Showing posts with label facts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label facts. Show all posts

Thursday, 1 October 2015

A tale of two Hekia Parata speeches.

This week is the first week of the term break.  Every term break there are teacher only days and planning days and professional learning days and conferences.  This week three conferences ran across the week, NZEI's Annual Conference, PPTA's Annual Conference and the School Library Conference (SLANZA).  I only found out on Tuesday that there were also conferences running for ERO and PaCT in Auckland as well.  So many teachers, principals, support staff and other educational professionals were well involved in many different conferences throughout the land.

NZEI began its conference entitled It's Got to be About the Child (see the picture on the left to see one of the banners) on Sunday.  They had a full agenda planned with different sectors within the Institute demonstrating their year's work and what was to come as well as CTU President Helen Kelly was speaking, Prof Bob Lingard from Queensland as the key note speaker and addresses from the Australian Education Union and Education International.

What was of note was our Minister of Education, Hekia Parata, was again not on the agenda.  Several weeks ago I had been told she had declined the invitation.

While not an official attendee for this year's conference, I decided to gate crash on Monday because of the speakers.  I really enjoyed Monday, and was as surprised as everyone when Louise Green stood up before the afternoon session and told the meeting that the Minister's office had rung to say Ms Parata wanted to speak to the membership the following afternoon and was rearranging her afternoon to do so.

So what prompted this?

I was not at the NZEI President's Awards Dinner on Sunday night (obviously), but I was told that Bill Noble, former NZEI President, did comment that previous to the current Minister, all the Ministers of Education of the day had spoken to the NZEI Annual Meeting each year.

It was then observed that the invited Ministry official was seen with two phones, and was texting away furiously on one of them.  To the Minister perhaps?

Join the dots from Sunday night to Monday afternoon.

Before the Minister arrived on Monday afternoon I engaged in the following tweeting exchange with the PPTA:



What was interesting was that after her greeting, Hekia address my tweet first.  Oops.


During the "acknowledgement" of my tweet, the Minister stated that she was supposed to be in China this week on a delegation regarding education or the like.  Well I know that Gerry Brownlee was in China on the day, apparently putting a deal about leasing pandas on the table.

The Minister also stated that she was going to Finland in a few weeks (here's hoping she actually takes a lot of notice of how they do things there!) and so her office decided she couldn't be out of the country so much, and withdrew her from the China trip.

She then claimed that the invitation was not reactivated within her office.


Looking at the explanation, then marrying it up with the fact that she had just arrived from two conferences in Auckland that day (the ERO and PaCT conferences), as well as the fact that she had been confirmed to speak at the PPTA conference in the next few days for several weeks... and well... you can see I thought (in polite terms), "CODSWOLLOP MINISTER!!"

Anyhow, you can watch the Minister for yourself in this video below.


The Minister aggressive at the beginning of her speech.  She then whipped through a 17 page speech in 12 minutes.  Note the video in 19 minutes long.  Ms Parata flung a lot of figures and numbers at us to justify what she has done.

Ms Parata also claimed that she wanted to be held to account.  That is very difficult if you do not front up to us each year, if you decide to show if three years after your last visit.

The Minister did not look at all comfortable with herself in front of the NZEI membership at all during her visit.

There were no questions.  There was no time for questions.  She had arrived at about 4:10pm and had to catch a flight at Rotorua Airport at 5:15pm. 

Please also watch National Executive Jan Tinetti's response to the Minister.  This is very clever and pointed.


Below is the Twitter feed from before, during and after Ms Parata's speech as a Storify.


Two days later, Hekia Parata spoke to the PPTA (I hope this embed works!).  Her demeanour was more relaxed, comfortable.  I wondered if it was because it was a smaller room with less delegates, if the NZEI members are more scary than the PPTA members... She was cracking jokes, spontaneously breaking into te reo (then having to translate when she realised 90+% of the attendees were not fluent bilingually)... it was all going so well until she got to answer a question on charter schools.  Watch and see... by the way this video is an hour long (if it is working).



On the plus side, at least Hekia Parata can remember her stance on the 1981 Springbok Tour, unlike the Prime Minister.

However, there is no comparison between apartheid and making a stance against charter schools.  I believe that the Minister may have been disappointed at the lack of media interest in her this week and was looking for a hook to get the media to sound bite.  Well it worked.  Here is an sample of the media coverage after this speech on 1 October 2015:
These articles were pretty much the first lot of press she had gotten since the 22 of September.

The PPTA has the right to make a stand against charter schools.  They have chosen to do so by not being professionally involved with charter schools or their staff.  This trainee teacher was still employed at the charter school at the time he wanted to do his student teacher practicum at a state school - hence the decision not to have him at the school by PPTA members who would have been required to mentor him.  As the PPTA has pointed out, those who have left charter schools to work back in the state schooling system have been welcomed back.  Besides, if charter schools are so fabulous, perhaps he could have done his practicum at one of those.  #justsaying

So some other issues to raise my ire:

Targeted PLD
The Minister said that there would be targeted PLD in reading, writing, maths, science and digital fluency along with a pilot for PE and health (note that National killed all the effective PLD in these areas in 2009 when they introduced the flawed National Standards and focused all PLD on implementing that very badly).

This PLD would be targeted at the regions with "consistently poor achievement data" - that would be Northland and Gisborne/East Coast schools - because "as tax payers we should be very concerned" that the current PLD has been ineffective.

To me that means that the Minister will be interfering directly in these schools with how they run and dictating what they do.  Where is the flexibility and collaboration in that?

While more PLD would be welcome, the Minister's signal that the Education Council (aka EDUCANZ) will most likely be responsible for this signals more warning lights.  It raises questions over the flexibility of PLD to meet the needs of individual teachers and schools, centralising education functions (after 26 years of decentralisation) and the ability the Education Council to administer and deliver PLD.

Funding of Schools
The Minister brought up how schools will be funded and the fact that it is now on the table for review.  While she says that no decisions have been made yet, think back to March last year when she accidentally slipped to a Herald on Sunday reporter that schools would be funded based on achievement data... and then back tracked after the article was printed.  From the article School funding shakeup looms (16 March 2014), I've copied these quotes

The Government did not want to fund schools according to their raw results in National Standards or NCEA, but on how much teachers had helped students to learn over the course of six months or a year, "the consistency and the progress".
"You've got to work out which school is delivering achievement, which schools are focusing on how they raise the quality of their teaching and leadership practice, and how is that translating into kids demonstrating that they're learning more?"

To hear Hekia come out with comments on this during her speeches worries me.  Angela Roberts from the PPTA was pointed in her reply to the Minister after her speech that the four meetings a year with the Education Forum the Minister established was not enough to collaborate and consult with the schooling sectors on how funding will work.  I agree.

I think John's Blog 8 Predictable Outcomes of Hekia's Planned Funding Changes alerts us to why the Minister's ideas on school funding are so flawed.

The Education Act is a dinosaur
The Minister stated in both speeches that the Education Act is a dinosaur and that there were parts of it that dated back to 1867.  I'm pretty sure that is the part of the Act that actually established education provision in New Zealand, and without it there would legally be no education provision allowed.  #justataguess

The Minister has said that children are not mentioned at all in the Education Act previously, that is keeps tripping her up (which means the Act is stopping her from completely destroying our quality public education system), and that she wants it to be child centric and all in one easy document.

Great -  just make sure that there is full and proper consultation with the sectors and all stakeholders.  And listen and use it.  Don't ignore us like you did with the Teachers Council!!

Early Childhood Education
Ms Parata acknowledged to the NZEI Conference that we had concerns over ECE funding being frozen.  She then proceeded to tell us how much more money is being spent on ECE now than in 2009 and that 98% of providers were meeting the standards.

What the Minister failed to consider was, that while more money is going into ECE, more children are participating in ECE and the funding per child has not increased.

Also, minimum standards does not necessarily equate to quality in ECE.  She did not address that.

Support Staff
Support Staff did not even rate a mention with the Minister.

IES/Joint Initiative
The Minister congratulated both unions on their participation with the MOE over IES/Joint Initiative.  But there was a smugness in how she gushed over the 31% of members who voted to return a 78% Yes vote for the Joint Initiative to go ahead.  NZEI has ceded all the power they earned in their rejection of IES in 2014 by taking the pig with lipstick that the Joint Initiative became after the negotiations with the MOE to the members and getting them to vote for it by saying it was the best we would get.

Jan Tinetti did acknowledge that the members were uneasy over the Join Initiative developments.  I'd say the members are furious.  I know I am, and this decision has meant I will not return to classroom teaching next year because I will not be party to the GERMification of our education system.  NZEI threw out the inoculation to the GERM by presenting this vote to the membership.

I know the Joint Initiative team put in a lot of hard work.  They collected a lot of data, examples and information that will continue to be useful in many ways.  But I consider what was put up to the membership to be an insult to their hard work.

I see the Community of Schools/Community of Learning model to be the vehicle to controlling what is taught and how, introducing and embedding PaCT in schools (because Hekia waxed lyrical on how it would make our workload better - yeah, right), bringing in super principals and replacing BOTs for each schools with Boards covering the cluster.  Just a few predictions.  I'll be devastated to see them come to fruition.

Invitations to the conferences
As stated above, Hekia said she would attend if invited.  She said that at the NZEI conference, and the PPTA conference, but her tone of voice inferred she had not been invited.  After the Minister left, last year's invitation to the NZEI Conference and the rejection from the Minister's office was put up on the big screens.  A comment was made as to "I don't know what goes on in the Minister's office but she is invited every year."

Today I challenged Ms Parata directly on her Facebook page about what she said in regards to invitations to conferences at the NZEI and PPTA conferences.  Her response was quick and concise.


I believe that this Minister of Education is incredibly dangerous.  What she has done, along with what Anne Tolley did before her (and she was a shocking Minister of Education too), and what Ms Parata is about to do will be devastating to our quality public education system, and too much of it will be irreparable if we don't stand up as NZEI members to stop her from implementing even more flawed right wing neo liberal policies.  If we don't, then we have failed the standard as professionals of the education sector.


Thursday, 25 April 2013

Beware the bullies who don't want you to excercise your democratic rights

This post is all about exercising your democratic rights to speak freely, to have an opinion and the right to express that opinion.  But before I get to that, I need to explain some other stuff....

GERM (Global Education Reform Movement) was a term coined by Pasi Sahlberg, leading educationalist from Finland, to describe the reforms touted by neo-liberalists to fix education systems they claim are in crisis.

Since the 2008 election campaign National has been claiming that New Zealand has a broken education system.  That the system is failing with 1/5 students leaving school unable to read and write or do basic maths without NCEA Level 2

National and Act having been ramming these "facts" down the throats of the electing public for nearly six years now.  Do you know where they got these facts from?

Below is a screen shot from The Daily Blog where you can read more about how National pulled the wool in regards to education:


So here we have National manufacturing "facts" to get National Standards legislation through parliament with little regard to the truth, and this has set the tone for what we have now: a government trying to force through yet another piece of legislation (Charter Schools/Partnership Schools/Hourua Kura) which was not even mentioned in passing in the 2011 pre election manifestos by either National or Act and yet they claim they have a mandate to do so!

Earlier this week Save Our Schools NZ posted a poll asking several questions gauging how successful you think the Charter Schools policy will be.  This poll was advertised on the SOSNZ blog, SOSNZ facebook page, and then shared on other group facebook pages and by supporters. 

Voting on the poll was tracking a long.... and then a certain oily blogger found out about it.


As you can see from the screen shot above (and I am not supplying a link to this bully's page) he called it a "union organised opposition".  The commenters were venomous and downright bully-like with their comments, then they went on to vote in the poll, and then made every effort to have the blog and facebook pages for SOSNZ reported and labelled as spam in order to stymy the debate and derail opposition.   

Let me assure you that the person who runs the SOSNZ blog is a stay at home full time mum of a pre-schooler who is deeply concerned about the direction of education in New Zealand.  She is also a qualified teacher, is a member of NZEI as she does the occasional bit of relief teaching, but is currently focusing on being a mum, and until the class size issue last year was not paying a lot of attention to education issues.

But one of National's mistakes last year was to announce increasing class sizes.  If one thing is going to upset parents it is the idea that their child will get even less attention from a teacher than what they already do.  Parents did a great job of making themselves heard over that issue, and it means that they are now paying more attention to education issues all round.  It has also ignited more organised opposition from not only parents and teachers (and their unions), but from grandparents, aunties and uncles, and just plain concerned citizens.

And now the Whale and his followers have ignited even more opposition due to their behaviour this week.

We live in a democracy.  One of the basic tenets of a democracy is free speech and the right to protest.  My disclosure statement at the top of this blog explicitly says that these are my views that I am expressing because I live in a democracy.  I am open to express my views and to protest against those things that I do not agree with.

I believe that I support the right for all people to do the same.

However I do not agree with bullying and telling blatant lies and not checking your facts.

The Whale however is known, in my opinion and the opinion of many who have been oiled, for all these things.

He has been to court for breaking suppression orders for at least three cases (although I actually agreed with him on this count) so we know he isn't that worried about breaking the law.

Last year when the Ports of Auckland dispute was at its zenith he released the personal details of one of the wharfies, lambasting him as being a malcontent who earned an exorbitant sum of money (exaggerated by the Whale), had had mega amount of leave (the man's wife was dying of cancer) and accused him of all sorts of things.... and it turned out he had accepted money to champion the case of the Ports of Auckland.  If you want to read more of this behaviour critiqued in regards to this issue click here.

Whale has a long history of targeting individuals.  I know of two principals who were very active in opposing the GERM.  One has since withdrawn her activism in order to protect her professionalism, school, community and family.  The other has increased his activism and retired from the teaching profession.  Why should one man's vitriol have so much influence?

And now I look at the lead up to NZEI's day of action and his lack of accuracy:



I have blanked out the names and pictures of the people concerned.  They have suffered enough from this bully.

The second person was particularly upset to be oiled.  For starters, her profile picture at that time included her grandchild and she did not think it fair that the Whale publicise the child.  Secondly, this lady is not, nor has never been, a teacher.  She joined the page because she is a concerned grandparent and worries for the future of education for her grandchildren in Christchurch.  Since she is not a teacher (or teacher aide or any other kind of support staff) she does not belong to a teachers' union.

Did the Whale stop to check his facts?  No. 

In the course of writing this blog I have messaged several people who this blog mentions to check facts and mostly to get their approval to write about them.  It is the ethical thing to do.

When the second person from the Whale's post above commented on his blog with corrections and to ask that the picture be removed, she received no apology and another unsubstantiated accusation was laid against her.  Also in the comments section was an accusation against one of the people shown in the Whale's post supposedly outing them on a personal matter.  I haven't included a link or a screen shot of that because I do not want to cause further unnecessary pain. 

The point that I want to make here is that not only is the Whale a bully, but he encourages his followers to do the same, and he does not moderate.  The abuse on this post and on the post about the SOSNZ poll was horrific and personal and defamatory.  The SOSNZ administrator has been advised she should seek a legal opinion on the comments made.

On the 27th of March I watched Media3 (after Nightline on TV3 Wednesday nights, repeated late Saturday mornings).  On this episode they were discussing the possibility of a new standards authority for media, including blogs.  Currently blogs do not fall under any standards in regards to media and broadcast.  The Whale appeared as his real self, Cameron Slater, and stated that he would most likely join the new authority.

I immediately gained the impression that this new authority would have even less teeth than the current authority governing media, because his blog definitely does not meet the standards that newspapers currently have to meet!

Earlier this week on that bastion of current events, Seven Sharp TV1 7pm Monday-Friday, Jesse Mulligan gave some great advice on how to take the piss out of Colin Craig without getting sued for defamation.  Click here to view.  So I am going to take a leaf out of Jesse's book an I am going to tell you some truths about the Whale.

Everything I have said above is the truth.  I've done exactly what Jesse said I should to avoid a defamation suit.  And did you note that I had done a google search or two to get the evidence?

This next part is just something I want you to consider about bullies in general:

"Bullies were also at higher risk for mental health problems, including depression, anxiety and hostility....  Bullies tended to hold a negative view of themselves, suggesting they pick on others to feel better about themselves, and they may especially single out those who have trouble fitting in for other reasons."  Sourced from: http://www.livescience.com/11163-bullies-bullying.html

"Q: What about a child who has been a bully?
A:
Studies have shown that bullying in childhood is often a “gateway behavior” that leads to serious problems later in life, including:
  • truancy
  • school failure
  • law-breaking behavior
  • substance abuse
  • destructive personal relationships
  • difficulty maintaining employment
  • cruelty to animals
  • violent crime
In fact, a study of 3,913 children published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal found that aggressive children had 8 percent more medical visits as adults compared with their peers, 10 percent more injuries and hospital admissions and 12 percent more Emergency Department visits. Aggressive children also experienced 44 percent more lifestyle-associated diseases as adults.
For all of these reasons, it’s imperative that a child who bullies others receives immediate help."
Sourced from:  http://childrenshospital.org/az/Site2912/mainpageS2912P1.html

You connect the dots.

Basically, I am saying that the Whale is below the standard for how he runs his blog.  His research skills are below the standard.  His comprehension skills are below the standard.  His critical thinking skills are below the standard.  His behaviour as a human being towards other human beings is below the standard.  His understanding of how a democracy works is below the standard.  You failed the standard Whale Oil.