17 May 2012 at 10:17 am
Take an institution….welfare, education, prison service or any number of public services. Reduce…maybe ‘reduce’ is the wrong word…reconfigure their functions to accommodate formulae that are ‘business friendly’. (Y’know, formulas that lend themselves to being viewed in terms of simplistic ‘inputs’ and ‘outputs’ so that costs and potential profits can be discerned.) Then privatise.
*Up-date: Bill adds this to the debate:
"Bill
17 May 2012 at 12:07 pm
Increasing the class sizes is a primer for privatisation. Once privatised, some schools would be in a financial position to decrease class sizes again. (Note, that it’s an economic decision and not an educational one.)
Those that failed to achieve a financial position that would allow them to cut class sizes would , in conjunction with other contributory factors coming into play, find themselves constituting the second tier of a two tier eductation system.
Of course, there is every reason to believe that those schools who would fail to achieve a high enough economic performance would be spotted by would be private concerns, avoided and remain as state schools. deliberately underfunded and second rate in a (data collected, numbers crunched and scores allocated) comparison to private ones.
12 comments:
Sometimes RG you talk a load of bollocks. As much as I wouild like to see privatised schools - there is nothing in a one student increase in class size that presages privatisation. If privatisation was the Gnats agenda (secret or otherwise) there is nothing to stop them privatising with the previous class sizes.
Paranormal
Paranormal - some points:
This is something Bill said, not me. That said, I agree wholehearted with him. Each of the changes being rung by National point, in my view, to the privatization of schools and manifestations that support the Tory ideology. National Standards are a pre-requisite to performance pay for teachers, as Parata said in radio today. Bill tracks that line further. Charter Schools are not privatization in drag, paranormal?
If privatization was on the Nats' agenda... it surely and obviously is, paranormal. Are you claiming that it is not? Be clear. You say there is nothing to stop them privatising with class sizes as they are now, and that's true but logic fails you where you don't see that larger class sizes eases their path to privatizing schools.
It interests me that having 'found' studies that 'show' that larger classes aren't a negative indicator for learning, Parata today is going to great pains to have us believe that she's only talking about increases on one or two children (per middle-school class!)! Hilarious and dark. Try to follow the machinations, paranormal :-)
We can only hope for the breaking of the monopoly on education
We can only hope for the breaking of the monopoly on education
You are needlessly repeating yourself, Goober.
We ignored you the first time.
Oh I see - someone else said something that you repost - at least you have now clearly stated you agree with it.
Ok, maybe I should have been more precise with my language - An increase in class sizes, by one student, does not presage privatisation of schools that are currently public.
BTW at the moment I don't think the gnats have the cojones to undertake privatisation in any area where it is needed. But that is purely an aside. I don't rate Charter Schools as privatisation either. Given that we already have private schools that receive government funding. Also it is not privatising an existing public school.
Bill completely misunderstands how the private sector operates. Lets talk in a hypothetical way. If privatisation was on the cards, the private sector would be more attracted too the poorer performing schools because that is where the most gains can be made. Surely that would only benefit the students in poorer performing schools?
I've been accused of being a conspiracy theorist before, but Bill (and you) may take the cake. Could it possibly be that the gnats mean what they say about actually wanting to improve outcomes for students and they see national standards as the way to improve those outcomes?. And what is wrong with performance pay? Surely paying good teachers more is what we really need to ensure they stay in education? As mentioned elsewhere - it's the way the rest of the world operates. Teachers and students could benefit from it.
From what I know is coming from the Education Ministry it is clear to me the move is more in line with freeing up some funding.
Paranormal
"Anonymous said...
Oh I see - someone else said something that you repost - at least you have now clearly stated you agree with it."
That's correct. I did attribute it.
Ok, maybe I should have been more precise with my language
I wish you would, paranormal, for the sake of clarity. Surely you believe that debaters should hold to clarity of expression? Or are you a supporter of the John Key 'talking out of the side of-ones-mouth' technique?
- An increase in class sizes, by one student, does not presage privatisation of schools that are currently public.
No one said it did.
BTW at the moment I don't think the gnats have the cojones to undertake privatisation in any area where it is needed. But that is purely an aside.
I know what you are saying.
I don't rate Charter Schools as privatisation either. Given that we already have private schools that receive government funding.
I don't understand what you are saying here. You seem to be saying that in order to be 'private' a school will receive no public money. Are any of our private schools in that position? Where did National's '30 million' for private schools, given in their first term, go?
Also it is not privatising an existing public school.
Perhaps, but the development of a Charter School in any given area could sound the death-knell for the local public school.
Bill completely misunderstands how the private sector operates. Lets talk in a hypothetical way. If privatisation was on the cards, the private sector would be more attracted too the poorer performing schools because that is where the most gains can be made.
Msst gains? Surely the private sector will be looking to where the most money could be made?
Surely that would only benefit the students in poorer performing schools?
I've been accused of being a conspiracy theorist before, but Bill (and you) may take the cake. Could it possibly be that the gnats mean what they say about actually wanting to improve outcomes for students and they see national standards as the way to improve those outcomes?.
Some will, para, as they are that way programmed. Only some will be aware of the deeper outcomes
And what is wrong with performance pay?
A great deal. Read this, if you will: http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.co.nz/2012/05/performance-pay-for-teachers.html Surely paying good teachers more is what we really need to ensure they stay in education? That's a very, very narrow view and oddly, isn't what teachers say. There are greater rewards than money. Too subtle for you to detect, perhaps.
As mentioned elsewhere - it's the way the rest of the world operates.
Some strata operate like that Para, but you are deluded if you think 'the rest of the world' operates that way.
Teachers and students could benefit from it.
You say 'could'. I say, 'won't'. I think you lack the broad view that allows you to understand why teachers are not jumping up and down in support of the Nat's plans.
From what I know is coming from the Education Ministry it is clear to me the move is more in line with freeing up some funding.
Moving it from the back office to the front, para? Bullsh*t. That's what I think.
Paranormal
Robert
That's correct. I did attribute it. but unusually this time you said you agreed with it.<-i>
- An increase in class sizes, by one student, does not presage privatisation of schools that are currently public.
No one said it did. What about "increasing class sizes is the primer for privatisation"<-i>
As for privatisation I am referring to what happened in the 80's (that was the blueprint for privatisation the left constantly misrepresent) and trying to understand how you could possibly see that Charter Schools is a reflection of that.<-i>
Perhaps, but the development of a Charter School in any given area could sound the death-knell for the local public school. If that's the case then that would be the local communities choice. That would have to be a good thing. but then you don't like people thinking for themselves do you. nanny knows best<-i>
Surely the private sector will be looking to where the most money could be made? Exactly. Think about it RG.<-i>
A great deal. Read this, if you will: http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.co.nz/2012/05/performance-pay-for-teachers.html Having read that it is clear you and Dave need to get out into the real world more. Very little understanding there about how professionals are rewarded and how subtle performance pay can be set up.<-i>
That's a very, very narrow view and oddly, isn't what teachers say. Now you need to be more precise. It's not what self serving protectionist teacher unions say.<-i>
There are greater rewards than money. Too subtle for you to detect, perhaps. And those other rewards are not removed, only enhanced. It may surprise you that it is not money that drives me but the rewards that come from working with and helping people. But you are too ideologically blinkered to think that anyone with a brain can have feelings as well. (wrongly attributed to Churchill I believe)<-i>
you are deluded if you think 'the rest of the world' operates that way. Au contraire RG - those that aren't in a protected delusional little world of their own.<-i>
I think you lack the broad view that allows you to understand why teachers are not jumping up and down in support of the Nat's plans. I say yet again it is you who lack the broad view and fail to understand that many teachers will welcome it like other professions that are released from protectionist yokes.<-i>
Moving it from the back office to the front, para? Bullsh*t. That's what I think. No that's not what I am referring to at all. there is some really good work going on at the ministry that when implemented will improve things. Wait and see RG, wait and see.<-i>
Sorry - lets try that again - with working hash tags -
That's correct. I did attribute it. but unusually this time you said you agreed with it.
- An increase in class sizes, by one student, does not presage privatisation of schools that are currently public.
No one said it did. What about "increasing class sizes is the primer for privatisation"
As for privatisation I am referring to what happened in the 80's (that was the blueprint for privatisation the left constantly misrepresent) and trying to understand how you could possibly see that Charter Schools is a reflection of that.
Perhaps, but the development of a Charter School in any given area could sound the death-knell for the local public school. If that's the case then that would be the local communities choice. That would have to be a good thing. but then you don't like people thinking for themselves do you. nanny/teacher knows best - not
Surely the private sector will be looking to where the most money could be made? Exactly. Think about it RG.
A great deal. Read this, if you will: http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.co.nz/2012/05/performance-pay-for-teachers.html Having read that it is clear you and Dave need to get out into the real world more. Very little understanding there about how professionals are rewarded and how subtle performance pay can be set up. The questions at the end are naive in the extreme except for the key one - how do we measure performance. the other key question is how do we create incentives that align with the outcomes we want.
That's a very, very narrow view and oddly, isn't what teachers say. Now you need to be more precise. Perhaps it's not what self serving protectionist teacher unions say?
There are greater rewards than money. Too subtle for you to detect, perhaps. And you need to understand those other rewards are not removed, only enhanced. It may surprise you that it is not money that drives me but the rewards that come from working with and helping people. But you are too ideologically blinkered to think that anyone with a brain can have feelings as well. (wrongly attributed to Churchill I believe) Another case RG of you and 'Pot, Kettle, Black'?
you are deluded if you think 'the rest of the world' operates that way. Au contraire RG - those that aren't in a protected delusional little world of their own.
I think you lack the broad view that allows you to understand why teachers are not jumping up and down in support of the Nat's plans. I say yet again it is you who lack the broad view and fail to understand that many teachers will welcome it like other professions that are released from protectionist yokes.
Moving it from the back office to the front, para? Bullsh*t. That's what I think. And yet again you are doing exactly what you accuse me of. No that's not what I am referring to at all. there is some really good work going on at the ministry that when implemented will improve things. It is that work that requires the funding for implementation. Wait and see RG, wait and see.
Paranormal
Paranormal
"An increase in class sizes, by one student, does not presage privatisation of schools that are currently public.
No one said it did."
What about "increasing class sizes is the primer for privatisation"
Good point, para. Your suspicions aren't stirred by this 'one child' increase? One child? Where did that come from, do you think? One day earlier, Parata was saying, 4 to 5 child increase. Why has it been softened so quickly to one child, in the middle school classes. That's hardly 'bigger class sizes' is it? And it's very difficult to see how there will be money saved by increasing class sizes by just one child. I smell bullshit. Do you?
" the development of a Charter School in any given area could sound the death-knell for the local public school."
If that's the case then that would be the local communities choice. That would have to be a good thing. but then you don't like people thinking for themselves do you."
That's a trite little insult there, paranormal. If the playing field was level, communities choosing one system over the other would be fair. However, if the State school had been undermined by funding cuts, negative political pressure and other such machinations from a Government that favours the Charter model, then your 'choice' becomes moot.
"Having read that it is clear you and Dave need to get out into the real world more. Very little understanding there about how professionals are rewarded and how subtle performance pay can be set up." Dave's argument is that teaching requires a different approach, in terms of measuring teacher performance. National clearly hasn't a clue as to how to measure teacher performance, despite declaring that they are going to. Parata was hopelessly fudging her lack of awareness on how it will be done. You speak authoratively about these things, paranormal. How about you describe the mechanism by whicjh teacher performance should be measured. I'll bring my real life experience to bear on your idea and we'll see how sound your thinking is. It's a challenge, please take it up.
" But you are too ideologically blinkered to think that anyone with a brain can have feelings as well."
That's a very stupid thing to say, paranormal.
"Thats a very stupid thing to say paranormal"
Thought it may have been a bit oblique for you RG, even with the strong hint - maybe this will help: http://thinkexist.com/quotation/if-you-re-not-a-liberal-at-twenty-you-have-no/347162.html
I was pointing out your ideology is blinkering you again.
Ok your challenge - without much deep thought on it but using a normal structure there would be several elements in an individuals pay scale. A base, then several "achievable/at risk" components. One of the at risk components would be the performance element that is based on a number of measurable as well as subjective criteria. In an ideal world each year the individual would discuss and agree the individual elements. That way the indivduals mentor can identify the key components for that individual, by mutual agreement. The elements could be a mix of actual class results, student feedback, parent feedback, milestones reached, peer feedback.
I assume you will say this is too complex - but that is the way it is normally managed and as noted in my post above it assists individual growth as well as the overall outcomes. As you can see a Union one size fits all approach will never work in an open and collegial environment such as that described taht is good for all concerned. Thats why your union buddies are so vehemently agin it. There's your conspiracy to look into.
Paranormal
Post a Comment