It's the principle of the thing! No-one really yet knows the details of how the pilot charter schools to be trialled in South Auckland and Christchurch are going to work. But, with no details in sight all--yes, all--the education and teacher unions roundly condemned the new policy. And their condemnation was as swift as it was universal.
When there is such a tight phalanx of reflexive opposition to a concept it is clear that ideology is driving and forming one's position, not data or facts or circumstances. Of course, union spokesmen felt forced to give reasons for their visceral opposition to trialling charter schools in New Zealand. With nothing to go on, they provided made-up reasons, which only served to underscore just how hide-bound and ideologically strait-jacketed the education unions are. Here is the bevy of reasons, offered up to the NZ Herald:
- A step towards privatising the education system (attributed to the teacher unions in general and the Labour Party)
- Charter schools take students and money away from existing schools (NZEI president, Ian Leckie)
- Charter schools undermine communities (Leckie)
- They increase social segregation (Leckie)
- They are less accountable (Leckie)
- Charter schools are bulk funding in drag (Sue Moroney, Labour education spokesman)
Charter schools undermine communities. Pardon. No student will attend a charter school unless his parents, caregivers, whanau, or immediate community approve--and choose. For they will have a choice, old boy, won't they. What you are really talking about is undermining the snug little community kept tightly bound in the monopolistic compulsory state-union controlled education system. What the real community of the pupil wants or chooses is an anathema. That is not what Leckie means by "community" at all.
Charter schools increase social segregation. What! Some kids play rugby league, others union. Cannot have that. It represents social segregation, don't you know. Oh, maybe Leckie means this: charter schools give kids an opportunity to excel academically, way beyond their neighbourhood peers. It gives them a chance to escape the ghettoes of South Auckland. In state education union speak, such things are evil because they represent "social segregation"! Illiteracy and innumeracy and lifelong benefit dependance is OK as long as the entire community is united in their thrall.
Charter schools are less accountable. To whom? To parents. Not at all. They will be far, far more accountable to parents than are state union controlled schools. Oh, but Leckie has a point. Charter schools are far less accountable to the endless accretions of bureaucratic rules, regulations, form-filling, and never-ending compliance of the union controlled state education system. And that's a bad thing, right? Except that most competent and truly professional educators will be looking over the fence with green faces. We don't think there will be any lack of teachers lining up for jobs in charter schools.
Charter schools are bulk funding in drag. Hardly. But, let's grant the point for a moment. Ms Moroney, unionist and Labour politician, would you please explain why Labour steadfastly promotes bulk funding in the public health system--champions it, in fact--whilst at the same time opposes it to the death, in the public education system. Has it got something to do with the relative strength of the puppet masters in the education sector, as compared to the health sector? Why, we believe it does. Your credibility on the issue is somewhat lacking. At the very least, you owe us all a "please explain".
Roll on charter schools.
No comments:
Post a Comment