Well this is a post I never thought I would have to write. New Zealand's' current education minister has been quoted in the press as saying "We're very much at the beginning of this process so no decisions at all
have been made as to which variables and in what way they'll be used
but will student achievement and learning be one of them? Absolutely." (Moir, Stuff 2015) Really? I would love to know other peoples opinions on this because its something that absolutely infuriates me! I completely understand the need to have a way of deciding how schools are allocated funding. Our current system is based highly on the socioeconomic status of the community. And I'm the first to say that their are both positives and negatives to this. In a way it makes sense, the base principle behind it being that areas with a more well-off community doesn't need as much funding as those in poorer areas, because families with more money can support their child's school more. However this isn't always the case, especially in regards to farming areas where land value is high but incomes in local families are low.
My worry is that by making the change to funding based on student achievement you will create more segregation between the lower and higher income families, as well as the opportunity for "selective testing and marking" by school's to ensure they get the funding they need. I guess either way you look at it, it's never fair. Does a school with a majority of students who start with no basic schooling skills deserve to be judged for achievement against a school where most students start as "above standard"?
The other thing that I start to question is.... is it fair to judge when the full resources are not there to help? It's like saying to skydiver 'you're going to be judged on your landing but we won't give you a parachute.' hmmm not a nice outcome..
Thoughts?
