There's an interesting new entrant into the Charter Schools market; the Herald reports:
Tuhoe plans to set up three charter schools and are negotiating with the Education Ministry on how they can do it on their own terms.Tribal negotiator Tamati Kruger said the Crown's model for charter schools would be used as a basis for the schools.Mr Kruger said Tuhoe expressed interest in setting up the schools early this year and had been working with the Education Ministry since.The iwi plan to set up three schools - a primary, intermediate and a secondary school - on different campuses but run by one board.Tuhoe children predominantly attend rural schools and the schools find it hard to recruit people to boards of trustees.
Well, well; that's an interesting development indeed. We wonder what the Labour Party and the teacher unions will have to say about it.
Of course Tuesday's announcement that Tuhoe and the Government are close to settling a long-standing impasse will see Tuhoe getting a significant cash injection. And we reckon that it's a very positive step that iwi leaders are going to make a significant investment in the education of their tamariki.
19 comments:
In the Tuhoe "Manamotuhake" charter schools, tattooed Tuhoe teachers will teach how the National Party granted Tuhoe independence from the Crown and began the separation of the Tuhoe Nation from greater New Zealand. They'll teach the children about the day Tuhoe established it's own banks, police department, legal system and armed forces and of the proud day when the toll gates went up at the entrance to Te Urewera.
The Tuhoe charter schools will become known as the 'hot-beds' for radical action and admired throughout the Muslim world for their effectiveness in training activists in the mold of the most famed of the teachers at the schools, Tame Iti.
Nice work National.
What is National thinking! Why have we given Tama Iti and his crowd hundreds of millions of dollars and the key to their own national park at a time when money is tight? This is madness! It can only be to buy off Maori at a time when the water is up for grabs. Whats wrong with our Government??
Paul, the total cost of all treaty settlements is well less than what the government paid to bail out South Canterbury Finance and many individual settlements have been less than the annual salary of many Government officials and you obviously have no idea about the history behind the Tuhoe settlement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Waitangi_claims_and_settlements
KS NZEI would probably say that any school that doesn't have to have be monitored for what it is taught (they don't have to teach to the National Curriculum) and doesn't have to employ registered and qualified teachers is a threat to ensuring a quality public education system. It makes no difference who wants to run one. There is already room in our current system of self managed schools to meet the needs of different communities (but with obvious safeguards).
What were you expecting as a response?
What was I expecting bsprout? Well; so far there's been a lot of vitriol from the unions and Labour in particular (and the Greens to a lesser degree) about unregistered teachers, and Big Business and those wicked Christians being able to push their agenda. Tuhoe is showing in a very tangible way that it is possible to look outside the square and maximise an opportunity that will benefit its tamariki. It rather blind-sides all the alarmist stuff that has been spoken so far in the charter school debate.
Does it?
It doesn't matter how many Charter Schools are set up that may have good intentions and do things well, it is the fact the policy weakens the need to have the same quality of provision as schools do now that is the concern. Why waste good money on setting up Charter Schools and increasing the risk of failure (they have very mixed results internationally) when all the supposed benefits of these schools exist within the current system.
It doesn't take much analysis to realize that Charter Schools are a seriously flawed proposition in the New Zealand context and the public meetings that have been held so far to promote them have failed to provide any comfort.
Like the meeting in Auckland this week do you mean bsprout? The one that was stacked with teachers who shouted speakers down, and stopped those who genuinely wanted information on charter schools from getting it?
The teacher unions did themselves no favours. A colleague of mine's wife is a teacher. He told me that when she saw coverage of the meeting on the telly, she wanted to hide such was her embarrassment with the behaviour of so-called professionals.
I didn't attend the meeting but I understand that there has been a lot of frustration at the lack of engagement with the profession regarding any of the educational changes that have been made recently. I also heard that Catherine Isaacs did little to address the concerns raised.
Primary teachers are actually a pretty mild lot in general, I believe we have only been on strike twice in our 130 year history. We are legally allowed 2 paid union meetings a year and yet most of our meetings are largely held outside of teaching hours. When teachers get angry and frustrated then there will be good reason.
I hoped you noted that in the recent OECD report on eduction it noted that New Zealand teachers worked far longer hours than most.
I have nothing but respect for the teaching profession bsprout. It's a job that I could not do, nor would I want to. But unions; hmmmm
Keeping Stock - do you then support the Tuhoe Charter schools where Tuhoe can teach what they think is important and use unqualified teachers and not have to implement National Standards?
You know that Tuhoe have anti-Government ideologies and want to have their own nation, seperate from the rest of New Zealand - do you want their children to be taught that in schools that are paid for by us taxpayers?
Around 95% of primary teachers (possibly more) belong to the New Zealand Educational Institute Te Riu Roa and much of our time is spent on professional work. NZEI also represents the profession and, as a representative of NZEI, I myself have done much work on curriculum writing with the Ministry and developing documents to support children with special needs.
It is extremely frustrating when we put forward valid professional concerns (who else can represent the profession to do this) and have them dismissed as political.
That's something I've always wanted to know too and maybe Keeping Stock you can answer it for me: why do private schools and maori schools not have to do national standards? I thought it was one law for all and we are all New Zealanders. I just don't understand this but you will be able to explain it, I am sure.
Denise, Kura Kaupapa (full immersion maori schools) do have their own form of National Standards
http://www.minedu.govt.nz/theMinistry/EducationInitiatives/NgaWhanaketangaRumakiMaori/Designing.aspx
A high proportion of National MPs send their children to private schools that also promote the fact that their smaller class sizes give them an advantage over public schools and they often support overseas exam systems other than NCEA. Obviously what is forced onto public schools is not considered important for private schools and one would have to wonder why that is.
No MP's from other parties send their children to private schools bsprout? Let's keep this debate honest.
Thankyou 'bsprout' I didn't know that there were national standards for Maori schools but from what you say I'm still not sure how they can be 'national' if they are different from what everyone else gets. I wonder Keeping Stock if you can tell me why the private schools don't have to do national standards. I don't really get the point from 'bsprout' about National MPs sending their children to those schools. Why don't those schools have national standards like the rest of our schools. It completely confusing me. There was such a fuss about having them and talk about one law for everybody and such passion from Anne (Tolley) when they were being introduced. How did the private schools slip through without national standards?
Thank you Keeping Stock.
I'm not sure why KS won't address your question Denise. Perhaps it is a sore point. I think you'll find that no one from the Right will talk to it because it is so obviously a rort, a sort of cronyism for 'National's children'. It is true that children from the parents of other political pursuasion also attend private schools, not to the same extent though, but it was National who made the decision to exempt private schools from compliance to national standards, so the question you asked can be answered by saying, becuse National wanted it that way. Maybe KS will challenge what I've said but don't hold your breath. His silence is indicative.
@ Denise and Tony - I have no idea why private schools have an exemption from National Standards. Nor will I try to second-guess why, because second-guessing gets me into trouble! I was educated at state schools, as were my children, and we all seem to have done OK.
As far as charter schools go, my understanding is that they will have to reach agreement on their curriculum with the Ministry of Education. Doubtless some kind person will correct me if that is not the case.
Nat's feathering their own nests that's all Denise.
Judging by the academic results seen in the news, it could be assumed that private schools teach well above the minimum standards of NCEA.
Charter Schools will struggle to get going. The teachers' Union will blacklist teachers that accept such employment.
Destabilisation is name of the game.
Post a Comment