NiuZila: Land of full fat milk and welfare money

I went to a launch the other day at the Malaeola Samoan Catholic community parish in Magele / Mangere.  The parish had teamed up with a health provider, South Seas, in partnership with the Ministry of Health, to start a programme within the Samoan Catholic community to address the issue of domestic violence and abuse.  What I want to note here was the aptly named title for the programme:  “E fofo le Alamea le Alamea”.  The Alamea is a spikey starfish called the Crown of Thorns.  If you stand on the spikes the poison can infect your body and can cause sharp stinging pain, nausea and vomiting for hours.  However, if you flip the starfish on it’s back and stick the infected area back in, it will suck the poison back out.  The figurative meaning is that our community contains the solutions to our own problems.  We just have to be willing to stand up for it.

I’ve written a few negative posts of late, about the “poor oppressed brown people”, “blame the white man”, “inherent racism and structural inequalities” etc blah blah blah.  I’m not retracting from my position in those previous posts, but I would like to respond to some of the feedback I’ve received asking:  What are we doing for ourselves?  After all the complaining, what is it that we as Pacific peoples / Samoans, doing to better ourselves?

I often think about an encounter I had while attending a motivational talk at high school.  Throughout the day there were the usual workshops, practical skills sessions, team building exercises etc.  But I kept on feeling “I’ve been here, done that”, waiting to be hit with something new, something I’d never heard before.  I needed to be re-motivated again.  Don’t get me wrong, there was a lot of fun, and plenty of heart-felt stories shared amongst the participants, but I was half waiting for some big surprise to jump out at me and knock me off my feet!  And so it wasn’t until the last speaker of the day that his words hit me.

The speaker was brought in and was not part of the organising crew for the programme.  He was no-one special or out of the ordinary.  He seemed like your ordinary Samoan guy.  He begun by asking all us participants to thank the organisers and those who had previously shared their stories.  He then said, the best way to thank these mentors, was to go out and mentor others: your brothers, your sisters, your little cousins, your friends.

I had spent that day waiting for the programme to cater to me, to provide me with answers.  But as the speaker had said, we are our own best mentors, we already have the skills and empowerment to go forth and “make an impact rather than be the impacted”.  We have our own solutions to our own problems within our own hands.

The Pacific Islands Dream Fonotaga, or simply known as Dream Fono, was an initiative founded in 2002, by well respected, academic and all round funny guy, Samoan, Efeso Collins.  The vision of the fonotaga is to inspire Pacific senior high school students to higher education. The fonotaga encourages students to aspire to being all they can be and offers guidance on taking real and practical steps to making those dreams a reality.

Key to the success of the programme has been the participation of Iunivesite o Aukilani / University of Auckland students who have been in menTOA roles. (MenTOA is a play on words combining the denotative meaning of the word mentor and the pan-Pacific word TOA, loosely defined as warrior or fighter).

The Iunivesite website states that high school students have consistently commented over the last four years that they have appreciated working alongside Pacific Iunivesite students who have been role models for them and shared part of their life-journeys with the participants.

In the past motivational speakers have included Jerry Seuseu (Niu Sila / New Zealand Warriors rugby league / lakapi liki player), Sandra Alofivae (Lawyer / loia), Lapi Mariner (Singer), Linda Vagana (Silver Fern netball / netipolo player), Ronji Tanielu (AUT Pasifika Liaison Officer), Dr John Hood (former Vice-Chancellor of the Iunivesite o Aukilani), Kevin Senio (Waikato Chiefs rugby union / lakapi player) and Sela Alo (NiuFM radio host).

Schools involved have included: James Cook, McAuley, Massey, Gisborne Boys’ High Schools; Tangaroa, Otahuhu, De la Salle, Aorere, Wesley, Tamaki, St Paul’s, St Catherine’s (Ueligitone / Wellington), Liston Colleges; Sir Edmund Hillary Collegiate and Auckland Girls’ Grammar.

This year the event was held at the Christian Youth Camps in Ngaruawahia, Waikato with nearly 150 students participating in the week-long event.  I had the privilege to be loosely associated with the Dream Fono a few years back, and the experience was mind-blowing.  I can tell you that the menTOAs and staff got as much personal growth out of the camp as the high school students. 

It’s always a good start to recognise that our parent’s and the generations before us had left our tropical homelands for a better future for ourselves and our children.  Re-telling our migration story begins to re-focus the kids vision of the past and in turn their future.  A focus too often muddied by contemporary issues, such as gangsta mentality, family economics etc.

Then throughout the weeks there were stories of kids having to work at two different McDonald’s stores in Aukilani Saute / South Auckland to help support their parents and study when they could.  Another story about a boy having grown up in a “bloods” family, and struggling to wear blue (which incidentally was the assigned colour to his group at camp), but truly broke down some barriers being amongst other Pacific youth.  And another guy admitting he’s gone off the rails because of the break up between his parents.  Yet in the same breathe they still held on to their dreams to become a doctor, a lawyer, a plumber, an electrician, a musician, a sports person etc.  It is true, dreams are for free, and we all dream.  Somehow we lose that drive to attain that dream along the way, whether it’s by teachers looking down on us, family financial pressure etc.  But the Dream Fono programme only begins to re-connect those dreams with the drive to achieve, and the knowledge that they can achieve those dreams.

Dream Fono, from my understanding, was never created to provide answer to all our youths problems, but it was there to stand by our youths and say:  “you can dream again”.  One week will never be enough, and so at the end of each Dream Fono the high school students are warned that the warm fuzzy feelings will soon subside once they’re back in their familiar surroundings.  But hopefully they will have realised that they are already well equipped, have the necessary skills and the motivation to go out and be menTOAs to their own younger family members.

Afterall, we have our own solutions to our own problems in our own hands.  “E fofo le Alamea le Alamea” - we just need to be brave enough to stand up.

A friend of mine was recently admitted to the bar.  After many years at Law School, passing the professional studies bar exams, she was admitted as a Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of Niu Sila / New Zealand.

I’ve always enjoyed going to the law admission ceremony.  For one thing there are a wholelot less people than the Iunivesite / University graduation ceremonies.  At graduation the graduate sits there for over an hour and a half waiting for their name to be called out.  And for those brief 5 seconds as the graduate walks across the stage in all glory… and then back off again, only to sit back down and wait for everyone else’s 5 seconds of fame.  No disrespect graduates, but the small number (30 maximum) of candidates being admitted to the bar brings about more of an intimate settings to celebrate the achievements.

Furthermore, the admission ceremonies are given a personal touch by allowing all the candidates to make a speech.  Of course there’s always a risk of getting a mixed bag in quality and length of the speeches, but there is no doubt that the speeches of the candidates are from the heart.  Many use the opportunity to testify before the public of the love and support the candidate received throught their studies, an opportunity not available at graduation ceremonies.

There’s always that speech that makes the audience sniff or brings a few tears to the eyes of some.  One lady retold the story how she came from Vietnam as a refugee, had struggled to learn English and to adapt to the Kiwi way of life, all the while raising her 3 children by herself on three cleaning jobs.  She dedicated her achievement to her children.

Then there was the humorous speech that always gets the crowd chuckling.  A young Samoan candidate thanked her parents for the opportunity, otherwise she was sure she would’ve had a career as a hardcore gangster rapper.  And almost proceeded to drop a beat!  Even the sitting judge gave a little smirk.

The opportunity to give a speech allows one to personalise what would otherwise be a very formal ritual.  Based in the old High Court building in Auckland (built in the 1800’s), with a judge sitting at the bench elevated above everyone, moving counsels on the flanks, and the candidates set before the judge, all wearing the funny old white wigs and long black gowns, it’s almost something out of the 16th Century, if it wasn’t for the official camera man to the left of the judge, and the modern attire of the audience.

Another dead giveaway that the scene isn’t from the 16th Century is the multi-ethnic make up of the candidates.  There were Samoans, Maori, Vietnamese, Chinese, Indian, Pakeha etc.  The maleSamoan candidate addressed the Court then began to thank his family and friends in Samoan.  It kinda triggered the rest of the group to feel comfortable enough to say their bits in their native languages too.

As a Samoan it was awe inspiring to see my fellow Samoan brethren being admitted to the bar.  The galley was full of proud Samoan fathers and sobbing mothers, aunties and uncles, brothers and sisters.  It was an achievement on behalf of their families as a whole.

It was a great celebration in a very respected and honourable institution, but was flexible enough to truly illustrate the diverse group of candidates.  Congratulations to all those who were admitted to the bar!

Faamalo lava le taumafai, faamalo foi le onosai.

Niu Sila / New Zealand is an interesting nation.  With a large indigenous Maori population, and a diversifying multi-cultural citizenry, there are constant debates about the place of Maori (and other minorities including Pacific peoples) in modern Niu Sila.

The Maori Party, currently in co-alition with the National Government, recently stirred up the radio talk-back red-necks with a call by co-leader Dr Pita Sharples to allow open access for Maori students into tertiary education.

Of course that’s not all he said, but that’s all the mainstream media picked up to get their revenue tills ringing.   Dr Sharples also said:

“My speech made clear that educational under-achievement by Maori students is obvious at school.  That is why the Government allocated an extra $20 million to expand the Kotahitanga programme in secondary schools, and almost $70 million to extend the 20-hours free early childhood education to kohanga reo and playcentres,” said Dr Sharples.

There is no doubt there is underachievement by Maori and Pacific students in education.

The Starpath Project at Iunivesite o Aukilani / The University of Auckland has warned in its report that many Maori and Pacific students may not make it to university because they are making ill-informed NCEA subject choices.  The study reports anecdotally on students who aspired to tertiary education but chose vocational subjects instead of academic ones.  It found parents did not understand NCEA so were ill-equipped to advise their children on subject choice, and the wide range of subjects available under NCEA meant students were being diverted from the narrow range of subjects which lead to tertiary success.

This is supported by other programmes I have been involved with, that too many schools with predominantly Maori and Pacific students are under-resourced (and sometimes mismanaged) with poor quality of teaching, offering limited subjects that would increase the chances of the students to get into tertiary education, instead offering easier vocational subjects.  Furthermore, many of these vocational subjects may give a student enough NCEA credits, but in order to get into many tertiary institutions the credits need to be ranked, which many vocational subject credits are not.

Dr Sharples states “But the point is: what can universities do to overcome the crisis? It is not good enough simply to blame schools.”

Dr Sharples also said “Wananga have transformed Maori aspirations for tertiary education, by making courses easily accessible, and providing a kaupapa Maori learning environment. So will the universities respond, by stepping outside conventional thinking, and embracing new approaches?”

A wananga is a type of tertiary education provider that provides education in a Maori cultural context.  Yet mainstream New Zealand (and some Pacific people) are up in arms about it, saying it’s racist, it’s segregation etc.  Those arguments only attempt to hide the differences between peoples.  By trying to say we are all the same, we conceal the inequalities that do exist between people.  There are structural inequalities inherent in our society that have many Maori and Pacific peoples starting at a disadvantage.

This isn’t purely politicking, but it’s statistically evidenced.  If you go to a high decile school the probability of gaining University Entrance is higher than a low decile school.  Where do most Maori and Pacific people’s live?  In low decile school areas.  How is that fair, that just because you are born in a area that has crap schools, thereby affecting your probability of gaining a tertiary education?

Again, from a mathematical point of view, ethnicity is the lowest common denominator when assessing on how to spread the limited public funds into education (and health etc).  It’s not a permanent characteristic, but it’s the most effective way to target disadvantaged groups: through targeting ethnic groups that dominate the poor socio-economic statistics.

Looking further ahead, with large youthful populations and higher fertility rates, Maori and Pacific people’s will make up the majority of the future workforce of Niu Sila.  Statistically, if this future workforce is born of a community that continues to fail in many academic areas, we will have a poorly skilled, poorly equipped workforce. 

For the aging Palagi population, they should be worried.  Statistically, they will make up the majority of the pensioner age group in the foreseeable future.  The elderly population will need a productive highly skilled work force to keep paying the taxes that will pay for their pensions.

If we were all born into families with the same level of wealth, attend the same quality of schools, given the same opportunities, then yes, then we can argue it’s an individuals own fault for not working hard enough to get into a tertiary institution.

But that’s not reality.  We do have poverty.  We do have crap schools.  We do have large concentrations of ethnic groups in low decile areas.  There are a whole host of other reasons that should also be taken into consideration when we start criticising some-one for not ‘working hard enough’.

Many Iunivesite’s do have programmes and scheme’s in place to assist disadvantaged groups with access into degrees and support services while studying.  But most people only point out the ethnic schemes: Maori and Pacific Island entry quota’s.  They don’t point to the mature student quota’s or the people with disabilities’ quota, or the women’s quota.  These are all disadvantaged groups, that the Iunivesite’s have identified as having under-representation in doctors, lawyers, engineers etc.

Many degrees have limited spaces.  To limit the number of student’s entering the degree the Iunivesite artificially creates a cut-off point, for example to get into a law degree student’s must have a A- average.  But that’s not to say a person with a B+ average is any less capable of completing that law degree than an A- student, it’s just that a line had to be drawn.  In fact the Iunivesite o Aukilani has chopped and changed the entry level for Law school many times over the last few years.  Therefore it is false to assume that students who enter a degree under a quota won’t be able to complete the degree.

Quota’s aren’t an easy ride to getting a degree.  It’s providing an opportunity to participate in tertiary education, acknowledging the societal inequalities that prevent many people from those disadvantaged groups of gaining entrance into the degrees.  Once in, they still have to meet the same level of academic excellence as everyone else, they still have to pass the same exams everyone else sits, they still have to prove themselves just like everyone else.

When a person graduates with a Iunivesite degree it’s because they earned it, bearing no consequence on the quality of that soon to be doctor or lawyer etc, since they all passed the same exams.

Dr Sharples also stated “I also called for universities to meet Maori educational needs half way, by interweaving kaupapa Maori into their own strong European academic traditions to create win-win outcomes for Maori and non-Maori students alike.  A New Zealand education for all citizens should draw on the strengths of both Maori and European traditions and pedagogy.”

Doesn’t that sound like equality to you?

So when Dr Sharples called for open access for Maori students into tertiary education it’s not an attempt to create inequalities but to redress the existing inequalities (amongst other measures).  After all, our futures depend on it…

[Update: Here's a great article by Samoan columnist for the New Zealand Herald, Tapu Misa, about the "business case" for targeted funding for Maori and Pacific peoples: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10581259&pnum=0]

The difference between private and public schools here in Niu Sila / New Zealand are probably not so pronounced as in other countries, well from a student’s perception anyway.  There are some very good public schools that many people mistake for private schools, and some private (church) schools that are worse than public schools.  But nevertheless, in general, there is a difference between private and public schools.

The usual stereotypes of rich little snobs having the luxury to choose to go to private schools, and poor grubby children of working class homes dependant on public schools, is not too far off the truth.  The rich can afford to and do send their kids to private schools, whereas the working class poor cannot choose and must send their kids to public schools, therefore totally reliant on the willingness (or unwillingness) of the Government of the day to resource and support the local school.

I started off this article saying the difference is not so pronounced here in Niu Sila, but that’s because we have a history of the belief in an egalitarian society, with decades of public funding into health and education.  It was very much built of the Kiwi idea of everyone being able to “have a fair go”.  Of course, with the lurch to the far right in the last half century, cuts in health and education have exacerbated the difference between the services offered by private hospitals and schools compared to public ones, as right wing neo-liberal free marketeers cut back the “fair go” State.

In that same vein, the Education Minister Anne Tolley said the Government had demonstrated its commitment to education in private schools through a $1.68 billion injection, from this years Budget, of frontline funding that will direct large amounts of money towards areas such as improving school buildings, boosting funding for children with special needs and running high-speed broadband internet through most schools.

Executive director of the Independent Schools of New Zealand Deborah James said “[Independent schools] bring a choice in education, not all schools suit all children so it’s wonderful in a democracy that families can choose an education that best suits the needs of their child.”

Unfortunately, what the Government and Mrs James fail to mention is this ‘choice’ really means rich people’s choice.  Unless your child was one of the lucky fortunate few who gained a scholarship to a private school, or you can afford the thousands of dollars in fees let alone uniform, stationary, sporting and other extra-curricular costs, then you don’t really have a “choice”.

And what support is given by the Government to the schools that parent’s with no “choice” have to depend on?

President of the Post Primary Teachers’ Association Kate Gainsford was concerned to see funding cuts of $35.779 million for professional development, $6.005 million for school support programmes and $11.701 million for curriculum support programmes.

The Government said private schools will receive their first Government funding injection in a decade the $35 million allowing them to keep their fees at a more affordable level for parents (ie rich parents).  And I believe that’s at the expense of underfunding the public schools making it less affordable for them to provide quality education for the poor parents.

My younger brother was fortunate enough to get a scholarship to allow him to pay for his fees at a private school, while my sister went to one of the top public schools in central Aukilani.  While there was not much difference in the educational achievements between the two (similar) schools, once either schools were compared to our local high school you could see how well resourced, the quality of teaching, the academic and pastoral care given, the range of options for sporting, cultural and extra curricular activities, were available at the private schools.

While I was studying at Uni, I part-time worked at the Equal Opportunities office.  The statistics I came across were really bad.  The majority of enrolments to the Uni from school leavers came from the top decile (rich) schools.  Even worse for Pacific and Maori students who lived in areas that had low decile (poor) schools, nearly half those at form 5 (third to last year at high school) drop out before they even get to form 7 (last year at high school).  That’s 50% of our younger generation not even making it to the starting line of trying to get into tertiary education.

Of course there are a myriad of reasons, but a lot of it has to do with the under funding, under resourcing (which affect quality of teaching, administration, range of subjects available etc) of those low decile schools which are largely public schools.

The previous Government implemented policies that did see some change in those statistics, by for example providing more funding for public schools.  Universities have also had for years quota systems for disadvantaged groups.  The previous Government strengthened those approaches by providing supplementary grants.  The result being an increase of tertiary participation by people from those disadvantaged groups.

The quota’s are a very contentious issue which I’ll leave for another blog, but it is undeniable that the current Government’s recent funding announcements will see a reversal of that trend.

Before the previous Governments policies, public schools were complaining that private schools were poaching the most talented students from public schools, thereby concentrating the brightest and talented students at the rich schools and then reflected in schooling results.  Of course the private schools said they were providing “choice”.  The previous Government reintroduced zoning which required schools to take in every student within their zone before offering any available spaces to students outside the zone.

The consequences were many of the public schools retained their talented and brightest students, improving the schools results.  Anecdotally, the richer schools have also been losing on the rugby field with first fifteen teams losing for the first time in school history, to poorer public school teams.  Retaining talent in public schools.

It’s not as clear cut, as I probably make it out to be in this article, on the pro’s and con’s of private and public schools.  But there is certainly truth in the fact that private schools don’t provide choice for every parent, just the rich ones.