Tags >> MOE
Posted by: PPTAweb
on 10, Oct, 2011
Tagged in: teaching , teachers , students , student achievement , secondary schools , PPTA , Performance pay , MOE , Ministry of Education , learning , education spending , education politics , education , Class size , annual conference
Sitting on the train wondering where to begin with this week's blog. Class size seems a good place to start as Kate Gainsford, PPTA vice president, was on breakfast TV yesterday morning discussing class size - and in the twitterverse a couple of commentators suggested performance pay for teachers would be better value for money in improving student achievement.
Posted by: Cynic
on 02, Dec, 2010
Tagged in: unions , teachers , STCA , secondary schools , salary , PPTA , pay , NZEI , negotiations , MOE , Ministry of Education , industrial action , Entrenchment , Employment Relations Act , education spending , education politics , conditions , collective agreement , bargaining
Entrenchment refers to a clause in the NZEI primary teachers' collective agreement. This clause is an agreement between NZEI and the MoE, it means that any increases in pay made to PPTA members will also be offered to NZEI members.
If NZEI members accept the offer, being taken out to them by their executive, they will receive an immediate pay-rise.
PPTA members have rejected the miserly mixed up offers of the Ministry - and have said they will continue to fight for improved teaching and learning conditions in secondary schools.
Posted by: Winged Avenger
on 03, Aug, 2010
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.
Posted by: majo
on 30, Jun, 2010
Did they listen to a word – did they listen to a single argument over those 12 days of bargaining?
It doesn't sound like it!
This government is showing total disregard for the work teachers do and the issues they face daily.
Posted by: Silverback
on 01, Jun, 2010
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?
|
