Teachers’ action

Press, 24 February 1986, Page 12

Teachers’ action

Sir,—lf ever there was a time for parents to sit up and take notice, surely it is now, as the militant secondary school teachers “act out” Mr Marshall’s proposed additions to the school curriculum. It seems the P.P.T.A. has engaged in "role playing,” to demonstrate to the nation how they Intend to teach unionism and peace studies in our secondary schools. These teachers we have seen in protests are the people Mr Marshall trusts to teach the children these new studies. These “professional educators,” when en masse in protest, behaved no differently from any other group in society, venting anger, hatred, and bitterness. How can these same teachers speak “peace” when they are prepared to disrupt and antagonise even the pupils? Is it any wonder that students’ at Waitakere staged a "sit in” and protested loudly because of what is happening to them? The remark by their principal, that "they are a hard core, who have worked themselves into a frenzy” could very well be applied to the P.P.T.A. Is this the way we want education to go? — Yours, etc.,

Mrs HELEN MORROW. February 21, 1986.

Sir,—ln reply to D. Champion (“The Press,” February 20) concerning teachers’ salaries, that letter states that teachers in England are better paid at every level. What it does not state is that the cost of living is far higher, particularly for food, which is required every day. What you pay in cents in New Zealand, you pay in pence in England. The standard of living in England is considerably lower than in New Zealand. Having had a brother and sister-in-law forking in England for a year ; on a teachers’ exchange scheme, receiving their New Zealand salaries, they lived like lords compared to their English counterparts. Could D. Champion please explain why teachers in England have to take secondary employment in their school holidays to support themselves for the rest of the year? — Yours, etc.,

B. A. SIMPSON. February 21, 1986.