The ideological commitment to both cut public service spending and impose targets may well have unintended consequences that get in the way of actual progress/improvement and yes, the current target model is familiar. The Key/English policy of raising the percentage of 18-year-olds who pass NCEA Level 2 not only narrowed the educational experience for our young people but it incentivised/pressurised schools to lower standards in NCEA. This has created a massive problem in the university sector are they faced with students who are qualified for university but poorly prepared for tertiary level studies. We now have most highly qualified generation in our history but arguably they are qualified but not educated. This is not the fault of the students or teachers (who will always do the best for their students) but rather policies that set out to solve complex problems with narrow and reductionist approaches. Ever the optomist I am hopeful we will see the government start to slow the pace and consider the consequences of their policies (but I am not holding my breath).
Great points again, thanks Mark. I certainly noticed, at the university level, what you aptly call 'qualified but not educated'. Business faculties are designed for that. GD
It’s kind of worrying when I see things like “reduce emergency room stays”, with no acknowledgement of why longer time may be necessary, or how it will be achieved. Is the delay due to lack of resources and staff? And if so, how will placing pressure impact the quality of care?
The theme is reduce, people in government housing, reduce truancy, reduce welfare dependence.
If this pressure is applied how do the ministries respond?
I would wager that the majority of serially truant students experience rough home lives, or experience poverty. I’ve seen quite a few mentions of kids leaving school to work so they can support their families, but there’s no acknowledgement of this.
If kids are increasingly skipping school, they should probably investigate why, rather than simply forcing them to attend (likely through targeting families with fines).
How do you simultaneously cut public sector support, and expect a reduction in welfare dependence and emergency housing, without acknowledging the cause of both.
They appear to be going ahead with “build to rent” further cementing the divide between landlords and renters.
I don’t think they realise that most people don’t think of a house as an investment, but rather a secure and consistent necessity.
Reducing welfare dependence is taking the form of making it harder to receive or maintain a benefit and opting to reduce staff which doesn't seem to improve the support that is available.
Great comments, thank you Peter! Once agencies start playing to the metrics, they'll lose sight of substantial underlying issues. In the Key years, it became plain that people were being deterred from applying for welfare. And I too would like to know how much truancy is due to young people needing to earn money to support themselves and whanau. GD
If I think back to my truancy days, I and a lot of my friends in similar circumstances were coming from unstable living. My biggest concern at 13 was eviction. Alongside being undiagnosed ADHD I found that the metric they used to measure student success wasn't something I was consistently able to manage.
Eventually, it came down to resentment and dissociation, I'm smart enough to graduate but couldn't do it within the restrictions of the schooling system. Which naturally resulted in completely avoiding going at all.
Funnily enough, the punishment for serial truancy was suspension/expulsion.
The ideological commitment to both cut public service spending and impose targets may well have unintended consequences that get in the way of actual progress/improvement and yes, the current target model is familiar. The Key/English policy of raising the percentage of 18-year-olds who pass NCEA Level 2 not only narrowed the educational experience for our young people but it incentivised/pressurised schools to lower standards in NCEA. This has created a massive problem in the university sector are they faced with students who are qualified for university but poorly prepared for tertiary level studies. We now have most highly qualified generation in our history but arguably they are qualified but not educated. This is not the fault of the students or teachers (who will always do the best for their students) but rather policies that set out to solve complex problems with narrow and reductionist approaches. Ever the optomist I am hopeful we will see the government start to slow the pace and consider the consequences of their policies (but I am not holding my breath).
Great points again, thanks Mark. I certainly noticed, at the university level, what you aptly call 'qualified but not educated'. Business faculties are designed for that. GD
It’s kind of worrying when I see things like “reduce emergency room stays”, with no acknowledgement of why longer time may be necessary, or how it will be achieved. Is the delay due to lack of resources and staff? And if so, how will placing pressure impact the quality of care?
The theme is reduce, people in government housing, reduce truancy, reduce welfare dependence.
If this pressure is applied how do the ministries respond?
I would wager that the majority of serially truant students experience rough home lives, or experience poverty. I’ve seen quite a few mentions of kids leaving school to work so they can support their families, but there’s no acknowledgement of this.
If kids are increasingly skipping school, they should probably investigate why, rather than simply forcing them to attend (likely through targeting families with fines).
How do you simultaneously cut public sector support, and expect a reduction in welfare dependence and emergency housing, without acknowledging the cause of both.
They appear to be going ahead with “build to rent” further cementing the divide between landlords and renters.
I don’t think they realise that most people don’t think of a house as an investment, but rather a secure and consistent necessity.
Reducing welfare dependence is taking the form of making it harder to receive or maintain a benefit and opting to reduce staff which doesn't seem to improve the support that is available.
Great comments, thank you Peter! Once agencies start playing to the metrics, they'll lose sight of substantial underlying issues. In the Key years, it became plain that people were being deterred from applying for welfare. And I too would like to know how much truancy is due to young people needing to earn money to support themselves and whanau. GD
If I think back to my truancy days, I and a lot of my friends in similar circumstances were coming from unstable living. My biggest concern at 13 was eviction. Alongside being undiagnosed ADHD I found that the metric they used to measure student success wasn't something I was consistently able to manage.
Eventually, it came down to resentment and dissociation, I'm smart enough to graduate but couldn't do it within the restrictions of the schooling system. Which naturally resulted in completely avoiding going at all.
Funnily enough, the punishment for serial truancy was suspension/expulsion.