We know that Charter Sachools were controversial - now Labour has said
what it will do - no surprises in that: : http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
It does however confirm what was suspected early on when it was
discovered that one "Trust" had purchased a farm - as was thought that
the time, this was apparenty not well handled by National, and it
seems that the capital costs paid from taxpayer funds are permanently
lost - kept by the promotors of the "School." Doubtless they will
have been careful to keep any donations to the National Party below
the disclosure limit . . . Crony capitalism continues to thrive under National . . .
On Sun, 7 May 2017 13:05:09 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>world:
wrote:
On Sunday, 7 May 2017 20:52:05 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
We know that Charter Sachools were controversial - now Labour has said
what it will do - no surprises in that: :
http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
It does however confirm what was suspected early on when it was
discovered that one "Trust" had purchased a farm - as was thought that
the time, this was apparenty not well handled by National, and it
seems that the capital costs paid from taxpayer funds are permanently
lost - kept by the promotors of the "School." Doubtless they will
have been careful to keep any donations to the National Party below
the disclosure limit . . . Crony capitalism continues to thrive under
National . . .
...
meanwhile, outside of blinkered political tribalism, and back to the real
preserve the status quo: unionised education and central control by political committees.http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2017/04/arizona-and-the-case-for-school-choice.html
And our own: >http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1704/S00189/partnership-schools-congratulated-for-ncea-results.htm
Labour and Chippie don't give a shit about the kids. They just want to
So you think it was worth literally giving away the farm for a failed
school, JohnO?
On Sunday, 7 May 2017 20:52:05 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
We know that Charter Sachools were controversial - now Labour has said
what it will do - no surprises in that: :
http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
It does however confirm what was suspected early on when it was
discovered that one "Trust" had purchased a farm - as was thought that
the time, this was apparenty not well handled by National, and it
seems that the capital costs paid from taxpayer funds are permanently
lost - kept by the promotors of the "School." Doubtless they will
have been careful to keep any donations to the National Party below
the disclosure limit . . . Crony capitalism continues to thrive under
National . . .
...
meanwhile, outside of blinkered political tribalism, and back to the real world:
http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2017/04/arizona-and-the-case-for-school-choice.html
And our own: >http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1704/S00189/partnership-schools-congratulated-for-ncea-results.htm
Labour and Chippie don't give a shit about the kids. They just want to preserve the status quo: unionised education and central control by political committees.
Of course not. But one anecdote is not an argument any more than any of themany public school failure anecdotes I could easily pour into this thread to cause diversions from the argument.
On Sunday, 7 May 2017 20:52:05 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:world:
We know that Charter Sachools were controversial - now Labour has said
what it will do - no surprises in that: : http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
It does however confirm what was suspected early on when it was
discovered that one "Trust" had purchased a farm - as was thought that
the time, this was apparenty not well handled by National, and it
seems that the capital costs paid from taxpayer funds are permanently
lost - kept by the promotors of the "School." Doubtless they will
have been careful to keep any donations to the National Party below
the disclosure limit . . . Crony capitalism continues to thrive under National . . .
...
meanwhile, outside of blinkered political tribalism, and back to the real
http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2017/04/arizona-and-the-case-for-school-choice.html
And our own: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1704/S00189/partnership-schools-congratulated-for-ncea-results.htm
We know that Charter Sachools were controversial - now Labour has said
what it will do - no surprises in that: : http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
It does however confirm what was suspected early on when it was
discovered that one "Trust" had purchased a farm - as was thought that
the time, this was apparenty not well handled by National, and it
seems that the capital costs paid from taxpayer funds are permanently
lost - kept by the promotors of the "School." Doubtless they will
have been careful to keep any donations to the National Party below
the disclosure limit . . . Crony capitalism continues to thrive under National . . .
On Sun, 7 May 2017 13:05:09 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, 7 May 2017 20:52:05 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
We know that Charter Sachools were controversial - now Labour has said
what it will do - no surprises in that: :
http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
It does however confirm what was suspected early on when it was
discovered that one "Trust" had purchased a farm - as was thought that
the time, this was apparenty not well handled by National, and it
seems that the capital costs paid from taxpayer funds are permanently
lost - kept by the promotors of the "School." Doubtless they will
have been careful to keep any donations to the National Party below
the disclosure limit . . . Crony capitalism continues to thrive under
National . . .
...
meanwhile, outside of blinkered political tribalism, and back to the real world:
http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2017/04/arizona-and-the-case-for-school-choice.html
And our own:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1704/S00189/partnership-schools-congratulated-for-ncea-results.htm
Labour and Chippie don't give a shit about the kids. They just want to preserve the status quo: unionised education and central control by political committees.
So you think it was worth literally giving away the farm for a failed
school, JohnO?
On Monday, 8 May 2017 09:56:08 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:"Anecdote"? Do you have any evidence that any of the money used to
On Sun, 7 May 2017 13:05:09 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, 7 May 2017 20:52:05 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
We know that Charter Sachools were controversial - now Labour has said
what it will do - no surprises in that: :
http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
It does however confirm what was suspected early on when it was
discovered that one "Trust" had purchased a farm - as was thought that
the time, this was apparenty not well handled by National, and it
seems that the capital costs paid from taxpayer funds are permanently
lost - kept by the promotors of the "School." Doubtless they will
have been careful to keep any donations to the National Party below
the disclosure limit . . . Crony capitalism continues to thrive under
National . . .
...
meanwhile, outside of blinkered political tribalism, and back to the real world:
http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2017/04/arizona-and-the-case-for-school-choice.html
And our own:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1704/S00189/partnership-schools-congratulated-for-ncea-results.htm
Labour and Chippie don't give a shit about the kids. They just want to preserve the status quo: unionised education and central control by political committees.
So you think it was worth literally giving away the farm for a failed
school, JohnO?
Of course not. But one anecdote is not an argument any more than any of the many public school failure anecdotes I could easily pour into this thread to cause diversions from the argument.
On 5/8/2017 10:02 AM, JohnO wrote:
Of course not. But one anecdote is not an argument any more than any of the many public school failure anecdotes I could easily pour into this thread to cause diversions from the argument.
Were liebor honest about their concern over education surely they'd want
to scrutinize the public school system in spite of it being run by their >union mates
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >https://www.avast.com/antivirus
After all, I'd have thought any secondary education system that's
designed so you can rig your curriculum and game your credits so as to
exit Year 13 with a certificate for which you've never even sat a final exam, must have something really special going for it.
On Sun, 7 May 2017 15:02:26 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>world:
wrote:
On Monday, 8 May 2017 09:56:08 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 7 May 2017 13:05:09 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, 7 May 2017 20:52:05 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
We know that Charter Sachools were controversial - now Labour has said >> >> what it will do - no surprises in that: :
http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
It does however confirm what was suspected early on when it was
discovered that one "Trust" had purchased a farm - as was thought that >> >> the time, this was apparenty not well handled by National, and it
seems that the capital costs paid from taxpayer funds are permanently >> >> lost - kept by the promotors of the "School." Doubtless they will
have been careful to keep any donations to the National Party below
the disclosure limit . . . Crony capitalism continues to thrive under >> >> National . . .
...
meanwhile, outside of blinkered political tribalism, and back to the real
preserve the status quo: unionised education and central control by political committees.
http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2017/04/arizona-and-the-case-for-school-choice.html
And our own:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1704/S00189/partnership-schools-congratulated-for-ncea-results.htm
Labour and Chippie don't give a shit about the kids. They just want to
many public school failure anecdotes I could easily pour into this thread to cause diversions from the argument.
So you think it was worth literally giving away the farm for a failed
school, JohnO?
Of course not. But one anecdote is not an argument any more than any of the
"Anecdote"? Do you have any evidence that any of the money used to
purchase the property was ever returned when the school closed?
Let us suppose that you really do have an equivalent "anecdote" about
a "public school" (by which I assume you mean a state funded school).
Would that excuse the incompetence of the current government over
their Charter School turning into yet another "crony capitalism"
handout?
Buit of course you do not have an equivalent "anecdote" - it is just a typical nat-troll attempt to distract, deny, and if all fails lie . .
.
So there's your challenge, JohnO - upir defence of NAtional's bungle
has failed, but your attempted distraction is being called - show some
real evidence!
On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 8:05:11 AM UTC+12, JohnO wrote:world:
On Sunday, 7 May 2017 20:52:05 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
We know that Charter Sachools were controversial - now Labour has said what it will do - no surprises in that: : http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
It does however confirm what was suspected early on when it was discovered that one "Trust" had purchased a farm - as was thought that the time, this was apparenty not well handled by National, and it
seems that the capital costs paid from taxpayer funds are permanently lost - kept by the promotors of the "School." Doubtless they will
have been careful to keep any donations to the National Party below
the disclosure limit . . . Crony capitalism continues to thrive under National . . .
...
meanwhile, outside of blinkered political tribalism, and back to the real
party feathering its own nest by exploiting children as its plaything-pawns, maybe more relevant to consider whether the NZ curriculum is the best that New Zealand can manage;http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2017/04/arizona-and-the-case-for-school-choice.html
And our own: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1704/S00189/partnership-schools-congratulated-for-ncea-results.htm
While there's nothing at all unusual about a New Zealand one-man political
After all, I'd have thought any secondary education system that's designed soyou can rig your curriculum and game your credits so as to exit Year 13 with a
In fact, I'd bet other OECD countries with their Oxford/Cambridge/Harvardelites simply can't wait to adopt our NCEA.
So, are they?
Anyone?
On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 2:43:45 PM UTC+12, jmschri...@gmail.com wrote:world:
On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 8:05:11 AM UTC+12, JohnO wrote:
On Sunday, 7 May 2017 20:52:05 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
We know that Charter Sachools were controversial - now Labour has said what it will do - no surprises in that: : http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
It does however confirm what was suspected early on when it was discovered that one "Trust" had purchased a farm - as was thought that the time, this was apparenty not well handled by National, and it
seems that the capital costs paid from taxpayer funds are permanently lost - kept by the promotors of the "School." Doubtless they will
have been careful to keep any donations to the National Party below
the disclosure limit . . . Crony capitalism continues to thrive under National . . .
...
meanwhile, outside of blinkered political tribalism, and back to the real
party feathering its own nest by exploiting children as its plaything-pawns, maybe more relevant to consider whether the NZ curriculum is the best that New Zealand can manage;http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2017/04/arizona-and-the-case-for-school-choice.html
And our own: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1704/S00189/partnership-schools-congratulated-for-ncea-results.htm
While there's nothing at all unusual about a New Zealand one-man political
so you can rig your curriculum and game your credits so as to exit Year 13 withAfter all, I'd have thought any secondary education system that's designed
elites simply can't wait to adopt our NCEA.In fact, I'd bet other OECD countries with their Oxford/Cambridge/Harvard
Zealand's secondary education isn't already 'slippery-slope' enough, we now have this from 2015:So, are they?
Anyone?
Mmmmm...thought not.
So, as if the government-sanctioned rigging and gaming underpinning New
'NCEA data “clearly indicates grade inflation has taken place”.'do. They’re wanting an 85 per cent pass rate at level two.”'
(http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/07/ncea_grades.html)
But why has this happened, you so rightly ask? I quote, verbatim:
'Because “[Increasing results] is exactly what the ministry is asking us to
In other words, National have been instructing educators to do the kind ofthing National does best: lower the quality bar while blatantly cheating New Zealanders out of their birthright.
This is nothing less than a downright determination, not to raise theintellectual quotient of the nation at all, but to blindside educator and student alike by a sleight-of-hand policy of 'Degrade to enhance." (This, by the way, is only a whisker
But we're not done just yet. National's chief media shill and thumb-twiddlingpollster now waxes expansive on his latest pet enthusiasm:
'It is designed so that more students will be able to leave school with acertificate of proficiency in at least some areas. It is not like School Certificate that was designed to have half the people sit it fail.'
(No, Mr Shill. It's an intellectually bankrupt government's bromide designedprecisely to create a scenario where what was once an honest 'fail' is now conjured into a bogus 'achieved.' In current parlance it's called 'Fake Education' - no one misses
But wait, there's yet more from National's pet Pollyanna, and, believe me,it's a zinger:
"Having said that, it would not be surprising if there is an element of gradeinflation. By its nature with mainly internal assessment, it will never be as rigorous as external examinations."
Now rub your eyes and, if your dwindling credulity can stand it, read thatlast sentence again.
That's right, that's the word you read: **Rigorous,** the criticallydegenerate lack of which is presided over, finessed, and parlayed by your shameless bunch of under-educated, self-satisfied Pontius Pilates in the Beehive.
So, next time you see BMA adorning some aspirant applicant's name, perhapsprudent to read it as Bogus Masters in 'Achievement.'
Some call this cultural progress.years ago)
So, what do you call it?
(Hint: check the latest international university rankings and compare with 10
On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 2:43:45 PM UTC+12, jmschri...@gmail.com wrote:world:
On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 8:05:11 AM UTC+12, JohnO wrote:
On Sunday, 7 May 2017 20:52:05 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
We know that Charter Sachools were controversial - now Labour has said what it will do - no surprises in that: : http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
It does however confirm what was suspected early on when it was discovered that one "Trust" had purchased a farm - as was thought that the time, this was apparenty not well handled by National, and it
seems that the capital costs paid from taxpayer funds are permanently lost - kept by the promotors of the "School." Doubtless they will
have been careful to keep any donations to the National Party below
the disclosure limit . . . Crony capitalism continues to thrive under National . . .
...
meanwhile, outside of blinkered political tribalism, and back to the real
party feathering its own nest by exploiting children as its plaything-pawns, maybe more relevant to consider whether the NZ curriculum is the best that New Zealand can manage;http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2017/04/arizona-and-the-case-for-school-choice.html
And our own: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1704/S00189/partnership-schools-congratulated-for-ncea-results.htm
While there's nothing at all unusual about a New Zealand one-man political
so you can rig your curriculum and game your credits so as to exit Year 13 withAfter all, I'd have thought any secondary education system that's designed
elites simply can't wait to adopt our NCEA.In fact, I'd bet other OECD countries with their Oxford/Cambridge/Harvard
Zealand's secondary education isn't already 'slippery-slope' enough, we now have this from 2015:So, are they?
Anyone?
Mmmmm...thought not.
So, as if the government-sanctioned rigging and gaming underpinning New
'NCEA data “clearly indicates grade inflation has taken place”.'do. They’re wanting an 85 per cent pass rate at level two.”'
(http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/07/ncea_grades.html)
But why has this happened, you so rightly ask? I quote, verbatim:
'Because “[Increasing results] is exactly what the ministry is asking us to
In other words, National have been instructing educators to do the kind ofthing National does best: lower the quality bar while blatantly cheating New Zealanders out of their birthright.
This is nothing less than a downright determination, not to raise theintellectual quotient of the nation at all, but to blindside educator and student alike by a sleight-of-hand policy of 'Degrade to enhance." (This, by the way, is only a whisker
But we're not done just yet. National's chief media shill and thumb-twiddlingpollster now waxes expansive on his latest pet enthusiasm:
'It is designed so that more students will be able to leave school with acertificate of proficiency in at least some areas. It is not like School Certificate that was designed to have half the people sit it fail.'
(No, Mr Shill. It's an intellectually bankrupt government's bromide designedprecisely to create a scenario where what was once an honest 'fail' is now conjured into a bogus 'achieved.' In current parlance it's called 'Fake Education' - no one misses
But wait, there's yet more from National's pet Pollyanna, and, believe me,it's a zinger:
"Having said that, it would not be surprising if there is an element of gradeinflation. By its nature with mainly internal assessment, it will never be as rigorous as external examinations."
Now rub your eyes and, if your dwindling credulity can stand it, read thatlast sentence again.
That's right, that's the word you read: **Rigorous,** the criticallydegenerate lack of which is presided over, finessed, and parlayed by your shameless bunch of under-educated, self-satisfied Pontius Pilates in the Beehive.
So, next time you see BMA adorning some aspirant applicant's name, perhapsprudent to read it as Bogus Masters in 'Achievement.'
Some call this cultural progress.years ago)
So, what do you call it?
(Hint: check the latest international university rankings and compare with 10
We know that Charter Sachools were controversial - now Labour has said
what it will do - no surprises in that: : http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
On Sun, 07 May 2017 20:51:55 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:
We know that Charter Schools were controversial - now Labour has said
what it will do - no surprises in that: :
http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
What was that again?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11852384
On Monday, 8 May 2017 20:08:16 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:many public school failure anecdotes I could easily pour into this thread to cause diversions from the argument.
On Sun, 7 May 2017 15:02:26 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Monday, 8 May 2017 09:56:08 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 7 May 2017 13:05:09 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, 7 May 2017 20:52:05 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
We know that Charter Sachools were controversial - now Labour has said >> >> >> what it will do - no surprises in that: :
http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
It does however confirm what was suspected early on when it was
discovered that one "Trust" had purchased a farm - as was thought that >> >> >> the time, this was apparenty not well handled by National, and it
seems that the capital costs paid from taxpayer funds are permanently >> >> >> lost - kept by the promotors of the "School." Doubtless they will
have been careful to keep any donations to the National Party below
the disclosure limit . . . Crony capitalism continues to thrive under >> >> >> National . . .
...
meanwhile, outside of blinkered political tribalism, and back to the real world:
http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2017/04/arizona-and-the-case-for-school-choice.html
And our own:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1704/S00189/partnership-schools-congratulated-for-ncea-results.htm
Labour and Chippie don't give a shit about the kids. They just want to preserve the status quo: unionised education and central control by political committees.
So you think it was worth literally giving away the farm for a failed
school, JohnO?
Of course not. But one anecdote is not an argument any more than any of the
Integrated schools such as Catholic schools are not state owned but are state funded. Even private schools receive some state funding. Your manifest ignorance of NZ education"Anecdote"? Do you have any evidence that any of the money used to<Sigh>. Yes, Dickhead, "anecdote". OED: "a short amusing or interesting story about a real incident or person". Was there a point to you going on about the term or are you just ignorant of its meaning?
purchase the property was ever returned when the school closed?
Let us suppose that you really do have an equivalent "anecdote" about
a "public school" (by which I assume you mean a state funded school).
<Sigh> Not quite, Dickbot. A public school is a state funded and owned school.
Would that excuse the incompetence of the current government over
their Charter School turning into yet another "crony capitalism"
handout?
The question is void. The government doesn't manage charter schools.
So with falling school funding, and unmanaged competition from other
Buit of course you do not have an equivalent "anecdote" - it is just a
typical nat-troll attempt to distract, deny, and if all fails lie . .
Of course I do. You should know by now that unlike you I don't post out of ignorance. Here's an *anecdote* of "public school failure". Took all of 5 seconds to find one with Google:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/77716175/Wairarapa-Colleges-1-8m-debt-affecting-kids-says-parent
Ah - the loser abuses - giving up so soon, JohnO?.
So there's your challenge, JohnO - upir defence of NAtional's bungle
has failed, but your attempted distraction is being called - show some
real evidence!
Shown. Now go fuck off and read something, you demented little amoeba.
On Mon, 8 May 2017 12:59:38 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>said
wrote:
On Monday, 8 May 2017 20:08:16 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 7 May 2017 15:02:26 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Monday, 8 May 2017 09:56:08 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 7 May 2017 13:05:09 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, 7 May 2017 20:52:05 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
We know that Charter Sachools were controversial - now Labour has
thatwhat it will do - no surprises in that: :
http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools >> >> >>
It does however confirm what was suspected early on when it was
discovered that one "Trust" had purchased a farm - as was thought
permanentlythe time, this was apparenty not well handled by National, and it
seems that the capital costs paid from taxpayer funds are
underlost - kept by the promotors of the "School." Doubtless they will >> >> >> have been careful to keep any donations to the National Party below >> >> >> the disclosure limit . . . Crony capitalism continues to thrive
real world:National . . .
...
meanwhile, outside of blinkered political tribalism, and back to the
preserve the status quo: unionised education and central control by political committees.
http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2017/04/arizona-and-the-case-for-school-choice.html
And our own:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1704/S00189/partnership-schools-congratulated-for-ncea-results.htm
Labour and Chippie don't give a shit about the kids. They just want to
the many public school failure anecdotes I could easily pour into this thread to cause diversions from the argument.
So you think it was worth literally giving away the farm for a failed >> >> school, JohnO?
Of course not. But one anecdote is not an argument any more than any of
story about a real incident or person". Was there a point to you going on about"Anecdote"? Do you have any evidence that any of the money used to<Sigh>. Yes, Dickhead, "anecdote". OED: "a short amusing or interesting
purchase the property was ever returned when the school closed?
school. Integrated schools such as Catholic schools are not state owned but areLet us suppose that you really do have an equivalent "anecdote" about
a "public school" (by which I assume you mean a state funded school).
<Sigh> Not quite, Dickbot. A public school is a state funded and owned
So you have no evidence that any money was paid back. As I thought.
Would that excuse the incompetence of the current government over
their Charter School turning into yet another "crony capitalism"
handout?
The question is void. The government doesn't manage charter schools.
Indeed it appears that sadly you are correct.
In spending money most
NEw zealanders would expect the government to have a contract that
actually calls for results from taxpayer money
- it seems that there
is minimal perusal even of results, with a contract that allows the
"private company" to receive both capital and operational grants, set
their own "management fees" if they provide some sort of educaiton
result, and keep any capital and unused operation grants when they
fail. Typical muppet crony capitalism - heads the "private company"
wins, tails taxpayer funds are lost; or if you prefer socialise the
losses, subside the profits. Thanks for confirming.
ignorance. Here's an *anecdote* of "public school failure". Took all of 5 seconds to find one with Google:
Buit of course you do not have an equivalent "anecdote" - it is just a
typical nat-troll attempt to distract, deny, and if all fails lie . .
Of course I do. You should know by now that unlike you I don't post out of
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/77716175/Wairarapa-Colleges-1-8m-debt-affecting-kids-says-parentSo with falling school funding, and unmanaged competition from other
schools, and with little or no training of school trustees, a school continues to provide education services as required, even though that
results in a loss. Did any person gain a farm from the debacle? Of
course not, but we see the same situation in DHBs - most make losses
as medical staff and even hospital management cannot force themselves
to turn away patients in need, despite the best efforts of government
to make them do so. Salaries for head of a DHB have skyrocketed under National as the job becomes increasingly toxic if they desire to meet governments unrealistic expectations, and "deficits" (so much nicer a
word than losses to a National government) continue to wrack up.
State schools are closely monitored,
yet still this happened - clearly
something is wrong with the monitoring. You may claim that is
equivalent to the contractual loss from the charter school, but the
scale of such losses indicate a desire by government to place publicly managed and monitored schools (and hospitals) in an impossible
catch-22 of cutting costs without cutting services. The incompetence
is in both cases with the government, but perhaps you see it
differently.
.
So there's your challenge, JohnO - upir defence of NAtional's bungle
has failed, but your attempted distraction is being called - show some
real evidence!
Shown. Now go fuck off and read something, you demented little amoeba.Ah - the loser abuses - giving up so soon, JohnO?
On Tue, 9 May 2017 04:42:58 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sun, 07 May 2017 20:51:55 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:
We know that Charter Schools were controversial - now Labour has said
what it will do - no surprises in that: :
http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
What was that again?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11852384
Yep, a bit more clarification was needed - the hikins piece gave the
big picture but did not cover transition for current Charter Schools
"Labour would have "adult" conversations about each existing charter
school when in power, Little said. If they met minimum conditions like
having registered teachers and teaching the national curriculum then
the school could stay open but become another type of school, such as
a special character school."
Now we know that some of those "adult" conversations may well result
in promotors seeing the writing on the wall and walking away - taking
their seed capital fron the Nat/ACT government with them because of
shitty contract provisions, but some (including the one Willie Jackson
is ionvovled with, may well decide that they really did want a quality education and that simple minimum conditions which apply to other
schools are actually worth doing to provide that quality education -
so Labour want better education outcomes, and less money going to
greedy management fee miners / capital grant stealers.
He situation with the school that turned into a full farm as profit
for the canny negotiators facing the muppet MPs is of course being
carefully avoided by the National and ACT Parties and their supporters
- did you think snipping the point of the original post would not be
noticed?
On Tue, 9 May 2017 04:42:58 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sun, 07 May 2017 20:51:55 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:
We know that Charter Schools were controversial - now Labour has saidWhat was that again?
what it will do - no surprises in that: :
http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11852384
Yep, a bit more clarification was needed - the hikins piece gave the big picture but did not cover transition for current Charter Schools "Labour would have "adult" conversations about each existing charter school when
in power, Little said. If they met minimum conditions like having
registered teachers and teaching the national curriculum then the school could stay open but become another type of school, such as a special character school."
Now we know that some of those "adult" conversations may well result in promotors seeing the writing on the wall and walking away - taking their
seed capital fron the Nat/ACT government with them because of shitty
contract provisions, but some (including the one Willie Jackson is
ionvovled with, may well decide that they really did want a quality
education and that simple minimum conditions which apply to other
schools are actually worth doing to provide that quality education - so Labour want better education outcomes, and less money going to greedy management fee miners / capital grant stealers.
He situation with the school that turned into a full farm as profit for
the canny negotiators facing the muppet MPs is of course being carefully avoided by the National and ACT Parties and their supporters - did you
think snipping the point of the original post would not be noticed?
On Mon, 8 May 2017 13:37:19 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:many public school failure anecdotes I could easily pour into this thread to cause diversions from the argument.
On 5/8/2017 10:02 AM, JohnO wrote:
Of course not. But one anecdote is not an argument any more than any of the
Were liebor honest about their concern over education surely they'd want
to scrutinize the public school system in spite of it being run by their
union mates
It is run by the Minister and the Department of Education. Are you
claiming they are union members?
There is pelenty of evidence that they do scrutinise the public school system, but that is not what has been raised in this thread - there
has never been any evidence of anyone invovled in the state school
system getting away with keeping a farm bought with government money
to provide for a school.
If you think there is, then do tell - I am sure Labour would be happy
to hear from you!
On Tue, 9 May 2017 04:42:58 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sun, 07 May 2017 20:51:55 +1200, Rich80105 wrote:
We know that Charter Schools were controversial - now Labour has said
what it will do - no surprises in that: :
http://www.chrishipkins.org.nz/labour_s_position_on_charter_schools
What was that again?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11852384
Yep, a bit more clarification was needed - the hikins piece gave the
big picture but did not cover transition for current Charter Schools
"Labour would have "adult" conversations about each existing charter
school when in power, Little said. If they met minimum conditions like
having registered teachers and teaching the national curriculum then
the school could stay open but become another type of school, such as
a special character school."
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 188:11:41 |
| Calls: | 2,081 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 11,137 |
| Messages: | 947,662 |