Posts by Rob Stowell
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Gower Speaks, in reply to George Darroch,
In today’s Horizon Poll, two thirds of New Zealanders expect National to lead a potential coalition government post-election. A plurality of New Zealanders want Labour to lead a coalition government post-election.
Fascinating, very understandable (most people I talk to are dubious about Labour/Greens getting over the line), and infuriating all at once :)
From a left perspective, vital the narrative changes from 'National leading' to 'election on a knife-edge'. Since that's a more realistic reading of what we know of the polls, it shouldn't be hard. (Some in National will be wanting the same story, to energise and focus their own vote.)
But there's some powerful voodoo against it. -
Definitely not a done deal. Long way to go and bound to be the odd unexpected wobble along the way.
-
At the risk of cross-threading, a side-note in the polls is how education looks to be at the top of the list this election.
Parata's oblivious blithering isn't doing the Nats any favours.
But NZ needs articulate passionate voices (like Jollissa :)) to explain how National's innocuous-sounding managerial approach - all efficiencies, and 'outcomes' and 'world-class' - is dangerously wrong-headed, at best. -
I'm curious if anyone else sees a consistent media fascination with ACT and equally consistent tendency to ignore Mana. They seem to have similar levels of support - Mana have a safer seat than ACT, since ACT's is courtesy of another party, and it seems possible that Mana could pick up another seat (Waiariki). Both are tied to one side of the aisle - no coalition options.
Is it because ACT has a past life as a more significant party; because it's wealthy, and the party of the wealthy; because it's so nutty and liable to implode in various ways that make good stories? -
Hard News: What Hekia Parata actually said, in reply to JonathanM,
Even if all this could be done, is the best pay scheme to use to begin with?
No :)
Even if everyone agreed the measurements were fair, objective, and measured real, valuable, rich educational achievement. Wrong tool. -
Hard News: Things worth knowing, in reply to bob daktari,
if the personal friend who paid personally is one of the owners of said company just where does the line of demarcation land?
It's not clear-cut in the other direction - quite possible for someone to pay personally for something they expect the business they own to benefit from. But if it was paid for by the company, ie through the company accounts, it's a business dinner (or they are defrauding their company).
-
Hard News: Things worth knowing, in reply to Chris Waugh,
I would guess Oravida paid.
Here's where it makes a difference: if it's a personal dinner, ie genuinely a social gathering, it's not the sort of thing that should be put on the company credit card. That goes for whoever you work for- university, company, kohanga reo. A 'private' dinner is properly paid for by private individuals.
The company/employers credit card quite properly comes out on some such occasions, because schmoozing can be a genuine business objective. The expense can (rightly) be called a business expense on the account sheet.
If Ms Collins' friends paid personally, it confirms her claim that it was a personal and private gathering. Perhaps unwise, but at least a little harder to call a conflict of interest.
If the company picked up the tab, it's a different story. -
Busytown: School bully, in reply to Pi Roy,
we have being sliding down the rankings for the last twenty years
All the way down to this?
Key findings of PISA 2006
Of the 57 countries participating in PISA 2006, no more than 5 countries achieved a result that was significantly better than New Zealand’s 15-year-olds in scientific literacy (2 countries), mathematical literacy (5 countries) and reading literacy (3 countries).
New Zealand and Finland achieved the largest proportion of students performing at the highest level of scientific literacy.(source)
Wish we were still sliding in that direction.
Nobody I’ve ever heard with any clue has ever said things were all rosy in NZ education – or that it’s equally good across the board, or that there are no bad teachers, or schools with poor staff culture – and especially noone denying there are kids in the ‘long tail’ who are not getting a fair chance to learn.
But the same stupid blind managerialism that fails and fails and fails isn’t the answer. (It’s everywhere. Brought into health in the 90’s it was only dialled back a notch at the Canterbury DHB when surgeons and nurses combined to fight, there was a protracted battle, only settled when a Govt commissioned report by Robyn Stent found 4 deaths directly attributable to bad management decisions. 4 deaths directly attributable no clear idea how many others might have been “adversely affected”. It’s hard to dismiss death as a rounding error.)
It fails because it assumes cost-accountancy and ‘efficiencies’ derived from second-rate business mangers always trump the collective experience of professionals – who are concerned with things like health and education, not performance pay, bonuses, cost-trimming and robotic worker output.
Health should be run by health professionals. Education should be run by teachers. -
Busytown: School bully, in reply to HORansome,
For some more words of wisdom about performance-based pay for teachers, my friend wrote this some two years ago.
in a similar vein this worth reading (not sure who Steve McCabe is, but I don't *think* he's the baby-faced guitar-slinger who fronts the Axmen.)
-
Brilliant, Jolissa, And what you describe is *extremely* infuriating. Destroying what you don't- can't won't- understand is vandalism. That's what I see - combined with concern-troll murmurs of 'killing them with low expectations.'
Hope Chris Hipkins really get's his teeth into this.