Davis provides a brief opinion as
to how league tables, performance pay for teachers, charter schools and the
like have some benefit to some students but there is no evidence that those who
the policies are meant to assist (i.e. the least advantaged students) will
benefit from such policies. It would be good to see Davis provide an actual
argument next time rather than a simple commentary. My views are simple, the
least advantaged students will always be adversely affected by policies that are
narrowly focused toward economic outcomes without consideration of social
outcomes.
In fact I read an article yesterday from The
Listener (June 23) where John Key justifies the mass migration of New
Zealanders to Australia - his argument was that its quite rational for low
skilled workers to leave NZ for better pay in Australia. Sure John Key, it is
rational for the worker, but it is not rational for a government to endorse a
system where citizens have to rely on the economy of another country in order
to improve their chances in life. Key then proceeds to argue that the problem
is that you can lose some people that you want to keep! So clearly Key has no
concern about the numbers leaving for Australia it is dependent on whether or not
they have the skills that Key sees as valuable. So what do we have? We have a government that
perpetuates inequality and that is committed to a “skills based cleansing” regime.
Returning to the education issue –
if National’s education policies only benefit some students (let me make it
clear the benefit is not to our least advantaged students), then under a National
led government they are submitting those students to a skills based cleansing
regime. It’s no wonder, that National
won’t support an increase in the minimum wage – that would incentivise our
unskilled and low skilled workers to stay in NZ.
