Was Mrs Tolley starting to learn something about her portfolio?

For a moment it appeared that someone was listening... 
PLD is highly valued by teachers and principals – and rightly so.  Suddenly it's appeared on the government's list of things to do.  Are they really listening?  Is Mrs Tolley learning?

Nope.

Once again the government is adopting a once over lightly approach that smells strongly of tokenism.  

MOE doesn’t have the staffing to offer this service?  That’s not surprising given its regional focus on property and finance.  Schools are businesses; principals are CEOs.  Now, get on with it: sell your brand and balance your books. 

Comment (0) Read More...

If you don't consult members and and then misrepresent their views in order to toady up to the government of the day there will be consequences as NZSTA is finding out

Comment (0)

According to John Key teachers aren't interested in kids and learning.  Look at this quote from his speech to the National Party last weekend

Friends, this Government has made a choice. That choice is to put the future of our children and this country ahead of the interests of those who resist change even when the status quo had been so clearly failing our children .

Thanks John. Nice to know you care and understand.   It makes me think   the unionists protesting outside are on to something with that rat image not only does it bear a passing resemblance to the man himself but it links back to Tolley's visit to the PPTA executive when she read them a story about Riley the Rat who learned "how to be happy with less". 

Comment (0) Read More...

Congratulations to Tony Ryall, Nick Smith, Judith Collins, Anne Tolley, Christopher Finlayson, David Carter for wiping out the Aussie Mozzie

Takes seven ministers to squirt a bit of dimp 'round the BBQ? 

But in all seriousness - fiscal responsibility and all that - and it really is nice seeing you all sharing the limelight - but hey could you give Anne a bit more time in her own portfolio area?

Comment (0) Read More...

"As a parent I would not be happy if my school was using money that should be going to the education of my children for sprinklers. I send my kids to school to get educated, not to have a shower."  (Anne Tolley)

But sending kids to a burned-down school, or even worse losing a student or teacher's life, is OK?

First the Ministry suggests that schools remove rubbish bins from their premises in order to prevent fires then they suggest "schools that cannot afford sprinklers should install security systems " (and how would security be cheaper in money and lives than sprinkler systems?). And what about prevention being better than the cure - school arson attacks cost more than $30 million in the last 10 years  - (and that's just dollars, not lost school/teacher/student work, not the loss of a community facility, not the people costs) did those schools have sprinkler systems?

Anne Tolley is a parent and she is the Minister of Education, the buck stops with her, not her ministry (despite media pitches to drive up sales for the $327 report from TransTasman).

Don't drop and roll for cover with glib comments Anne - you should ensure every school is funded to install sprinkler systems and not treat students, teachers and communities in such an off-hand cavalier way. 

Comment (0) Read More...

Have you seen the part of Vote: Education that changes the ops funding calculation for secondary schools?

From 2011 the ops funding will be recalculated every quarter and secondary schools will have the ops funding adjusted accordingly.

The MoE website  says that this is an incentive to schools to improve their retention of students.

What?

 Apparently in the mind of the Ministry schools now influence the school leaving rate more than:

The state of national economy.

Or the state of the local economy

Or the needs of employers to recruit apprentices or employees in the mid year.

Or the armed forces or police with their mid-year intakes.

Or population movements

Or the collapse of a local industry

In effect schools are going to be fined for having their kids sorted and ready to move on to the next step in life.

Made the cut for intake into the Navy, Angela?  Excellent we’ll fine the school when you leave.

An apprentice for your engineering firm, sir?  To help take up that free trade opportunity in China?  Sorry, can’t help.  If we give you a student in the middle of the year, we’ll be fined.

Apparently the only time kids can leave school for any reason is at the end of the year.  At any other times schools will have their funding cut.  They’ll be fined.

So a 4% increase in secondary ops funding, less the 20% increase in GST, plus the reduction in ops funding due to the new calculation method equals no increase for secondary schools.

Any school unfortunate enough to have students leave during the year will probably be worse off than they were before this budget.
 
I’d love you to tell me that I have got it wrong, but I think that the only way I can have this wrong is if there is an as yet undetected proposal to fully compensate schools for the GST increase beyond the 4% rise announced in the budget.

I wonder which bright spark gave the Government this piece of stunning policy advice? Perhaps the Minister has been sold a pup by a disingenuous official who has devised a way to use a superficially appealing phrase like “incentive for schools to improve their engagement with students” to claw back the money that the GST has not already got.
 
It just has to be stopped somehow.

What thoughts has PPTA got?

Comment (0)

The April edition of the PPTA News includes a message from the president, Kate Gainsford, about a new and REDUCED funding formula that the Ministry of Education is developing for small area schools (below 200). Well that’s what it seems to be planning judging from this document  entitled Change of Class Applications (pdf) and  obtained under the Official Information Act.   Various ministers of education have been establishing new schools (even when there are surplus places at surrounding schools) as if there was no tomorrow.  

The most recent minister, Anne Tolley has belatedly realised that the cost of facilitating parental choice by providing a secondary school on every corner - where the dairy used to be - is unaffordable. So what has she done?  According to the document seven new kura kaupapa Maori have been approved by the minister to become wharekura (ie. area schools that provide education from year 1 to 15) BUT at a much lower funding rate than other are schools get.  The document says this is an interim measure but that the ministry is working (in secret it appears) on a permanent formula. This raises a number of questions:

• Should wharekura get less funding than other area schools?
• Are all schools with roll numbers below 200 going to face reductions?
• How are the interests of schools that are small because they are remote going to be safeguarded?
• Are parents going to be expected to make up the shortfall?
• Is it right to provide “choice” thorough a mechanism that reduces funding and potentially diminishes education quality?

Comment (0)

By Observer  

This government doesn’t seem to have the slightest commitment to the idea that employers should act in good faith or that the State Sector Act 1988 (s77A) requires schools to “operate a personnel policy that complies with the principles of being a good employer”.   

When it announced its poorly thought-through decision to can ACE (night schools) funding within the 2010 year, it appears to have had no clue as to how schools were meant to pay redundancy costs except that they should use whatever spare ACE money they had.  Even a quick risk analysis would have told them that schools would not have enough to pay if the employees had had a lengthy period of employment. 

Comment (0) Read More...

Government funding cuts hit the Ministry of Education

First they shuffle the money out of PD into National Standards, and perhaps out of the Behaviour Action Plan/Special Education into Truancy action, now job losses. 

Apparently this will mean the Ministry will be more efficient,  and less bureaucratic  

Possibly the same logic that says cuts to staffing in schools will allow schools more flexibility?

Comment (0)

 By Winged Rodent

At a time when the world focuses on the dangers of climate change, the government appears to be going green -  by recycling its spending this Christmas.  
We could see the $200 million 'budget' allocated to fighting truancy and crime among teens as a form of "up-cycling” – a term coined to describe "the creation of a product with higher intrinsic value from a material at the end of its service life."  
In other words, it is taking an empty ice-cream container, covering it with glitter and calling it a present.

Comment (0) Read More...