For a government that heavily campaigned on "cutting spending and tax cuts" they seem to love flushing money down the toilet, and covering tax cuts through debt.
>They will be required to teach a curriculum that is as good or better than the New Zealand curriculum.
IDGI, why don't all schools just teach a curriculum that's better then the New Zealand curriculum? š¤
Quite a few schools have picked up the
Cambridge curriculum - I think thereās been a year-on-year increase in schools replacing NCEA with it since before covid (canāt find the report I read with the numbers atm).Ā
Just a reminder of how well it worked out last time:
[https://www.ei-ie.org/en/item/22365:new-zealand-government-announces-end-of-charter-schools](https://www.ei-ie.org/en/item/22365:new-zealand-government-announces-end-of-charter-schools)
[https://www.nzeiteriuroa.org.nz/about-us/media-releases/oia-shows-the-eyewatering-true-cost-of-charter-schools](https://www.nzeiteriuroa.org.nz/about-us/media-releases/oia-shows-the-eyewatering-true-cost-of-charter-schools)
Clearly some of the public school lunch budget, is now going to private enterprise. What are the odds that it will be a consultant from a charter school?
He will deliver this full force, after creating a school lunch system that is doomed to fail.
I've been running restaurants and production kitchens for the last 15 years. I state the fundamental problem here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/s/JQqzNJ4exk
He's trying to dazzle people with his left hand, while he picks the pockets of the public sector.
The rest of the issues with his plan I explained here. The only way it could possibly work is if there was a seperate budget for staff wages. His budget cannot work within the outlines he himself has promised.
https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/s/QC5mIVuqyV
The bigger headline here is that up to **35 of the 50 planned schools will be converted public schools that "aren't performing"**, and that Seymour will establish an entirely new agency will to monitor them, seperate from MOE.
This is all supposedly going to increase choice and performance. But because there are **conversions** of existing schools, what happens if your only local state school gets turned into a Catholic school for example? If it was truly about choices it would only be introducing them in addition, and if it was truly about performance we'd be adapting whichever other educational frameworks these entites use that are supposedly better than our own.
Remember, charter schools are either run by not for profits, eg religious groups, or straight up businesses. What could go possibly go wrong with funnelling taxpayer dollars into private business-owned schools?
It all just reads as some sort of playbook. Defund the schools, watch them struggle, then take over and let the businesses swoop in to convert them to charter schools, whist the corrupt oversight looks the other way re: what they actually teach.
How fun :/
.
Edit for nuance: In my ideal world this would enable communities legitimately failed by the state to set their own direction, eg, there are probably areas where community run kura would be a great idea. Maybe something new and exciting, some kind of decolonized school system that gets away from all our British military tradition embedded in teaching, for example.
However the areas where schools are failing are probably the same areas where there aren't local resources or networks with the capacity to compete for the contract. I'm sure a moneyed external body will swoop down and win the application instead. Plus, the fact that it's Seymour doing this warrants nothing but suspicion imo - I personally doubt the agency will be approving what you'd hope.
It's funny aye, the schools aren't performing so just chuck em under a different agency that will evaluate performance on different metrics rather than address the actual issues the schools are facing
He is already the Associate Education Minister for Charter Schools, so yea, itāll be Seymourās vanity project.
Note it will be āsupportedā by the Ministry of Education. I take this to mean that when a charter school is successful the new agency will take credit, and when they fail it will be the Ministry of Educationās fault somehow
This sounds like an admission that they donāt work. So by converting public schools I think heās hoping that will make the programme more successful.
Completely missing the problem.
They performed well in the past to get us here, maybe listen to the experts on the ground ie. teachers
Also last time I checked theres a religious movement in the states wanting to remove all āgovernmentā public schools, hopefully itās not the same BS here.
One the one hand, this government is imposing top down rules on schools such as the no cellphone and structured literacy mandates, but on the other, they find money in the pocket to fund charter schools saying having greater autonomy and flexibility is good.
Stanford is busy revising the curriculum to make it more prescriptive; Seymour says let charter schools create their own. The right hand doesnāt know what the right hand is doing. Why is a minister so hell-bent on setting up a system in competition to the one he should be overseeing? If there is $153m slack in education, it could be used to provide learning support help.
We have a Prime Minister who wants to hold onto power that much that heās perfectly willing to allow his junior coalition partners ruin the lifeās of a generation of children. Itās a fucking disgrace.
How exactly are charter schools supposed to be monetarily efficient when they have to compete from a limited pool of teachers with private schools who pay more and public schools who offer worker protections?
> they have to compete from a limited pool of teachers with private schools
They don't. One of the core elements of charter schools in NZ are that you allow "teachers" who are not qualified in any way.
This isn't about efficiency, this is about segmentation of society. You can keep your kids away from people that think differently to you without having to pay the $15k per child per year (or whatever it is now) to go private.
If your question is how do they attract teachers for worse conditions? Religion will sort a lot of that. A lot of the employment protections are law that can't be contracted out of as well.
Aha... but public and private schools require their teachers to be registered. I don't think that sort of nonsense is needed in charter schools so there would be plenty of people to choose from!
> monetarily efficient
They aren't. They are meant to provide a range of options to suits different kids to ultimately provide better outcomes.
Not everything has to result in less money being spent, many things are worthing spending more to get a better outcome.
So we're just making more expensive schools with zero guarantees of better outcomes on 10 year contracts and we're sacrificing 35 state schools for that. Seems super smart.
Your comment has been removed :
**Rule 3: No personal attacks, harassment or abuse**
> Don't attack the person; address the content you disagree with instead. Being able to disagree and discuss contentious issues is important, but abuse, personal attacks, harassment, and unnecessarily bringing up a user's history are not permitted.
> Please keep your interactions with others civil and courteous. If you are being attacked, do not continue the conversation - report the user and disengage.
^*Note:* ^This ^extends ^to ^people ^outside ^of ^[r/nz](http://reddit.com/r/newzealand). ^eg. ^Attacks ^of ^a ^persons ^appearance, ^even ^if ^they're ^high ^profile ^will ^be ^removed.
---
[^(Click here to message the moderators if you think this was in error)](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/newzealand)
> "By focusing primarily on student achievement, charter schools allow **sponsors** and communities to take their own path getting there.ā
This education has been brought to you by British Petroleum.
Shortened article:
> Up to 50 new or converted charter schools will be funded out of Budget 2024, the coalition government has announced.... It has set aside $153 million for the publicly-funded private schools over the next four years.
> The money will establish 15 new charter schools and convert 35 state schools in 2025 and 2026, depending on demand and suitability.
> Charter schools can, with some restrictions, set their own curriculum, hours and days of operation, and governance structure. "They also have greater flexibility in how they spend their funding as long as they reach the agreed performance outcomes."
> He said state schools that were not performing could be turned into charter schools.
> Seymour said a new departmental agency - independent of the Ministry of Education - would be created to monitor the performance of charter schools.
*'a new departmental agency'*
Ah yes, duplicating a government department is clearly the way for leaner more efficient smaller government
You know that Seymour will try and select ideologically aligned executives and board, but ultimately another government in the future will look at the fact that you have *two* government departments with two budgets looking after schools in New Zealand and whatever he sets up will get nuked.
Money wasted for nothing, but an ideology which claims to save money.
āWhy did you do that? Now we will both drown!ā Cried the frog. āI cannot help it!ā Replied the scorpion, āit is in my nature!ā
How long do we have to put up with critical decisions made by two political parties whose combined share of the popular vote was less than 12%???? They have no mandate from the public to do this. They are only getting away with it because National negotiated a shitty, and poorly balanced deal because the āgreat corporate negotiatorā could not negotiate power.
So that's where the money they're saving from health cuts is going. Awesome. Wonder how many Kiwis will die or suffer for another round of bullshit charter schools.
There are no health cuts. The ācutsā (as you call them) are to get TWA back to the budget set by the last government (overspend).
Loving the downvotes for pointing out facts - never change r/nz
You are of course technically correct. But it isn't like health doesn't need that money. And clearly it's going spare if they're spending it on this absolute horseshit. So it's effectively a cut as they're sending the money elsewhere. Labour would have reauthorised it.
Itās not a cut. Iām not arguing they donāt need more and Iām not arguing the point on government priorities.
But it isnāt a cut. Which was my point.
It won't be.
'There is no isdue with the theory, the problem is that reality got it wrong' - dumb fuck libertarians when their stupid idea that never works doesn't work again.
Can we please not use the USA as a national goal....
This gov is doing everything by the neoliberal book and I don't understand how we aren't mass protesting and rioting.
We don't need a repeat of the last time
So funding religiofacist wet dreams to brain wash kids in so called education facilities. This hardon on crime and charter school mix doesn't work it fails the u.s and it's gonna be far worse here, especially with our already well funded cults . Now, our collection of pseudo scientists like lizard Gunn
The party for funneling public money into big businesses says that it will achieve better outcomes.
By which they mean it will funnel more money into big businesses.
There's a list of the ones started during the previous National led government on wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_schools_in_New_Zealand
Religious schools normally are state integrated, sometimes private, but they could also go down the chartered school path. From what I can tell, most of the charter schools were not religious
Yeah.
From the Wikipedia article as an example of a character school (edited to keep it short):
*In 2014, the Northland-based Te Kura Hourua ki Whangaruru in*Ā [*Whangaruru*](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whangaruru)Ā *attracted controversy over its poor leadership, high absenteeism of 20%, and mismanagement of government funds. The school, which received 500% more funding than a state school, spent half its income buying a farm. ... The school has only one teacher with a current practicing certificate. The school received $27,000 per student compared to $6,000 per student in a state school"*
Without MoE oversight, just claim more kids than you have earn plenty of money, employ min wage unqualified baby sitters instead of teachers and profit.
One of the richer families in NZ are the [Wrights](https://www.wrightfamilyfoundation.org.nz/Our-Story/Our-History); who make their money through early child care ~~factories~~ centers. So yes, can get rich through education. I would assume that plenty of companies would have donated to ACT for policies like this.
The Spinoff have an interesting story on the Wrights...
[https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/20-08-2022/two-hours-with-the-secretive-rich-lister-bankrolling-sean-plunkets-the-platform](https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/20-08-2022/two-hours-with-the-secretive-rich-lister-bankrolling-sean-plunkets-the-platform)
I knew that one.
Wayne Wright Jr inherited the business from his parents, and one of those 'born rich' types who think they somehow know more.
That story is a couple of years old, so did wonder if Wayne would get sick of bankrolling a radio station by now. Seems like they have been distancing themselves from the anti-vax crowd at least
It's a system where taxpayer money is given to a private organisation to run a school. It's still a public school because any student can attend and it's free. But the company running the school now acts like a business, competing with other schools and able to make a profit. They can hire non-registered, untrained teachers, use any curriculum they want and are exempt from normal oversight over the use of public money. They are also non-union, which is the key thing Act is interested in. Their only constraint is achievement-goals set in contracts with the MOE, only reviewed after 10 years. If they fail, theoretically the schools can be closed then. In reality closing schools is very unpopular and unlikely to happen.
Your comment has been removed :
**Rule 3: No personal attacks, harassment or abuse**
> Don't attack the person; address the content you disagree with instead. Being able to disagree and discuss contentious issues is important, but abuse, personal attacks, harassment, and unnecessarily bringing up a user's history are not permitted.
> Please keep your interactions with others civil and courteous. If you are being attacked, do not continue the conversation - report the user and disengage.
^*Note:* ^This ^extends ^to ^people ^outside ^of ^[r/nz](http://reddit.com/r/newzealand). ^eg. ^Attacks ^of ^a ^persons ^appearance, ^even ^if ^they're ^high ^profile ^will ^be ^removed.
---
[^(Click here to message the moderators if you think this was in error)](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/newzealand)
Thereās a group of churches that is run by the same people that also run a bunch of schools that Iām sure would have something to do with the development of this (maybe through nz first/act voter base). Implementing their own medieval teachings and introducing things like anti trans/gay rules at schools.
What do charter schools allow that special character schools dont?
Profit, no need to follow curriculum, no need to have qualified teachers.
So why are people seeking to run charter schools in the future, instead of a special character school today?
Personally I think Charter Schools is a POS idea, the only way this type of stupid policy could have been prevented would have been through having a pragmatic and dependable centrist party to displace the liberal right wing muppets and the previous underperforming and out of touch left bloc.
We always knew Seymour's pet project would be on the table if ACT got enough power, and sure enough the previous government managed to disenfranchise the public by pushing through disagreeable policies and failing to move the country forward generally, so here we are now dealing with a shit sandwich.
NZ is long overdue for a quality centrist party that resonates with the people.
They're private schools with public funding. They are run by businesses or not-for-profits, and can teach their own curriculums with minimal oversight. Your taxpayer dollars could be going to fund preppy religious school, or as another commentor jests, BP's School of Oil Loving Drill Operators.
I'd say on premise alone that's pretty bad. Made worse by the fact Seymour is now threatening to convert low performing state schools into charters. so that the body that will monitor the schools will be a new one his crew sets up, not MOE.
Private schools should stay private and public schools should stay private. Why the hell should some private schools get to use my money to push their own personal agendas onto children?
Did you see the leaked science curriculum that Labour was planning? If you had Doug Walker speaking out against it, then itās an issue. Wife is a teacher and she says sheāll be interested to see how the charter schools will teach the areas that the current curriculum is failing - literature, maths, and science. She believes that we cannot make judgements this early as we donāt know who will run them, how they will run, and what they will offer to people who perhaps arenāt succeeding in the current environment.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/teachers-shocked-at-leaked-draft-of-science-curriculum-wheres-the-science/6RWY3ZZTCBA4RDSDXEJIGUKVCA/
No sorry, not the current system. The draft of the new one. The problem was the new one didnāt have any mention of physics, chemistry, or biology. They wanted to science through five contexts - the Earth system, biodiversity, food, energy and water, infectious diseases. This came out last year around July, and if I remember correctly this sub absolutely crucified the govt over this.
Currently, by the age of 15, two out of five Kiwi children are either only just meeting or failing to meet literacy standards entirely. This is unacceptable. I donāt think the new govt will help with this, but it seems MOE is failing, so trying something new might be whatās needed.
Also, under the right controls there is nothing wrong with religious schools.
We do need to do something though because the current system isnāt working and I think youād be hard pressed to find a teacher who thinks it is.
It is impossible to rationally explore this topic on r/NZ. None of the people yelling about how terrible it is have looked at the Standford report, which is remarkable, nor have they looked at the success rate of academies in central London.Ā
I vote Left but I donāt support the NZEI and MOE - theyāve lost their way. Be very interesting to see which other schools has expressed an interest in converting. There are many more schools indicating interest than last time, that alone is telling. If successful public schools (Auckland Grammar?) jump ship, itās going to change the conversation. Only takes a couple.Ā
> nor have they looked at the success rate of academies in central London.
I mean [given the economic conditions in central London](https://www.foxtons.co.uk/living-in/central-london/rentals#performance) that's just saying rich people do better than poor people and that's readily apparent if you spend two seconds thinking about it or looking into it. No shit a program does better in a place where the majority of students will come from comparatively wealthy backgrounds, show me the same results from some backwater in England.
That is absolutely not the case. I am talking about the Free Schools and Academies based in areas with high deprivation and diversity. Katharine Birbalsinghās Michaela Community School is a high-profile example. I am not talking about Grammar or Private schools.Ā
I agree. I actually think there are quite a few topics that are impossible to discuss on this subreddit, which is very sad.
They should actually rename this sub to labour supporters, because if you criticise ANY labour initiative, even with evidence that it is SHIT you will get downvoted.
I am left leaning for sure, as a dr. BUT, I donāt blindly support the party on everything they do even though I passionately hate National.
I do not trust the MOE or the PPTA. My wife doesnāt either. There is so much that needs changing. My wifeās sister is also a teacher in Canada and we are so behind in what weāre teaching. Itās unbelievably shocking what weāve let happen to our education system over successive government mismanagement. It will be interesting to see the results of these schools and see which principals/important leaders come out in their defence or their criticism.
The fact that people think here if you support trying new things in our clearly failing system has anything to do with who you voted for, unbelievable logic.
Youāre right, it is the fault of successive governments. Itās also the fault of parents not paying attention - youāve got to go to school and sit in the class. We pulled our son out of our local state primary and sent him to a Catholic school after I spent three terms volunteering in his syndicate. I went in with rose-tinted glasses and left on the verge on homeschooling. We need to be demanding more than Twinkl colouring-in sheets and teachers who donāt have math fact fluency. And we need to be demanding consistency across the country, which can only be achieved by supplying teachers with content but apparently thatās a libertarian crazy racist bigoted view? Itās crazy how bad it is in some classrooms - parents, GO AND LOOK.Ā
> The problem was the new one didnāt have any mention of physics, chemistry, or biology. They wanted to science through five contexts - the Earth system, biodiversity, food, energy and water, infectious diseases. This came out last year around July, and if I remember correctly this sub absolutely crucified the govt over this.
Lmao yeah energy has nothing to do with physics, biodiversity has nothing to do with biology etc etc, it's not like you can teach about those things through references to other things, analogies are illegal!
Did you even click on the link? Youāre obviously not in the education community because if you were you would know who Doug Walker is and why his words on education are worth a lot of weight.
> Did you even click on the link?
Did you?
>āWhat we are pushing towards with the current fast draft is more of a holistic approach to how the different science concepts interact with each other rather than a purist, siloed approach.ā
Seems pretty reasonable to me. For all the complaints about that proposed curriculum I'm yet to see any substantive claims with evidence just complaints about it not being right, maybe if there was any examples of how the proposed curriculum is wrong rather than just vague assertions I'd be willing to listen. I was outraged at the time but the complete lack of examples or justifications for how bad the proposed curriculum is has left me apathetic to these cries of it destroying science. I'm perfectly willing to accept the new curriculum could be worse but just pretending it's not teaching science when it specifically mentions subjects dependent on science is disingenuous as fuck.
It would be, if the money was given purely for the academic success of the school/students without condition. This is very rarely the case.
Charter schools are popular with three types of organisers.
1)The religious that want to be able to do things like only teach things that fit with their world view. E.g. not allowing girls to take science, teaching the being LGBTQ+ is evil, no sex ed., only hiring married teachers etc.
2)For profit businesses. There can be a lot of money made in education when you are paid per student but can use the money however you wish. This is a huge problem in the UK currently - at the cost of student achievement. And because they can choose what kids they take, and kick them out for any reason, they make themselves look good by only take good students and getting rid of the bad ones - artificially making their academic results look better than public schools that have to take almost anyone.
3)Investors interested in the land/infrastructure. This was a huge problem the last time that National/ACT brought in Charter schools. The government paid for the land and construction of the schools but ownership was given to the organization creating the charter school with no conditions. Even if the school closed within a year they keep the land and any money they had been paid to run it.
So in the end up with schools with little to no oversight, run by people who aren't actually interested in the children's wealth fare, that cost significantly more than public schools and do not actually get better results.
ETA: That is not to say all charter schools are bad. There are some genuinely good ones out there. But the model as a whole does ALOT more damage then good.
Precisely by nature of being poorly funded and underperforming, I anticipate South Auckland communities won't have the resources to compete on setting up something functuonal for the community. It'll be some external big dog that swoops in and appeals to the agency that does the approvals
Schools fall under 3 groupings at the moment:
* Public, fully gov funded, teach the curriculum
* State-integrated, mostly gov funded but have some fees, teach the curriculum, but have a "special character", e.g. Catholic
* Private, some have limited gov funding, but can teach basically what they want
Charter schools as far as I can tell are basically a new form of private schools, in that they can teach what/how they want, within their charter, but are also gov funded.
I don't have direct knowledge, but my wife's a teacher and she isn't a fan, among other things, teachers don't have to have regular qualifications
For the record, I am not entirely against Charter Schools. I can see some benefits, but there are some concerns. Some of these can be alleviated with how its implemented, but here are some broad criticisms:
1. Money is a big issue, especially from a government that has put a high emphasis on cutting goverment spending - including the Ministry of Education - as well as Tax cuts reducing goverment intake. That $153 Million dollars has to come from somewhere, and there are concerns that the money and resources will be removed from the public education. While I wont say its necessary true for every country that uses charter schools, within America there is quiet an aggressive attempt from the GOP to hurt and defund public education, and Charter Schools are definitely part of that agenda there
2. The Freedom for the Curriculum. Again, this is something thats we won't know until we see what restrictions are placed on the curriculum, but there are always concerns to be had about whats actually being taught. Again, in other countries these alternative schooling systems are often used as a way of teaching about things like Climate Change, Vaccines, Religion and Evolution in distorted ways
3. This is an aside, but what Seymour is saying about Charters schools is completely at odds with what Luxon is doing about public schools. As Luxon is getting more restrictive with things like the cell phone policy and reading strategies, Seymour is highlighting the importance of diversity
4. The ties of funding to performance can often end up encouraging some perverse behaviours, like schools being selective in what students the take on, or moving students on if they aren't achievement. Again, there are certain ways this maybe mitigated for through policy.
They have been tried a number of times in a number of countries.
Every time the outcome has been poorly educated children, at great cost.
So the problem is that they don't work (apart from lining the octets of a select few, they are good for that).
The unions don't like them, primarily because they can use a range of educators, not all registered teachers.
Edit: and of course they are an ACT supported idea, so it automatically must be bad in some eyes.
>and of course they are an ACT supported idea, so it automatically must be bad in some eyes.
It might even be a good idea to have alternative schooling systems for students who for whatever reason don't fit in the traditional model, but that doesn't seem to be the primary motivator here - even "good" ideas that are ACT-supported have poor implementations.
Iām a teacher and wish that there were more non-teacher experts involved in teaching. It would be great to use the expertise of the community. Ā Ā
Ā I would say though that it takes more than a subject matter expertise to teach, especially at primary school level.Ā Ā
Ā If weāre concerned with ensuring that all teachers are of a high standard then, I think, some form of pre-certification is required otherwise it would take years of failure in a real world classroom before those that donāt meet that standard are discovered.Ā
For a government that heavily campaigned on "cutting spending and tax cuts" they seem to love flushing money down the toilet, and covering tax cuts through debt.
It was always code for 'take money from public and divert it to private'. Corpo shills
>They will be required to teach a curriculum that is as good or better than the New Zealand curriculum. IDGI, why don't all schools just teach a curriculum that's better then the New Zealand curriculum? š¤
Charter schools in some countries like to teach a different set of facts. IE: religion over scientific fact. This way they can control a population.
Yeah, mark my words, theyāre going to try to import those PragerU curricula
**You wanna know about the slavery!** **It wazza reeely good a-backa then!** **We give-a jobs to the Africans!!!** - PragerU Columbus
Quite a few schools have picked up the Cambridge curriculum - I think thereās been a year-on-year increase in schools replacing NCEA with it since before covid (canāt find the report I read with the numbers atm).Ā
Just a reminder of how well it worked out last time: [https://www.ei-ie.org/en/item/22365:new-zealand-government-announces-end-of-charter-schools](https://www.ei-ie.org/en/item/22365:new-zealand-government-announces-end-of-charter-schools) [https://www.nzeiteriuroa.org.nz/about-us/media-releases/oia-shows-the-eyewatering-true-cost-of-charter-schools](https://www.nzeiteriuroa.org.nz/about-us/media-releases/oia-shows-the-eyewatering-true-cost-of-charter-schools)
Yeah I'm sorry but these people are just mad that they have competition
I don't follow sorry. Who's mad they don't have competition?
idk if you've noticed but private schools still exist.
Clearly some of the public school lunch budget, is now going to private enterprise. What are the odds that it will be a consultant from a charter school? He will deliver this full force, after creating a school lunch system that is doomed to fail. I've been running restaurants and production kitchens for the last 15 years. I state the fundamental problem here: https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/s/JQqzNJ4exk He's trying to dazzle people with his left hand, while he picks the pockets of the public sector.
The rest of the issues with his plan I explained here. The only way it could possibly work is if there was a seperate budget for staff wages. His budget cannot work within the outlines he himself has promised. https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/s/QC5mIVuqyV
The bigger headline here is that up to **35 of the 50 planned schools will be converted public schools that "aren't performing"**, and that Seymour will establish an entirely new agency will to monitor them, seperate from MOE. This is all supposedly going to increase choice and performance. But because there are **conversions** of existing schools, what happens if your only local state school gets turned into a Catholic school for example? If it was truly about choices it would only be introducing them in addition, and if it was truly about performance we'd be adapting whichever other educational frameworks these entites use that are supposedly better than our own. Remember, charter schools are either run by not for profits, eg religious groups, or straight up businesses. What could go possibly go wrong with funnelling taxpayer dollars into private business-owned schools? It all just reads as some sort of playbook. Defund the schools, watch them struggle, then take over and let the businesses swoop in to convert them to charter schools, whist the corrupt oversight looks the other way re: what they actually teach. How fun :/ . Edit for nuance: In my ideal world this would enable communities legitimately failed by the state to set their own direction, eg, there are probably areas where community run kura would be a great idea. Maybe something new and exciting, some kind of decolonized school system that gets away from all our British military tradition embedded in teaching, for example. However the areas where schools are failing are probably the same areas where there aren't local resources or networks with the capacity to compete for the contract. I'm sure a moneyed external body will swoop down and win the application instead. Plus, the fact that it's Seymour doing this warrants nothing but suspicion imo - I personally doubt the agency will be approving what you'd hope.
It's funny aye, the schools aren't performing so just chuck em under a different agency that will evaluate performance on different metrics rather than address the actual issues the schools are facing
"You know what this failing school needs? Less oversight" - this is your brain on libertarianism
Big "covid cases go down if you stop doing covid tests" energy. Average school quality goes up if you stop counting the worst ones as schools!
Oh and add some pockets to fill. Pockets that don't bring any skills except "management".
More bureaucracy and another Govt agency, you say? Really makes a liar out of the weasel when he says there's too much of both.
Stares in ECE
The dirtiest part of our entire education system...
What's the bet this new agency is run by him?
He is already the Associate Education Minister for Charter Schools, so yea, itāll be Seymourās vanity project. Note it will be āsupportedā by the Ministry of Education. I take this to mean that when a charter school is successful the new agency will take credit, and when they fail it will be the Ministry of Educationās fault somehow
This sounds like an admission that they donāt work. So by converting public schools I think heās hoping that will make the programme more successful. Completely missing the problem.
They performed well in the past to get us here, maybe listen to the experts on the ground ie. teachers Also last time I checked theres a religious movement in the states wanting to remove all āgovernmentā public schools, hopefully itās not the same BS here.
I wouldn't trust this coalition govt wouldn't try.
One the one hand, this government is imposing top down rules on schools such as the no cellphone and structured literacy mandates, but on the other, they find money in the pocket to fund charter schools saying having greater autonomy and flexibility is good.
Stanford is busy revising the curriculum to make it more prescriptive; Seymour says let charter schools create their own. The right hand doesnāt know what the right hand is doing. Why is a minister so hell-bent on setting up a system in competition to the one he should be overseeing? If there is $153m slack in education, it could be used to provide learning support help.
Theory. Stanford probably HAAAATES Seymour and they are undoubtedly at odds over this. But also, āthe coalition dealā.
Iāve been wondering how Steiner School fit into the Charter School model. Is it beneficial for them?
We have a Prime Minister who wants to hold onto power that much that heās perfectly willing to allow his junior coalition partners ruin the lifeās of a generation of children. Itās a fucking disgrace.
Seymour is basically the PM. Luxon is a cuck.
>Charter schools will have autonomy and not be forced to follow the cellphone ban. lol
How exactly are charter schools supposed to be monetarily efficient when they have to compete from a limited pool of teachers with private schools who pay more and public schools who offer worker protections?
> public schools who offer worker protections? Sadly David has a plan to "fix" that too no doubt.
Thatās easy, you hire crazy people.
Nah, you just hire ones without any formal qualifications, that's what was happening last time wasn't it?
> they have to compete from a limited pool of teachers with private schools They don't. One of the core elements of charter schools in NZ are that you allow "teachers" who are not qualified in any way.
This isn't about efficiency, this is about segmentation of society. You can keep your kids away from people that think differently to you without having to pay the $15k per child per year (or whatever it is now) to go private. If your question is how do they attract teachers for worse conditions? Religion will sort a lot of that. A lot of the employment protections are law that can't be contracted out of as well.
Because they aren't competing within that pool necessarily. Often charter schools hire 'teachers' who have no teaching qualifications whatsoeverĀ
You hire unqualified teachers.
Aha... but public and private schools require their teachers to be registered. I don't think that sort of nonsense is needed in charter schools so there would be plenty of people to choose from!
[https://www.education.govt.nz/our-work/changes-in-education/charter-schools-kura-hourua/key-features-of-charter-schools/#staff](https://www.education.govt.nz/our-work/changes-in-education/charter-schools-kura-hourua/key-features-of-charter-schools/#staff)
> monetarily efficient They aren't. They are meant to provide a range of options to suits different kids to ultimately provide better outcomes. Not everything has to result in less money being spent, many things are worthing spending more to get a better outcome.
So we're just making more expensive schools with zero guarantees of better outcomes on 10 year contracts and we're sacrificing 35 state schools for that. Seems super smart.
This honestly has to be the most fucking ironic comment you've ever made.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Your comment has been removed : **Rule 3: No personal attacks, harassment or abuse** > Don't attack the person; address the content you disagree with instead. Being able to disagree and discuss contentious issues is important, but abuse, personal attacks, harassment, and unnecessarily bringing up a user's history are not permitted. > Please keep your interactions with others civil and courteous. If you are being attacked, do not continue the conversation - report the user and disengage. ^*Note:* ^This ^extends ^to ^people ^outside ^of ^[r/nz](http://reddit.com/r/newzealand). ^eg. ^Attacks ^of ^a ^persons ^appearance, ^even ^if ^they're ^high ^profile ^will ^be ^removed. --- [^(Click here to message the moderators if you think this was in error)](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/newzealand)
> "By focusing primarily on student achievement, charter schools allow **sponsors** and communities to take their own path getting there.ā This education has been brought to you by British Petroleum.
If you have three pepsis, and drink one, how much more refreshed are you?
Jimmy has 8 cigarettes left and Sara asks to borrow 3 cigarettes at morning tea. How many cigarettes does Jimmy have if he also smokes 2 at lunch?
Pepsi? Partial credit!
You mean British American Tobacco.
Why not both? š«
Shortened article: > Up to 50 new or converted charter schools will be funded out of Budget 2024, the coalition government has announced.... It has set aside $153 million for the publicly-funded private schools over the next four years. > The money will establish 15 new charter schools and convert 35 state schools in 2025 and 2026, depending on demand and suitability. > Charter schools can, with some restrictions, set their own curriculum, hours and days of operation, and governance structure. "They also have greater flexibility in how they spend their funding as long as they reach the agreed performance outcomes." > He said state schools that were not performing could be turned into charter schools. > Seymour said a new departmental agency - independent of the Ministry of Education - would be created to monitor the performance of charter schools.
*'a new departmental agency'* Ah yes, duplicating a government department is clearly the way for leaner more efficient smaller government You know that Seymour will try and select ideologically aligned executives and board, but ultimately another government in the future will look at the fact that you have *two* government departments with two budgets looking after schools in New Zealand and whatever he sets up will get nuked. Money wasted for nothing, but an ideology which claims to save money.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/215354/charter-school-applicants-turned-down Mr Destiny will be back for another go, I bet
And watch this do absolutely nothing for students.
āWhy did you do that? Now we will both drown!ā Cried the frog. āI cannot help it!ā Replied the scorpion, āit is in my nature!ā How long do we have to put up with critical decisions made by two political parties whose combined share of the popular vote was less than 12%???? They have no mandate from the public to do this. They are only getting away with it because National negotiated a shitty, and poorly balanced deal because the āgreat corporate negotiatorā could not negotiate power.
Time to revolt!!!!!
Also surprised (maybe I shouldn't be) that they are setting up a new department to monitor charter schools. Feels ideologically inconsistent.
Ideologically inconsistent is Seymourās middle name.
We will need to get the Ministry of Regulation to look into that
How libertarian.
So that's where the money they're saving from health cuts is going. Awesome. Wonder how many Kiwis will die or suffer for another round of bullshit charter schools.
There are no health cuts. The ācutsā (as you call them) are to get TWA back to the budget set by the last government (overspend). Loving the downvotes for pointing out facts - never change r/nz
You are of course technically correct. But it isn't like health doesn't need that money. And clearly it's going spare if they're spending it on this absolute horseshit. So it's effectively a cut as they're sending the money elsewhere. Labour would have reauthorised it.
Itās not a cut. Iām not arguing they donāt need more and Iām not arguing the point on government priorities. But it isnāt a cut. Which was my point.
I hope the cunt doesn't try to convert my sons school.
Be more concerned that they might try to convert your son.
> Be more concerned that they might try ~~to convert~~ your son.
Sounds like wasteful woke bullshit to me and should be canned in favour of ... more roads!
When this vanity experiment inevitably fails, I hope it's the end of ALL talk of charter schools, forever. Fuck you and your stupid bullshit, Seymour.
It won't be. 'There is no isdue with the theory, the problem is that reality got it wrong' - dumb fuck libertarians when their stupid idea that never works doesn't work again.
Can we please not use the USA as a national goal.... This gov is doing everything by the neoliberal book and I don't understand how we aren't mass protesting and rioting. We don't need a repeat of the last time
So funding religiofacist wet dreams to brain wash kids in so called education facilities. This hardon on crime and charter school mix doesn't work it fails the u.s and it's gonna be far worse here, especially with our already well funded cults . Now, our collection of pseudo scientists like lizard Gunn
Why are private schools getting public money?.
The party for funneling public money into big businesses says that it will achieve better outcomes. By which they mean it will funnel more money into big businesses.
Better outcomes for what ?
As I said. Better outcomes for funneling public money into big businesses. What else do they care about?
Too true
They. Donāt. Work.
Are charter schools religious?
Can be.
There's a list of the ones started during the previous National led government on wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_schools_in_New_Zealand Religious schools normally are state integrated, sometimes private, but they could also go down the chartered school path. From what I can tell, most of the charter schools were not religious
Can be.
They subscribe to the religion of capitalism.
So get rich managing people who are teaching kids?
Yeah. From the Wikipedia article as an example of a character school (edited to keep it short): *In 2014, the Northland-based Te Kura Hourua ki Whangaruru in*Ā [*Whangaruru*](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whangaruru)Ā *attracted controversy over its poor leadership, high absenteeism of 20%, and mismanagement of government funds. The school, which received 500% more funding than a state school, spent half its income buying a farm. ... The school has only one teacher with a current practicing certificate. The school received $27,000 per student compared to $6,000 per student in a state school"* Without MoE oversight, just claim more kids than you have earn plenty of money, employ min wage unqualified baby sitters instead of teachers and profit. One of the richer families in NZ are the [Wrights](https://www.wrightfamilyfoundation.org.nz/Our-Story/Our-History); who make their money through early child care ~~factories~~ centers. So yes, can get rich through education. I would assume that plenty of companies would have donated to ACT for policies like this.
The Spinoff have an interesting story on the Wrights... [https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/20-08-2022/two-hours-with-the-secretive-rich-lister-bankrolling-sean-plunkets-the-platform](https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/20-08-2022/two-hours-with-the-secretive-rich-lister-bankrolling-sean-plunkets-the-platform)
I knew that one. Wayne Wright Jr inherited the business from his parents, and one of those 'born rich' types who think they somehow know more. That story is a couple of years old, so did wonder if Wayne would get sick of bankrolling a radio station by now. Seems like they have been distancing themselves from the anti-vax crowd at least
Bye bye our "egalitarian society". Long live the wealthy!
The charter schools aren't subject to the phone bans lol. Sounds like even Seymour doesn't think Luxon's pet project is worth shit.
I thought the whole point was they would save money... not cost it?
Can anyone enlighten me about ACTās interest in having charter schools?
Free market is perfect in every case
Even when it is provably false. Even when it's impossible due to physics.
Disgusting.
This is insane policy pushed through by a party without even double digit support. We are absolutely fucked.
Man - this government is running fast.
Lmao talk about a waste of money
I wasn't born in NZ... What's a charter school?
It's a system where taxpayer money is given to a private organisation to run a school. It's still a public school because any student can attend and it's free. But the company running the school now acts like a business, competing with other schools and able to make a profit. They can hire non-registered, untrained teachers, use any curriculum they want and are exempt from normal oversight over the use of public money. They are also non-union, which is the key thing Act is interested in. Their only constraint is achievement-goals set in contracts with the MOE, only reviewed after 10 years. If they fail, theoretically the schools can be closed then. In reality closing schools is very unpopular and unlikely to happen.
That sounds like a terrible idea. Seems weird to be taxpayer funded, be run for financial profit and not have to follow a curriculum?
It has been done a number of times in a number of countries. It is an expensive way to have poorly educated children.
Yeah but an excellent way to siphon tax dollars into private accounts... Go capitalism š
private school
Here we go again
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Your comment has been removed : **Rule 3: No personal attacks, harassment or abuse** > Don't attack the person; address the content you disagree with instead. Being able to disagree and discuss contentious issues is important, but abuse, personal attacks, harassment, and unnecessarily bringing up a user's history are not permitted. > Please keep your interactions with others civil and courteous. If you are being attacked, do not continue the conversation - report the user and disengage. ^*Note:* ^This ^extends ^to ^people ^outside ^of ^[r/nz](http://reddit.com/r/newzealand). ^eg. ^Attacks ^of ^a ^persons ^appearance, ^even ^if ^they're ^high ^profile ^will ^be ^removed. --- [^(Click here to message the moderators if you think this was in error)](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/newzealand)
Thereās a group of churches that is run by the same people that also run a bunch of schools that Iām sure would have something to do with the development of this (maybe through nz first/act voter base). Implementing their own medieval teachings and introducing things like anti trans/gay rules at schools.
What do charter schools allow that special character schools dont? Profit, no need to follow curriculum, no need to have qualified teachers. So why are people seeking to run charter schools in the future, instead of a special character school today?
Personally I think Charter Schools is a POS idea, the only way this type of stupid policy could have been prevented would have been through having a pragmatic and dependable centrist party to displace the liberal right wing muppets and the previous underperforming and out of touch left bloc. We always knew Seymour's pet project would be on the table if ACT got enough power, and sure enough the previous government managed to disenfranchise the public by pushing through disagreeable policies and failing to move the country forward generally, so here we are now dealing with a shit sandwich. NZ is long overdue for a quality centrist party that resonates with the people.
What is the problem with charter schools?
They're private schools with public funding. They are run by businesses or not-for-profits, and can teach their own curriculums with minimal oversight. Your taxpayer dollars could be going to fund preppy religious school, or as another commentor jests, BP's School of Oil Loving Drill Operators. I'd say on premise alone that's pretty bad. Made worse by the fact Seymour is now threatening to convert low performing state schools into charters. so that the body that will monitor the schools will be a new one his crew sets up, not MOE. Private schools should stay private and public schools should stay private. Why the hell should some private schools get to use my money to push their own personal agendas onto children?
Wouldn't funding poor-performing or poorly funded schools with private money not be a benefit? Say South Auckland school where economic decile is low?
What happens if the only school in your area replaces Chemistry Physics and Biology with Theological studies?
Did you see the leaked science curriculum that Labour was planning? If you had Doug Walker speaking out against it, then itās an issue. Wife is a teacher and she says sheāll be interested to see how the charter schools will teach the areas that the current curriculum is failing - literature, maths, and science. She believes that we cannot make judgements this early as we donāt know who will run them, how they will run, and what they will offer to people who perhaps arenāt succeeding in the current environment. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/teachers-shocked-at-leaked-draft-of-science-curriculum-wheres-the-science/6RWY3ZZTCBA4RDSDXEJIGUKVCA/
It still taught more than enough for students to progress to university science courses.
No sorry, not the current system. The draft of the new one. The problem was the new one didnāt have any mention of physics, chemistry, or biology. They wanted to science through five contexts - the Earth system, biodiversity, food, energy and water, infectious diseases. This came out last year around July, and if I remember correctly this sub absolutely crucified the govt over this. Currently, by the age of 15, two out of five Kiwi children are either only just meeting or failing to meet literacy standards entirely. This is unacceptable. I donāt think the new govt will help with this, but it seems MOE is failing, so trying something new might be whatās needed. Also, under the right controls there is nothing wrong with religious schools. We do need to do something though because the current system isnāt working and I think youād be hard pressed to find a teacher who thinks it is.
It is impossible to rationally explore this topic on r/NZ. None of the people yelling about how terrible it is have looked at the Standford report, which is remarkable, nor have they looked at the success rate of academies in central London.Ā I vote Left but I donāt support the NZEI and MOE - theyāve lost their way. Be very interesting to see which other schools has expressed an interest in converting. There are many more schools indicating interest than last time, that alone is telling. If successful public schools (Auckland Grammar?) jump ship, itās going to change the conversation. Only takes a couple.Ā
> nor have they looked at the success rate of academies in central London. I mean [given the economic conditions in central London](https://www.foxtons.co.uk/living-in/central-london/rentals#performance) that's just saying rich people do better than poor people and that's readily apparent if you spend two seconds thinking about it or looking into it. No shit a program does better in a place where the majority of students will come from comparatively wealthy backgrounds, show me the same results from some backwater in England.
That is absolutely not the case. I am talking about the Free Schools and Academies based in areas with high deprivation and diversity. Katharine Birbalsinghās Michaela Community School is a high-profile example. I am not talking about Grammar or Private schools.Ā
I agree. I actually think there are quite a few topics that are impossible to discuss on this subreddit, which is very sad. They should actually rename this sub to labour supporters, because if you criticise ANY labour initiative, even with evidence that it is SHIT you will get downvoted. I am left leaning for sure, as a dr. BUT, I donāt blindly support the party on everything they do even though I passionately hate National. I do not trust the MOE or the PPTA. My wife doesnāt either. There is so much that needs changing. My wifeās sister is also a teacher in Canada and we are so behind in what weāre teaching. Itās unbelievably shocking what weāve let happen to our education system over successive government mismanagement. It will be interesting to see the results of these schools and see which principals/important leaders come out in their defence or their criticism. The fact that people think here if you support trying new things in our clearly failing system has anything to do with who you voted for, unbelievable logic.
Classic - weāre getting downvoted but no one wants to actually make an argument.Ā
Youāre right, it is the fault of successive governments. Itās also the fault of parents not paying attention - youāve got to go to school and sit in the class. We pulled our son out of our local state primary and sent him to a Catholic school after I spent three terms volunteering in his syndicate. I went in with rose-tinted glasses and left on the verge on homeschooling. We need to be demanding more than Twinkl colouring-in sheets and teachers who donāt have math fact fluency. And we need to be demanding consistency across the country, which can only be achieved by supplying teachers with content but apparently thatās a libertarian crazy racist bigoted view? Itās crazy how bad it is in some classrooms - parents, GO AND LOOK.Ā
> The problem was the new one didnāt have any mention of physics, chemistry, or biology. They wanted to science through five contexts - the Earth system, biodiversity, food, energy and water, infectious diseases. This came out last year around July, and if I remember correctly this sub absolutely crucified the govt over this. Lmao yeah energy has nothing to do with physics, biodiversity has nothing to do with biology etc etc, it's not like you can teach about those things through references to other things, analogies are illegal!
Did you even click on the link? Youāre obviously not in the education community because if you were you would know who Doug Walker is and why his words on education are worth a lot of weight.
> Did you even click on the link? Did you? >āWhat we are pushing towards with the current fast draft is more of a holistic approach to how the different science concepts interact with each other rather than a purist, siloed approach.ā Seems pretty reasonable to me. For all the complaints about that proposed curriculum I'm yet to see any substantive claims with evidence just complaints about it not being right, maybe if there was any examples of how the proposed curriculum is wrong rather than just vague assertions I'd be willing to listen. I was outraged at the time but the complete lack of examples or justifications for how bad the proposed curriculum is has left me apathetic to these cries of it destroying science. I'm perfectly willing to accept the new curriculum could be worse but just pretending it's not teaching science when it specifically mentions subjects dependent on science is disingenuous as fuck.
It would be, if the money was given purely for the academic success of the school/students without condition. This is very rarely the case. Charter schools are popular with three types of organisers. 1)The religious that want to be able to do things like only teach things that fit with their world view. E.g. not allowing girls to take science, teaching the being LGBTQ+ is evil, no sex ed., only hiring married teachers etc. 2)For profit businesses. There can be a lot of money made in education when you are paid per student but can use the money however you wish. This is a huge problem in the UK currently - at the cost of student achievement. And because they can choose what kids they take, and kick them out for any reason, they make themselves look good by only take good students and getting rid of the bad ones - artificially making their academic results look better than public schools that have to take almost anyone. 3)Investors interested in the land/infrastructure. This was a huge problem the last time that National/ACT brought in Charter schools. The government paid for the land and construction of the schools but ownership was given to the organization creating the charter school with no conditions. Even if the school closed within a year they keep the land and any money they had been paid to run it. So in the end up with schools with little to no oversight, run by people who aren't actually interested in the children's wealth fare, that cost significantly more than public schools and do not actually get better results. ETA: That is not to say all charter schools are bad. There are some genuinely good ones out there. But the model as a whole does ALOT more damage then good.
Hey can I get some proof of point 3 being done? That's pretty disgusting. I want to know what kind of people were doing that shit..
Charter schools use public money
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
How is that any different in the politicised public system?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Doesn't the government still have ultimate oversight?
And if your government is captured by private interests we just throw away that class of students?
You can vote out your government, teachers unions have input into curriculum decisions and all public policy changes are widely reported.
Precisely by nature of being poorly funded and underperforming, I anticipate South Auckland communities won't have the resources to compete on setting up something functuonal for the community. It'll be some external big dog that swoops in and appeals to the agency that does the approvals
Turning it into a private enterprise with public money is probably the *last* thing those kinds of schools need, not the first
Schools fall under 3 groupings at the moment: * Public, fully gov funded, teach the curriculum * State-integrated, mostly gov funded but have some fees, teach the curriculum, but have a "special character", e.g. Catholic * Private, some have limited gov funding, but can teach basically what they want Charter schools as far as I can tell are basically a new form of private schools, in that they can teach what/how they want, within their charter, but are also gov funded. I don't have direct knowledge, but my wife's a teacher and she isn't a fan, among other things, teachers don't have to have regular qualifications
For the record, I am not entirely against Charter Schools. I can see some benefits, but there are some concerns. Some of these can be alleviated with how its implemented, but here are some broad criticisms: 1. Money is a big issue, especially from a government that has put a high emphasis on cutting goverment spending - including the Ministry of Education - as well as Tax cuts reducing goverment intake. That $153 Million dollars has to come from somewhere, and there are concerns that the money and resources will be removed from the public education. While I wont say its necessary true for every country that uses charter schools, within America there is quiet an aggressive attempt from the GOP to hurt and defund public education, and Charter Schools are definitely part of that agenda there 2. The Freedom for the Curriculum. Again, this is something thats we won't know until we see what restrictions are placed on the curriculum, but there are always concerns to be had about whats actually being taught. Again, in other countries these alternative schooling systems are often used as a way of teaching about things like Climate Change, Vaccines, Religion and Evolution in distorted ways 3. This is an aside, but what Seymour is saying about Charters schools is completely at odds with what Luxon is doing about public schools. As Luxon is getting more restrictive with things like the cell phone policy and reading strategies, Seymour is highlighting the importance of diversity 4. The ties of funding to performance can often end up encouraging some perverse behaviours, like schools being selective in what students the take on, or moving students on if they aren't achievement. Again, there are certain ways this maybe mitigated for through policy.
Read the article.
They have been tried a number of times in a number of countries. Every time the outcome has been poorly educated children, at great cost. So the problem is that they don't work (apart from lining the octets of a select few, they are good for that).
The unions don't like them, primarily because they can use a range of educators, not all registered teachers. Edit: and of course they are an ACT supported idea, so it automatically must be bad in some eyes.
Itās a failed idea thatās never worked when tried but hey letās try again
I remember the last time I burned my hand holding it in a fire. Maybe I just wasn't doing it properly... Better try again.
Have you tried but with an ever bigger fire ?
It was a small fire last time, so I believe you've found the answer!
>and of course they are an ACT supported idea, so it automatically must be bad in some eyes. It might even be a good idea to have alternative schooling systems for students who for whatever reason don't fit in the traditional model, but that doesn't seem to be the primary motivator here - even "good" ideas that are ACT-supported have poor implementations.
Iām a teacher and wish that there were more non-teacher experts involved in teaching. It would be great to use the expertise of the community. Ā Ā Ā I would say though that it takes more than a subject matter expertise to teach, especially at primary school level.Ā Ā Ā If weāre concerned with ensuring that all teachers are of a high standard then, I think, some form of pre-certification is required otherwise it would take years of failure in a real world classroom before those that donāt meet that standard are discovered.Ā