Monopoly Education is Poor Education

In New Zealand, the Ministry of Truth Education may be looking at introducing or amending 135 school enrolment zones in Auckland. The plan is designed to save the Ministry millions of dollars by forcing parents to send their children to undersubscribed schools rather than oversubscribed ones which would require expensive expansion projects to keep up with demand. Having more enrolment zones gives the MOE more ability to manage this demand.

Obviously this is going to rub many parents up the wrong way. There is a reason parents try at all costs to avoid a local school and instead elect to send their child to a school further away. Why would parents make their lives more difficult? Quite simply, parents are closer to understanding their child’s needs, and have more skin in the game than faceless bureaucrats drawing lines on a map. Perhaps it would be better to consider why some schools are unpopular and why others are full. Perhaps instead of continuing to restrict choice we could increase choice and make schools more responsible for attracting students to their area by providing a service that parents actually want. Maybe, just maybe, leaders in unpopular schools could consider what it is that makes them unpopular and figure out how to turn the ship around.

Monopolies do not tend to provide excellent customer service, and we have a near-monopoly situation with education in New Zealand. Being in education, I am aware of independent schools in areas of Auckland that offer a basic no-frills education. These schools charge fees and still are bursting at the seams. You have to ask yourself why. Seriously. If these schools can attract people away from free schools charging thousands of dollars per year while simultaneously offering no optional extras – just a basic traditional education – how bad must the local schools be?

Could it be possible that most parents might know more about what good education looks like than the MOE and government bureaucracy? Yes. Would we be better off if the government retreated from its overly controlling approach to all things education and allowed parents more choice? Without a doubt. Would more choice lead to healthy competition? Certainly. Would educational standards rise? Of course. Would the unions and many teachers complain? Naturally, why would the turkey vote for Christmas? Should we do it anyway? Imagine the fun! Will this government do anything that will increase educational outcomes? Can the blind lead the blind?

Journalism at its Finest?

The danger of criticising media on issues of spelling and punctuation is that it is very easy to make these mistakes oneself. And yet sometimes journalistic mistakes demonstrate an unfortunate lack of knowledge that just seems inappropriate for journalists, let alone the Chief of staff of the New Zealand Herald.

Take this article on the investigation into historic sexual abuse at Dilworth school. Not once, but twice in this piece we have one of the alleged perpetrators being described as a past victor of St Luke’s Anglican Church in Manurewa. The word I think she was looking for is vicar!

Is this an indication of the appalling ignorance of Christian faith that has become mainstream? And if our journalists are so ignorant, how can we trust them to understand the issues and report in a fair and balanced way? Maybe I have this wrong, but I would have thought that journalists should be some of the more well rounded and knowledgeable citizens. Furthermore, to be that kind of citizen in New Zealand should mean at the very least, a cursory understanding of the Christian faith and its place in New Zealand.

It should go without saying that I am not here defending (or maintaining the guilt of) the men before the courts. I am merely making a comment on journalistic ignorance.

UPDATE: By 7:00pm, the NZ Herald article had been updated and corrected. No mention of the mistake of course.