Talk:Secondary education in New Zealand/Archive001

This talk page archive contains discussions which were concluded before the refactoring of the article. Information presented here may be inaccurate or out of date.

Discussions from

17 October 2004 to 3 February 2006

---

Current Info

I have tried to make this page a bit more useful by adding a link to the ERO, and pushing the link to the NZ Secondary schools category further up the page. A list of nine schools is not really much of an article about NZ secondary schools. Another option would be to rename this page "Nine Old Schools in NZ". A much better page would actually discuss secondary schools in NZ -- early years of aping English Public (i.e. Private aka independent) Schools; current role of single-sex schools; selected entry 'Grammar Schools'; rise of co-ed schools; introduction of zoning; current role of independent; special issues relating to Maori language schools; current school governance processes; state integrated schools; the correspondence school; international students and so on.

Neil Leslie 04:36, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Not every school deserves mention

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools:

   * I think that a school should have at least one of the following to qualify:
      1. Significant architectural legacy
      2. Famous alumni
      3. Historical, documented importance to a community
      4. Building or campus verified as integral in a major historic event
   Davodd 01:40, Mar 5, 2004 (UTC) 

These form a good guideline for inclusion of schools: you can't have a page for the Everytown High School which just describes the statistical data for the school.

Even for the alumni, it can't be just a list of successful businessmen--the alumni should be nationally significant.

Therefore schools like Auckland Grammar, Christ's, Nelson and Wellington do rate a mention, whereas without further information I don't think HVHS and Onslow should be there.

To that end the article will be reverted and modified.

202.0.43.44 04:41, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I agree with your qualities that a school needs to have to be on here, but I think additionally:

• If a school has an article, it should be here. If you don't think it should have an article, take it up at the article page.

• If a school has no article, but it is noteworthy, then write an article or remove it (for a tiny article it could go straight in this list) or put in a request.

Will update accordingly.

--ihatepotsmokinghippies 09:21, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

P.S. I also think alphabetical order is more helpful and relevant, and schools should be listed by their current name, especially as the only two that changed did nothing noteworthy under the old names. --ihatepotsmokinghippies 09:27, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

About the recent addition of Scots College:

refer to the top of the page:

  * I think that a school should have at least one of the following to qualify:
     1. Significant architectural legacy
     2. Famous alumni
     3. Historical, documented importance to a community
     4. Building or campus verified as integral in a major historic event
  Davodd 01:40, Mar 5, 2004 (UTC) 

 ...Even for the alumni, it can't be just a list of successful businessmen--the alumni should be nationally significant....
To that end the article will be reverted and modified.
202.0.43.44 04:41, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm sure that the author has information on how Scots satisfies one of the criteria. It certainly does not satisfy point (2) at the moment though with more information this can be satisfied. Bobboy 07:34, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

"If a school has an article..."

Note that quite a number of schools listed here have articles - many of them highly un-noteworthy, with articles written presumably by current or ex-pupils (Thames High School comes to mind). I certainly think that a considerable number more schools that the highly elitist group currently represented on this page need adding - if there's to be an article at all, there needs to be more on there than half a dozen schools. The top two or three schools in each of the main and provincial centres probably need to be noted (yes, that includes the like of Onslow and Hutt Valley), with more than that for the big cities and possibly some of the smaller centres' schools, too.

I'm not advocating listing every secondary school in the country, but I am surprised the likes of Otago Boys, James Hargest, Christchurch Boys, and Wesley College aren't on this list. Grutness|^hello? 07:08, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Headings, etc

The article now is just a mishmash of info. Needs to be cleaned up.

202.0.40.109 05:52, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but it is improving. Feel free to continue to edit it. Neil Leslie 08:39, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Institutional history

Wallie (correctly) removed some piffle. What is left is not terribly solid either -- "The early schools of the foundation of Governor Sir George Grey were designated "grammar schools"." While Wgtn Coll used to have 'grammar' in its name, what about Nelson Coll and Wang Collegiate? Were these both Grey shcools, and were they both formerly called grammar. What about Otago Boys?

Also "The older schools tend to stay together for sporting competitions." If you look at college sport welllington or college sport auckland you'll find that the old schools tend to compete with all other schools, old or new. Wgtn Coll also says of its sports teams 'most codes' feature 'at the top of the local sporting scene', seeming to indicate that they play against all and sundry.

1904 is also not the only key date.

And why the UK Cadet Force is mentioned is beyond me.Neil Leslie 19:37, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I am about to bin this section, and will rewrite later. Why bin it rather than leaving it? As noted above the material on which schools play what against who is hard to justify. The article mentions Seddons reforms of 1904 However [1] says "The introduction of the “free place” system in 1903" and [2] says "In 1901 a free place system was introduced in which every child was to be offered a free place in a secondary school." 1901, 1903 or 1904? [3] also states that up to the introduction of the free places scheme Wgtn Coll was in financial straits, which seems to conflict with the assertion that this school charged large fees.

Some mention should be made of the Education Act of 1877 (perhaps more appropriate in the Education in NZ page) and the moves in 1936, '44 and '64 to extend the leaving age.

Tomorrow's Schools deserves a mention, and of course some data on the number of students who attend state/state integrated/private schools and boys only/girls only/co-ed schools wouldn't go amiss.

The development of technical schools is also worth discussing.

And the legislation relating to state/state integrated/private schools should also be covered.

And all to be done from NPOV too. Neil Leslie 09:14, 3 February 2006 (UTC)