Every charter school interview I've heard in the past couple of weeks includes the term 'ideological' repeatedly. As if that's a bad thing, except for the ideology the government and unions agree with of course.
I also think this will be a bigger fight than the government expects but meantime Mr Hipkins is determined, and the wiggle room is decreasing. Though not gone quite yet.
The fight, I think, will not be pitchforks in the street but a quiet anger rising in those impacted. And their friends and relations. And given the demographic of charter schools it is probable that many of those families will be among the 'missing million' but will be turning out to vote next time. Potentially a lot of voters.
If the schools are permitted to become 'special character' then the transition back to the current model may not be too difficult under a different government. Of course by then the passionate folk who set them up in the first place will be long gone.
But not all partnership or charter schools have done well, and at this stage they are a definite minority in number. In about 2014, there were only 357 students enrolled in all five charter schools. Now there are about 10-11 charter schools, and I think enrollments are still below 2000 students.
If National spin is to be believed, the cost per student isn't higher for charter schools, but it's up there. There have also been some horror stories, have a look at the wiki page.
I gather Jacinda doesn't think her Minister of Health's profile picture on twitter is a good look ...esp when raving on how he is going to fix obesity ....like no more KFC
What a twit
Last edited by winner69; 10-02-2018 at 11:37 AM.
“ At the top of every bubble, everyone is convinced it's not yet a bubble.”
But not all partnership or charter schools have done well, and at this stage they are a definite minority in number. In about 2014, there were only 357 students enrolled in all five charter schools. Now there are about 10-11 charter schools, and I think enrollments are still below 2000 students.
If National spin is to be believed, the cost per student isn't higher for charter schools, but it's up there. There have also been some horror stories, have a look at the wiki page.
The fact is charter schools have been brilliantly successful for many students even though the schools are still in their infancy. It's only Labour's gutlessness that stops them acknowledging the benefits. They should tell the unions to get stuffed and do what's best for students.
The NZ education system is a long way short of what it should be, and it should be open to alternatives. But of course it's not about the customers, aka students; it's about the precious teachers. Pathetic on the part of Labour, and in particular the deadbeat, out of his depth, temporary education minister, Chris Hipkins.
With any sort of luck they'll get pressured by their own party members (they can't all be stupid) to continue with the program. If so they'll rename the scheme, claim they have fixed it and then carry on. Just as they did with TPP.
Well put FP. That´s exactly how it is. EZ of course not all of the charter schools have done well in the first couple of years and some have failed. The same applies to state schools. Some of them do a terrible job, but that doesn´t mean all state schools should be closed. Labour is doing this purely as an ideological opposition by the Unions as they fear losing control of the system. Shame on the likes of Willie Jackson who claims to be fighting for the underdog and those that have for one reason or another failed in the state system but flourished in charter schools. He´s got no principles and is full of hot air. Disgraceful.
Artemis I think you may be right. This may make some of the "missing million" come out and vote next time and they won´t be voting for Labour.
I gather Jacinda doesn't think her Minister of Health's profile picture on twitter is a good look ...esp when raving on how he is going to fix obesity ....like no more KFC
What a twit
Haha.. yeah definitely (and ironically) a potential rebrand for KFC there.
".... an economic study’s finding that sugar taxes – one of the most commonly advanced policy fixes for obesity – don’t achieve their purpose illustrates why we need smarter and less-doctrinaire approaches to our shoulds and shouldn’ts."
Well put FP. That´s exactly how it is. EZ of course not all of the charter schools have done well in the first couple of years and some have failed. The same applies to state schools. Some of them do a terrible job, but that doesn´t mean all state schools should be closed. Labour is doing this purely as an ideological opposition by the Unions as they fear losing control of the system. Shame on the likes of Willie Jackson who claims to be fighting for the underdog and those that have for one reason or another failed in the state system but flourished in charter schools. He´s got no principles and is full of hot air. Disgraceful.
Artemis I think you may be right. This may make some of the "missing million" come out and vote next time and they won´t be voting for Labour.
It might be the missing 4,000 votes that come out then, the parents of current charter students, if they are in fact doing well. I wonder what the respective average attendance rates are between state and charter schools. That would tell a story.
I know a local headmaster of a small troubled state school who liked the look of the charter way, being an existing school the idea was to use the premises of a closed down school out in the country for an outdoor/trade experience etc. The idea was tried, appeared to be working, but was shut down by the education dept a couple of years ago.
Now we're short of tradespeople, the likes of hotel owners wanting to bring in 194 Chinese workers to get their building completed on time. This starts at the secondary level, where students decide where they might go for tertiary training.
Successive National Govts have had their part to play, with the unending call for market forces to decide. And where did that lead? Rod Oram in 2011, remembers the Bolger years.
Ideologically, a National-led government could easily shift more training costs to businesses, arguing they benefit from upskilling their staff so they should pay for it.
But this was exactly the deeply damaging mistake the Bolger Government made with the Industry Training Act of 1992. It radically reformed skills training, leaving only skeletal government support. Quickly, many companies developed a new training culture. Rather than take responsibility themselves, they poached skilled staff from competitors that kept training. As a result, the number of people in formal workplace training plunged and skills shortages became chronic.
Reviving industry training was one of the key planks of Helen Clark's 1999 election campaign. The Modern Apprenticeship Act of 2002 was one of her government's first major pieces of legislation. It created Industry Training Organisations, each tasked with developing government-funded programmes for its specific sector.
Between 1999 and 2009, the employees receiving industry training more than doubled, from 49,580 in 1999 to almost 126,000 in 2009. Government funding for it almost trebled in the last 10 years, from $62m in 2000/01 to $180m in 2010/11.
So National policy had a bad effect on the trades in the Bolger years, they tried it again in their latest 9 year term, and now we're paying for that with high house prices and rental costs.
More recent National spin, before they were turfed out.
Phil’s got his Housing Report and jeez things are a disaster eh after 9 years of National denial and lack of action
Can Phil fix it?
Probably not in his term of Minister anyway. I’ve noticed over the years when a government (in many parts of the world including NZ) intervenes in the housing market to make houses more affordable, the intervention makes them less affordable, and ensures that the first-time buyer is more indebted. The whole point of the intervention is to make accommodation cheaper, yet this never seems to work.
So is Phil going to build his 100,000 homes or whatever the number is and rent them out at affordable rents (state as a landlord) or is going to build them and sell them to first home buyers who then become indebted (to somebody) with ‘cheaper’ accomodation still a dream
Good on Phil having a go anyway
“ At the top of every bubble, everyone is convinced it's not yet a bubble.”
Phil’s got his Housing Report and jeez things are a disaster eh after 9 years of National denial and lack of action
I need to read the report in full. But headline says we have 1.9m private dwellings. At 2.6 people per dwelling thats enough for 4.9m people. Current NZ population = approx 4.7m
I need to read the report in full. But headline says we have 1.9m private dwellings. At 2.6 people per dwelling thats enough for 4.9m people. Current NZ population = approx 4.7m
It doesn’t make much sense does it
Probably isn’t a housing crisis anyway
Most people who really want to own a home manage to do so come what may.
The ‘accomadation’ Problem seems to be the fault of these horrible landlords who want to make a buck or two out of property.
“ At the top of every bubble, everyone is convinced it's not yet a bubble.”
The ‘accomadation’ Problem seems to be the fault of these horrible landlords who want to make a buck or two out of property.
Fuelled by the accommodation supplement.
Anecdotally (and subject to more rigorous analysis) I've been talking to a few students this year who are reporting an increase in rents. The $50 student allowance increase must be purely co-incidental.
Bookmarks