Copyright thedailyblog
In these days when television media, whether state or privately owned, is forced to focus on the lowest common denominator to attract ratings and subsequently advertising revenue, there is, as I’m sure you are aware, a dearth of current affairs programming. Back in the ‘good old days’, state TV was adequately funded by the government and this enabled them to produce quality current events programmes that explored the issues of the day. Sadly this is no longer the case and so we are poorly served. Filling this gap, however, is the Bradbury Group, which is available on a range of platforms – YouTube, ROVA, Sky TV & Waatea Facebook – and it is always an enjoyable and informative watch. Martyn selects a wide range of guests of differing backgrounds, who, as well as providing informative comment on the issues of the day, also engage in friendly banter. Older people out there might remember the Ralston Group back around 1990, and the Bradbury Group is a worth successor to that. My particular interest with last night’s episode was the ongoing nonsense over the proposed forceable conversion of Kelston Boys High into a charter school. As signalled elsewhere, the mechanism that enables this to happen was included in David Seymour’s Charter School legislation. If you think that Seymour is content with just announcing a few new charter schools every now and then, then you are mistaken. His ultimate goal is 100% charter schools or as close as he can get to that, and if the Kelston Boys bid is successful, expect many others to follow. Most/all of these will target schools in lower socio-economic areas, where societal circumstances have a major negative influence on attendance, student achievement, and behavioural problems. You’ll be well aware, by now, of the ideologically driven curriculum changes which have been imposed on schools, and which was followed by the recent announcement to remove Te Tiriti obligations from schools. The predictable outcome will be further deterioration in achievement and behavioural issues, thus providing the fuel for further charter school conversions. Do you see how the game is being rigged? The Kelston situation was discussed on two occasions during the Bradbury Group show, once in an interview with Chris Hipkins, and then by the panel members. There was no support for this, or for future similar aggressive takeovers, and I suspect that is indicative of the feeling in the wider community. However as the proceeding of the Regulatory Standards Bill shows, this government takes no notice of public opinion when carrying out their agenda. So the question to be asked, which school will be next? A couple of days ago, Brie Elliot received, via an OIA request, a copy of the Kelston Charter School application: “THE PROBLEM WHICH CONVERSION TO A CHARTER SCHOOL WILL SOLVE is the continuing fall in educational attainment at Kelston Boys’ High School. The paramount objective of a school Board is (or will be when the Education and Training Bill (No 2) passes) is “to ensure that every student at the school is able to attain their highest possible standard in educational achievement”. In 2024, only 12.1% of Year 13 students at Kelston Boys’ High School were awarded University Entrance compared to 77% of Year 13 students at neighbouring Avondale College and 93% of Year 13 students at Liston College, the other single-sex boys’ secondary school in West Auckland”. “In a general sense we intend to manage the school as though it were a business where the school community can be seen as shareholders, although without the power to appoint the Board. We see the converted school as a social enterprise with a mission (raising educational achievement) that empowers the community and is funded through the sale of “bums on seats” to the government, supplemented, perhaps, by related government contracts (e.g. attendance services, crime reduction, Oranga Tamariki) or income from international students attracted to the school’s rugby and other sports programmes.” Businesses make profits, right? That’s money transferred from the taxpayer to the people behind the school. And so the application goes, expanding on these issues, and on the severe behaviour issues currently plaguing the school, before promising the earth in solving all of these. If you believe that, would you like to buy a bridge? If it was so easy, then it wouldn’t be a problem now. There’s so much research that establishes the fact that what is happening in schools is a reflection of what is happening in their communities. There is nothing proposed in the application that couldn’t be achieved within the present state school format, the difference being that charter school funding is far more generous than that provided to state schools, which is has always inadequate and is worse in these days of austerity. This lack of funding very much restricts what can be done now. Increase the current school’s funding to the level offered to the charter school, and the difference disappears. The Charter School application had a number of sections redacted – why? Brie discovered that by copying and pasting the text, the redactions disappeared and the material could be read. That is indeed very sloppy. What damning material was being hidden? Brie’s observations are worth reading. “I’ve attempted to alert the Charter Schools Authorisation Agency to a serious privacy breach in one of their charter school applications. Personal information, including names and contact details of staff and other sensitive parties, was made publicly available without consent. My emails have not been acknowledged, and my address has been blocked by the agency. This is not just a technical issue. People affected: staff, and even law enforcement personnel – should never have had their information exposed. They deserve to know their data was shared and corrected. I have referred this matter to the Privacy Commissioner to ensure the breach is addressed and affected individuals are informed. Transparency and accountability in public institutions are critical, especially when it involves sensitive personal information. The public is watching. Privacy cannot be ignored.” There seems to be two issues here, the first being the sloppy redacting of this sensitive information, and the second is the attitude of the Charter Schools Authorisation Agency to Brie’s emails. Is this indicative of their overall disdain for procedures and communication with the public? Given the background of the whole charter schools ideology, I wouldn’t be surprised if this was the case. Whatever, be aware, this is only the start of the charter school issues.
