What numbskull came up with that bright idea?
If they really wanted to help our most vulnerable students, wouldn't it make sense to only grant the funds on the condition they are spent in service of the kids they were supposedly engineered to help.
It's just all too random for my liking - there's no real substance or accountability. The general concept has merit and deserves a big tick but the execution of it fails miserably.
Just like the introduction of NCEA that unfortunately saw the cooking of some "internal books", I can see where some schools may attempt to misrepresent their real number of under-achievers in order to get a much needed funding boost.
It's such a shame that schools these days have become so diluted.
The actual learning/education is now so watered down with political correctness and the providing of services which - in an ideal world - should be being provided at home.
The feeding, the clothing, instilling basic values ... it just goes on and on. Give it another five-to-10 years and our high schools will probably all have birthing units for teenage mums.
No bloody wonder our kids are under-achieving. Our poor teachers are so thinly stretched being surrogate parents it's a miracle the kids are learning anything at all.
There is no easy answer but surely the government can do better than this jacked-up scheme.
It's our children's futures we are talking about here - their future employment options and earning potential are riding on this education, so we can't afford to get it wrong. Spending money on kids now will save the taxpayer millions in benefits later because the children will be employable.
If anyone is an under-achiever in the education system of this country, it's Hekia Parata and her department. They are failing our kids miserably, which is why our kids are failing.
■ Kate Stewart is a politically incorrect columnist of no repute who was educated in the school of hard knocks and the university of life - feedback welcome at investik8@gmail.com
