Govt accused of planning bigger classes

04 Feb 2012 10:02a.m.

Kim wrote:

@Mike..It's hard to take someone complaining about useless, resistant to change teachers when they spell teacher "techer" 3 times. I think your spelling just ruined your whole argument.

04 Feb 2012 12:33a.m.

Mike wrote:

Take higher learning like at university.

I've been to lectures with 485 seats - one lecturer! I've taken a university course where over 1700 took the one course. After me they were more organised and had the lecturer give the one lecture tele-linked to several (5 at the same time) lecture theatres allowing even more teacher-pupil ratio! I've had computer assessed work where I did the work and it was then largely marked by a computer program - not a person (and thats over 20 years ago).

In todays age of information there is no need to have small teacher to pupil ratios as small as we have today. If compare the way things were when techers did everything manually in pre-historic times of our ancestors while they were at schools in bigger classes, the techers today have an easier life of less work, less outside school activities like sports etc, and they want even smaller numbers of pupils and even less work while more of there job is streamlined.

There is much room for improvement in todays teaching but likes of Clarke will always resist progress.

At high school I had 38-42 in our class (Maths/English/Science/Social Studies), and we also in our class had the highest marks in the school. Dont worry, it was only a small school with over 1700 students, the 3rd largest high school in NZ at the time. Maybe it was the largest class size in the form gaves us the highest marks? It was all done manually then too.

Technology allows one to target learning better today than previously, and this also allows teachers to start students and let the students get on with learning. Its not about ratio, but results. If a teacher wont use new tech out of political principle, they wont improve productivity. Technology allows the teaching to be better targeted, but techers resist this as such targeting may also be used to measure their performance.

Many families put alcohol/ciagrettes/pot ahead of learning - family priorities.

03 Feb 2012 01:45p.m.

LBV wrote:

If this goes through I can see more parents home schooling their kids - or maybe setting up a small group of families together and sharing the job. Large classroom sizes do not work - especially when the disruptive kids are left in the classes as well. I also feel for the school librarians. All staff should be paid for by the government - not just teachers. That way the funds for each school actually get spent on what is necessary.

03 Feb 2012 10:25a.m.

Dan wrote:

Let me voice my opinion that it makes no logical sense to foist more students on teachers per class room and state that the both the quality of education as well as teachers standards will rise!!! Are they kiddin me or is this some stupid bean counters thinking which looks good on paper but is not practical. Get a life Mr.Keys. Concentrate on welfare bludgers and leave education alone.

03 Feb 2012 07:49a.m.

wondering wrote:

I am wondering to @ Clarke: will this assembly line teaching result in assembly line training of lower decile students? What sort of degree does one require to train little kids to put together plastic components or sew sneakers in the sweat shops likely to be announced in the next few weeks. ?

03 Feb 2012 07:28a.m.

Wiseacre wrote:

Typical short-sighted right-wing attitude. They know the cost of everything, but the value of nothing. We should value our teachers and our children's education - not treat them as a cost to be managed more 'efficiently'. Foisting more pupils on fewer teachers is a recipe for disaster. Of course, this won't apply to their own children, as they keep funneling public funds to the private schools of the elite. They are developing a two-tier education system in New Zealand - private schooling for the children of the financial & political elite where the privileged minority can get an actual well-rounded education, and public schooling for the unwashed masses where they get trained in reading and arithmetic. The elite don't want a populace capable of critical thinking & questioning authority - they want obedient workers, with just enough training to do the job and fill in the paperwork.

03 Feb 2012 05:57a.m.

Clarke wrote:

Well that would be just another destructive blow to the education sector... First we have early childhood cuts Then we have assembly line corporate charter schools where the drive for profit outweighs the desire to deliver kids in these schools with what they need. Or you get macdonalds counters in your school lunch rooms, or school clothing with company logos on them that cost 5 times what a non name branded uniform would cost. Then school closures all over the country. Now any old donkey (with a degree of any sort???) can magically become a fully qualified in 6 weeks under Nationals leaky homes scheme.. sorry leaky teacher scheme. A teacher who gets no practicle experience with kids before they become qualified is someone who doesnt know how to teach still. And why are the only going to low decile schools? would better schools not accept their short cut degrees?. To follow that up with less one on one teacher time in the classroom because classes are now what... twice the size??? No one out there can blame teachers if their kids fall way behind and get labelled failures now. But hey... dont worry Nationals big fix is in..... its WiFi! and ipads! lol now they can teach themselves... soon all cribs will need to carry WiFi as a standard feature lol I wonder if any idiot believes Keys Bollux any more. He seems to be turning education into something that only the rich can afford while the state provides workfactory education centres for the poor and middleclass.