To feed or not to feed . . .

An animation to raise awareness about the issue of child poverty in NZ, and the need for food in schools programmes, has  been released by an educational research project at The University of Auckland.

. . . “NZ is a first world country with a child poverty problem. Poor nutrition is a significant problem in NZ.” says project coordinator, Dr Airini, Head of School of Critical Studies in Education at The University of Auckland. “We have hungry children in our schools. Going to school hungry affects a child’s ability to learn. Healthy food helps children learn. With better education our children might escape the poverty cycle.”

Providing food in schools is likely to be a modest cost compared to the societal benefits of a giving all Kiwi children a healthy start to life. Estimates for implementing food in schools programmes range from $5-$10million a year. Programmes like these promote a healthy diet, and improve children’s school attendance, behaviour, and ability to learn. Breakfast clubs also provide a safe, early morning place to increase social skills and confidence, creating a better school environment.

“Learning is a physical activity. Children need healthy food every day to help them be learning-ready” says Dr Airini. “We wouldn’t expect our All Blacks or Silver Ferns to do their best if they’re hungry. Why would we think children could do their best as learners if they’re hungry? Good food feeds the mind.”

“Teachers, schools and community groups say we need to provide food in schools to help our hungry children”, she says. “In the end, it’s not just hungry kids that benefit, but all New Zealanders.” . . .

This and the animation are pushing the case for someone – community groups, businesses, the government – to provide food in schools.

But over at Offsetting Behaviour Dr Eric Crampton shows that providing food doesn’t necessarily do any good:

A few months ago, Social Service Providers Aotearoa asked me to review the literature on school breakfast programmes and provide an assessment of whether public funding of school breakfast programmes offered value for money.  . .

I was only looking at school breakfast programmes, and so I can’t here comment on school lunch programmes. I’m not sure why we’d expect results to vary greatly, but it’s worth having the caveat.

Anyway, on my best read of the literature, it’s hard to make a case for that we’d get any great benefit from the programmes. Rather, we often find that they don’t even increase the odds that kids eat breakfast at all. Many shift breakfast from at-home to at-school, but among those who hadn’t bothered with breakfast before the programme, not many wind up starting when schools provide it. You can then get kids reporting that they’re less hungry as consequence of the programmes, but it’s awfully hard to reject that the main thing going on is that kids are eating at 9 at school instead of at 7 at home and are consequently less hungry when asked at 11. . . .

So, some bottom lines:

• School breakfast programmes really don’t seem to increase the likelihood of that kids eat breakfast at all;
• To the extent that they improve outcomes in some studies, we really can’t tell:
  • whether the effect is from changing the timing of breakfast, in which case we should instead have a morning tea break;
  • whether the effect is any better than just giving those families an equivalent cash transfer. . .

Hungry children won’t be happy children, ready and able to learn as well as those who are properly fed.

Poor nutrition and sub-optimal learning in childhood will almost certainly lead to problems later in life.

But the research shows the solution to children who don’t have enough to eat isn’t as simple as providing food.

Not all schools have chosen to be part of Fonterra’s milk in schools programme which shows a blanket approach wouldn’t be welcome.

It’s a complex problem and the solution must be one which really makes a positive difference.

Overseas loan defaulters owe us all

The gap between the repayment rates of New Zealand-based borrowers and overseas-based borrowers continues to grow, despite overall lifts in the number of people paying off student loans.

Overseas-based borrowers make up 60 per cent of the 84,562 borrowers in default as at March 31 this year, despite comprising only 15 per cent of the borrowing population. They are responsible for 82 per cent of the $520 million currently in default.

“More overseas-based student loan borrowers are paying more off their student loans as a result of the Government’s compliance initiative, but we need a major behavioural change if we are to see the pay-back rate even begin to match what we currently receive from domestic borrowers,” Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment Minister Steven Joyce says.

“It is simply not fair for those overseas to get a far easier ride than people who stay in New Zealand, contribute here, and pay off their loan responsibly.”

These people have been educated at our expense and the money the loans they are defaulting on are owed to us all.

“Our initiatives to date to encourage overseas-based borrowers to repay their student loans have collected $64 million since October 2010,” says Revenue Minister Peter Dunne.

“Overall we have collected $812 million from all borrowers (overseas-based and domestic) up until March 2013, which is up over $263.4 million on the same period last year. However some of that is undoubtedly a one-off as a result of people paying more before the end of the repayment bonus programme at the end of March.

“While the default amount owed by New Zealand based borrowers has decreased by 5.9 per cent in the last year, the default amount of overseas based borrowers continues to increase – since March 2012, it has risen by 34.3 per cent.

“While that’s partially the result of shortening the repayment holiday for overseas borrowers, the evidence we had was that the long holiday just masked the overall low level of compliance,” he says.

The outstanding student loan balance is currently $13.5 billion.

Just think of the many good uses that money could be put to if it was paid back.

The Government has been considering further initiatives for overseas-based borrowers and will make announcements regarding the selected initiatives shortly.

“We are determined to lift the rate of overseas-based borrowers repayments to ensure people are meeting their commitments to New Zealand taxpayers, just like the New Zealand-based borrowers are doing,” says Mr Joyce.

Many people who are working overseas will be finding the high dollar erodes the value of the currency they’re earning but that is no excuse for defaulting on a loan.

Interest-free student loans were a very expensive election bribe and the amount owed by overseas defaulters increases the cost to the rest of us.

Not all schools want free food

Hone Harawira’s Bill proposing to provide food for all decile one and two schools will be debated in parliament soon.

It is a blunt instrument which will do nothing for hungry children in higher decile schools and provide food where it’s not needed and not wanted.

A school principal in Whangarei says a proposed law change aimed at providing meals for students in poorer schools could reinforce negative stereotypes. . .

Hora hora Primary principal Pat Newman said that may send a message that all parents with children at poorer schools don’t feed them properly.

He said it does not cost his school a lot to step in when it needs to, discretely offering breakfast and sandwiches to individual students in need. . .

The Press points out other problems with the proposal:

One difficulty is the sheer logistics of the proposal. Most schools are neither set up nor staffed to provide meals to pupils. One figure much bandied about during recent debate has suggested that 80,000 children go to school each morning without having had breakfast.

While that number has a whiff of the Ministry of Made-Up Numbers about it, even confined to decile 1 and 2 schools, Harawira’s proposal would be a large and time- consuming effort to get breakfast and lunch to all those deemed to need them.

But the main difficulty with Harawira’s idea is that it tackles the issue from the wrong end. Hungry children in school are a just symptom of a root cause – inadequate, negligent parenting and decision-making.

For the state to take over providing something as fundamental as proper meals will, if anything, only aggravate that root cause.

The more dud parents become aware that their children will be fed if they fail to do so, the more they will be inclined to abdicate the responsibility.

Providing a decent breakfast and lunch for a child is hardly an onerous or expensive task. Eggs on toast or cereal for breakfast, and sandwiches with a nourishing filling for lunch, are within the capacity of every parent. . .

It’s not the fault of hungry children that their parents don’t feed them and it is a problem which needs to be addressed.

But providing food for all low decile schools isn’t the best way to do it.

Fonterra is providing free milk for all schools that want it – some high decile schools choose to have it, some low ones don’t.

This targeted and voluntary approach, in conjunction with charities like Kids Can which provides food,  doesn’t address the problem of hopeless parents.

But at least it doesn’t waste food on schools which don’t need it, and gives it do children who do.

Opt in and targeting better than universal

NZEI is urging the government to vote for the bill to provide children in low decile schools with breakfasts and lunches.

This is a blunt instrument. It’s also an expensive and wasteful one.

Fonterra has offered all schools free milk and some have chosen not to take it because their children don’t need it or the staff think it’s too much work.

Allowing schools to opt in and targeting those whose pupils are most in need is far better than a universal approach which will be cost more and generate more waste.

 

School closure investigation overdue

Chief Ombudsman Dame Beverly waken is investigating the way in which the Ministry of Education conducts consultation on school closures and mergers.

. . . Dame Beverley will be looking in some detail at a number of closure and merger consultations carried out in recent years, including the process that is currently underway in Christchurch

“I will assess whether the consultation processes operate in a manner that adequately ensures fair and meaningful participation by affected parties and, if they do not, how they could be improved”, says Dame Beverley. . .

Such an investigation is long overdue.

School mergers and closures are always fraught and the Ministry has been handling them poorly for years.

North Otago was one of the areas into which then Minister of Education Trevor Mallard strode in clodhopper boots demanding mergers and closures nearly 10 years ago.

There was little if any consultation and very poor understanding of communities of interest and other factors which ought to have been considered.

The Minister got the blame and three MPs who lost their seats in the south – Mark Peck in Invercargill, David Parker in Otago and Jim Sutton in Aoraki – could lay some of the responsibility on this issue.

But then, as now, most of the blame ought to have been laid at the Ministry’s door.

It didn’t learn from the mistakes made before the 2005 election and repeated them with bells on in Christchurch where even more sensitivity was required.

Changes in population result in changing educational needs. New Schools will be needed in areas of growth, old ones will need to close or merge in areas of decline.

Handling that is core Ministry business for which it ought to follow best practice. Instead it appears to follow the process which didn’t work nearly a decade ago and from which it seems to have learned nothing.

I wish Dame Beverley well in her investigation and hope her findings lead to much needed improvements for the sake of schools, pupils, staff and their communities.

Readers breed readers

Who would have thought that:

. . . The analysis of New Zealand’s 15-year-olds in an OECD reading test says the difference between students with more than a year of early childhood education and those with none is equivalent to a year and a half of schooling.

The study says there is a similar difference between teenagers whose parents read to them in their first year of school and those whose parents did not.

It says students are also likely to be much better readers if their parents read books and talk to them regularly. . .

There is no doubt a lot more to the research than this report suggests but it does seem to be stating the obvious – readers breed readers.

 

 

 

Potential

Quote of the day:

 “She told me I had potential. No one ever told me that in my life.“ Feterika Fred Sao

This is an inspiring story of someone who overcame illiteracy as an adult.

It shows the importance of education and good teachers who let every child know they have potential and help them reach it.

Choice is good

Mike Hosking gets to the nub of charter schools:

. . . Being a charter school isn’t the trick. The trick is what it potentially allows. It potentially allows you to do things differently and some people want and like that. It potentially allows you to focus on specialist areas of learning instead of a broad brush approach, and some people like that as well. There might be some with a religious element or a sporting element or an artistic element, and some people think that’s exactly what they need. But what it indisputably does is provide more choice, and why you’d be afraid of that bewilders me.

Here’s the other bit that makes all the opponents’ arguments null and void – none of it is compulsory. You don’t like it? Don’t go. You don’t believe in it? Don’t enrol your kids. You think it will be a disaster? Stay away.

All that a charter school is is choice, and choice is good.

Charter schools won’t work for all pupils, just as the many variations of schools we already have don’t.

But they will provide choice and opportunity for children who need something they’re not getting from what’s on offer now.

Only a handful of charter schools are being established. No-one will be forced to teach at or attend one and they shouldn’t be regarded as a threat to existing schools.

They will complement other schools not compete with them.

Critisicm but no alternatives

The Opposition has been quick to criticise Hekia Parata’s proposals for education in Canterbury but have offered no alternatives.

Labour leader, David Shearer doesn’t even seem to understand the issue:

David Shearer: Does he not concede that closing schools in Christchurch following a natural disaster, where kids require and rely on stability and security from their schools, is manifestly different from closing schools under the Labour Government?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: This is the logic that the Leader of the Opposition is wanting New Zealanders to believe: that on the back of a catastrophic earthquake in Christchurch that has dramatically changed the demographic patterns of where Cantabrians live, where there is huge damage to the schools involved and where the land is substantially damaged, nothing should happen. . .

Some schools have had extensive damage, others have lost large numbers of pupils.

Leaving the schools open wouldn’t be in the best interests of the pupils nor would it be best use of public money.

The opposition might think damaged buildings and under utilised facilities isn’t a problem but the government does and has a $1 billion dollar programme of investment to solve it.

What’s in the children’s interests?

Watching and listening to reports on the announcements of school closures and mergers in Christchurch I have been concerned about the way teachers and parents have reacted.

The news a school is to close would be difficult to take but the adults appear to be putting their own emotions ahead of the best interests of the children.

The prospect of job losses would be devastating for the staff but major changes whether it is a school closure or merger, doesn’t have to be a tragedy for the pupils.

Children take their lead from adults.

Teachers and parents could make the process much less upsetting for the pupils by putting their interests first.

A couple of schools in Oamaru were told they had to merge by the then-Labour government. Neither was particularly happy about it but they accepted that falling rolls couldn’t justify two schools, got on with the necessary work and took the children with them.

They included pupils in the plans and treated the changes an adventure rather than a disaster.

Education Minister Hekia Parata made it clear why change is necessary:

“The face and make-up of greater Christchurch has, and will continue to change dramatically due to the earthquakes, and the education sector must respond to those changes.

“There were already around 5,000 places available in schools in greater Christchurch before the earthquakes, and 4,300 students have not re-enrolled, meaning there are now 9,300 places available – that’s roughly equivalent to the entire student population of Gisborne.

“The aftermath of the earthquakes has required us to have a look at all the schools across greater Christchurch and see what we could do better.

“We have looked at not only earthquake damage, but also roll size, population movement and projected growth, building issues, and what opportunities existed to create better, more modern schools,” Ms Parata says.

These modern schools are designed to reflect the latest education research and the advice of education experts, to ensure children are being taught using the latest techniques and technology.

“We have a chance to build brighter, more modern schools in better locations, with great new facilities, and to ensure all children are getting access to good, quality education within a close distance of where they live.”

The new schools will be better than the old ones.

The government is making a $1 billion investment building or rebuilding 15 schools over the next 10 years.

The initial announcement of possible closures and mergers wasn’t done well but yesterday’s was handled much better.

It also had far fewer changes than originally mooted but more than 9000 extra places in schools means there does have to be change.

Given that, it is better to accept the proposals and look to the future, for the children’s sake if not their own.

Schools role to educate

Education Minister Hekia Parata will this morning be announcing the interim decisions for 31 Christchurch schools marked for closure or merger.

The NZEI has called off its planned strike, which is encouraging but there will be jobs lost and communities changed which will be difficult for those affected.

However, let’s not forget that there are more than 200 schools educating around 78,000 children in Christchurch and more than 4,000 children have left the city.

The Minister said in a Facebook post that the proposed changes will affect 31 schools and around 5,500 pupils which is 7.6 of the entire school population in the region. More than 80 per cent, or 177 of the 215 schools in greater Christchurch, are not affected.

Those figures won’t make it any easier for staff who will lose jobs and children who will have to go to a different school.

But the status quo isn’t a good option. It’s better to have fewer, newer schools where most children are than keep open old schools with extensive earthquake damage and sharp drops in roll numbers.

There will be sad stories from teachers and support staff who will face redundancy; from children in schools that will close; and from their families.

But let’s remember the role of schools is to educate children.

In doing so it provides jobs and a focus for a community and the loss of those is unfortunate.

But the prime consideration is the best educational outcomes for the children and the best use of the public money required to do that.

Apropos of that – there are good news stories about education in Christchurch, such as this one about Clearview – a new school with a growing roll, enthusiastic principal and happy pupils.

No good faith in strike threat

Primary teachers in Christchurch are planning to strike in February, a day after Education Minister Hekia Parata is scheduled to make an announcement on the future of schools in the region:

Union spokesperson Sandra Spekriejse said that while the members have not decided what form the strike will take, it will be only the first in a series of actions because they have not been listened to. . .

How can they say they haven’t been listened to when they don’t know what’s in the announcement?

The Ministry of Education made a dogs’ breakfast of the start of the process.

That may or may not have anything to do with John Armstrong’s description of the ministry as highly dysfunctional and teacher union-driven.

But regardless of the ministry’s incompetency in this process,  there’s been a lot of consultation and plenty of opportunity for submissions since the initial announcement.

If the union had any notion of acting in good faith it would wait until the announcement is made before taking strike action which will disadvantage pupils who have already had more than enough disruption from the earthquakes.

They would also accept that there are far more places available in Christchurch schools than pupils available. The sooner there is certainty over which schools stay open, which merge and which close, the better for the pupils, the staff and the school communities.

Milk in Schools show no need for taxpayers’ food for all

The Mana Party says support is increasing for its plan for taxpayer funded food for all decile one and two schools:

“It’s a pretty simple bill really” says MANA Leader and MP for Te Tai Tokerau Hone Harawira, “Invest in making sure the 80,000 kids going to school hungry each week are fed and ready to learn and realise the benefits in better educated and healthier school leavers down the track”. . . 

I don’t know where the 80,000 comes from but Fonterra’s milk in schools programme has proved that not all low decile schools have hungry children and that some higher decile schools.

Fonterra’s trial in Northland showed some schools wanted the milk and some didn’t.

The scheme is now being rolled out through the rest of the country and some schools are choosing to get it but others aren’t.

There is no point in a universal scheme for decile one and two schools which provides for some who aren’t in need and misses others who are, especially when schemes like Fonterra’s milk in sare providing help where it’s needed without taxpayers’ money.

Civics education inadequate – Electoral Commission

The Electoral Commissions say civics education is inadequate.

As it begins to prepare for the 2014 general election, the commission is talking to the Ministry of Education about providing increased, and better, lessons on citizenship, the law and the government. . .

Chief Electoral Officer Robert Peden says Canterbury’s Student Volunteer Army shows that young people care, they just don’t see the parliamentary process as relevant.

An improved “civics” education will teach young people how to use the system to have their voices heard, he says.

An understanding of citizenship, law and government are fundamental to feeling part of and participating in society.

The school curriculum is already very full, some would say too full. But the addition of civics education should be encouraged, even if it means something else has to go.

Doesn’t character matter?

A teacher who tried to hire a gang leader to assault her principal has been cleared to teach again:

. . . She was also charged with falsifying records and other misconduct.

The Teachers Council has imposed a series of conditions on her returning to teaching and has censured her.

The council said she had had serious health issues and both her parents had recently died. It says there is nothing to suggest her teaching ability is under question.

There could well be a lot more to the story that the report shows.

I hope there is and that is shows that character is taken into account when questioning teaching ability.

Fonterra’s milk in schools going nation wide

Fonterra’s trial of free milk in schools has been declared a success and will go nationwide next year.

Fonterra Chief Executive Theo Spierings said that after trialling the school milk programme in Northland, Fonterra had decided to roll out the programme to all 2000 primary schools throughout the country from next year. 

“We are totally committed to Fonterra Milk for Schools because we believe it will make a lasting difference to the health of New Zealand’s children. We want Kiwis to grow up drinking milk because it’s good for them and we are proud that this programme will give every primary school kid the chance to enjoy this nutritious product,” he said.
 
“New Zealand is the largest exporter of dairy products in the world, but at home, we’re not drinking as much milk as we used to. We want to be the dairy nutrition capital of the world and this starts with our kids.”

Research conducted by the University of Auckland has shown that children’s milk consumption in the Northland community, both at school and at home, has significantly increased since the pilot began.

“We know that getting Kiwis drinking more milk is not an overnight job but we are committed to helping improve the health of our kids,” said Mr Spierings.

The Co-operative made the announcement at an event co-hosted by its farmer shareholders and Hillpark Primary School in Manurewa. Mr Spierings said the success of this year’s Northland pilot had informed the decision to roll out nationally.

“The Northland pilot allowed us to test our systems. We learnt some valuable lessons and got great feedback from schools in the area. We can now move forward with confidence the programme is a winner.

“That said, this is a huge undertaking and we’ll be rolling out town by town.  We will continue with Northland, and launch in Southland in the first term next year, moving through the country during the year. We expect to have all schools who wish to take part on board by Term 1 2014.”

Manaia Health Chief Executive Chris Farrelly said the Northland community was privileged to trial the programme and was pleased that all schools would now get the opportunity.
 
“This move by New Zealand’s largest company to make this wonderful product available to our children is a significant game changer,” said Mr Farrelly.

“This is not just looking out for our kids today, but for the future. If we get it right for them now, then we’re going to get it right for our country.”

Principal of Hillpark Primary and New Zealand Principals’ Federation executive member, Gavin Beere, said the Federation fully supports Fonterra’s generous move.

“Schools play a key role in shaping children’s lifestyles. This includes their diets and attitudes towards nutrition, so it’s incredible to be able to offer this healthy product every school day.”

Fonterra Ambassador Richie McCaw said: “Over this past year I have been blown away by the passion of Fonterra’s people and the importance of the Co-operative’s farmer roots in everything it does.

“As a country, we should be extremely proud of this long-term commitment our New Zealand dairy farmers are making.”

Mr Spierings said the cost of the programme would depend on the number of schools participating – and this would not be known until the end of next year. 

“While we don’t know the exact number, we believe this is the largest single community investment by a New Zealand company and we are very proud to be making this investment in the health of our future generations.”

This is an opt-in scheme.

Schools which don’t want to have the milk won’t get it.

And while it’s being called free milk that means the schools and pupils don’t pay for it but Fonterra and ultimately its shareholders do.

However, if it improves the health and education of children and increases demand for milk then the social and financial dividends which more than justify the cost.

Coincidence?

Last night Education Minister Hekia Parata issued a media release headlined International studies show changes must be made to improve education outcomes.

Education Minister Hekia Parata says two international research studies on student achievement released tonight confirm that more work must be done to improve our education system.

“While we have a good education system overall there are persistent signs of under-performance. The findings of these studies must serve as a wakeup call.  We cannot take for granted that our overall achievement at the senior end of our system can be maintained if we do not improve the system all the way through.

“Unfortunately these results show that we are either standing still or falling behind in reading, maths and science.  We must pay urgent attention to what these studies tell us and tackle some system-wide challenges.

The Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), was completed between November 2010 and October 2011 for Years 5 and 9 and shows marked drops in maths and science achievement, particularly at middle primary school level, and no improvements in reading literacy.

“While we have some high performing children, we have many children who lack basic skills and knowledge, particularly in mathematics and science, compared to children of a similar age in other countries. That is seriously worrying,’’ says Ms Parata.

“These studies indicate that we need to increase our focus on improving teaching quality and leadership. And, as our own research shows we must give particular attention to transitions – when children move from one level of schooling to the next.

“We must ensure that children develop good reading and writing skills from the moment they start school. Given the critical role this has in starting children on the right path it would suggest that our best and most experienced teachers are needed most at this level.

“In the transitions work that our Education Review Office has done they have also identified how important it is to create a successful transition at Year 9 so that the progress to NCEA2 is much more planned and assured.

“We need good, quality data so we can see how a child’s learning is progressing. We are starting to see the benefits of that this year with the first reporting of National Standards data. The data enables us to support all learners and target those who are falling behind much earlier and give them the help they need. We have a five year plan to improve the quality of that data.

“We are also working with schools to better understand and use their data to change the way that teaching occurs when it is clear that what is being done is not working.

“ERO has also identified the importance of using assessments to get better learning – rather than assessment simply to have assessment. National Standards is built on developing consistency and progression and not on a high stakes national test, as happens in other parts of the world.

“Given the disturbing trend reflected in the PIRLS and TIMMS studies it is important that we get on and embed national standards into routine practice.

“We know that the strength of a parent’s involvement with their child and their school makes a very positive difference.  It also helps to identify those families that may be struggling and to find the assistance needed from other agencies.

“We need to ensure parents are involved in their child’s learning, that they know what questions to ask teachers and how they can best support their child’s learning. 

“We also need Boards of Trustees to ensure that their main focus is on raising student achievement. The changes we are proposing in the Education Amendment Bill will provide more clarity for schools and Boards of Trustees, and ensure children’s needs remain the central focus for our educators.

“We must work with parents, children, teachers, principals, Board of Trustees, the education sector and experts to address the issues raised by this research.  We want all our children to leave school with the skills they need to reach their potential in a modern society.”

This is carefully worded.

It acknowledges the good work being done, outlines concerns and accepts that improvements are needed, notes the importance of assessment for better learning rather than assessment for its own sake, recognises the important part parents play in their children’s education and the need for everyone in education to work together to address the issues.

Contrast that reasoned message with this advertisement from the NZEI which appeared in last night’s Oamaru Mail – and presumably other papers:

It says:

The Government is imposing standardisation and competition on our primary schools, claiming this will make schools and teachers more accountable.

These failed policies from overseas known as the “Global Education Reform Movement” (GERM) are infecting our schools through the introduction of National Standards, school league tables, charter schools and performance pay for teachers.

New Zealand has a world leading education system. It does better than countries where the GERM has been introduced. When a GERM infection arrives schools and centres get ill and kids learn less.

New Zealand educators have an antidote to the GERM.

We want fair and equitable education for everyone.

We pledge to work together with parents and communities to ensure all our schools are great schools.

And we will continue to work to ensure every child gets the education they need.

To find out more visit http://www.standupforkids.org.nz

Full marks for emotion and confusion (imposing standardisation and offering charter schools?) ; zero for reasoning.

It’s a stark contrast to the reasoned and factual release from the Minister.

That was embargoed until 10 last night. The advertisement appeared in yesterday’s paper which is published in the morning.

Could it be the two are related and the union knew what was coming, or is it just a coincidence?

Milk in schools works

Not every school which was offered free milk from Fonterra has liked it.

But TV3 found a Waikato school where it is making a positive difference to the children’s learning.

It’s also making a difference to milk consumption out of school:

Northland kids have been drinking more milk – at school and at home – since the Fonterra Milk for Schools programme kicked into gear in early 2012, according to an independent evaluation by the University of Auckland.

Fonterra commissioned the report to understand the impacts of its school milk pilot on children’s consumption and attitudes to dairy.

Associate Professor Cliona Ni Mhurchu, who led the evaluation, says the results show a significant increase in children’s milk consumption following the adoption of the Fonterra Milk for Schools programme in Northland schools.

“A key highlight of the results is that the rise in consumption has happened both at school and at home – with the evaluation showing a 28 per cent increase in the number of students who reported drinking milk five or more days a week.”

In addition, the evaluation showed a clear increase in the number of children drinking milk at least twice a day – with students consuming milk twice or more each day increasing from 66 to 77 per cent.

“The evaluation provides evidence that Fonterra Milk for Schools is helping to increase children’s milk consumption not only during school time, but overall as well,” says Associate Professor Ni Mhurchu.

Carly Robinson, Fonterra General Manager Co-operative Social Responsibility, says the Co-operative is encouraged by the findings.

“Our goal with Fonterra Milk for Schools is to make a lasting difference to the health of New Zealand children. New Zealand is the largest exporter of dairy products in the world, but at home, we’re not drinking as much milk as we used to. These findings show that this programme can help get Kiwi kids drinking more milk.”

116 Northland primary schools are participating in the Fonterra Milk for Schools pilot – making up 85 per cent of the region’s eligible schools.

“Each term we survey the schools and our latest results showed that around 90 per cent of schools that responded were either satisfied or very satisfied with the programme,” says Ms Robinson. . .

The milk is free to the schools but it costs the company and in turn its suppliers.

But if the programme is helping children and increasing milk consumption then it’s worth it.

Wise words

Writer Owen Marshall gave the address at the university of Otago’s graduation ceremony last weekend.

Among his wise words were these:

. . . if the university as a whole “ever loses that essential love of knowledge for its own sake, that scholastic enthusiasm and tolerance, then the spark will be gone”.

The university was then likely to be “a place of formal, empty pedantry, meal-ticket mentality, or a debased, bums-on-seats democracy”, . . .

And:

. . . “Everyone seems to be an expert on education, and a good deal of vehement and often ignorant criticism is advanced, for always there are people who are eager to find fault in the performance of others, yet unwilling or incapable of taking responsibility themselves.

“Of course we need accountability, efficiency and a response to modern youth and modern society.

“We also need to preserve and commend those values that are at the heart of the best universities – scrupulous scholarship, academic enthusiasm, intellectual curiosity, a fellowship of the heart and mind, and a desire to pass on knowledge.”

And:

He emphasised the need for gratitude, which was “not much in fashion these days”.

“We hear much of rights, accountability, consumers, performance and delivery, all in a mechanistic way, but not much about gratitude, and not much about dedication.”

Graduates owed gratitude not only to family and friends but also to Otago University itself.

And he thanked Otago staff who had “persevered through the squalls of restructuring and the doldrums of educational policy, to maintain a vision of senior study that upholds opportunity based on talent, an openness to intellectual possibility, the value of reason and knowledge of life generally.” . . .

Student loan repayments up 11%

The latest Student Loan Scheme annual report shows an 11 per cent increase in repayments and a decrease in the overall cost of the scheme, Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment Minister Steven Joyce says.

“The Government remains committed to interest-free student loans, but it is important the scheme is affordable for students and taxpayers, and sustainable for the country,” Mr Joyce says.

“The write-down on student loan lending reached 47 cents for each dollar lent in 2008/2009. We have now reduced that to 39 cents in the dollar, and are working to reduce the cost further.

“The Government has been getting more young people through higher levels of tertiary education, and student loans are a key means to help with that goal. Our recent policy changes have focussed student loans more on people who are likely to achieve qualifications and then earn enough to pay back their loan in a reasonable time.”

“While we have seen some success in reducing the cost of the student loan scheme to taxpayers, it still remains high. The Government is working to improve the compliance of overseas based borrowers, and that initiative together with policy changes made in Budget 2012 will both tighten lending criteria and increase the speed of repayments.

Labour’s 2005 election bribe was expensive enough, that it did little or nothing to ensure people repaid their loans made it worse.

Every dollar not repaid by those who owe it is a dollar more the country has to borrow and a dollar further away from a return to surplus.

The report’s findings include:

• The cost of lending has fallen 17.5% over the last three years. The cost fell from 47 cents per dollar in the 2009 valuation, to 39 cents per dollar in the current year.
• Repayments increased by 11% to $767 million in 2011/2012
• The median repayment time is 6.7 years and it reduces to 5.5 years for those who remain in New Zealand until repayment
• The valuation of the loan scheme increased by $286 million in 2011/2012
• The loans uptake rate by students was 74%, up from 73% in 2010/2011
• Inland Revenue is chasing borrowers overseas who aren’t meeting their repayment obligations. So far, they have gained $19.4 million, which is $12 for each dollar spent on the project.

The full report is here.