The members of NZEI Te Riu Roa and PPTA have delivered a resounding rejection of the Government’s latest funding proposal, with more than 99% voting against it in meetings around the country, and calling for further action.
Teachers and support staff believe the “global funding” proposal is effectively a return to the failed bulk funding experiment of the 1990s and could result in fewer teachers and larger class sizes, to the detriment of children’s education.
Most kindergartens, primary and secondary schools were represented at the meetings.
There were three parts to the vote:
1. That this meeting rejects the Global Budget bulk funding model because it undermines the equity and quality of our education system. 99 percent vote in favour
2. That this meeting call on the government to instruct the ministry to work collaboratively with the sector to develop a funding system that recognises the real costs of delivering an equitable quality education to all learners. 99 percent vote in favour
3. That the unions continue to work together with their communities to campaign for better funding for education. 99 percent vote in favour Read more »
Free Press writes
Teacher Unions’ Odd Position
Teachers will strike this week, forcing parents all over the country to make alternative arrangements. Their concern? That principals and boards of trustees will be given more flexibility in how they use their funding. They believe this will lead to fewer teachers being employed, but why would that be?
How it Plays out in Partnership Schools
ACT’s Partnership Schools have total flexibility in their funding. They have generally used this flexibility to economise on material things and employ more teachers. It is not clear why the teacher unions believe state schools would use flexibility to employ fewer teachers, unless… Read more »
The fear mongering in the press releases from the Green party and the PPTA have been put to rest by Hekia Parata. A recent speech in Parliament made it very clear that online learning will not be replacing traditional schooling. Instead, as I had predicted in my post this week it will complement traditional education. While she did say ” in whole or in part ” that is likely a reference to it replacing the current correspondence school model.
What a coincidence, yesterday the Green party put out a press release on Voxy about online schools and only seven minutes later the PPTA did one as well.
Clearly, neither the Green party nor the PPTA supports online schools. Here is a brief summary of the points each group made in their press release.
The teacher’s union are whinging again. Has there ever been a government policy they’ve agreed with?
This time they are scaremongering over bulkfunding…like it is a bad thing.
A government proposal is threatening to revive one of the most bitter disputes the school sector has seen in the past 25 years.
It has suggested giving schools a bulk allocation of funding and leaving it up to principals to decide how much of it to set aside for staffing.
Principals’ and teachers’ groups say that sounds like “bulk funding”, which was ditched in 2000, and they are angry the government has sprung it on them as part of its review of the school and early childhood education funding systems.
Under the proposal, according to an information sheet published by the Ministry of Education, schools could decide how much of their funding to use for what were called staffing credits, and how much to use as a cash component paid in instalments to cover operational costs.
The suggestion differed from past bulk-funding proposals because the ministry would continue to pay teachers’ salaries, it said – the schools would receive notional “credits” for their teachers, not the actual funding for their pay.
- Principals would determine the split between ‘cash’ and ‘credit’, with the flexibility to make adjustments during the year.
- Unspent credit would be paid out at the end of the year and a process for recovering credit overspends would be established.
- Teaching staff salaries would be charged against the credit portion at an average rate. This was a significant difference from historical bulk-funding proposals, which would have seen schools charged the actual salary.
- Non-teaching staff salaries would be charged against the credit portion at actual cost.
However, any unused allocation of staffing credits would be paid to schools at the end of the year.
The board of Kamo High School seem to be changing their story regarding the pulling of support from a local charter school.
They now say there wasn’t any bullying from the PPTA, despite originally claiming that was the case.
Kamo High School’s board chairman says there was no intimidation from the national teachers’ union after the school agreed to let a charter school use its facilities.
The Whangarei school had agreed to give charter school Te Kura Hourua o Whangarei Terenga Paraoa access to its chemistry laboratory but letters released by Act Party leader David Seymour show the Post-Primary Teachers’ Association (PPTA) urged the school to withdraw their support.
Mr Seymour, whose party led the introduction of charter schools in New Zealand, said the PPTA had bullied the Kamo High School out of a “win-win” arrangement. However, the school’s board chairman said the school hadn’t been bullied but he could see both sides of the issue and supported the PPTA.
“I don’t think they are bullies, no one felt intimidated or forced to do anything,” he said.
“On an operational level we have state assets and it’s our view they be available to forward the education of the community.”
I guess that just proves that Kamo High School are as spineless as a jellyfish.
PPTA president Angela Roberts said she was concerned about the charter school using Kamo High School’s facilities when charter schools receive funding equivalent to $28,000 per student, compared with $15,000 per student for a similar-sized state school.
“We don’t want these schools, which are being propped up by considerable additional funding, using resources at these state schools,” she said.
In a letter sent on May 10, PPTA’s Ms Roberts warned principal Joanne Hutt that sharing facilities could go against health and safety laws and would upset teachers who had voted not to support charter schools.
Two weeks later, the school told Ms Roberts that it had decided not to share its chemistry lab with Te Kura Hourua, saying the issue had become a distraction.
Raewyn Tipene of the He Puna Marama Trust told One News the charter school needed to work in a chemistry area and believed there wouldn’t be a problem to ask the nearby high school.
If that isn’t bullying then it is a clear case of gutlessness from the board of Kamo High School.
– NZ Herald
The disgusting bullying tactics of the PPTA have been laid bare as they continue their ideological war on Charter schools.
Act Party leader David Seymour is accusing a teachers’ union of bullying a state school which offered to share resources with a charter school.
Letters released by Mr Seymour show that the Post-Primary Teachers’ Association (PPTA) urged Kamo High School in Northland not to offer support to charter school Te Kura Hourua o Whangarei Terenga Paraoa.
The Decile 5 school had agreed to give the charter school access to its chemistry laboratory.
In a letter sent on May 10, PPTA president Angela Roberts warned the school’s principal Joanne Hutt that sharing facilities could go against health and safety laws and would upset teachers who had voted not to support charter schools.
“At the least this will lead to resentment and ill-feeling, and would be an unfortunate situation where there is no plausible benefit to the students or staff of Kamo High School,” she said. Read more »
There is an interesting editorial in The Herald that paints the PPTA in an unfavourable light. It is rare to read an education article that isn’t blaming the government for all of education’s woes and even rarer to find one that contradicts the head of a union. Even more startling is that the journalist points out that a statement made by Chris Hipkins is a lie. It is not a small lie either, it is a whopper.
It is sad but possibly not surprising that the first tranche of funding for the Government’s “communities of learning” scheme has been taken up mainly by schools that were already better off. Sad, because the purpose was to spread the benefits of the best leadership and teaching and in this way reduce the gap between top performing schools and those at the bottom. But perhaps not surprising because, like every education initiative of a National Government, the scheme was greeted with suspicion and derision by the profession and the poorest schools may be the easiest to discourage from participating.
The fact that 36 per cent of the first round of extra funding has gone to decile 10 schools and only 11 per cent to decile 1 schools, “makes a mockery of National’s claim they are targeting educational achievement”, says Labour’s education spokesman, Chris Hipkins. “It is also a slap in the face to the many outstanding teachers flogging their guts out in our poorest communities.”
It is nothing of the kind; the scheme was, and is, open to all.
The journalist couldn’t be any clearer. He or she is calling Chris Hipkins a liar.
The inability of school Principals to pay staff differently where there are shortages has two causes – the PPTA opposed bulk funding and PPTA/NZEI insistence on national contracts.
Principals struggling to fill teaching positions have resorted to buying houses for staff as a last ditch attempt to offset the impact of the housing crisis.
A “perfect storm” has created a secondary school teaching shortage, exacerbated by teachers fleeing Auckland’s skyrocketing house prices, a principal says.
A new survey of principals found about one in 10 schools reported they were unable to fill permanent positions after advertising.
The average secondary school teacher earns between $46,000 and $75,000 but the median Auckland house price is $812,000 – four times the value of a Southland house. Read more »
On the PPTA Blog there is one writer Tom Haig who has a passion for attacking charter schools. One of the more recent rockets he has fired was one claiming that a particular charter school got rid of students at a higher rate than other schools.
Interestingly it turns out that this is a myth about charter schools that originated in America.
Research Disproves Another Charter School Myth