Snook, via John Minto:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1002/S00098.htm
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)