The heart has been ripped out of Christchurch school communities

Schools can be the heart of their communities. In the aftermath of the Canterbury earthquakes, schools played a stabilising role not just for students, but for parents and staff as well. Schools were one of the rocks around which the city was able to regain hope in a return to normalcy.

Now though, the Government has ripped the hearts out of some of the hardest hit communities.

While we rejoice with those school communities who were spared, we share the sentiment of Ouruhia School, one of those who managed to defeat a closure proposal, who said that their “heart goes out to all the other school communities, parents, teachers, support staff and most of all to our young ones whose schools are closing.”

Currently, seven schools are set to close and twelve more to merge. This number could be added to in the coming months as decisions on the status of a number of schools is still yet to be determined, including the five schools in the Aranui Cluster.

The thoughts of all the Green Party go out to the students, parents and teachers of Branston Intermediate, Glenmoor, Greenpark, Kendal, Linwood Intermediate, Manning Intermediate and Richmond, all of which are planned to close.

Richard Chambers, the head of Manning Intermediate has stated that “The minister promised us that we would have two years no matter what. It was a guarantee she made to our community repeatedly, it was unequivocal”.

Now though, it seems his school may be closed at the end of the year, creating further disruption in the lives of everyone associated with the school.

That disruption will be even larger for Christchurch’s disabled students. CCS Disability Action has noted that “not all schools are welcoming to disabled students” and that “for the majority of families with disabled students choosing a school was a stressful draining experience.”

There is currently no plan in place from the Ministry to ensure that disabled students are welcome and supported at their new schools, or to ensure that their support programs and resources transfer smoothly.

With the census coming up in just two weeks, it is remarkable that Hekia Parata was not willing to wait for the most reliable data on population movement in Christchurch. Similarly, her decisions do not take into account the vital work being done by communities, and supported by the Christchurch City Council and CERA, to plan for renewal in many hard hit suburbs, including the work in New Brighton.

Closing schools now undermines that hard work that could have a huge potential impact on population, and therefore school rolls.

Hekia Parata owes an unequivocal apology to the people of Christchurch for the on-going misinformation and stress she has forced upon all those involved in this disastrous process.

At every step in this process, schools have complained that they were not adequately consulted, that they were not listened to and that their concerns were never addressed. Still, Hekia Parata has not apologised.

Throughout this whole process, the one thing that has not changed is the inconsistent approach by this Minister. She says one thing to some, then the opposite to others. She promises one thing, then delivers another.

It appears that some of the schools may have been saved simply because they were able to lobby the most effectively. This is an unacceptable way to make decisions that impact so heavily on the lives of so many children, parents, teachers and support staff.

In the coming weeks and months, the Green Party will continue to stand strong with the people of Christchurch as they continue to fight to save their schools and restore their wonderful city.

58 thoughts on “The heart has been ripped out of Christchurch school communities

  1. “Throughout this whole process, the one thing that has not changed is the inconsistent approach by this Minister. She says one thing to some, then the opposite to others. She promises one thing, then delivers another.”

    Duplicity. It’s doubly ugly.

  2. At the heart of this issue is what happens to the money that is realised when the land on which closed schools were on is sold off. Follow the money to see why this is being advocated.

    This began years ago under Labour – with the closing of primary schools. The land asset was being cannibalised to deliver capital into some fund. Was this one held within education for new projects – and why they were so zealous in trying to fund-raise by closing schools or was/is it to cannibalise the education resource into some consolidated fund outside of education (or to enable zero budgets with edcuation required to find disposable assets to sell to raise funds for operational purposes or new building).

    In my area when their plan to close local primary schools was blocked (the nationwide programme came to an end because some went straight to the PM and explained the error of Mallard’s ways) the Ministry came back with a plan to close the 2 intermediates and 2 high schools by building on another (former national polytech/CIT cannibalised to grow the Petone tech component of Weltec of Mallard’s electorate) educational site a giant combined school with 2000-3000 pupils. As if the area was a resource to be land asset stripped in one way or other to raise money for some central fund and we had yet to be bled to our quota for this purpose.

  3. My concern for the merged schools and maybe some of the others is the that rolls may reach their optimum peak and then playing fields may get reduced for new classrooms.

    That said there may be plenty of spare land for fields on land not fit for building on. But will it be where the schools are?

    The other question is whether existing facilities (specialist subjects etc) on some of the school sites are sufficient for the higher rolls.

  4. Metiria says “The heart has been ripped out of Christchurch school communities”

    The Greens expect us to believe they now suddenly care about communities.

    When they show any concern at all when the previous government they were propping up, closed not just a few schools, but hundreds.

  5. The Greens don’t expect you to suddenly believe anything at all, photonz1. You’ve shown over and over that you choose not to believe anything the Greens say. Your claim is laughable.

  6. Greenfly says “Your claim is laughable”

    The actual figure is 281 schools closed by the previous government.

    That you think that’s laughable just proves that you don’t give a toss about whether schhools close or not – it’s all about petty point scoring.

  7. And again, photo leaps over backwards in order to misunderstand greenfly’s post and goes all pot and kettle with his “petty point scoring” suggestion.

  8. Can anyone name any period when Greens were in coalition with Labour or indicated their support for school closures while those Labour led coalition governments in power made those decisions?

    And photonz – are you saying that you oppose the closure of local community schools – then and also now?

  9. SPC – probably Photonz1 and maybe Arana will take a pot at it, so long as they don’t have to provide any evidence to back their claims. Your second question is just plain mean and will have photonz1 flapping around on his kitchen floor like a landed fish.

  10. Of course, all schools should remain open, no matter how damaged, or how unstable the land, and no matter if they’re mostly empty because the kids have moved on. It makes absolute sense that no school, anywhere, should ever be closed down.

    I have a question.

    If schools are the heart of communities, and you surely wouldn’t close one down or integrate one into another unless it was pretty much falling down, then can you please explain your post of February 14, 2013? More than happy to disrupt kids, teachers and parents of a charter school for ideological reasons, but if it’s done out of sheer physical necessity in an earthquake zone – well, that’s “ripping the heart out” and clearly an abomination.

  11. Arana plays her facetious card, the one with the snarky trim, but no one’s interested.
    It would be unpleasant to disrupt a Charter school, it’s true. All the more reason to avoid setting them up in the first place, knowing that there was widespread political opposition to them, and that indications were clearly given that they’d be significantly modified when there was a change of Government. Seems fair warning to me.

  12. Seems fair warning to me.

    Seems like the tears for “the heart of their communities” are only shed if the school is ideologically acceptable.

  13. You’ve been wrong about so many things, Arana, that your latest mistaken belief will not surprise anyone.

  14. That Greens actually care about ripping the heart out of communities is disingenuous on so many levels.

    Not a whisper of complaint when the previous government closed nearly 300 schools.

    Happy to rip the heart of a community if the school in question is a charter school.

    Caught out pretending to be concerned, when they are so transparently doing nothing more than shallow point scoring.

  15. Arana, are the schools that are closing damaged (they are being used) or on land that us unsafe (they are operating)? If they were empty of children who is opposing their closure?

    You have no idea about the status of the schools that are being closed or merged onto another site – you are making unsubstianted inferences. About as credible as the original plan that was based on shonkey data.

  16. photonz clearly you are not willing to oppose closure of community resources. Not under Labour or National.

    And there is no evidence that Greens supported the closures under Labour – they were not part of the government that enacted them.

  17. SPC says “And there is no evidence that Greens supported the closures under Labour – they were not part of the government that enacted them.”

    Yeah right.

    You failed to oppose school closures 281 times.

    We’ve had four school closures within 2km of her over the last year or so – that a much higher rate than Christchurch for our size.

    And we didn’t even have an earthquake and the subsequent demographic changes.

    The combined larger schools have vastly superior facilities, as well as much better academic, sporting and cultural oportunities, than the smaller schools ever had.

    Kids from the small schools now have access to specialist teachers for reading, music, arts, tech etc, gyms, a pool, far more access to computers and IT teachers, a larger variety of sports, and teams they can join in sports that weren’t even available at the small schools.

    Previously in the small schools they always struggled to get enough kids in a single age group to put togther sports teams.

  18. photonz – you and Hekia Parata have a lot in common you are both arrogant but ignorant of the facts om matters you think you can make judgment about.

    From frogblog 2005

    Labour’s decision that there will be no more school closures is a very good one. The Greens were staunchly opposed to Labour’s school closures (go here to see the fourteen press releases we put out in early 2004 about the issue).

    However, I find Bill English‘s triumphalism on the issue rather disingenuous. He was on the radio this morning claiming victory over Mallard. Well, Mallard is right to point out that English is the last person who should be acting all superior about school closures.

    English was part of the Bolger and Shipley National Governments (for which he was an MP from 1990 and a Minister from 1996) which closed a great many schools. 224 schools have been closed in New Zealand since 1990 – the majority (118, or 53%) – were closed by National. So, Mr English, please get off your high horse

    http://blog.greens.org.nz/2005/09/29/of-schools-and-high-horses/

    Gotta love that English posed as opposing school closures in 2004/2005 for political reasons while in a government that made them 1990-1999.

  19. Photonz1, one of the largest cluster of school closures under Labour was in Invercargill. I was one of the leading people involved in fighting the Ministry’s plans at the time. The only politician to come to Invercargill to support the opposition to the unnecessary closures and poor process was one Rod Donald, Co-leader of the Greens. We greatly appreciated his support. You are also misrepresenting the situation with school closures, some were necessary but the process (as in Christchurch) was often flawed and mismanaged.

    Again facts have no place in your arguments.

  20. The Labour government announced a 5 year moratorium on school area reviews in Feb 2004 (and a complete end to them in September 2005 – they had operated since 1990).

    Coincidently this press release preceded the Labour decision in Feb 2004

    Tuesday, 10 Feb 2004 | Press Release
    Contact: Metiria Turei MP

    The Green Party will put the government’s school closure plans at the top of the agenda at their next meeting with the Prime Minister. “We will urge Helen Clark to rein in Trevor Mallard,” said Green Education spokesperson Metiria Turei.

    “Having attended the 133-pupil Te Pahu School in South West Waikato, Miss Clark must understand that small country schools are central to the survival of distinctive rural communities. Labour needs to have a heart, as well as taking a ‘whole of government’ approach to rural and provincial New Zealand. There is a clear contradiction between the government saying they want to foster regional development while continuing to rip out rural infrastructure. “The government needs to consider the impact a school closure will have on a whole community, especially when many of the schools are the only visible public service left. “I urge communities facing school closures to not give up. Fight for your children, your communities and the future of provincial New Zealand, the Greens will do everything we can to support you.”

    http://www.greens.org.nz/press-releases/greens-urge-clark-rein-mallard-school-closures

  21. You have no idea about the status of the schools that are being closed or merged onto another site – you are making unsubstianted inferences.

    I’m not sure of the point of this thread. Are the Greens against any school closing because “it’s a school” and therefore some kind of sacred entity?

    Schools close all the time. Other schools open. So what? So do many other entities. Most kids move schools a few times in their lives, many kids move more often. Two weeks into a new school, their school is “the bestest eva”.

    The people who have trouble adjusting to change teachers and politicians. What is wrong with these people? Change happens in all other sectors. Why must they be immune?

  22. The date of Labour’s 5 year moratorium on new reviews was announced on 27 Feb 2004. The Green response.

    Friday, 27 February 2004, 5:37 pm
    Press Release: Green Party
    27 February, 2004
    Media Advisory
    Greens step up fight to save schools

    Rod Donald to visit Timaru schools & Invercargill on Monday, 1 March
    Green Party Co-leader Rod Donald will be visiting Timaru schools this Monday, 1 March, at the request of parents and principals following Trevor Mallard’s determination to press on with South Canterbury school closures despite his moratorium on further reviews. In the evening Rod will speak at a public meeting in Invercargill called by Mayor Tim Shadbolt to mobilise the local community against school closures in that city (7.30pm, Ascot Park Hotel).

    “Trevor Mallard’s determination to force through the current round of school closures is indefensible now that he has called a halt to all future reviews,” said the Green Party Co-leader.

    “The moratorium on school closures is without doubt an admission that the process and outcome are both fundamentally flawed. Closures are based on the false assumption that bigger is better and suggest that the government expects its own regional development strategy to fail.

    “Trevor Mallard claims that he needs to finish the current reviews because it would be too stressful for locals to do otherwise. The opposite is true; if he took the trouble to visit Timaru and Invercargill he would see that his plans to close schools have been incredibly divisive, splitting communities right down the middle.

    “The sensible course of action for the Minister is to cancel the current round of reviews and allow local communities to decide what’s best for them. In some cases this may still mean a school closes, but it would happen in a fair and humane manner.”

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0402/S00501.htm

  23. That’s a serious whipping you’ve taken there, photonz1. The facts provided by SPC and sprout reveal both your ignorance of the issues and your intent to baselessly demean d’Greens. A gentleman such as bjchip would acknowledge and apologise, if he was caught out behaving the way you (and Arana) have, not that he ever would put up such a low-brow argument, but I suspect we’ll hear nothing of the sort from you, making you look very weasley, in a stoaty kind of way.

  24. I’ve being “caught out” behaving like….what?

    I’m still not sure what the Greens are saying. No school should ever close? No school in Christchurch should close? Explain to me why running over- capacity of 9300 places is a good idea.

  25. Arana, you love to twist and over simply stuff to suit your argument. No one in Christchurch believes that no schools should close, the opposition and concerns are about the process and lack of consultation. This Government uses deliberate misinformation, fudges facts, ignores consultation and just plain lies to get their way. Parata promised many schools that any closures would be progressed over a number of years and schools accepted her at her word and planned around that. What was announced ignored those promises. You can’t believe anything this Government says!

    http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.co.nz/2013/02/lies-and-deception-leading-education.html

  26. So, the Greens agree schools should close, but they want to talk about more first?

    No matter what the government does – and no matter who the government is – many schools will be closed and amalgamated in Christchurch. People will be upset about it.

    And?

    How is talking about it going to change anything? It’s going to happen, no matter how much any government consults and talks. At some point any government must act and ignore the inevitable wailing and gnashing of teeth as it is simply not possible to keep everyone happy.

  27. Metiria puts out a release saying closing schools rips the heart out of communities…..

    …..LESS THAN ONE WEEK after promising to close schools.

    Sometimes it’s sensible to close and amalgamate schools, like when demographics change (even without earthquakes). Christchurch had 5,000 empty places in it’s schools BEFORE the earthquakes, and lost another 4,500 children after.

    Obviously there needs to be some changes.

    Other times it’s stupid to close schools. Like in the future perhaps a highly successful charter school with community support and a waiting list to get in.

    The decision to close schools should be made on the merit of the situation.

    Instead of on the chance to score political points, or on blind ideology.

  28. Actually, if the government had actually rebuilt the city as quickly as it might have done (and would have done in any other OECD nation) people would be flowing back into communities in the Christchurch region. This move works to destroy the desireability of life in the Christchurch region and sets us up to have to replace lost capacity if it recovers in spite of the government.

  29. Actually, if the government had actually rebuilt the city as quickly as it might have done (and would have done in any other OECD nation

    Ah, but this is New Zealand, mate. We’ve got to have endless consultations about the consultation process lest someone, somewhere gets offended.

    I don’t know why – it was founded by people who actually did things. I think they’ve all left.

  30. Arana, I thought I should point out that doing things in a positive sense generally means building or constructing something, which i think you were referring to when mentioning our fore fathers and mothers. The Government you are supporting is into wrecking things:
    -Our public education system
    -ACC
    -Our manufacturing sector
    -Our construction industry (15% of the workforce have left when we desperately need them)
    -Our once egalitarian society
    -Family incomes (the median has dropped alarmingly)

    Also as you support a dictatorship you obviously have no idea what real consultation means.

  31. Don’t be silly, Sprout.

    ACC is a rort and a ponzi scheme. Our education system fails one child in five. We are no good at large scale manufacturing and never will be. Our construction industry is coming off the back of a GFC where no one has been building anything. We are not equal and never were. Family incomes are low because NZers constantly vote against measures to increase them. Mining, being just one example.

    I don’t support a dictatorship.

  32. ACC is not a Ponzi scheme Arana, because it makes investments and earns money from them. In fact those earnings were one of the main reasons why the government was advised to cut ACC levies. They didn’t however because they use the money gained from ACC for other things.

    Unfortunately the new harsher regime over at ACC means many of the people who need help are no longer getting it. Those cuts in payments have been soaked up by other things like building roads of little significance and giving tax cuts that have disproportionately benefited the already wealthy.

    Unless you are relying on an outdated study, our education system doesn’t fail one in five children. New Zealand has one of the best educational systems in the world, and although there’s room for some improvement, what National has planned is not an improvement.

    The GFC ended a number of years ago yet there was the loss of 17,000 manufacturing jobs last year under a National government. Blaming the GFC for their policy failings is no longer appropriate when it’s clear to all but the most ideologically blind right winger that the current administration has no answers.

    New Zealanders vote against increasing incomes? Get off the grass Arana. your argument is so ludicrous as to almost not be worth responding to… As is the only solution you offer. Why are mines that already exist closing if there’s such a huge demand?

    The answer is that we don’t need more mining, we need to diversify into things the world is crying out for more of like organic produce… Moving towards a clean and green economy is the only answer to our economic woes and the sooner people like you Arana wake up and realise it the better.

  33. In the beginning there was the claim that Greens did not oppose the closure of schools by Labour.

    This dismissed as a lie – they then moved on to another fiction that Greens opposed any change to school service delivery and opposed all school closures.

    Russel Norman Feb 27 2004

    “The sensible course of action for the Minister is to cancel the current round of reviews and allow local communities to decide what’s best for them. In some cases this may still mean a school closes, but it would happen in a fair and humane manner.”

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0402/S00501.htm

  34. photonz

    Can you supply any evidence to support this claim?

    “Metiria puts out a release saying closing schools rips the heart out of communities…..…..LESS THAN ONE WEEK after promising to close schools.”

    Or is this another unsubstantiated lie?

  35. Arana asks (giddily);
    “I’ve being “caught out” behaving like….what?”

    A photonz1. Sorry for the cruel insult, but you had to ask, didn’t you!
    Arana continues, revealingly:

    “I’m still not sure what the Greens are saying.”

    Well, that much is clear, Arana. Perhaps you could keep your troll-y comments to yourself until such time as you are sure you know what the Greens are saying! Your inability to grasp information provided is becoming legendary.

  36. On the issue of over-capacity. It enables choice within the state system.

    If there is under capacity there is no neighbourhood school unless strict zoning is applied.

    I suppose creating shortage in the state system is desired by some but there are costs – they include the cost of transportiung children to school (we spend billions on roads to alleviate the cost of travel time, then create this for parents getting children to school – running down bus services and reducing access to local schools).

  37. SPC asks “Can you supply any evidence to support this claim?”

    “Metiria puts out a release saying closing schools rips the heart out of communities…..…..LESS THAN ONE WEEK after promising to close schools.”

    Certainly

    Metiria’s quote on closing down charter schools “If they don’t want to apply or they fail the criteria, then they have to close. “

  38. The answer is that we don’t need more mining, we need to diversify into things the world is crying out for more of like organic produce…

    Ho ho. “Organic”. You can torch your money growing overpriced produce the market doesn’t want if you like, just don’t use mine.

    http://www.freshplaza.com/news_detail.asp?id=93648

    The organic market is fadish, dependent on a wealthy middle class, and not a great export opportunity because consumers who buy it care about food miles.

    BTW, news just in. Thin film solar panel maker @Nanosolar ($485M raised, founded in ’02) has 2nd round of layoffs, following major down round in ’12; could be 75% of staff; faces price competition from China.

    If they can’t do it, in the US, on $500M, we’ve got no chance.

  39. The conditional term being “If they don’t want to apply or they fail the criteria”.

    So yes, MTs position is to close schools that (i) apply to be come integrated but don’t meet the Education Act criteria or (ii) don’t apply to become integrated.

    It’s a pretty long bow to draw that she proposes to “close schools” without adding the qualifiers.

  40. I’d like to see the link and context, but it does seem that these are not schools that yet exist. And all she is saying that charter schools have to meet the criteria applied by future governments – so lax criteria set by this government for their establishment may not continue (if Greens are in a coalition government).

    The same thing applies now to private schools that cannot afford to remain open – they seek to become integrated, but must meet the terms for this.

  41. Your inability to grasp information provided is becoming legendary.

    Your inability to contribute anything of value to a debate, as opposed to just trolling other commentators, is what is legendary.

  42. SPC, Gregor = it’s not exactly complicated.

    She stated very clearly Greens will eliminate charter schools, and any that any who refuse to integrate will be closed.

    So they’re not being closed because they have falling rolls, fail to attract students, or have poor results.

    They could have fantastic results, and huge community support, but they will not be allowed to continue.

    It’s rare to hear anything so ignorant.

    Schools need to stay open, or close, BASED SOLELY on the merits of their situation.

    These decisions should NEVER be based on nothing more than blinkered ideals, or political point scoring.

  43. Governments placing criteria for those providing services using taxpayer money is not a novel concept.

    Each government tweeking the terms for those is also not unique – why do you presume that those setting up schools under charter school criteria would not choose to continue on the terms set for other tax funded schools?

    There is a reason why political parties announce their policies before elections – and one is to serve notice to interested parties of possible future changes to governnace arrangments.

  44. Photonz1 – if a school had “fantastic results, and huge community support” why would they elect not to integrate? The process of integraton asks schools to conform to minimum mandatory MoE standards to be eligible for public funding unless I am grossly mistaken. Are you suggesting that government oversight of public funds is not important so long as “fantastic results, and huge community support” is engendered?

    Alternatively, if the school wanted to maintain a profit motive with less oversight then they could set themselves up as a fee paying private school, right? No doubt parents would be happy to pay for continuing “fantastic results”.

    As SPC states, if policy changes modify the frame of reference/standards within which a school operates – particularly one that receives public as opposed to private funding – I see no particular problem.

    While I agree that the policy is in the broadest sense “ideological”, what policy isn’t?

  45. Gregor asks “Photonz1 – if a school had “fantastic results, and huge community support” why would they elect not to integrate? ”

    A friends boys both went to a charter school in the states. It was excused from the usual curriculum, and specialised in tech and IT subjects. Because that’s what they were interested in, the boys excelled there, after bombing out badly at the local state school doing subjects they hated.

    If a charter school like this is forced to integrate, it legally has to go back to a standard curriculum instead of the one that makes it, and it’s pupils, so much more successful in the first place.

  46. Photonz1 – do you know how broad the course selection of the standard curriculum is in NZ? It’s massive. That’s why aside from reading, writing, and arithmetic, there is already a fairly wide choice in educational options and styles for kids (though admittedly, less so if you live outside the cities).

    Unless you are seriously proposing that the State should fund, with your tax dollars, every particular educational whim, good and crackpot, without oversight or requiring trained teachers, not baselined against State benchmarks that are now mandatory for public schools, based on the strength of a “my friend in the States” anecdote.

    As I noted on another thread, if there was a level playing field where over time, charter models could be tested to assess their relative value and benefits, then I have no philosophical problem or otherwise with the model.

    The reality is however, that the deck is being stacked, ideologically, in favour of charter schools by not setting any standards at all to measure them against the state model and categorically restricting MoE oversight and public scrutiny via the OIA process. If the model is so good, why the secrecy?

  47. The Green Party opposed many school closures when Labour was in Government. Metiria and I visited the Wairoa schools together, she also visited schools down south , she spoke out, please don’t try and re write history! Sometimes schools agree to close because of roll losses, that makes sense, much of the CHCH renewal doesn’t!

  48. photonz1, the flexibility to do this exists in the current system but has been limited by National Standards. We have wonderful Technology and Science curriculums that are under supported because this government sacked all the advisors. All schools should be providing interesting programmes for boys interested in practical learning activities.

  49. Catherine says “Sometimes schools agree to close because of roll losses, that makes sense, much of the CHCH renewal doesn’t!”

    So what would you do?

    Keep throwing fifty million taxpayer dollars down the toilet every year to fund 9000 empty desks in Christchurch?

  50. Gregor says “Photonz1 – do you know how broad the course selection of the standard curriculum is in NZ? It’s massive. That’s why aside from reading, writing, and arithmetic, there is already a fairly wide choice in educational options and styles for kids”

    Yeah right.

    How many cities and regions have a school that specialises in tech and IT?

    I bet it’s a big fat ZERO.

    Which is exactly why some charter schools thrive – kids get to do the subjects they love, instead of being forced to do the ones they hate.

  51. Sprout says “photonz1, the flexibility to do this exists in the current system but has been limited by National Standards. ”

    One word for that excuse – feeble.

    (National Standards are for primary schools – not the secondary school I was talking about)

  52. Photonz1- My argument remains for secondary schools too (you never made this clear so there is no need to be so condescending). A High school in Invercargill does very similar things that you describe without being a Charter School.

  53. sprout says “A High school in Invercargill does very similar things that you describe without being a Charter School.”

    Now you say we can have curricula like that, completely contradicting your last post said we couldn’t because of National Standards.

    I suppose it hasn’t sunk in that you lost the National Standards battle long ago.

    That’s great that there’s at least one tech school in the country. What school is it?

    You’ve just finished saying they have curricula like thatt do that because of National Standards

  54. Please ignore the gobblydegoop in the last line – two bits of unfinished sentences that dropped out of sight.

  55. Photonz1- the new Zealand Curriculum enables schools to be innovative and design school curriculum that meets the needs of the pupils and community. National Standards shifts the focus to literacy and numeracy and has meant that all advisors for science and technology have been sacked. We don’t need the flexibility in curriculum that Charter schools are supposed to provide if schools are allowed to implement the curriculum as it was envisaged (without National Standards).

    The school is not a “tech” school but it provides practical teaching approaches that appeal to boys (or girls) who want to engage in tech subjects. Like designing, building and then racing a go cart. Many High Schools do similar things and even have students working in partnership with businesses in the local community. All schools should be meeting the needs of the students within them rather than having just one or two schools doing innovative stuff that only a few can attend.

  56. Photonz1 needs to stop being immature by talking back to SPC, GreenFly and all of those honest others and grow up!, just get over it, what happens, happens, but if you really cared, you would go to Hekia yourself and confront her about this!

Comments are closed.