'I can be objective' says Isaac - and my appointment is not political
Posted by: Cynic
on 08, May, 2012 
Charter schools - New Zealand education for sale - - you can buy anonymously 
it's a captive market, guaranteed income from the taxpayer and regulation free, ... sign up here.
'I can be objective' says Isaac - and my appointment is not political
Well tie me to an anthill and smear my ears with jam! I just couldn't maintain my zen listening to Catherine Isaac on Native Affairs. Cynic is back.
Have a listen to this paragon of virtue on Native Affairs and then tell me she's objective.
Link to Native Affairs Maori Television (couldn't get an embed code) so choose 7 May 2012 broadcast Series 6 Episode 9 (Catherine Isaac is about 17mins through)
Where did she get those stats she quotes - according to the objective non-political source:
30% of NZ students don't leave school with basic numeracy and literacy ...
52% of Maori students don't leave with basic numeracy and literacy...
and to top it off here is some interesting objective non political opinion ...
96% of students go to a public school which indicates there isn't enough diversity in our education system
The stats (the real ones not the drive up a crisis in education cos I'm objective and not a political appointment ones) are on the Education Counts website, it's useful to get the numbers right
I saw no understanding of the research - I suspect she hasn't read any... apparently the vast amount of literature is a problem ... (after all it's only our tamariki we're talking about here).
The research apparently, depends on the view you bring to it - hmm, for the record, there is difference between anecdote, hope and research - and NZ kids deserve to be served by an education policy that is informed by research evidence.
Apparently you can't compare the child who got into the charter school with a child who didn't - What!? run that by me again Catherine!
Apparently you can only compare kids who are lotteried in with kids who are lotteried out!
Unlike the research - Catherine and her henchcolleagues are able to identify exactly which factors work for kids and which ones don't - so they can give NZ kids only what works. Amen brothers and sisters - please add some more $ to the Charter School collection plate.
Not only is Catherine an objective and a non political appointment - she is NZ's education messiah, no longer will we need to look at the evidence - we can just ask the Charter school group. Watch out for your job Hekia!
Mind you - as she was appointed by John Banks - today she probably "can't recall" saying any of it.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
PPTAweb
said:
|
Re: Research comparing lotteried in and lotteried out students You might find this of interest - Quality Control In Charter School Research, Posted by Matthew Di Carlo on May 18, 2012 http://shankerblog.org/?p=5867 RCTs = Randomised Controlled Trials" "RCTs, on the other hand, account for the differences between students using the magic of random assignment. Put simply, they focus on applicants only, and compare those who did and did not attend a charter school. Since the factor determining which schools these students attend is a random lottery, this means that charter students should be, on average, the same as non-charter students in terms of student and family characteristics that are known to affect achievement. Due in large part to the infrequency of lotteries, there are only a handful of charter RCTs out there. Most notably, a lottery study of New York City charters found generally positive, meaningful effects on a variety of different outcomes, as did this analysis of charters in Boston (also see here for more on Massachusetts, and this RCT of a small group of charters in Chicago).** More recently, a 2010 Mathematica lottery study of 36 charter middle schools across six states, a relatively large proportion of which were in rural or suburban areas, found no discernible effect overall (there was, however, a positive impact among low-income students, one which was very modest in reading and strong in math, along with a strong negative impact among non-low-income students in both subjects). The data from this study were expanded and used in the new Mathematica analysis discussed below. So, while it’s true that the lottery studies generally show positive effects, it’s also worth noting that we are really only talking about a small group of studies in a limited set of locations, most of which include relatively few schools. Moreover, one might reasonably assert that oversubscribed charters tend to be among the better ones out there (as evident in the number of applications they receive). So, it’s hard to argue that they are representative of charters as a whole, whether in a given location or nationally (see here and here for more on this issue of external validity).*** That said, the “best evidence” argument is obviously correct in its premise that RCTs are to be preferred, even if they are not without their own issues (e.g., limited scope). Since, however, experimental analyses are simply not feasible in most cases, it is important to assess whether different non-experimental alternatives are suitable for informing policy decisions. ..." For the record the New Zealand education environment is very different to the American/UK/Swedish education environment. The question needs to be - why would anyone think that it is OK to experiment on NZ kids with a charter model here. The only possible answer is privatisation and profit - and I include Trusts in this discussion eg Cognition http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominio...er-schools "Cognition Education, which is New Zealand's largest educational consultancy and posts an annual profit of more than $50 million" |
|
Show/hide comment form
