Those who watched the Green Room, where the excluded Greens had their alternative online discussion and commentary, would have been highly frustrated that Russel or Metiria weren't able to challenge Key or Goff. Findlay MacDonald's interview with the Green leaders afterwards displayed that both had a far better grasp of the issues confronting us than what was displayed on TVNZ.
I'd like to, bsprout. Where's it at? The 'environment' questions in the so-called 'leaders' debate' went nowhere, neither having a green bone in their body :-)
They are in the process of making it available, there's a possible link if you click on "Green Room" on my post: http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.com/2011/10/green-leaders-show-initiative.html
I've been irrelevant all my life, Fred and am quite used to the feeling. The Greens though, being the 3rd biggest party in New Zealand politics, are far from irrelevant. I was interested to see that the TV3 poll on 'matters that are important to New Zealanders' had, to the great surprise of the commentators and each and every political leader, a 'clean environment' at the top of its list, ahead of 'the economy' Irrelevant? I don't think so, Fred. I challenge you to watch the Greens 'alternative debate, Fred', then perhaps ypu'd have some relevant comment to make :-)
I thought Goff appeared more like a PM than the incumbent. And you just can't hide from the glaring long term vs short term thinking of the left (greens included) vs the right (trickle down effect anyone?).
Key seems way too defensive and lacking in sincerity when it comes to the policy he speaks of. The only time he seemed to have some spark was speaking of education, which is indeed an important area of policy, so it beggars belief that Nat Standards is his policy for a world class education system.
Lets get real - last nights performance will make very little difference between red vs blue voters. Both leaders did well in the eyes of their respective supporters.
IMHO the big difference is Goof was allowed to come out from under the bushel. His performance was good enough to stop some of the flight from Red to Green.
Anonymous@11:31 Agreed. Key's overt support of national standards was odd and gave Goff the opportunity to attack at a high level (you're own asdvisor warned against it etc.) I have to assume that National has nothing else it can offer to promote its record in the field of education.
paranormal - the 'debate' was worth watching, in my view, just for the way it allowed Goff to redress the spin that has enshrouded him for so long. He bade his time, generally, and struck at Key effectively. The 'you have lied, John', stuff was well timed and bold. I expect the last of the debates to be lethal mixtures from both of them. Gloves off and, bar slip-ups, an eventual points victory to Goff, for what that's worth.
On a political level I think National is on a winner pushing national standards. Parents like the idea of finding out how their children are performing in an understandable report.
When they see the teachers unions and liarbour bashing what seems to be a good idea, it just backfires on the unions and Liabours support.
I don't agree at all, paranormal, with your assessment of parental views, nor with your use of the demeaning term, 'Liarbour'. Parents in the south have, I believe, not succumbed to the simplistic spin that Key furthered last night, as we have an active group of educational professionals down here that has kept the real issues in front of the parents. The claim by Key that national standards are important to the future of our children is wrong and has already weakened the educational system, to the detriment of those children. It's the wrong direction to take.
Schools, and I've worked in dozens, Shunda, are essentially effective and sound institutions. The children are almost invariably happy in them, the teachers are engaged and professional and the curriculum being delivered in a thorough manner. I have no need at all to support the school system - it would suit me better perhaps to be critical and call for alternative systems, as I do for most other things, but I know schools inside and out, pre-school to tertiary, from the point of view of a student, a teacher a parent and an administrator. I don't accept your view of schools, though I don't deny your sincerity. The present system is very good, though in a constant state of improvement, or at least, change. It was that way when I began teaching, 25 years ago, and it still seems to be that way. The teachers and their representatives are sincere. The aims of New Zealand schools are genuine and laudable. If you are demanding perfection, I'm not terrible sympathetic. That's pretty much how I see it, Shunda. Despite that, I struggled to fit into the system, but that's me and I don't resent the system that I didn't quite match up with. In general terms, we are very lucky indeed to have it. National standards, btw, are a crock. They are a false 'good' and merely a lever to weaker and erosive systems that will not help students or the country.
In truth, I found the leaders debates revealing, in that both Key and Goff (where were Turei and Norman? They'd have been ten times the value) were there together and could speak to each other with us watching. I feel that Goff was strong. I felt that Key, who should have dominated (after all, he's had three years of adulation, where Goff has had denigration form all quarters), was middling. Goff hit his straps as the event unfolded and dug deep into Key's weak spot - his credibility. Calling him on his lies was a good thing to do - many viewers would have gone, 'yes!' at that, being frustrated by the teflon protection that Key has enjoyed so far. Goff was not frightened to call him on that and other things. It was a turning point for the left supporters, I reckon. It'll slow-burn til the next debate, but watch out.
I think you are lucky if the parents in Southland are that engaged in what is happening. I suspect however it is the few motivated ones you are talking to. I would suggest the majority of sheeple just aren't that engaged. They are only looking at the style rather than the substance, whether it is School Standards, Law and order, Environment, or any other hot topic.
As for the school system, as you might expect I beg to differ. We are in the grips of a failed experiment with our future. Schools are a one size fits all system that just doesn't work.
The proof is that after 10 years in the system 20% - 25% of school leavers can't read and write (dependong on which stats you look at) and up to 40% don't have the level of 3r's skill to survive in a modern world.
The unions are complicit in this by ensuring poor teachers remain in classrooms. But the worst of it is the system still grinds up our most valuable people. Those that don't think the same as "us". If you are dyslexic or "ADHD" and a problem for the teacher then they use mechanisms such as drugging you. By the time these individuals reach their prime and should be able to really move things forward their brains are mush.
I've told you about my experiences with school. Our wider family have similar experiences with individuals written off by the school system you think is so good, who have gone on to do incredible things.
But getting back to the subject at hand. Those political tragics (me included) who watched the performance would have had their beliefs reinforced over who was best on the night. I still think Goof's performance was good enough to damage the Green vote.
I'm not talking to a few motivated ones, paranormal. I'm describing over two decades of work in the industry. Your opinions, if I might hazard a guess, are primarily based on your own families experience of schooling. That's all very well, but I wonder which of us has the broader, more balanced view. I am no longer in schools and have no particular reason to laud them, but my finding is that we are very lucky to have them. Ideally, they'd be better. Practically, they are good, not bad, as you and National and the Rightwing like to proclaim.
Robert - Why do you see this as a left / right thing? What is it about school leavers not being able to read and write after being ground through the system for 10 years that you find acceptable? Yes we have a 'good' school system but as you teachers are want to say - there is so much room for improvement.
Thanks also for the condescension. I use real life examples to add substance to the national statistics. Fact of the matter is - every family will have similar examples they can relate to.
Robert I don't doubt that you (or your Son) are a fine teacher, and would love for my kids to have a teacher like you, but do you think that could be the reason you didn't feel you could fit in so well??
There are good teachers and bad. Bad teachers and a good deal of state experimenting derailed my education, it's funny how as an adult one can look back and see clearly that certain teachers were no up to the task (especially after talking to their peers).
Our current High school has a commissioner in charge trying to sort out a shocking mess (left by said teachers) I wonder how you would explain how such a situation could occur if all teachers are so capable and competent. I believe they clearly can't be, and something needs to be done to ensure kids lives aren't derailed before they are 15 years old.
"Yes we have a 'good' school system but as you teachers are want to say - there is so much room for improvement."
Alright then, we're not so far apart on this. National standards are a feeble attempt to improve things - counter-productive, in my view. Imposing a regime that is unpopular with staff and administration is clearly not clever.
Shunda - there will be 'rogues' in every section of society. My experience is that these are few and far between in education. I know parents are opinionated when it comes to their own child's education and there are many opportunities for parents to find fault as their child moves through the system - they're in there for quite a stretch after all! I stand by my claim that over all, the system is good. As to my not fitting so well as others, you'd expect that, surely :-) Those teachers who do fit the education system are often far more proficient than me, achieving more in terms of the curriculum and serving their students very well indeed. My contribution to education has been of a different sort, I would suggest. As an aside, I've been asked to be guest speaker at the up-coming Garston School Pet Day in November! What an honour that is! I'm delighted to be asked and will be there with bells on (Dipton's just down the road. I'm guessing that'll be here my next invitation comes from :-)
But getting back to what I was saying - the reality of National Standards is not the issue when it comes to Leaders debate. It is the style over substance that matters for most voters as they don't bother delving into the facts.
Just also to point out you believe vouchers is not they way ahead. The Danish experience would suggest otherwise. From memory, only 10% of students have moved schools following the introduction of the voucher system. But what is clear, all schools have lifted the quality of what they're doing. Now Danish teachers wholeheartedly support the voucher system when I believe they were wholly opposed to it to start with.
BTW my experience comes from a range of areas - not just my family. I have worked with the ministry in various capacities over the past 15 years, with parents & educators in Wellington, Auckland & the Waikato and been involved in politics at local and national level.
28 comments:
Those who watched the Green Room, where the excluded Greens had their alternative online discussion and commentary, would have been highly frustrated that Russel or Metiria weren't able to challenge Key or Goff. Findlay MacDonald's interview with the Green leaders afterwards displayed that both had a far better grasp of the issues confronting us than what was displayed on TVNZ.
I hope those who missed it can watch a replay.
I'd like to, bsprout. Where's it at?
The 'environment' questions in the so-called 'leaders' debate' went nowhere, neither having a green bone in their body :-)
They are in the process of making it available, there's a possible link if you click on "Green Room" on my post: http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.com/2011/10/green-leaders-show-initiative.html
...."neither having a green bone in their body'.
What does it feel like to be so irrelevant, Rg?
I've been irrelevant all my life, Fred and am quite used to the feeling.
The Greens though, being the 3rd biggest party in New Zealand politics, are far from irrelevant. I was interested to see that the TV3 poll on 'matters that are important to New Zealanders' had, to the great surprise of the commentators and each and every political leader, a 'clean environment' at the top of its list, ahead of 'the economy'
Irrelevant? I don't think so, Fred.
I challenge you to watch the Greens 'alternative debate, Fred', then perhaps ypu'd have some relevant comment to make :-)
I thought Goff appeared more like a PM than the incumbent. And you just can't hide from the glaring long term vs short term thinking of the left (greens included) vs the right (trickle down effect anyone?).
Key seems way too defensive and lacking in sincerity when it comes to the policy he speaks of.
The only time he seemed to have some spark was speaking of education, which is indeed an important area of policy, so it beggars belief that Nat Standards is his policy for a world class education system.
Lets get real - last nights performance will make very little difference between red vs blue voters. Both leaders did well in the eyes of their respective supporters.
IMHO the big difference is Goof was allowed to come out from under the bushel. His performance was good enough to stop some of the flight from Red to Green.
Paranormal
Anonymous@11:31
Agreed. Key's overt support of national standards was odd and gave Goff the opportunity to attack at a high level (you're own asdvisor warned against it etc.) I have to assume that National has nothing else it can offer to promote its record in the field of education.
paranormal - the 'debate' was worth watching, in my view, just for the way it allowed Goff to redress the spin that has enshrouded him for so long. He bade his time, generally, and struck at Key effectively. The 'you have lied, John', stuff was well timed and bold. I expect the last of the debates to be lethal mixtures from both of them. Gloves off and, bar slip-ups, an eventual points victory to Goff, for what that's worth.
On a political level I think National is on a winner pushing national standards. Parents like the idea of finding out how their children are performing in an understandable report.
When they see the teachers unions and liarbour bashing what seems to be a good idea, it just backfires on the unions and Liabours support.
Paranormal
I don't agree at all, paranormal, with your assessment of parental views, nor with your use of the demeaning term, 'Liarbour'.
Parents in the south have, I believe, not succumbed to the simplistic spin that Key furthered last night, as we have an active group of educational professionals down here that has kept the real issues in front of the parents. The claim by Key that national standards are important to the future of our children is wrong and has already weakened the educational system, to the detriment of those children. It's the wrong direction to take.
It's the wrong direction to take.
I have asked for, but never received an alternative from you Robert.
I am shocked at how fragile the school system is and also shocked by the lack of basic integrity of some teachers.
These 'leaders' debates are nonsensical garbage, I find it interesting the way people perceive them, particularly the 'who won' nonsense.
They are for entertainment, and even then you have to wonder about those entertained by it.
Schools, and I've worked in dozens, Shunda, are essentially effective and sound institutions. The children are almost invariably happy in them, the teachers are engaged and professional and the curriculum being delivered in a thorough manner. I have no need at all to support the school system - it would suit me better perhaps to be critical and call for alternative systems, as I do for most other things, but I know schools inside and out, pre-school to tertiary, from the point of view of a student, a teacher a parent and an administrator. I don't accept your view of schools, though I don't deny your sincerity. The present system is very good, though in a constant state of improvement, or at least, change. It was that way when I began teaching, 25 years ago, and it still seems to be that way. The teachers and their representatives are sincere. The aims of New Zealand schools are genuine and laudable. If you are demanding perfection, I'm not terrible sympathetic. That's pretty much how I see it, Shunda. Despite that, I struggled to fit into the system, but that's me and I don't resent the system that I didn't quite match up with. In general terms, we are very lucky indeed to have it. National standards, btw, are a crock. They are a false 'good' and merely a lever to weaker and erosive systems that will not help students or the country.
In truth, I found the leaders debates revealing, in that both Key and Goff (where were Turei and Norman? They'd have been ten times the value) were there together and could speak to each other with us watching. I feel that Goff was strong. I felt that Key, who should have dominated (after all, he's had three years of adulation, where Goff has had denigration form all quarters), was middling. Goff hit his straps as the event unfolded and dug deep into Key's weak spot - his credibility. Calling him on his lies was a good thing to do - many viewers would have gone, 'yes!' at that, being frustrated by the teflon protection that Key has enjoyed so far. Goff was not frightened to call him on that and other things. It was a turning point for the left supporters, I reckon. It'll slow-burn til the next debate, but watch out.
Btw - Key's set-up 'drunken sailor' line was pitiful and pitiable. Contrived and mean spirited. That's Key.
Robert
I think you are lucky if the parents in Southland are that engaged in what is happening. I suspect however it is the few motivated ones you are talking to. I would suggest the majority of sheeple just aren't that engaged. They are only looking at the style rather than the substance, whether it is School Standards, Law and order, Environment, or any other hot topic.
As for the school system, as you might expect I beg to differ. We are in the grips of a failed experiment with our future. Schools are a one size fits all system that just doesn't work.
The proof is that after 10 years in the system 20% - 25% of school leavers can't read and write (dependong on which stats you look at) and up to 40% don't have the level of 3r's skill to survive in a modern world.
The unions are complicit in this by ensuring poor teachers remain in classrooms. But the worst of it is the system still grinds up our most valuable people. Those that don't think the same as "us". If you are dyslexic or "ADHD" and a problem for the teacher then they use mechanisms such as drugging you. By the time these individuals reach their prime and should be able to really move things forward their brains are mush.
I've told you about my experiences with school. Our wider family have similar experiences with individuals written off by the school system you think is so good, who have gone on to do incredible things.
But getting back to the subject at hand. Those political tragics (me included) who watched the performance would have had their beliefs reinforced over who was best on the night. I still think Goof's performance was good enough to damage the Green vote.
Paranormal
I'm not talking to a few motivated ones, paranormal. I'm describing over two decades of work in the industry.
Your opinions, if I might hazard a guess, are primarily based on your own families experience of schooling. That's all very well, but I wonder which of us has the broader, more balanced view. I am no longer in schools and have no particular reason to laud them, but my finding is that we are very lucky to have them. Ideally, they'd be better. Practically, they are good, not bad, as you and National and the Rightwing like to proclaim.
Robert - Why do you see this as a left / right thing? What is it about school leavers not being able to read and write after being ground through the system for 10 years that you find acceptable? Yes we have a 'good' school system but as you teachers are want to say - there is so much room for improvement.
Thanks also for the condescension. I use real life examples to add substance to the national statistics. Fact of the matter is - every family will have similar examples they can relate to.
Paranormal
Robert I don't doubt that you (or your Son) are a fine teacher, and would love for my kids to have a teacher like you, but do you think that could be the reason you didn't feel you could fit in so well??
There are good teachers and bad.
Bad teachers and a good deal of state experimenting derailed my education, it's funny how as an adult one can look back and see clearly that certain teachers were no up to the task (especially after talking to their peers).
Our current High school has a commissioner in charge trying to sort out a shocking mess (left by said teachers) I wonder how you would explain how such a situation could occur if all teachers are so capable and competent.
I believe they clearly can't be, and something needs to be done to ensure kids lives aren't derailed before they are 15 years old.
Read "When people matter most" by Colin Prentice.
"Yes we have a 'good' school system but as you teachers are want to say - there is so much room for improvement."
Alright then, we're not so far apart on this.
National standards are a feeble attempt to improve things - counter-productive, in my view. Imposing a regime that is unpopular with staff and administration is clearly not clever.
Shunda - there will be 'rogues' in every section of society. My experience is that these are few and far between in education. I know parents are opinionated when it comes to their own child's education and there are many opportunities for parents to find fault as their child moves through the system - they're in there for quite a stretch after all! I stand by my claim that over all, the system is good. As to my not fitting so well as others, you'd expect that, surely :-) Those teachers who do fit the education system are often far more proficient than me, achieving more in terms of the curriculum and serving their students very well indeed. My contribution to education has been of a different sort, I would suggest. As an aside, I've been asked to be guest speaker at the up-coming Garston School Pet Day in November! What an honour that is! I'm delighted to be asked and will be there with bells on (Dipton's just down the road. I'm guessing that'll be here my next invitation comes from :-)
Sir Tim Wallace was their most recent speaker. So long as I don't talk about Spitfires, they'll not compare me unfavourably with Sir Tim.
But getting back to what I was saying - the reality of National Standards is not the issue when it comes to Leaders debate. It is the style over substance that matters for most voters as they don't bother delving into the facts.
Just also to point out you believe vouchers is not they way ahead. The Danish experience would suggest otherwise. From memory, only 10% of students have moved schools following the introduction of the voucher system. But what is clear, all schools have lifted the quality of what they're doing. Now Danish teachers wholeheartedly support the voucher system when I believe they were wholly opposed to it to start with.
BTW my experience comes from a range of areas - not just my family. I have worked with the ministry in various capacities over the past 15 years, with parents & educators in Wellington, Auckland & the Waikato and been involved in politics at local and national level.
Paranormal
'involved in politics', paranormal?
Do tell. I'm happy to describe all of my involvements 'at local and national' level.
"It is an interesting question how far men would retain their relative rank if they were divested of their clothes." - Thoreau
More allusions to naturism!
What gives???
Post a Comment