Posts by Jackie Clark
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Oh and re the nondriving thing, I have a dear friend who doesn't drive, and I never did till I was 28 or so. My husband turned up one day with a car, and told me I was going to learn to drive. I'm not normally prone to being told what to do, but I did recognise it was a good idea. Whilst I love driving, though, I can see where nondrivers come from. Traffic is wearisome and somewhat stressful, petrol is expensive, and quite frankly, who wouldn't want to read a book on the way home from work? I like giving lifts to people, anyway. It's company in the car, and it gives you more time to yak - while keeping your eyes firmly on the road of course. I can't claim to be a perfect driver - I don't dawdle, is one way of putting it, but I know that most people like driving with me. Except my husband, funnily enough.
-
BTW, has anyone heard from Danielle recently (given some of the comments upthread about imminent arrivals precipitating driving lessons)?
Oh, the wonders of facebook. Our lovely Danielle had a boy, Deborah. A bonny big one.
-
One of the biggest post-9/11 gems was when Richard Prebble compared flying passenger jets into skyscrapers with this...
Re the flying flour flypast, I met the mother of Marx Jones on one of those Out West train trips. She was the sister of the fake Goldie, and inordinately proud of her son. Interesting family. I wonder what ever happened to him?
-
my brother has MD - thankyou for your work during Bow Tie Week.
I meant to say, Christopher, that I did no work at all during Bow Tie week, really. Just hooked them up with Dad's old tie and turned up to see it regifted. In actual fact, it was all because of a dear friend of mine, who does alot of work for the MD peeps, and whose young son has Duchennes. She was the one who did all the work, behind the scenes. We were talking last night, and felt it was a great pity that there wasn't a press photographer on hand that night. Could have been good to have that publicity. Ne'er mind. It's all for the good.
-
I hate to be a spoilsport but I'm just not that big a fan of summers anymore. Too hot, too humid. I don't remember them being this hot 40 odd years ago, but then I spent most of my time in the water, as a child.And my Xmas hols were a bit shit, really. What with spending a week with a not entirely happy family at a rented bach that was like Back To the Future, only there were power cuts. In a house that ran almost entirely on a computer. Not good. And then there was Chch, which was, as always, strange for me, and the weather was cold. There have been highlights this year, though. The biggest one was going with my mum to present a bow tie to Grant Dalton. It was all in aid of Muscular Dystrophy week. The MD society had had neck ties with insignia made into bow ties, and Mum donated Dad's America's Cup one to them, which was the one we gave to Grant. And Michael Fay was there as well being presented a KZ7 tie. That wasn't my favourite part, of course. Favourite bit was when Grant took me and Mum to his office, and there was a framed photo of my Dad on the wall. I cried. He cried. It meant a lot.
-
On being an introvert – and faking the extrovert (Part One) blog post
Great blog, webweaver. I too said yes to all the criteria of being introverted. I'm always telling people I'm shy, and no-one ever believes me. I really hate big crowds, and I'm only ever comfortable with people I know. That isn't to say that I can't get out there and meet new people. It just takes a lot of effort, which I am willing to put in on most occasions. People get away with a lot, though, by being "shy" though. Annoys the shit out of me. If I make an effort, why can't they? Harrumph.
-
Ha! Laugh you may, Barnes, but they were bloody brilliant. They even exhorted the crowd to rise up and give the heaveho to the SuperCity. I love them. I cannot stress enough - LOVE them.
-
It's quite the weekend for music in Auckland.
Can we not forget the Topp Twins. At the zoo, tomorrow. I, for one, am inordinately excited.
-
Oh, and the joy just goes on and on. Can we have Helen back now, please?
-
You quite rightly ask: Who reviews the reviewers? Do the ERO make their data accessible for alternate intepretation?
ERO is an interesting animal. Before they come, they tell you what it is they are focusing on, and you have to fill out a questionnaire about your practises around that focus. You can also ask them to focus on something which you feel you may do well, or an area in which you feel there have been improvements. Or, I guess, if you are a new Principal, or senior management, you can ask them to focus on something you may have concerns about. They focus on one general thing every three years - a nation wide focus. This last year it was literacy, which had been changed, incidentally, from the initial stated focus on the way in which Maori students are catered for. In the case of early childhood, most of the ERO reviewers are ex primary teachers, others have never been teachers at all. And most of them, if they were teachers, were so a reasonably long time ago. The ones I have interacted with often have no knowledge of current early childhood teaching theories, and some are very oldfashioned indeed in their interactions with the children. Culturally, they may be completely inappropriate for the setting they are assessing, and their methods of observation may reflect that cultural unknowingness. In early childhood centres, they come for a day, watch everything you do - hanging over you, being completely obtrusive, because when you're sitting on the ground working with a child you're inevitably near a chair that they sit upon, sort of a foot away from you - and ask alot of questions of (in the case of public kindergartens) the two or three of you who comprise the teaching team.They talk to parents - who you steer them towards, the ones who have indicated they are happy being talked to - and other staff who may be there - Education Support Workers, admins etc. At the end of the day, they report their findings back to you. It's all very strange, and quite intimidating. It's intense and very close scutiny of your teaching practises, your policies and procedures, the way you operate as a team, as an individual, and as a centre.
When they are finished, they report their findings to you, as I said, and then they send you a draft report. If you don't agree to something they have written, you have a finite period of time in which to question that, or to amend the report. Then, and only then, and it can be months later, do they issue the final report, which they send to you, and put online for public scrutiny. So in some ways, it is up to the educationalists to read the draft report carefully, and amend or question the bits they don't like. Do primary/secondary teachers get a chance to look at their schools' reports, and have an input? Are primary/secondary teachers a part of the initial findings? Do they have a chance to have their point of view? In early childhood, certainly in public kindergartens in the AKA, it's a round table process with the ERO reviewers and the teaching team. I'm not confident it's that way in other places that are being evaluated. Perhaps some of my primary/secondary colleagues could shine a light? So, who does review the reviewers, apart from themselves?