Hon Erica Stanford
Minister of Education
Parliament Buildings
Wellington
Dear
Ms Stanford
I write to ask if you would re-consider the inclusion of Section 9 and Section 127 in the Education and Training Amendment Bill (No 2) 2025 on the basis that they are not relevant to the regulation of the education system. (See the Coalition Agreement’s statement about Treaty relevance.)
Sections 9 and 127 are not relevant because:
- The education system should be regulated according to
its secular (i.e. neutral) character.
- Ethnic identity education does not lead to the
achievement required for equitable outcomes.
- A knowledge-rich subject curriculum is derived from,
and accountable to, disciplinary (i.e. scientific) knowledge and methods,
not to the belief systems in Section 127.
I respectfully suggest that a Supplementary Order Paper be used to ensure that the Bill honours the Coalition Agreement.
Sincerely
Elizabeth Rata
Professor Elizabeth Rata is a sociologist of education in the School of Critical Studies, Faculty of Education and Social Work at the University of Auckland where she is Director of the Knowledge in Education Research Unit (KERU).
12 comments:
Probably a bit of a power struggle here between commonsense and ideology. It will be interesting to see what Stanford opts for.....not holding my breathe on this one.
If the Te Ao ideology clause is not removed, NZ's Ed system is sunk forever. Stanford is very woke.
Let's get to the core of this right now. If Minister Stanford does not summarily remove Sects 9 and 127 and all the associated mumbo jumbo from the Act then she herself must be summarily dismissed. Thanks to Elizabeth for spelling out the blindingly obvious, her letter reflects exactly what I said in my submission, none of the rubbish is relevant.
Surely ACT and NZ First will vote against this.
I honestly don't know why Stanford is in the National Party. She belongs with Labour.
Stanford is clearly blindly woke.... and weak... and fully indoctrinated and incapable of critical thinking, so not holding my breath.....
Anon @ 11.34 : along with Luxon.
And "equitable outcomes for Maori students" is an unachievable aspiration and has no business being a legislated "objective" supporting the "paramount objective of students attaining their highest possible standard of educational achievement." It's a nonsense when schooling, and its attendance there at, is so variable, not to mention the importance of yet vastly different levels of support given within the home environments of those students - and nevermind even all that being equal it can still result in markedly different outcomes even between siblings. For such to have been formally proposed, much less uttered, reflects a very poor understanding of reality and the warped ideology at play. It's no wonder our education system is in such a parlous state.
So thank you, Professor, in attempting to instil some common sense, which is so patently lacking in our MoE, and in both present and previous Govts. It's past time the swamp was drained!
Why is this even an issue in a supposedly democratic Western country ?
Because that status for NZ is seriously in doubt today.
The concept of equitable outcomes is a Marxist construct and a correct interpretation of the Treaty would be to give equality of opportunity to all students, not that the Treaty has any relevance whatsoever to education in New Zealand or anywhere else. Basically the bill needs to have the bogus, fabricated 'Treaty' elements ripped out as Elizabeth says, they are not relevant - what is the point of the NZF/National Coalition agreement to deal with this when the references are allowed to remain in something so important as removing indoctrination from our education system?
As this actual process has been taken over by National - Potaka and Goldsmith, ambiguity will remain.
Post a Comment