Here’s a great video explaining the Unteach Racism app and its links to critical theory. Please share this video with all your friends who are interested in education in NZ. We need to get the word out because this is bad news for education in New Zealand. The Teaching Council should be ashamed of producing such a biased and divisive app.
Unteach Racism – Module 3 – Low Expectations
In previous articles, we have investigated the brand new app that The Human Rights Commission and The Teaching Council of Aotearoa New Zealand have put together. The first module was an introductory one and contained the usual fallacy of assuming disparities in ethnic outcomes are caused by racism. In module 2 we were presented with the issue of low self-belief which we were led to believe was caused by teachers and schools. Today we look at module 3 and low expectations.
From the outset, I had more hope for this module. It’s a well-known truth that teacher expectations are extremely significant in the learning process. There has been significant study into this and a psychological phenomenon known as the Pygmalion effect has been noticed. Essentially, the idea is that learners internalise the expectations their teachers have for them. If a teacher has high expectations for a particular child, the child will rise to meet those expectations, and conversely, if a teacher has low expectations for a child, they will sink to meet those expectations. One classic study gave teachers a class that was described as containing extremely gifted students. Teachers were told who these students were. At the conclusion of the study, these students had fared the best. What the teachers didn’t know, was that these ‘gifted students’ were selected at random, and were ordinary children. So, low expectations and high expectations from teachers and our educational system do matter. More on this later, but back to the module for now.
We are initially presented with a quote. Studies have shown that Māori students recognise when teachers have low expectations for them and so put in less effort than they do for teachers who have high expectations for them. We are then reminded of the possibility of implicit bias. It is, we are told, important that we ‘heighten our awareness of these biases.’ These implicit biases may be impacting our view of our students and therefore limiting them. To determine whether we have implicit biases we are then directed to an American Implicit Association Test. The test begins by getting you to identify dark and light faces that come up on your screen, pushing a key with your left hand for light skin and a key with your right hand for dark-skinned. Next, we are presented with good words and bad words and have to sort them out likewise. After this things are mixed up with faces and words appearing. Then various combinations are made so that the person taking the test is thoroughly confused.
What does this supposedly prove? An implicit preference for Light Skinned People relative to Dark Skinned People is assumed if the test subject is faster to sort words when ‘Light Skinned People’ and ‘Good’ share a button relative to when ‘Dark Skinned People’ and ‘Good’ share a button. In the interests of full disclosure, when I sat the test this on two different occasions this week, I came out as supposedly having a slight automatic preference for Dark Skinned People over Light Skinned People. I am not aware of any such bias in my teaching practice.
To begin with, what is really being measured here? Might it just measure familiarity? We tend to find people we are around all the time better looking and tend to associate them with ‘good’ just because they are familiar. But does this mean in a classroom situation we would unconsciously have lower expectations for those who are less familiar? I am not sure this follows at all. It might be equally likely that we expect more of them. It’s not at all clear to me what the test ultimately proves.
Realistically in 21st century New Zealand, there would not be many teachers who unconsciously expect less from a darker (or lighter) face. I think we are too multicultural for that to be a reality. Our actual experience as teachers would counter this supposed implicit bias. For example, my teaching experience has been in classes where children with lighter skin are a distinct minority. Do I expect more or less from them than I do from the many different darker-skinned ethnicities I have taught? I doubt it. I have taught high achievers from many different ethnicities. I do not bring expectations into classes I teach based on skin colour, and I suspect few teachers do despite the absurd and unsupported claims of people like Whetu Cormick who suggests many New Zealand universities are “pumping out teachers and many of them are biased, they discriminate and they are racist.”
Nonetheless, I do believe low expectations are having a negative impact on Maori and Pacific education. The irony is that it is not the conservative teachers, those who oppose the ‘Treaty Partnership’ nonsense being foisted upon the education sector, those critiquing the proposed new history curriculum, those critiquing the vacuous New Zealand curriculum and calling for more stringent standards, or those calling for an end to race-based entry into tertiary courses who have lower expectations for some learners. No, we are the ones who expect high standards from all our learners. We are not the racists.
The very people who have low expectations for Maori and Pacific learners are those putting together modules like Unteach Racism – the Teacher’s Council and many of the ‘elites’ controlling our education system. Let me give four brief examples of the low expectations I see in education. To begin with, let’s take our friend Whetu Cormick, former President of the NZ Principals’ Association. In 2019, in a response to a press release from The New Zealand Initiative critical of New Zealand’s education, Whetu Cormick suggested that what we need is a curriculum that is relevant to the community. He wasn’t worried that many New Zealanders didn’t know the names of the continents. If a kid in Bluff cares more about muttonbirds than continents, that’s what he should learn about says Cormick. So condemning a child to ignorance is OK as long as he studies what his culture is interested in. That’s low expectations.
We also see the tyranny of low expectations in the public schools that extirpate any books of the Western canon from their English literature courses and encourage children to choose books that they can ‘relate to’ as if brown children are incapable of relating to people of the past in the same way Pakeha children can. Surely Shakespeare is foreign to anyone living in 21st century New Zealand, but the riches we can glean from his study of human nature transcend culture and time.
Again we see low expectations in this ridiculous notion that to celebrate culture we must always have children dressing up in cultural garb and performing. If that is taking children out of academic learning time, which it so often is, we are short-selling those children academically. Schools should not be about teaching children their culture – that’s the job of the family. Schools are there to provide what family usually cannot – an academic pathway to success.
Finally, let’s not forget, the low expectations of thinking academic learning has to in some way relate to Tikanga Maori. You know, the typical nonsense that a teacher must relate all his lessons to the children’s cultural background. How does one relate differential calculus, or inorganic Chemistry to Maori culture – or any culture for that matter? Are we not humans, and isn’t investigating the world and seeking to understand its complexity and design a part of our human nature? Isn’t that larger than our own particular culture?
The truth of the matter is this: the path to wealth and success for many children in poorer families is not through focussing on their own community values and culture. In some cases, these values are precisely what is causing or exacerbating poverty. Rather, education should enable all our children to access the riches of the wider community. Education is not about keeping our children comfortably coddled in the culture and community they grew up in. Rather we need to be offering all our children the treasures of millennia of Western Civilization (and the many cultures and that have contributed to this). Let’s not sell our children’s birthright for a racist mess of pottage. Let’s give all our children their birthright as citizens of a Western democracy.
Unteach Racism – Module 2 – Low Self Belief
In our previous post, we evaluated the first module of Unteach Racism, finding it to be worthy of an F- grade. Today we are moving on to module 2 entitled “Low Self Belief”. We come to this second module with lower expectations given the pure unadulterated manure we found in the first module.
The goals of the second module are to introduce the concept of intrapersonal racism and explore “learner voice and experience of low self-belief and internalised racism”. For those of you who don’t see everything through the lens of racism, otherwise known as normal and unwarped human beings, you may be unaware of some of the language here. You’re probably busy working hard earning an income to feed your loved ones rather than stealing taxpayer money to produce divisive drivel being commissioned by the government to investigate important issues facing us all. So, you ignorant rubes, intrapersonal racism (also called internalised racism) is racism taken on board about one’s own race.
So where are we supposed to see this intrapersonal racism? It apparently occurs when people “accept society’s negative beliefs about their own culture.” Apparently, it happens through constant exposure to a negative view of your own particular race. You know, when society constantly presents you with a negative racial stereotype.
Now, readers, I know what your wicked hearts are thinking already before you say it. You are thinking to yourself “Oh great! Someone has finally seen the danger of the elites and media constantly banging on about white people and their supposed privilege! That’s sure to lead to internalised racism,” I suggest you settle down you racist bigots. That’s not going to lead to intrapersonal racism. Honestly, what were you thinking?! You need to read more academics. It’s quite simple really. Those people are white. They can’t help but be racist, except they never experience intrapersonal racism. Just because. So shut up now and don’t ask any more questions or I’ll report you to the Teaching Council. Racism is bad, white people do it and never suffer it. Intrapersonal racism is bad, white people cause it but never suffer it.
So who experiences this terrible intrapersonal racism? Did you say Maori? Well done! Come to the head of the class you genius…unless of course, you are a white male. In which case just shut up. So according to our beneficent overlords at the Teaching Council of Aotearoa NZ, it is up to teachers to help lift the ‘limits society is causing our learners to place on themselves through internalised, intrapersonal racism.’
What limits are we talking about here? Is it the limit of assuming that Maori children need to be focussing on cultural activities like kapa haka as if this is what education is centred around? Because as any teacher who subjects themselves to the tripe put out by every trendy mainstream educational publication like the Education Gazette will tell you, just about every article on Maori education is accompanied with photos of Maori in kapa haka and cultural garb as if this is what culturally appropriate education for Maori looks like – limiting them to dancing and singing. Is that the kind of limit we are talking about? No of course not. That is helping Maori achieve excellence apparently. Let me quote from a particularly egregious example of this mindset from the Education Gazette. Here kapa haka teacher Brad is quoted as saying, “Our children are extraordinary, They’re doing genealogy, mathematics, social studies, performance arts – all on stage,” and later he denigrates the “solution of one teacher, one subject, one way of delivering.” He says, “Imagine if you could box this up – kapa haka – and place it into schools.” Yes, imagine what a lower GDP would look like for our country….but on the upside, at least we could all enjoy ourselves performing on stage. So is this thinking a limit that society is causing our learners to place on themselves? No of course not! That’s how we will improve education for Maori you racist morons. As we encourage more kapa haka our students’ understanding of complex calculus, biology and chemistry will increase exponentially leading to more Maori in engineering and science careers.
So what is it you ask? What limits is society causing learners to place on themselves? Are they the limits caused by accepting Maori truancy and our leaders blaming it on schools not making their programmes desirable? Or perhaps it is the limit of government policy that encourages fatherless homes by sanctioning all forms of ‘family‘? Maybe you are thinking about drug addiction and alcohol dependency? What about gangs? Perhaps these are things which cause learners to place limits on themselves. Well if you were considering those things, the new hate speech laws can’t come quickly enough. People like you should be locked up permanently.
It’s quite clear that the way society causes our Maori (or ethnic minority) learners to place limits on themselves is through our racist teachers. It is our racist teachers who place these limits on otherwise angelic students who come from loving family backgrounds with parents who encourage their children to study hard each night and attend school regularly with full bellies.
Evidence? All the evidence we need for this is in listening to student ‘voice’. Here’s how one ruined child describes his experience. “We feel like we are failing when we are constantly reminded that we are not doing well – Principal use to bring out all these graphs to show us how we are failing, and it would just piss us off.” I find it surprising that a principal would show graphs comparing achievement of different ethnicities. However, it seems odd to me that one would remain “pissed off” with not doing well. I remember a teacher I had who treated me very poorly and more or less insinuated I was no good at the subject. I was upset and angry. So I knuckled down and went on to kick some butt in that subject.
Here’s another example of student voice. “I don’t get a chance to go to school. I always get suspended first week of term. I’m not sure why.” This one is intriguing. Evidently, the racist teachers and principal and school boards conspire against this poor victim of racism. He innocently arrives at school on the first day of term, but no matter how well he behaves, the school has it in for him. He’ll be gone by Friday. Absolutely crystal clear case of racism. He might not have any idea of why he was suspended, but if we have our biases removed, we should all be able to surmise it’s due to racial bias.
Let’s look at one last example of student voice. “Im real good at maths but my teacher just thinks im stupid so never gave me any time cept to get me n trouble. But if you are a Pakeha its all good.” Well our friend here might be good at Maths, but it’s doubtful the same could be said of his versatility in English. Again this is a clear case of racism. The teacher spends no time with him, because the teacher is racist. It’s not that the teacher is spending time with students who are struggling with maths rather than those who are good at it. No, it’s clearly racism. We see this in the biased way the teacher deals with this student. He deliberately ‘gets the child in trouble.’ Again we have a case of an innocent young man quietly working on factorising his quadratic equations in class, and the teacher deliberately causes trouble for him. Without a doubt it’s racism.
So, dear racist readers. It is now totally clear that New Zealand teachers are responsible for placing limits on Maori and ethnic minority students. No way is this a case of teenage students not liking their teacher and thinking the world is against them. That’s definitely not a thing. These quotes prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that our whole system of education is racist to its very white bones. Teachers are causing students to place limits on themselves.
The module sums up the way our school system and teachers place limits on Maori and ethnic minorities. Teachers do this in five main ways. Firstly Maori culture is not valued. One Maori student complains that this is demonstrated in the way Maori children are always asked to perform kapa haka when visitors attend the school but their culture is ignored the rest of the time. Clearly, this is oppression. Because of course we teachers are always asking our white children to perform highland dancing when dignitaries arrive at the school, and the rest of the time we are focussing on ‘white’ culture in the classroom – you know – drinking cups of tea, saying ‘jolly good show’, listening to classical music all while encouraging the colonising of backward nations to civilise them. Secondly, our racist teaching force negatively stereotypes students and thinks the worst of them. Every teacher I know looks at their class and thinks, “Ok so I’ve got five Maori kids in this class. Gee I better keep an eye on them, they’ll probably be passing weed and stealing my stationery.” Thirdly we apparently deliberately make children feel stupid and dumb. This totally rings true, doesn’t it? Every teacher I know refuses to treat children as individuals, but thinks of them according to their group identity and then treats them like that. Fourthly we expect them to fail. That’s why every teacher gets into teaching. For the perverse enjoyment of seeing children fail. We are excited to promote ethnic inequality in the classroom. The truth is finally out! No way do we offer free after school tutorials to struggling students in order to assist them to grow and develop in their learning. And if we did, we’d only invite the Pakeha and Asian kids. Finally, teachers do their best to ensure Maori and ethnic minority students feel excluded. Teachers deliberately engineer their classes to exclude ethnic minorities. They want them to feel as uncomfortable as possible so they will just stop coming.
Makes you think that we’d be better off without teachers really. Or maybe the Teaching Council of Aotearoa New Zealand needs to be defunded so that good teachers can get on with their jobs without being insulted with this bilge.
Unteach Racism – Module 1
A new website called Unteach Racism has been set up for teachers in New Zealand. Apparently, this is the result of a few years of collaboration between the Teaching Council and the Human Rights Commission. The stated aim of the website is to support teachers to ‘identify confront and dismantle racism in education.’ Who knew racism was such a problem in New Zealand education?
Who knew teachers were deliberately favouring some and targeting others for failure? Being a teacher myself I was shocked! Having always desired the best for all my students and delighted in the achievement of every single one regardless of ethnicity, I was shocked to be informed that racism is a systemic part of New Zealand education. I assumed my colleagues were more or less the same as me. Yet it seems thousands of my colleagues are racist rednecks who have slipped into the education system with the nefarious intention of secretly passing on their intolerant bigotry and deliberately targeting sections of our community for permanent illiteracy, innumeracy, shame and poverty.
Thankfully, despite being educated in such a patently racist system, our glorious Teaching Council has remained untouched by this racism and is committed to rooting out the bigotry of hate and oppression in order to usher in a glorious new dawn of racial harmony and educational equality. So the result is an app that is apparently designed to brainwash support teachers to think about what they know about racism so they can teach unteach it in the classroom. Thankfully this will without a doubt immediately shame all these evil racist bigots within the teaching profession and they will repent of their evil ways. No longer will they be able to blame weeknight party throwing, sexually immoral, unemployed, drug-dealing drunkard parents for the failure of their children. The blame will be back squarely where it belongs – with the racism of the system.
So in the next few weeks, we will work through the eight modules on the app. Today we will look at Module 1 which is entitled “Unteach Racism”. The stated aims of this module are to introduce the concept of systemic racism and identify its impacts in education and other sectors. We commence with a typically emotive and fluffy speech that one expects from a young girl who has not yet moved into the real adult world. She is a young Maori student who suggests that failing to pronounce a name or place correctly is feeding the ‘taniwha of racism’. So take that all you ignoramuses who pronounce Paris ‘Pa-riss’. You racist bigots.
We are then taken on a tour of examples of ways that racism has shaped our systems, structures and social outcomes. The module consists mainly of statistics of which some are noted below. A few of the statistics are linked back to government reports, but a couple are linked to articles from Stuff – that bastion of neutrality and objectivity.
- June 2017 unemployment rate for Pakeha was 3.4% while Maori had an unemployment rate of 11.1%
- In 2017 the mean hourly rate for Pākehā was $30.09, for Pacific Peoples it was $22.96
- 52.9% of the prison population is Maori, but only 18.7% of our population is Maori
- Maori home ownership rate is 31%, whereas Non-Maori home ownership is 57.9%
- Pacific and Māori participation in Early Childhood Education is lower than Pakeha
- Only 2.7% of students are enrolled in Maori medium education
- Maori learners are twice as likely to be suspended
Once again, we have a list of disparities cited with no context to ‘prove’ racism. Despite the stated aims of the module being to introduce the concept of systemic racism and identify its impacts in education, it seems that the two ideas are conflated. For the designers of this brainwashing app, systemic racism seems to be defined as the existence of disparities between races. This ‘proves’ systemic racism. Actually, these statistics do no such thing. Even a quick read of some of the linked reports demonstrates there is complexity. For example regarding the unemployment rate, a Statistical Analysis of Ethnic Wage Gaps in New Zealand suggests that “Educational level and occupation are the two factors that have the largest impact on Māori-Pākehā and Pacific-Pākehā wage disparities, amongst all those considered.”
Assuming systemic racism is the cause of these disparities is simple and perhaps, therefore, appealing to the simple-minded, but what if the existence of disparities is not so simple? What if different cultures in their different values tend to choose things in accordance with those differing values? And what if those different choices lead to different outcomes? Even some of the quotes from learners illustrate this. One child in Kura Kaupapa Māori was asked about achievement. The learner said, “Achievement should be more than grades. Be able to support whānau and doing jobs well in life.” That’s not something I (an experienced teacher) have heard regularly (if at all!) from an Asian parent’s lips. Perhaps, just perhaps, the values a family has will make more of a difference to a child’s educational success and achievement than this mythic taniwha named ‘systemic racism’. If the problem is ‘white privilege’, what is it that enables other minorities such as Asians to succeed more than Pakeha New Zealanders?
Since feedback is an essential part of the teaching process, I have assigned a grade to the Teaching Council of New Zealand and given them my teacher’s comment on their work. Let’s hope for better in the future.
Grade: F–
Comment: Teaching Council of Aotearoa New Zealand. Thank you for finally handing in your group assignment entitled Unteach Racism. It’s a little overdue. I note you started this in 2018 with the Human Rights Commission. Frankly, I expect more from you given the exorbitant fees you forcibly charge me for the privilege of you hectoring me and badgering me all in the name of improving my teaching. Furthermore, given the extensive time frame you got with those extensions, I was hoping for a top-quality assignment. Unfortunately, I have to grade you an F double minus for biased presentation of statistics with no context, lack of critical thinking, an absence of diversity of thought and alternative viewpoints and a divisive approach to race relations in New Zealand. I also think you have inaccurately titled the assignment. I suggest “Teaching Racism” would be a more suitable title. Please do better next time. With a little more research and a more balanced approach, I hope, though sincerely doubt you are capable of more.
The Best Thing You Can Do to Help Your Child Succeed at School
Every good parent wonders how they can best help their child achieve at school. Obviously, we can ensure our child is attending a first-rate school that provides excellent teachers. That’s not always possible, and even if we do manage it, the school and the teacher are only one part of the story. How can we as parents do our bit at home? What is the best thing you can do to help your child succeed at school?
The number one thing you can do at home is provide a knowledge-rich environment. Talk to your children. Have dinner together and let them hear you use ‘big words’ as you talk with your wife. Read aloud to them. Seems simple right? Yet so many children are short-changed in this area. It is more common for ‘families’ to eat dinner separately staring at screens, and few children are read to past their toddler years, but this has educational ramifications.
Really? Yes, really. The number one reason children from lower socio-economic homes fare worse in school is because they lack the vocabulary and knowledge that children from more wealthy homes have. These children go to school with a vocabulary that is hundreds and sometimes thousands of words fewer than children from more wealthy families. This gap tends to widen over time in the wrong sorts of schools. Since vocabulary size is the most important indicator of reading ability and comprehension, these children will find it more difficult to pick up knowledge at school. But let’s not just assume this is a problem for children from poorer homes. More and more busy two-parent working families are spending less time with each other.
I believe that providing knowledge is so important to success, that if you read to your children for an hour a day, taught and encouraged them to read every day for a few hours (ensuring the quality of books being read), provided them with basic numeracy skills while avoiding unnecessary screen time throughout the first six years of school, your child could miss school entirely, and enter the intermediate years in no way lacking. If you are not well educated yourself, become acquainted with your local library, and assign your child reading tasks every week. This is essentially what neurosurgeon Dr Ben Carson’s mother did, despite being unable to read herself. He links his future success as a neuro-surgeon to his mother’s strict reading regime of two books per week.
Arrogance and Ignorance
Arrogance and Ignorance go together like conjoined twins, but there isn’t a brain between them. We’ve seen it recently in the student lead climate protests. It’s a feature of our education system. We teach children that they are at the centre of the world, that they are so creative and smart and their generation will end bigotry and save the planet. And yet we would struggle to find a more woefully ignorant generation.
Some time ago I had the opportunity of seeing some results for a TIMSS trial in New Zealand. The school whose results I saw was an independent school. Their results far exceeded the national median. In fact, for Mathematics, the mean (of 2-3 students) from each of the five different test versions was significantly above the upper quartile (75th percentile) of the NZ wide results.
But what was striking was a section of the TIMS trial that asked questions about how children perceived their ability in mathematics. The children at this school did not perceive themselves to be good at mathematics in comparison to the New Zealand average. On average they rated themselves lower on statements like “I usually do well in mathematics”, “I learn things quickly in mathematics” and “I am good at working out difficult mathematics problems.” This despite the fact they were actually in the top quartile of New Zealand. Moreover, the students rated their teacher more highly in statements like “My teacher is good at explaining maths” and “My teacher is easy to understand”.
So here we have a group of children who are very skilled in comparison to the average New Zealand child. They rate their abilities lower than the average New Zealand child, and they rate their teacher higher than the average New Zealand child. In other words, they have a lower estimation of their own ability and higher estimation of the teacher. These are children ready to excel. They understand their limits and recognise in age and experience someone who can benefit them. Their less successful New Zealand counterparts, despite being objectively worse at mathematics, esteemed their abilities to be higher and their teacher’s abilities to be lower. An attitude of arrogant ignorance, which our public schools encourage through their child-centred philosophy, will hold these children back from true excellence.
Producing Arrogant Ignorance
Recently some students in Wellington skipped school and marched demanding government action on climate change. Photographs of the event unsurprisingly featured crowds of mostly young women with that look. You know, that wide-eyed earnest but naive and slightly unhinged do-gooder look which makes even the most die-hard egalitarian sometimes wish we didn’t have universal suffrage! Our education system is producing arrogant ignorance.
The zealous sweethearts attending the march exude condescension and arrogance. One of the signs read “We’re giving up lessons to teach you one.” You didn’t know you needed a teenage girl to teach you did you? Another girl confidently insisted we need more climate change education in schools and expounded, “We only have a limited amount of time left before the effects of climate change become irreversible…” I guess one could agree with her on the requirement of more education on climate change, but our meaning is no doubt diametrically opposed.
Arrogance is the end result of an education system that is child-centred and that rejects rigour and depth of knowledge. Our approach to education teaches children that they know what is best and they are at the centre of the learning process. We’ve attracted teachers who see themselves as facilitators of learning rather than experts who want to pass on civilizational riches to the next generation. The long term consequences? Ignorant children who hector and bully adults despite being more ignorant and poorly educated than previous generations.
Unlike these poor dears who have only been toilet trained for just over a decade, those of us who are educated and have been around a little while know that confident ‘scientific’ predictions are often total bosh. Take Paul Erlich. In 1970 he said, “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” Or what about Life which ran an article in 1970 saying, “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….” So spare us the doomsday predictions. We’ve heard it all before.
We don’t need to be lectured by kids who know next to nothing about anything. What we need is education that provides children with a depth of knowledge. We need an education system that provides rigour and challenge. We need an education system that teaches children humility – one that demonstrates to them how little they do know and how often the ‘wise’ have acted like fools. We need an education system that is not thinly veiled political propaganda. Instead, our largely female teaching body and our feminine dominated approach to education have reduced our education system to feel-good slogans and used naive, anxious and emotionally-driven children as pawns in political activism.
Fleeing a Sinking Ship
As mentioned in previous posts, I have some knowledge of a small independent school in New Zealand. Situated in a low socioeconomic area of the country, you would naturally assume it would struggle to attract students. Not so. It has waiting lists at almost all levels. Despite local state schools having millions of dollars thrown at them in building upgrades, parents are desperate to move their children into this small independent school. Unfortunately, the school is at capacity in most year levels, and has to turn away many of those who apply.
So what’s going on in these other schools? There are of course multiple factors. One is discipline. Some schools seem reluctant or unable to deal with difficult students. In one of the local schools, teachers are instructed to leave the classroom with the rest of the class when a student ‘loses it’ and begins destroying things. Independent schools tend to have more ability to deal with discipline issues because a contract exists between parents and the school. Truculent students can be dealt with effectively by putting the onus back where it belongs – with the parents.
A second issue is of course the academic side of things. Unfortunately, the New Zealand curriculum is content-light and this is supposedly one of its benefits. Children will be able to learn skills in a way that caters to the interests and knowledge of their local community. This sounds very nice in theory, and in higher decile communities it has less of a negative impact than in lower decile communities. In lower socio-economic areas this ‘skills-based’ local knowledge approach tends to leave children from knowledge poor communities trapped. They are not provided with the knowledge that will help them succeed in society.
On a related note, there are low-expectations. Students applying to enter this independent school must sit placement tests, and the results of most children who apply from the local schools are depressing. Children can get through intermediate without knowing virtually anything about fractions or even basic numerical skills. In English, many students are unaware of basic conventions such as capitalization and punctuation. They write as they would text. Speaking of texting, these children often have atrocious handwriting because they have done most of their ‘learning’ on devices.
Unfortunately, for some children, they will never make up the lost ground. Those who spend their primary years in these state-run institutions may be doomed academically. High school teachers cannot be expected to teach cognitively challenging concepts in preparation for the rigours of university to children who are innumerate and illiterate. It is not fair or realistic.
So my advice to you if you are living in a low-socio economic area is to look very carefully at your options. If you want your children to succeed in the world, you might want to look at other options. If you are relatively well-educated yourself, you might consider home-schooling. If you are not, you might consider doing everything you can to get your child into a school that focusses on giving your child a knowledge-rich education. If you cannot afford to do that, the next best thing is to join your local library, and get your child reading widely. If your local school is focussing on things like environmental issues or cultural groups, realise that as nice as these things might be, if they are taking time away from attaining knowledge, your child is being cheated out of an education that could raise his sites, his future prospects, his future earning potential, and his future living standards.
Strategic Evangelism
I recently read of a Gallup poll from the 1980s that looked at when people came to Christ. Apparently, 18 out of twenty people came to Christ before the age of 25. At age 35, one in fifty thousand became Christians, and at age 45, one in two hundred thousand. Now I don’t know the details behind these statistics, but they highlight what many studies of this nature have found, namely that people are more likely to come to Christ at a young age. I guess what would be of significance would be how many of those who came to Christ as children came from Christian families.
Regardless, I think this has huge implications for our evangelistic efforts. Targetting children and students in evangelism seems to be a sensible strategy, not only because of a much higher likelihood of success, but from a long term strategy perspective. People who come to faith early have a much longer time to grow in that faith and let it shape them and how they raise their own families. This should create a positive feedback mechanism.
If this data has merit, it makes me wonder why the church has not latched onto it in a more wholehearted fashion. Kids-ministry is definitely a priority for many churches, and Christian camps are often seen as strategically important, but why aren’t we seeing more churches in New Zealand thinking about starting Christian schools? If childhood is a strategically important time, why wouldn’t we want to make the most of that time? Wouldn’t having Christian Schools attached to our churches make sense? If these were integrated into the life of the church, they surely would provide powerful opportunities for mission and discipleship. Why not talk to your pastor and other key Christian leaders about these truths.
Tactics for Conservatives
In a recent post on Kiwiblog, David Farrar pointed out in passing the typical tactics of those aiming for liberalisation of laws. He writes, “You achieve sustainable change by smaller moves.” He attributes the success of gay marriage to the smaller steps taken towards this (for example civil unions), and the failure of the cannabis referendum which aimed for legalisation rather than first stepping through decriminalization.
I wonder how we of a more conservative mindset could take this onboard. What big goals do we have, and what are the small but winnable battles that can take us nearer to our goals? It seems to me that National governments are generally just breathers before our heads are pushed back under the stagnant waters of moral corruption under Labor governments. It would be good if we could start moving things in the opposite direction.
A key battle to win of course would be education. We must get the government out of education, or at the very least, limit the influence of the secular left. There must be little objectives along the way to this goal. One of them would be to reduce the influence of the teacher unions, and perhaps this could be done by conservative teachers banding together to form an alternative federation of teachers. Another focus could be altering the uniform approach to teacher registration. Why should all teachers have to be registered by the Teachers Council? Why can’t private schools hire unregistered teachers? Another key target would be to offer relatively inexpensive independent schools around the country that provide such a good education that nobody would want to send their children to the local public schools.