0 Comment of the Day - 13 June 2014

We blogged on Monday with Hekia Parata's response to NZEI negativity over National's Investing in Educational Success policy. A robust debate ensued, even if it was rather one-sided, with Dave Kennedy trying to defend NZEI's position against all comers. We admire his dedication, but with disagree with his argument.

Early yesterday morning there was a new comment left on the post. We contacted Tom, the author, and asked for permission to use the comment as the basis for a new post. He gave permission late yesterday, so here's what Tom had to say:

Tom said...

Sorry for this late comment -

I would like to focus BSprout’s particular statement regarding teacher aides for children with disabilities. Despite apparently being a teacher, he clearly knows nothing or anything about this particular topic.

I am deaf and I was mainstreamed into a primary school. And I can say definitively that a useless, hopeless teacher was and still is much more damaging to a disabled child’s educational progress than any lack of hours with a teacher aide.
A teacher aide, even though they can be a godsend, is not a substitute for a good teacher. Their role is meant to be supporting the child in particular ways that teachers do not do. For example, my one checked that my aids and implant processor were working, that batteries were in ample supply, that the FM system was hooked up and took loads and loads of notes/transcriptions for me to read.
 
Far more often than not though, teachers took this to be an excuse to slack off with me – they frequently did not bother to approach me or check my work even at my aide’s insistence, they refused to add more visual aids to their teaching (e.g. key words written on board as teacher talks) and put me in the too hard basket. They often expected my aide to do the whole job of teaching me when their job is really to facilitate the education.
 
Virtually all of the teachers in my first primary school were of this type. They were all useless, slackers and encouraged each others’ behaviour, refused to be accountable to my parents and the BOT, and had a useless leadership team. There was nothing my teacher aide or my parents could do, except switch my entire family to another school on the other side of town (instead of having to walk one block as we did before.)
 
At this new school, teachers had already worked with quite a few children with disabilities, they had gone out and gotten extra training and the principal, well, she brooked no crap or slackness from anyone who entered the school. The teacher aides (including mine) became part of a team with the teaching staff, and the teaching staff were inclusive and flexible to make their teaching style workable for all children – those with disabilities and those without.

So I can definitely say with confidence having experienced the system first hand that the biggest problem facing children with disabilities is not lack of teacher aiding hours. The biggest problem by miles are the absolutely useless p.o.s teachers who should have been ages ago or made to up their game but haven’t because the unions shield those people from ever having accountability.

I would also like to say that I deeply resent BSprout’s teachers-knows-best attitude and that the entire education system should just be left to teachers and never be accountable to children and their parents, the ones that are actually receiving and paying via taxes and donations for the service. If I had been left to mercy of useless w**kery lazy-arse teachers, I do not want to know where I would be today.

Apologies at having written an entire novel,
Tom.

June 12, 2014 at 1:46 AM

This certainly provides an interesting alternative perspective, and we thank Tom for allowing us to highlight it. We don't propose to add anything; this is Tom's perspective of the school system, and his words can do the talking.

0 Why don't they mention the PPTA?

There seems to be a split in the ranks of teacher unions. The Herald reports on an apparent "epic fail" of Hekia Parata's Investing in Educational Success policy:

The Government's $359 million expert teachers policy has proved to be the latest in a series of "epic failures" in the education sector due to a lack of consultation with teachers and Labour will soon announce a better model it says.
The Government policy which would see "expert" and "lead" teachers identified and paid extra to act as role models across several schools was slammed by primary teachers union the NZEI and the NZ Principals Federation after they met to discuss it this week.
NZEI National President Judith Nowotarski said leaders from national and regional principal and teacher groups had sent a clear message that the policy, as it currently stood, was "unacceptable and unworkable" and "identified the lack of direct benefit for children in this policy".
School leaders were concerned the policy would remove highly rated teachers and principals from their schools for two days a week, which would impact on children's learning.

Labour's education spokesman Chris Hipkins said the fact that teachers and principals were willing to turn down pay rises of up to $40,000 a year "reflects how bad they believe this policy is".

And Green Party candidate, former teacher and NZEI delegate Dave Kennedy offers a similar narrative at his blog:

Classroom teachers, the New Zealand Educational Institute, the New Zealand Principal's Federation and education academics have all strongly rejected the Government's proposed $359 million Investment into Education Success (IES). All believe that this substantial amount of money will not produce the results that the Education Minister claims and would be better spent elsewhere.

Now the fact that NZEI, the Labour Party's Education spokesman and a Green Party candidate with strong NZEI links are singing from the same songbook is nothing new. But what is interesting is that none of them mention the secondary teachers' union, the PPTA.

We blogged last week about our surprise at the PPTA's willingness to throw off its tradition reluctance to deal with a National Party Education Minister. PPTA has engaged with Hekia Parata, and even though it is early days in what has already been a tense relationship, there are some very promising signs.

And the PPTA has published an interesting blog-post on its website that busts o few of the myths surrounding IES. We have left the link on Dave Kennedy's blog, given that he is always so keen to provide us with links to further our education on causes dear to his heart, if not to ours. The post is headed Six Impossible things being said about IES, and begins thus:

Alice laughed. "There's no use trying," she said:
"one can't believe impossible things."
"I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen.
"When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day.
Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast." 
1. There has been no consultation.
This might be true if these changes had been legislated in place but that’s not what happened. The $359 million was an employer offer made to unions for them to bargain and amend with the aim of eventually putting it into their collective agreements.   If using the democratic structures of unions to make changes for teachers isn’t consultation what is?
2. The money could be better spent on…
It possibly could but it was approved via the Budget process to be spent on a specific educational initiative.  Budget spending decisions are a government prerogative.  Anyone waiting for the day when a democratically-elected government sets its budget priorities by national plebiscite will be waiting a long time.  If it is more important to spend money on addressing issues of poverty than teachers does that mean teachers will never seek another pay increase?
3. IES creates a layer of management…

We won't steal any more of the PPTA's thunder (but urge you to read the piece), and in fact can't quite believe that we are endorsing a union's point of view. But we reckon that the PPTA is on the right side of this argument, despite Dave Kennedy's rather patronising comment that "I also believe they do not understand the full ramifications.". With due respect to Dave, patronising a brethren union is not the way to win friends and influence voters!

It would seem that Chris Hipkins has simply rushed out a presser after reading the NZEI's diatribe about Mrs Parata and the IES policy. Perhaps he has former NZEI people advising him. In any event, the opposition of NZEI and the Principals Federation seems to be more about election-year ideology than advancing opportunities for their members.

Once again, we commend PPTA for putting aside past differences with Mrs Parata in an effort to improve the lot of principals and teachers, because that will ultimately improve outcomes for the children they teach. We'll leave the last word to the PPTA:

Listen carefully – that is the sound of professionals collaborating.  

0 Congratulations Dave

The Green Party has announced its party list over the weekend. And a regular commenter here has an outside chance of making it into Parliament. Dave Kennedy, aka bsprout has been ranked at #19 on the list, up four places from his 2011 ranking.

Here's the top 20:

And in a story on the list, the Dom-Post's headline writer seems to have given Dave a bit of a nod:

On current polling, Dave won't make it into Parliament, but if Labour's vote collapses much further, he could stand a chance. Both TV channels are reporting polls tonight, and if the numbers we've heard being bandied around are true, things will be tense in Labour's War Room tomorrow.


Footnote: We've blogged before about Matthew Beveridge's Politics and Social Media blog. He's just posted a link to another name from further down the Greens' list, whose sole tweet has been in breach of the Green Party's stated values!