One of the most startling recent shifts in U.S. education was the adoption by the National Education Association (NEA) of a resolution supporting the use of student standardized test scores, along with other measures, in the teacher evaluation process. Meeting in Chicago on July 3, 2011 the nation’s largest teachers’ union with 3.2 million members reversed its previous position to head-off what the New York Times described as “a growing national movement to hold teachers accountable for what students learn.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/us/05teachers.html?pagewanted=all
The momentous decision by the NEA not only brought the union more into line with the rival American Federation of Teachers, but responded to the changing reform dynamic now affecting some 15 American states. That policy shift stood out in sharp contrast to the strong resistance expressed by both the Canadian Teachers Federation (CTF) and its de-facto lobby organization, the Canadian Education Association (CEA)
The Canadian teacher unions now find themselves as outliers, fighting a rearguard action against teacher quality reform. While NEA president Dennis Van Roekel sought to respond to the inevitability of change, the Canadian teacher unions continue to demonstrate a “head in the sand” approach.
Canadian teacher unionists continue to inhabit another planet when it comes to education reform. Instead of reacting to the NEA decision, the CTF continued to hide behind its own opinion surveys and to present “smaller class sizes” as the panacea. Indeed they continue to base that opposition on teacher-sponsored surveys purporting to show that 67% of Canadians favour “teacher evaluations of students” over “standardized tests.” http://www.ctf-fce.ca/Newsroom/news.aspx?NewsID=1983984692&year=2010
Teacher unions in Canada, from coast to coast, continue to resist teacher quality reform and to maintain a hard-line stance. Since the rapid unionization of the teaching ranks in the 1960s and ’70s, teaching has been a white-collar profession central to the rise of public sector unionism. While teachers aspire to be professionals, they toil in what Education Sector aptly termed “locally controlled civil service regimes which were, in turn, grafted upon industrial unionism.” The inherent contradictions of this situation periodically reveal themselves, most recently in the about-face by the NEA on the critical issue of student-test based teacher evaluation. http://www.educationsector.org/publications/admirable-move-countrys-biggest-teachers-union-yes-you-read-correctly
Teacher unionism improved teacher salaries, but teachers were incorporated into a standardized “one-size-fits-all” system. Everyone had to get a bachelor’s degree from a recognized university, then obtain a standard provincial teaching license before entering the classroom. Once they entered the system, everyone was paid according to the same union salary schedule, which doled out raises based on years of experience and credentials such as master’s degrees. There were few differences in rank or status, meaningful performance evaluations were non-existent, and it remains nearly impossible to be fired for cause.
On the inside, however, teachers inhabited a different world. Until the 1990s, standards and curricula were largely left in the hands of local districts and schools. Principals, in turn, gave individual teachers broad discretion over what happened every morning after students settled into their desks and the classroom door closed behind them. That meant huge variance in what students were taught, even among students with different teachers in the same school and grade. It also meant tremendous variances in how well students were taught. As with all legitimate professions, some people are much better at it than others, but the official line was that raising the issue was tantamount to “teacher-bashing.”
Teachers’ unions found solidarity, and thus power, in promoting uniformity in the modern bureaucratic education world. Then, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the educational standards-and-accountability movement took root and brought the return of new forms of standardized student testing. At the time, nobody seriously proposed using the tests to evaluate individual teachers—the Canadian and American teacher unions made sure of that. http://www.aims.ca/en/home/library/details.aspx/1862
Over the past decade, accountability for student learning has become widely accepted and independent think tanks like the Fraser Institute and the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies (AIMS) have begun to rank schools and to raise new questions about the limits of education reform. With the financial support of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the U.S. National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) and Education Sector have succeeded in putting improved teacher evaluation on the public policy agenda. Initial research demonstrated that up to 33% of student learning was determined by the quality of teaching in the classroom. More recent research has shown that some teachers were much better than others in raising student performance levels.
Canadian teacher unions tremble at the prospect of performance-based evaluation and tenure. After two years, most teachers secure a permanent contract and never again face any kind of real scrutiny unless they commit some chargeable office. Unions always tend to rally to the defense of their weakest links. Confronted with teacher quality reform proposals, they simply go to ground hoping the agitation will blow over. Opening the door to more effective teacher evaluation they fear will put “the whole system of unity through uniformity” at risk.
Leading Canadian policy researchers like Dr. Ben Levin continue to turn a blind eye to the latest research on teacher quality measures. In May of 2011, Levin told the Nova Scotia media that he was opposed to student-test based teacher evaluation because “no reliable measures existed” to assess teacher performance.
New American research suggests otherwise. A June 2011 Education Sector report by Susan Headden explores the initiatives underway in more than a dozen American states. She was particularly impressed with IMPACT, the Washington D.C. model combining five classroom observations with student test scores in rating teachers on a four-point scale of effectiveness. As her report made clear, “multiple measures teacher evaluation is the future of K-12 education. And in Washington, D.C., the future is happening now.” http://www.educationsector.org/publications/inside-impact-dcs-model-teacher-evaluation-system
Why is the Canadian education establishment so resistant to teacher quality reform initiatives? Who is really calling the tune – provincial education authorities or the Canadian Teachers Federation backed by the CEA? Should we put much stock in the assessment of teacher unionists who defend the status quo and still oppose the current student testing programs? If teacher unionists remain cool to testing, then why would we ever expect them to embrace student test based teacher evaluation?
Your questions are right on the money.
My guess is that the union bubble of “all teachers are equal under the eyes of the contract” would be burst if there were serious comparisons made between teaching quality.
The reason the Canadian “education establishment” resists quite simply is because those in those establishment ranks have a vested interest in keeping up the union facade…..likely having been former educators and payers into the union coffers themselves.
They’re simply continuing what they learned through their union talking points.
Fear of comparison equals fear of failure to measure up to the really good teachers out there too I expect.
Once the qualifications of teachers recognized cross-Canada this should definitely be addressed.
At the present time, each province has different academic standards with the result that an Ontario teacher with a 4 year BEd from Queens isn’t recognized in NS as being qualified.
The NEA motion also says learning can only form part of a teacher assessment and further, NEA believes that no test exists at present that is accurate enough to be used. The same applies to so-called Value added assessment which is said to measure yearly progress from whereever it starts but so far gives wildly different results for the same teacher year over year.
Even using VAA, poor students to date do not make the yearly gains of middle class kids notwithstanding the measure. In many middle class communities, students make 1-12 month gains in a ten month school year due to family situations while, even with the best teachers, poor studets often grow only 7-9 months worth in a ten month year due to their situation.
You can switch the entire staff from the suburbs to the inner city and it will make no difference. American teachers have capitulated, unwisely in my view, to American pressure which is wildly off the mark.
There should really be one question in education, WWFD, (what would Finland do?) or Korea or Canada.
America is #19 in the world and flailing around looking for scape goats everywhere but where it really is. They have no intention to eliminate poverty or even mitigate it. When it is pointed out to them that Finland has a 4% child poverty rate and the USA has a 20% rate, they just get angry and say what is your next solution. Canada clobbers USA in PISA and OECD is very quick to point out that the difference is based in our social programs to mitigate poverty.
Teachers are 100% blameless in the education situation but politicians and parents simply are not able to blame themselves and therefore look for scapegoats.
New Zealand went through this “blame the teacher” period 10 years earlier and very soon had a teacher shortage. Harris did the same thing to teachers and nurses and created shortages of both.
Read the New Zealand article at http://www.educationnews.org
Asked why NZ was rising very fast in OECD date, the NZ experts told Americans. “You have a high accountability low trust system in America. That does not work. What works is a low accountability high trust system.” That is what NZ and Korea where teachers are deeply respected and Finland where they are also trusted do.
That is why they lead the world. Teacher accountability leads directly to LOWER results. Do not pass go do not collect $200.
UK has a massive teacher drop-out rate so they asked all of their young promising teachers why they quit before 5 years was even up? Answer-too much accountability, too little professional freedom.
Teachers are 100% blameless in the education situation but politicians and parents simply are not able to blame themselves and therefore look for scapegoats.
___________________________________________________________
Bollocks
Funny how the teachers are not part of the problem in the successful countries of which we are #3.
When I discount Finland due to their tiny poverty rate compared to Canada and when I discount Korea due to their very long hours and after school tutorial sessions, I come to the conclusion that, given the above, Canada has the world’s best teachers and I mean that.
USA has huge numbers of unqualified teachers because some areas, qualified teachers refuse to teach. They also have huge numbers of teachers teaching outside of their subject expertese. All countries have this but not like the USA.
American teacher pay is so pathetic that many fine teachers leave because they refuse to subsidize the system with low wages.
“Teachers are 100% blameless in the education situation but politicians and parents simply are not able to blame themselves and therefore look for scapegoats. ”
Doug,give me a break,we are all responsible for personal effectiveness no matter the job;stop blaming the kid and their parents`s socioeconomic sector.
I taught 90 percent of the K-3 students at Sheshatiu to read and spell after training their teachers when the years previous only 10% were learning.
The teachers themselves speak of progressivism,fuzzy math,fuzzy reading and facilitation rather than teaching as rotting the public education sector.
We can`t have one teacher succeeding with all kids and one failing 70 per cent of the class due to incompetence.Actually,I know the Universities don`t train the teachers how to teach Reading according to the empirical research,you know all of my analogies…
Dr.`s and lawyers often say ,we don`t have a pension,why do they?
As Paul inferenced,the teachers got uniform pay and pensions but they lost their professionalism card with the public.
Notwithstanding,I hold them in very high regard and see that most care about children and their personal effectiveness and while training I see they are extremely eager to enhance their “effectiveness’.
Teacher accountability and testing all Grade 3 and Grade 5-6 kids is imperative.
In Grade 1 all children should be checked with Dibels for phonemic awareness!If we aren`t going to bother to teach properly let`s intervene very early for God`s sake.
Ben Levin refuses to look at a half a billion dollar longitudinal study from the NICHD where a Canadian became famous in the U.S. for his findings ,Keith Stanovich,he stated that learning to read in all children is a sound based process.
You don`t know anything about the science of Reading,a little like Ben but you are not quite as harmful,you are not the Canadian conductor of instruction methodology.I find it INCREDIBLE that he does not espouse accountability.
The Thomas B. Fordham Institute is in the forefront of American education reform and Fordham’s Education Gadfly bulletin, Flypaper, has just produced an interim assessment of the D.C. IMPACT model of teacher evaluation.
Fordham Institute Fellow Laurent Rigal (July 22, 2011) posted this perceptive critical assessment of the new model:
“A few days ago, 206 “ineffective” or twice-rated “minimally effective” teachers were dismissed from their positions at the District of Columbia Public Schools thanks to the District’s new teacher-evaluation system, IMPACT….
D.C.’s terminations over the past two years mark a major milestone: the first time that teachers have been systematically, objectively assessed—and then held to account for their performance. Not even Montgomery County or Cincinnati (both of which are praised for their teacher-eval systems) can boast the rigors or consequences of IMPACT. What’s more, IMPACT has survived the Fenty-Gray mayoral shift (and the exit of its architect, Michelle Rhee). It looks like the evaluation system is here to stay.
But should we really be celebrating, as Education Sector’s Kevin Carey has asserted, “the triumph of empiricism”? Not just yet.
Claims that the “system is working” are, at best, premature and, at worse, detrimental to that very system’s future. (Is it no more than a fancy way to axe teachers, the opponents may say?) Tallying the number of educators fired cannot be the gauge for assessing the success or effectiveness of a program like IMPACT. And banners touting the program’s success cannot be raised on the basis that all fired teachers are ineffective; that assumption is not necessarily valid.
IMPACT may be a ground-breaking new evaluation system. Still, it’s one that needs adjustments and improvements (check out this report from Susan Headden at Ed Sector for more). For example, there is an observed inequitable distribution of IMPACT’s teacher ratings: More quality teachers are found in the already high-performing (and wealthy) wards (like Wards 3 and 4) and more ineffective teachers are found in the low-performing wards (like Wards 7 and 8). This may be an issue of teacher-quality distribution. But could it also show a flaw in IMPACT—that it’s harder for teachers in already low-performing wards to get an “effective” rating, bringing into question the fairness of the evaluation process? If so, one unintended negative consequence of IMPACT would be that it would lead to more firings (potentially unwarranted) in schools where quality teachers are needed most—and maybe lead to a flight of good teachers out of Wards 7 and 8, as they might garner better marks for the same effort and skill-base in Wards 3 or 4.
While others districts (like Prince George’s County, adjacent to D.C. and plagued with similar problems) have opted to pilot their new evaluation programs before full-fledged implementation, DCPS dove into IMPACT whole-hog (there is an education-quality crisis sweeping the District, after all).
Now, as a teacher, I resent the idea of Ms. Jones or Mr. Thomas being fired due to an untested evaluation process. I resent them having to carry that “ineffective” stigma, effectively barring them from obtaining another teaching position. Yet, as a parent, I resent the idea of my son being assigned an utterly ineffective teacher because there is no rigorous and valid teacher-evaluation system to ensure that those who can’t teach don’t. This is not a dilemma that is easy to solve.
There is a growing consensus that teacher-evaluation systems are in need of major overhaul and that staying our current course is not an option. There is also somewhat of a consensus over the use of student achievement as a component of such evaluation as well as suggestions on how to evaluate such evaluation systems. However, we’ve a long way yet to go; it is way too early to claim that IMPACT “is working.” Several years of careful and rigorous data analysis are needed before the IMPACT program can earn that label. Until then, much caution is required and it would be prudent not to stand on the deck of DCPS’s flagship proclaiming “mission accomplished.” (Flypaper, Thomas B. Fordham Institute)
Comment:
The IMPACT model looks to me like a rather unique “pilot project” — one with human casualties. Laurent Rigal’s analysis suggests that IMPACT is being implemented as some kind of experiment designed for purposes other than providing a valid, field-tested form of teacher evaluation. We definitely need to overhaul teacher evaluation systems and to link them with student learning, but this looks like a BETA version. It’s Michelle Rhee’s legacy and, like others, it takes a “bull-in-a-china-shop” approach to school reform. Word to the wise: Early adopters beware!
I appreciate this and concur; in my specialty (early reading instruction)though, it`s completely different. We can absolutely test accurately what children need to be doing and know to be effective readers and spellers.First,teacher must know how to do it.
It`s easier to appraise effectiveness in the foundational years,the point being, they have to decide if there are learning standards and what core curriculum is..what do they want the kids to be able to do by the end of grade 3…end of a grade 5,6,7,8,?
I agree about Michelle Rhee being a bull in a china shop..But lots of reformers do edubabble and don`t say one specific thing to help teachers be more effective.
Do you think that`s a fair idea?
One more question,does student grading on exams and reporting those results to principals not lead to insight into teacher effectiveness?
Has public school`s walking away from scoring exams not made effectiveness foggier..it seems to me subject matter examinations and scores test both the student`s mastery and the teacher`s effectiveness.
You would always have a 15-20 margin of error for kids that don`t do their work but otherwise,the class should be passing?
Trying to win the Stanley Cup when no one is keeping score would be rather bizarre, to say the least.
Yet, that’s what we’re trying to do in public education.
In my opinion, the problem isn’t bad teachers but a bad system that basically causes teachers to give up and go with the flow and collect the ol’ paycheck… or they simply quit and find another career.
One of our sons quit in his first year.
great analogy and one that most every profession would understand.
Both good and bad teachers exist. We all know that – that’s why very few, even teachers buy the “all teachers are created equal” union mantra.
Andrew, I agree with you that a bad system is a result of what we’re seeing these days.
You are mixing American problems and attempting to apply them to Canada. The USA first of all is conducting a major witch hunt because they are #19 in OECD, don’t know what to do about it and are in a “blame the teacher” phase. It will pass, nothing will be gained, no scores will improve, no gains will be made and we will move on to the next “hobby horse” in education.
As Paul already pointed out, the “ineffective” teachers teach the poor. Switch the locations and the effective suburban teacher becomes the ineffective unban teacher. The results are full of wild swings for exactly the same teacher in 2 different years.
Americans, as I have pointed out, pay so badly people cannot afford to be teachers. Less attractive postings cannot get qualified teachers. Charters are failing in the same locations every week.
Turnover in urban schools is very high because the job is just not worth it and life is too short. I have visited these schools and seen the armed Wakenhut security guards and the bag scanning machines to get in the front door. It is easier to get into Pearson airport.
You just have no idea what blackboard jungles these schools are until you have seen them. There is nothing in Canada to compare.
You wonder why teachers fail in these settings? I wonder how anyone succeeds.
I met the teachers, maybe half have no certification, half are teaching outside their subject area.
We simply do not have a teacher quality issue in Canada to compare. Solution? If you want better look at Finland.
Doug has hit the issue right on the head.
Canada has an alternate method to the US to ensuring high quality teachers are in classrooms. First, getting into teaching is a fairly selective process, with more people turned away from teacher programs than accepted. Second, new teachers have to wait a long time for a classroom, and those less motivated to continue waiting for a classroom, or who struggle with substitute teaching, are more likely to quit. Hence, we have two places of selective pressure on the teaching profession. Both of these are vastly different than what happens in many US teacher colleges.
I’d like to see more training available for Canadian teachers (BC spends only 0.71% of its budget on professional development), and a higher pay overall (which would encourage a wider range of people to enter the teaching profession, increasing the selective pressures discussed above). However, given the vast numbers of teachers compared to higher esteem professions, like doctors and lawyers, it seems unlikely that our society will make this kind of investment in education anytime soon.
Bollocks.
We have good teachers and bad teachers.
We have dedicated teachers and teachers who are along for the ride.
We have teachers who hate teaching but hang in “to get their pension”.
We have teachers who totally love teaching.
Then we have the real prize winners – those who can’t wait to get out of the classroom and into the board office so they can cause some real damage. That crowd couldn’t figure their way to their own bathrooms without GPS and a gaggly of “consultants”.
Halifax principal cleared of bullying
CBC News Posted: Jul 21, 2011 3:04 PM AT Last Updated: Jul 21, 2011 3:19 PM AT An investigation by the Halifax Regional School Board has concluded that Jane Gourley did not bully or harass teachers.
The board announced the outcome of its investigation on Thursday.
Gourley left her job as principal at St. Margarets Bay Elementary School on May 24 after 10 teachers claimed she harassed and bullied them.
She finished out the year in an office at the board’s headquarters in Dartmouth.
Gourley’s next assignment was at Rockingham Elementary. But some parents objected to the transfer before the investigation was over, and Gourley withdrew from the post.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2011/07/21/ns-rockingham-principal-bullying-investigation.html
You are so right, Doug. The differences in the way we fund and operate Canadian schools make comparisons impossible. But, we can certainly learn from the American experience. Blaming teachers for what are largely effects of long-term, systemic poverty that manifest in poor attendance, transience, and lack of home support at best and drug and alcohol abuse in the worst cases. Even in states where teacher qualifications vary tremendously, coming from a strong family with parental support for education is usually the top predictor of success in school, regardless of the teacher. Teachers are important, but only after basics are met. It certainly reinforces Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. If you don’t attend to the bottom, it doesn’t really matter what’s on top.
I am all for reform – social reform that is. Reform that reduces child poverty and reform that supports teachers who daily face the challenges of acting as educators, mothers, fathers, judges, nurses, and social workers while trying to meet the diverse needs of too many students in their classes. Then, add lack of adequate training, supports, respect, and pay while using standardized tests
Canadian Unions resist American style “reform” for good reasons, supported by credible research. Teacher evaluation in Saskatchewan could probably be improved, as could most all processes, but it is more fairly based upon TEACHER performance; not students’. We have many tools for self-reflection, peer collaboration, and administrative reviews and all of them are more valid indicators of teacher quality than student performance on standardized tests. Our professional associations (unions) rightly resist evaluation based upon student performance on standardized tests.
One final note to those who think wages in education should not be based upon education and experience. Competition for scarce resources in a meritocracy (as proposed by many reformists) would remove the collaborative environment schools work so hard to build. I cannot imagine beginning a career in teaching without support and mentorship. A “merit” based pay scale would destroy collaboration right as technology places us on the cusp of the most powerful sharing ever possible in education.
Good lawyers and bad lawyers, good doctors and bad doctors, good carpernters and bad carpenters, good pilots and bad pilots.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
But especially,
Good parents and bad parents.
Gee, now you say the opposite of what you said before.
Yiou really are a politician, eh?
You caught that too did you Andrew?
Not to mention we have the ability to choose doctors, carpenters, and airlines. If we’re treated badly, or quality of work is poor or an airline has a high record of crashes and poor service we vote with our feet.
Parents would come to a principal I knew and say “my child is not learning, the teacher is no good.” The principal would answer “the other 25 kids in that class are learning very well, your child has missed 20% of the classes, handed in only half of the assignments, caused disruptions, etc. Who do you think is at fault, Mrs Smith and the other 24 children or your child?”
This is what school is actually like for people in the REAL world.
you have to consistantly be living in fairy land to believe there is a realistic fault application to parents in a situation cited such as this.
Parents come to a principal, or educators, because they must do so in order to make some sense of what their child is experiencing in a certain situation when required. Dealing with parents who can’t work out solutions with teachers or won’t form a working group to help Johnny is part of the job. Some teachers suceed, some do not. Blaming is never the answer.
I truely laugh at the “parent/teacher night in Canada”.
“Mr and Ms. Shwartz, you have 7.8 minutes to discuss Johnny’s academic and behavioural progress. Excuse me the clock is ticking…”
Once again, Doug misses the real issue here which is not to blame the teacher but to evaluate the teacher.
Blame a parent, blame a student, blame poverty, but do not reform the system and seek solutions – well that is pathetic!
Yes Steven, he’s not the only one either. The wagons are circling before our eyes and actually answering many of the questions Paul poses in his initial post.
As Andrew says “BULLOCKS” (the 20th Centuries version of “BS)
mmm. Maybe better said as strong families, weak families?
Doug at 1:39.
I can sure identify with your example. Been there and done that too many times. That is exactly what happens. Each parent blames the teacher for their child not doing well. But, in the context of an entire class, it is, more often than not, the child’s own behaviour that is the problem. Yet, some parents and the public have a problem with that.
I once had a father tell me flat out that it was 100% my responsibility for Joey (in Grade 5) to learn. I said, no it was 50/50. That Joey had to be willing to take part, that I simply could not open his head up and dump in learning and skills. And, that his son was quite capable of learning.
I found out later the family was splitting up and Joey doing badly in school was in his way of rebelling.
Think that is an isolated example? It’s not.
Plus, when I was a teacher educator and involved in supervising student teachers, I became aware that many children don’t even try on standardized tests. So, when they do badly, we fire the teacher?
Both my husband and I have worked in middle class schools and downtown schools. In the latter case, the kids don’t have the same support at home. They also don’t have books to read, have anyone to read to them, nor do they always have computers. My point is that we were the same teachers in each place but I would bet the standardized test results were quite different.
So, should we be fired for the outcomes in one school compared to the other?
In other words, a single evaluation method like that t’is not as easy as some think. It certainly isn’t fair when all things are considered.
Meaning, while I am all for education reform, using standardized tests alone cannot test teacher ability or effectiveness. I think Harris had the right idea with some kind of paper re-qualification test every five years. Plus, why not re-institute ministry of education inspectors to check on teachers on a random basis. They do it for private schools, so why not all schools.
Doug — re another comment you made on July 22nd at 3:24pm. There was no teacher bashing during the Harris years. That was union paranoia because he wanted some type of teacher testing. Moreover, there was not a teacher shortage because of anything Harris did.
For example, during the 1995 campaign (I was a PC riding communications chair so I remember) the unions claimed 10,000 teachers would be fired if a PC government was elected. When, in fact, 10,000 were eventually hired.
Re nurses, it was hospital administrators who fired the nurses. Harris removed $400 million from hospitals to put into homecare and long-term care. He expected the top heavy administrations would be cut. Instead, they cut the front line workers. In fact, I ended up in an ICU in that period and overheard nurses talking about being laid off when the hospital I was in had just hired three more accountants to deal with the cuts. But, remember, both the health care and education budget grew during both Harris’ mandates.
So, please don’t generalize and make things up.
Disagree totally with the first part of your post Sandy. If parents had a union I could award you with the “parent basher” label for joining the pile-on.
Not all parents are created equal. However, the system learns very quickly how to manipulate and yes even push parents to behave badly. Some parents are simply creeps but at the end of the day it is you, the educator who they’re spending the bulk of their days with.
If my child was spending 5 hours a day at the dentist, you better believe I’d want to know what was going on and have something to look and can compare to see the results of him/her spending time there.
I agree pretty much with the rest of your post.
“Why is the Canadian education establishment so resistant to teacher quality reform initiatives?”
Because it may make “the blob” look bad…or worse.
“Who is really calling the tune – provincial education authorities or the Canadian Teachers Federation backed by the CEA? ”
A combination of both who tend to morph to “blob” when it suits them.
“Should we put much stock in the assessment of teacher unionists who defend the status quo and still oppose the current student testing programs? ”
No. At some point what matters needs to be measured as proof that a student is in fact “educated” having attained proficiency in the basic skills.
“If teacher unionists remain cool to testing, then why would we ever expect them to embrace student test based teacher evaluation? ”
The best question of the bunch Paul. Perhaps the teacher unionist mentality, especially of those who can’t get jobs in Ontario currently will bring new acceptance with them as not all individual teachers jive with the union hierarchy. We know it and they know it.
I read earlier that Doug would like to retain a “low accountability and high trust” ratio. I believe Ben Levin is big on low accountability also. Sounds like exactly what a teacher/unionist would currently say and support.
One question is this.
If in provinces like NS student enrolment continues to plummet, and budgets continue to be cut, will the teacher/unionists look inward and explore student test based evaluation?
How long can they continue to resist teacher quality reform before the BLOB determines they have reached a critical point?
Interesting point Catherine makes in that not all teachers jive with the union hierarchy.
We have to be careful. Everything that is wrong with the teaching profession can not be laid at the feet of the teachers’ unions. You allocate more power to them than they deserve. No, as I said on my own blog, look also to the politicians. Things had begun to change during the Harris years, and yes, the unions felt threatened. But, new curriculum was implemented and teacher upgrading was going on. It was none other than Gerard Kennedy who cancelled everything the unions didn’t like.
In truth, there are no easy answers as they will find out, in time, in the U.S. What they will be left with are teachers who can teach only to the test and not the think-for-themselves, research and creative problem solving the children and youth will need once they are adults.
I don’t agree. I think that the teacher unions have done their fair share of contributing to preserving and protecting some of those “blob” notions that may have fit into a 20th Century public system that which thanks in large part to the myths around school reform and school choice created by the unions(and their parent groups), has not moved us into the 21st Century.
Lost in the rancour of positional ping pong is the valid question at the heart of this issue.
Teachers, like everyone else, vary in attitude and ability. Their personal and professional circumstances also vary. Consequently, the quality of their teaching varies. I have never heard any credible spokesperson, on either side of this debate, say otherwise.
The question then is, What shall we do to maximize the quality of teaching by supporting the continuous learning and improvement of the vast majority of successful teachers and deal with the inevitable, but very rare instance of incompetent or misbehaving teachers?
Currently, we depend upon the supervision of administrators. This is imperfect, and limited by vigilant union defence of due process that sometimes seems to cross over into the unbelievable but which is fundamentally fair and essential to an effective system. It is also limited by the ability to clearly evaluate and “grade” teacher effectiveness in a complex process that “batch processes” a very diverse student body. Nobody things this approach is ideal but no superior and affordable alternative has been found. (Technology seems to hold some promise here but that is a different discussion and, in any event, the potential is not yet realized.)
Problems of “under funding” are, I believe, genuine but also a distraction in this debate. There will never be sufficient funding to do what could be one in education if we could apply what we know to the fullest extent for all students. The same is true in health and probably in all areas of human endeavour. If we can step out of the blame game perhaps we can own this real world challenge jointly and stop letting it obscure the also valid question of quality assurance. Both deserve attention and neither excuses the other.
If there were a reliable way to fairly evaluate teaching, I believe that all responsible people would support its use – subject, of course, to the due process that all should expect, whether teacher, student, administrator or parent.
So, the remaining question is, How might such an evaluation process work? To date, I am not aware of a widely accepted answer to that question. Perhaps one will be developed but at the moment the complexity of the learning-teaching relationship seems to defy such efforts. The same, of course, is true in most other professions since one of the defining characteristics of a “profession” is a unique body of knowledge that cannot be systematized in a way that permits training and thus mass access to the skills. Professionals, almost by definition, work in complex systems.
In the professions we depend on social status and remuneration that will attract quality candidates, high standards of preservice training, ongoing inservice learning and oversight by a “college” composed of professionals and the public that sets standards training and investigates complaints of misconduct or incompetence.
While we await a professional assessment system that I personally doubt we are likely to see in the near future (in education any more than health or law or engineering), I would suggest that greater attention be paid to making the “college” system really work. Here in BC it has not done so, but it could and it seems to me to be the best way to pursue the quality assurance that everyone would like to see.
I cna’t speak about other unions but the NSTU (Nova Scotia Teachers Union) is a farce.
I cannot name a single education reform notion that is not simply incorrect. Teachers do not resist them because the union says so. The union resists them because the teachers say you must fight charters, vouchers, merit pay, testing, teacher testing, longer hours, etc etc to your last breath and to our last nickel. Only the profoundly ill informed or the ill intentioned would support this nonsense.
Teachers unions BTW are nobodies business but the teachers.
“Teachers unions by the way are nobodies business but the teachers.”
I always believed teacher’s unions helped improve teachers salaries.
Even though it is not my business, I wonder where the teachers remuneration comes from?
“Teachers unions by the way are nobodies business but the teachers.”
Until they use children as pawn in disputes and puppet parent groups to do their bidding.
At that point all bets are off and it very much IS the business of parents and communities.
They are in the public system by choice and are definitely the public’s business.
The
If you want private go join the UAW.
So I’ll ask the same question I asked when the word “accountability” was being bandied about.
At that time not a single person in this forum was able to establish a criteria and a way to measure “accountability” yet all we heard was that the public education system “must be held accountable”.
How do you propose testing teachers?
What would be the criteria?
How would it be measured?
Here’s another one. I am a classroom teacher for highschool, and I have been a teacher of the primary grades also. I know that here in BC it is common for teachers to “fake pass” students. I have been personally told by a Director of Instruction that there are many ways to interpret the IRPs. He says “We teach students, not curriculum.” which means, we teach nothing because the kids can’t do anything, and then pass them on to next year. To me this is the problem why my 16/17 year old high-school students can’t read analogue clocks, or don’t know what a ‘dime’ is or can’t read the difference between the words ‘house’ and ‘horse’. The teachers and schools cheat b/c there is no way for students now to actually pass these exams. This is not b/c the students are stupid, it is b/c they haven’t been taught anything in this progressivist morass called public schools. Cheating is the new standard. Malkin, any thoughts on this? Is it the same in Ontario?
Posted by madteacher on 07/20 at 03:27 PM
I cut and pasted this from the SQE site last week.
Something`s very wrong with the curriculum..
Now,we have EQAO,THE TROUBLE IS THERE ARE NO CONSEQUENCES FOR THE BOARDS THAT GET LOW GRADE 3, 6 AND 10 SCORES…
Why bother?
There is everybody else in the democratic world and some that are not so democratic world who are progressing each year very well. Then there is the USA which is blinded by its hedgemonic “ONLY BUSINESS KNOWS…PUBLIC BAD – PRIVATE GOOD” nonsense that nobody else believes. As a result they are #19 and probably falling. They are doing everything in the reform playbook which essentially means they are doing everything wrong.
As you can see the nations with the low accountability/high trust ratio are surging ahead. The nation with the high accountability/ low trusts ratio is stagnating.
They are no model to anybody about anything least of all teacher accountability. They are thye only ones with a problem.
I am speaking apples,you are speaking vegetables..why is there no consequences when a board only teaches half their children to read by grade 3?
Bruce, seeing as you are here, many of us believe you can definitely assess and be accountable when it comes to teaching students to read. We`d like to see 90% of all students learn rather than 50% in many school boards.
Just look at what those in the know like Linda Siegel had to say about B.C.`recent new policy manual about early reading instruction. (Editor: Forwarded to you by e-mail)
The B.C. Primary Program draft document is inaccurate and misleading in the area of literacy. Hopefully, the document will undergo substantial revision in this area.
Who would dish out the “consequences”?
What would theybe?
Who would suffer the consequences?
1.MOE-consequence givers,some shame also by going on a list of you are not doing well…
2.3 years to do better to get their students reading
3.The Internet is rich with reading research,that`s why there`s no excuse any more,they will have to clamour to do better.
4.if they move to 15%-20% improvement they are on their way to an accountable model,next time they`ll do even better.
5.If not,people get fired or replaced.There was a board like that in Alberta 1 and a half years ago,the graduation rates were so bad,they were fired and the Minister hired a watchdog..trustees were also fired .The Ministry representative hired new staff…
I wonder what their mode of improvement will be,will they figure it out?
How do you propose testing teachers?
What would be the criteria?
How would it be measured?
Oh, and who would pay for this new group of educrats?
Northland School Division-the Minister put in a Ministry appointed Deputy to change management…they replaced the trustees and the Superintendents,2 of them.
I am talking about instilling anxiety.
Will change of management cut it?
No,change of instruction would help…
I am watching to see what they do.
In Ontario we have a similar board,they get away with all of it annually,not a peep from the Ministry saying,you better improve or we`ll take away your authority…
I believe in teacher training in the areas of empirical evidenced pedagogy-then testing.
In content subject matter I believe more in the role of the individual,there are teachers who are incredible at teaching Geography..why not video them and mentor other staff with them;I`m not against standardized curriculums and lesson plans,actually I believe in them,as long as they`re developed on kids and not just “written”:).A collective team in schools for different subjects could have the job if the teachers would be willing to work more than 6 hours per day,as stipulated by the Unions..oh my.
You can`t hear a mouse by 4 pm!
How do you propose testing teachers?
What would be the criteria?
How would it be measured?
Who would pay for this new group of educrats?
I didn`t say test them,I said offer up consequences for sloppy results and create anxiety-like a kid who won`t go to summer camp if he fails,he`ll go to summer school.
Why is there no consequence for failure…
One of our regulars, Andrew Gilmour, keeps asking us to tackle the question of defining “accountability” in education. “What does accountability mean?” is a perplexing question because far too many educators go to great lengths to obscure its meaning and “corporatizers” discuss it with the sophistication of a butcher wielding a meat cleaver.
Back in the spring of 2011, the Society for Quality Education held a Toronto Symposium on “School Accountability” subtitled “Measuring Up.” I attended the afternoon session and spoke on a panel where it was discussed, but — again– not really explored in any great detail. Several speakers dismissed the issue with the glib statement that “there is none” in public education.
Most educators have great difficulty addressing “school accountability” because it is so rare in the field. Since the 1960s, students have been assessed more for “effort” than actual achievement and that is when it started and became ingrained in public school culture. How much effort you expend has come to mean more than what you actually achieve in the peculiar world of public education.
Defining teacher accountability is a little like trying to nail jelly to the wall under the current regime. Teacher hiring, evaluation, and tenure all support the prevailing view that “process” and “effort” mean more than ” content” and “achievement.” Most student and all teacher evaluation was simply “peer-referenced” and driven by the “god of self-esteem.” One notable exception to the pattern was Larry Lezotte’s abortive Effective Schools movement and the rather feeble “teacher effectiveness” tools.
The Coalition for Education Reform booklets, NOT Good Enough series, written by Bill Robson in the mid-1990s, remain the best explanation of how the whole Ontario system was effectively “dumbed-down” and converted into an exercise in “social promotion” for those who played by the rules. (Beg, borrow or steal a remaindered copy today)
Student testing and accountability measures have begun to right the balance, since the mid-1990s. Students are now tested and evaluated by “criterion-based” forms of evaluation. One important indicator was the rapid growth of the IB Diploma program, based on higher academic standards and “criterion-referenced” examinations. Many of the provincial and state testing regimes have set their own “standards” and introduced the tiresome phrase “meeting standards” or “expectations.” That was unheard of at the height of educational progressivism when, to quote The Toronto Star, the operative principle was “Do Your Own Thing.”
Teacher evaluation is the last frontier of non-accountability. Leading educators who resisted “standardized testing” have no interest in seeing the same principles applied to their own profession. That is the main stumbling block and the teacher unions are still on sentry duty protecting the fortress.
The D.C. IMPACT model is fascinating because it challenges directly the notion that teachers can never be evaluated according to any valid, research -based set of criteria. Effectiveness is clearly defined in the model and teachers are assessed on a four-tier scale where classroom observation reports account for 50% of the evaluation. Student test results are only factored in at 33% where they exist in certain grades and subjects. The IMPACT model may not be perfect, and needs to be compared with the competing Cincinnati and Montgomery County models.
We do need measurable standards in public education and so do teachers. The IMPACT model was definitely “ramrodded” in, but it has its merits. It’s proving that teachers can be evaluated in terms of their actual effectiveness and exploding one more myth in public education. The only question now is when it will take root in Canada and attract the attention of our slumbering provincial education authorities.
Interesting, Paul, but here at the AVRSB, “testing” the teachers would be highly unfair even if an objective testing method existed.
How can teachers be objectively evaluated (a much better term, in my opinion) when they are micro-managed by the board office?
How can they be objectively evaluated when they have been reduced to delivering corporate-bought “systems” rather than teaching?
Interesting also Andrew, because on the south shore acountability has recently been challengeded by a member of the elected school board. The question is will the Minister follow through.
If board staff and school boards can’t govern with accountability, how can we expect teacher evaluation to ever become a reality here in Canada?
Through direct challenges to the system. Interesting that Cape Breton students are beginning to just that.
Perhaps we wouldn’t be so hard on union and teachers IF that education “partner” EVER admitted its failings and take responsibility for some of what’s wrong with the system today.
I can’t say as I’ve ever heard a union do that….anyone else?
I can’t say as I’ve ever heard a union do that….anyone else?
________________________________________________
The NSTU certainly hasn’t the time to do that. They’re too busy trying to not look overly inept and ridiculous.
“The Coalition for Education Reform booklets, NOT Good Enough series, written by Bill Robson in the mid-1990s, remain the best explanation of how the whole Ontario system was effectively “dumbed-down” and converted into an exercise in “social promotion” for those who played by the rules. (Beg, borrow or steal a remaindered copy today)”
Maybe it’s time for a third installment Paul? There are many still around, like me who helped contribute to NOT Good Enough, and STILL Not Good Enough.
At the time those were cutting edge and told the truth.
I see it as hiding their head in the sand,if they admit the smoke and mirrors and lack of accountability,they have to do something about it.
I still think the MOE has a responsibility to it`s citizens.
I was in touch with Nova Scotia who is dumping Reading Recovery.I still have not seen ONE word about phonological awareness,phonemic awareness,phonics,training teachers….
That`s called ignoring research!Ego drives the train.
“Teacher evaluation is the last frontier of non-accountability. Leading educators who resisted “standardized testing” have no interest in seeing the same principles applied to their own profession. That is the main stumbling block and the teacher unions are still on sentry duty protecting the fortress”
Excellent paragraph Paul…and accurate in my opinion.
I have to add that the all of the resistance to testing, and especially teacher testing make the public suspicious of teachers….and so I think that the marketing strategy of the teacher unions against testing is having a more negative effect on perception by the public than ever before.
It gets even dumber than that, Jo-Anne.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2011/03/16/ns-reading-recovery-teacher.html
Exactly!Citizens of merit need to sit on these boards and watch out for our money,this is appalling.
Like our lovely Smitherman E health scandal,bureaucrats don`t give a #%$&@ about our money or accountability.
We need watchdogs.
I know Catherine but I`m still sympathetic.
Because ego runs the teacher licensing divisions at Universities,in K-3 teachers aren`t given the tools in teaching Reading,my obsession,you are all probably sick of hearing me go on but seriously,I have had several teachers tell me and it`s corroborated by Ed Week recently that most teachers are never informed to the methodology of teaching Reading.
20% of kids will learn if they are locked in a closet,20% will learn with ease…the other 60% will always flounder!
The International Reading Association responsible for disseminating the flawed myth in the first place has never back tracked even after it was absolutely confirmed by 1995 how kids need to learn the sounds to learn to read and spell properly,they don`t need JUST exposure to words and memorization of words for Friday`s test.
There is also I am told fuzzy math instruction and a lack of arithmetic instruction.Word problems prevail the current curriculums,try to do the work if you`re mainly guessing at the words!
For the above reasons I feel the legislation for Reading Instruction across Canada has to change and research has to be honoured.How can I blame teacher and test her if she was never trained.
I think the answer is in consequences,if they`re severe enough there will be a scrambling to try and do better,they will search out their own solutions.
1) We really don’t have an issue of teacher quality in Canada
2) Our 15 year olds are the world’s best readers
3) Our science and math are good given the amount of time on task we devote to it compared to Asian nations.My wife grew up in Hong Kong. They had a math specialist teacher since grade 2 and at least one hour per day that could not be compromised. We have neither a teacher problem nor a learning problem.
The question is a little odd to me. Why do unions disagree with and fight reform? Of course it depends on how you define reform. Lately it has meant far right wing neo-conservative privatization reform in the form of charters, vouchers, merit pay, testing, teacher testing and the minor issues that tag along in the slip stream of these reforms.
The teachers themselves along with the teachers unions HATE every one of these reforms and will fight them forever with every weapon in their arsenal. Unions and teachers consider these to be ‘the policies of the ignorant’. The teachers unions fully expect these reforms to crash and burn in the parts of the USA where they arrive.
Already it is clear that most charters are failing, vouchers have not delivered in Wisconsin, NYC is abandoning merit pay. Daniel Willingham can demostrate convincingly that VAA assessment of teachers doesn’t work. Student testing is having no effect on American results. Testing everywhere only demonstrates overwhelmingly that results are a poverty problem not a teacher problem or an instruction problem.
The reforms advocated by the reform movement are based on some deep structure hidden agendas that most Canadians do not want. These are primarily the introduction of more religions into schools and the privatization of education so that some very big players can make some big money and leave public education for the kids that live in public housing.
The above is not Doug Little talking. I have been in on all of the high level discussions on this. The teachers see neo-con reform as “the Great Satan” and will continue relentlessly until the reform movement gives up or comes to see that their reforms are ill-conceived, wrong headed and most of all, 180 degress in contradiction to the rapid improvement of the nations going in the opposite direction.
You`re an exemplary Union member.
I think your e mail perfectly articulates the fear you all have that you`ve been found out!
“teachers unions HATE everyone of these reforms…”
Mediocratic extremism!
Steven,thank you.
Perfectly stated,I personally had to look it up.
Your synthesized remark is thrillingly accurate.
http://www.celiagreen.com/tassano/meaning-of-mediocracy.htm
Though blind to the mediocrity that is infusing public education, Doug definitely has a point about the word “reform”. The term has morphed into a variety of different interpretations of convenience by the propaganda machines of the different groups.
We might want to simply use the word “improve” when referring to “improving” public education.
Good point!.
Interesting that the painter Lucien Freud, 88 years old, passed on to the the big studio in the sky. A painter working in a post modern mediocracy, he was difficult to catagorize with critics. The following statement by Freud (nephew to Sigmund) could also relate to the need to reform/improve teacher evaluation:
“I think the most dangerous thing for an artist to do is be pleased with one’s work simply because it is one’s own. One wants every picture to be better than one’s predecessors – otherwise, what’s the point.”
To continue to rely on the supervision of administrators in Canada’s public education system who are not intent on finding a new dynamic to improve teacher evaluation leaves me wondering then what is the point?
Facinating deductions by Tassano.
We are #3 in the entire world.
#1 Finland has a much smaller poverty basis and a much more rigorous teacher development program but is still only very slightly ahead.
#2 Korea has much longer hours, after school tutorials, a national obsession with education and is only slightly ahead.
#3 Us.
Yet what do we do? Look for inspiration from the one basket case nation in education that could not organize a line-up to the washroom. They are the world’s worst role model.
Churchill – “the USA will always do the right thing having exhaused all other possibilities.”
The USA is going through a right wing reform period. It will fail and make no difference to American achievement. Most can see those areas under reform influence are already failing. At that point, the USA might join the rest of the world in a low accountability/high respect mode and begin to make some progress.
We are #3 in the entire world.
____________________________________________________________
Were.
We have been going downhill.
Where we stand now, I couldn’t say.
As to NS we were ranked somewhere in the mid 30s and are getting worse.
You`re like a painter who paints over the peeling paint.
You reduce everything to oversimplification-my new word,mediocracy.
There is so much room for improvement,why balk so earnestly and wish to retain the status quo so adamantly?
Because you love it just as it is!
Teachers come first in New Brunswick, certainly in the eyes of provincial archivists and educators.
The Spring 2011 edition of the Associates of the PANB Silhouettes Newsletter features a lead story entitled “From pen to pension” and purports to be a history of the entire New Brunswick education system. The article recounts the story of the rise of teacher unionism and its benefits for teachers.
It’s an enduring fable speaking to the blinkered view shared by too many educators. The unmistakable message: the system exists for teachers.
“It’s an enduring fable speaking to the blinkered view shared by too many educators. The unmistakable message: the system exists for teachers.”
Perfectly stated and that`s what has to change.
Here is the reason school choice has to exist,the system won`t change,unless it has to.
Just look at the defiant posts by Doug and the ridiculous rationalizations for the status quo.
“The unmistakable message: the system exists for teachers.”
Nothing new in that at all Paul. It’s been stated here often and it doesn’t take many long at all to reach that gem of reality.
Status Quo is a bumper sticker. The message is that you must favour MY reforms or you like the status quo. Neither I nor the teachers`unions favour the status quo at all.
We advocate:
1) Much more money being spent. Our kids deserve it.
2) Much smaller classes in poor areas. The deserve it even more, close the gap.
3) Much more summer learning activities for the poor to mitigate the `summer slide`
4) Much more extensive evening help for the poor such as Pathways.
5) Rapid development of the ECE-ELP and its downwand extension to 2 year olds as we can afford it.
6) A great deal more support staff
7) Higher standards for teachers entering the profession
8) An end to the EQAO (Ontario) and similar across Canada.
9) Higher salaries for teachers
10) Much bigger budgets for resources including new technology, smart boards, electronic readers,
11) Free tuition + living allowances for post secondary.
That does not sound like the status quo to me. That sounds like a formula for success.
Make Canada number 1 in the world. We can do it. Formula above.
2) Much smaller classes in poor areas. The deserve it even more, close the gap.
___________________________________________________________
No they don’t. All children are equally deserving. Methinks that you are engaged in class warfare rather than in improving public education.
11) Free tuition + living allowances for post secondary.
___________________________________________________________
The grand deception is right here: FREE
If I emailed this to my mother she would say “road apples.”
Higher standards are achieved by continuous assessment and evalution, with a critical eye for improving teacher training methods and skills to ensure students get the basics where ever they may reside. Not a pompus wish list made up of assertions intended to create an educational playground for the BLOB.
I applaud your response!
Typically, Doug again speaks for himself. Not many teachers in my family would support that list.
It’s more ammunition that puts adults before children.
There are very few worker bees who don’t claim massive spending on their part of society is absolutely vital and teachers are no exception. The problem is that massive spending increases on education would be done at the expense of other, equally useful, things.
If, as we keep being told, our education system is among the best in the world that’d suggest that we’re already spending perfectly adequate resources on it. The claim that we should spend massive amounts more in order to be “#1”! is more about ego than substance.
You can only milk the “for the kids!!” for so long.
On a personal note I’d be intrigued to see how much money is spent that is only vaguely related to being used if kids are the top priority. I suspect you’d find all sorts of money goes to things that are very questionable in terms of providing any real benefit to kids.
Trouble is,with no accountability and an adult centric system,some of these requests will find the funding the way of Wall Street,in the teacher`s pockets.
Curious,does it concern you that EQAO exposes the neglect and lack of achievement in so may students?LOL
Vito Perrone former Dean of the Graduate School of Education at Harvard:
“Standardized testing does not tell us anything that we didn’t already know.”
Curious for the reformers. The results of testing prove over and over again that the poor do badly helping create the demand that more money be spent on the poor, classes be made smaller, ELP etc etc. To that extent testing is helpful. It also proves only the poor need help. It rather makes the case for the left that leftwing solutions are the ones needed but we do wonder how many times we must prove the same thing.
It`s not just the poor ,far from it.
We need teachers here,perhaps Sandy will return tomorrow.
I ran a reading clinic,there are many children with no poverty issues whatsoever that have weak phonemic awareness,the symptom that identifies a kid early to probable problems with reading.
We also have the ABT kids,Ain`t been taught.
Try to engage a child in Gade 4 and 5 and reduce their school phobia and tame their behaviour when they have this problem.
Several years ago my wife taught a Grade 7 class for 3 months.
She was having all kinds of trouble getting them to do or understand anything. It turned out that, with two or three exceptions, they were at the Grade 4 level in literacty.
This was at a school in the Annapolis Valley Regional School Board.
Thank You Andrew,there`s more of this than you could ever imagine!
If teachers would write in anonymously they would tell us their stories.
It becomes impossible to teach the later year curriculum due to the weak literacy abilities of the students,”swept merrily”under the carpet.
If teachers would write in anonymously they would tell us their stories.
_______________________________________________________
I have tried to get them to do that. I even offered to sign a contract that guaranteed them their anonymity.
All refused – being afraid of the Annapolis Valley Regional School Board and the Nova Scotia Teachers Union and losing their jobs.
I think , also in the situation of NS’s southshore, Andrew may be correct here.
I have attended SAC meetings where if issues related to school reviews, impact assessments, accountability, or generally anything which might cause contention and be anethema to school board policy, teachers remain mysteriously silent. That is untill it is time to vote on recommendations guided by the admin.
I would truely love to witness a public debate on the issue of teacher quality reform and student test based evaluation amonst teachers without the union in the room.
Andrew – it’s called a “culture of fear” bread into the school system by the unions with help in indoctrination by teacher faculties.
I would bet that teacher apathy and how they view themselves has much to do with how much of a closed shop the teachers are forced to endure.
What is the top country in the entire world in the reading level of 15 year olds? Answer? Canada.
What is the top country in the entire world in the reading level of 15 year olds? Answer? Canada.
_____________________________________________________________
When?
Now.
http://educationviews.org/2011/07/24/why-%e2%80%98no-excuses%e2%80%99-makes-no-sense-revisiting-the-coleman-report/
#3 now. Singapore, HK and Shanghai are not countries. The last 2 are at the top of China which lags way back but moving up fast.
Ok, compare Nova Scotia with Singapore and Hong Kong.
Reluctant to post the year that Canada allegedly was No. 1, Doug?
Paul did a whole blog on this in December
Click to access PISA2009-can-report.pdf
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-teachers-20110615,0,7804604.story
” It also proves only the poor need help. It rather makes the case for the left that leftwing solutions are the ones needed but we do wonder how many times we must prove the same thing.”
Reflecting on your last message I must say this is the sound bite that diminishes you the most extensively.
Also Doug,I have never ever read statements that are more diminishing,absurd and uncaring towards children.
Children who struggle need early intervention of significance and support so they don`t fall behind.Falling behind is DANGEROUS!
You sound like one of those school board superintendents who yawn as the EQAO scores show only 1 in 2 kids are learning in Grade 3-they say,oh yes,we have so many new immigrants in our schools,or we have so many First Nations students in our school,then in Grade 4 we see they identify a block of 30% of their kids for accommodation,the whole special ed ,testing gang moves in.
Yes Doug PISA BLAH BLAH BLAH.There are huge problems in large numbers of kids and early grade concern and detailed awareness and intervention are direly needed as is an instruction change and faculties that honour research when training their teachers instead of opinion.
I met a Special Ed Professor from OISE at a show who`s never read the National Reading Panel Synopsis,how can that be?She asked for a copy.
Complete sloppiness.
In great hospitals, people die. Great lawyers lose cases. If you are looking for perfection you will never be satisfied. My goal is for Canada to be #1 with a wide gap over #2. This is something we could easily do with proper funding and focus.
Ya those vouchers are great at blocking out disabled kids.
http://www.care2.com/causes/aclu-sues-over-wisconsin-voucher-program.html
Maybe we’d be better charging absurdly high “tuitions” or marketing to a specific ethnic groups? That’s a model of “blocking out” the vast majority pf kids and yet some here do it every day.
Which vouchers are those (in Ontario) that are causing so many problems?
We have no vouchers in Ontario;he`s speaking U.S.
“In great hospitals, people die. Great lawyers lose cases. If you are looking for perfection you will never be satisfied. My goal is for Canada to be #1 with a wide gap over #2. This is something we could easily do with proper funding and focus.”
People die from illnesses that have no cure-Reading problems have cures,your Union simply doesn’t offer them,too busy raking in the money for the pension and too busy running human complexity establishment like schools with broad strokes and sweeping meaningless statements .
Ah. More irrelevant chatter, then.
Prime example…
We have a hot tub and had the water tested on Saturday.
Among the notes was: Checkpukes.
Huh?
My wife the teacher was able to translate: Check pucks.
Jo-Anne, you may be interested in my latest post. I have been working on it on and off all day. http://crux-of-the-matter.com/2011/07/24/what-is-dyslexia-what-can-be-done-about-it/
Regarding the discussion here, I am uncertain what to say. When I shared a personal experience I had back when I taught Grade 5, Catherine accused me of being close to parent bashing. Learning is not a passive activity, that’s the bottom line. Kids have to buy into what the teacher is teaching. Kids also have differing levels of ability. They are not all going to get As. Yet, I get the feeling that unless all the students in any given territory get the same type of results on standardized tests, the teachers are to blame.
Plus, the reality is that parent expectations really have changed. When I was a kid, if you got in trouble at school, you got in trouble at home. Now, it is the exact reverse and the kids know it. No, whether anyone here agrees or not, parent expectations and interference are big issues with teachers. When I taught university, it was not uncommon, for example, if I gave a student a grade he or she disagreed with, that I would get a telephone call or e-mail from their parents.
On Jo-Anne’s issue regarding reading, as a reading specialist myself, I can understand completely where she is coming from. However, the reality is that it would be impossible to teach inexperienced teacher trainees the skills Jo-Anne knows — the basic of learning to read, of course, but the indepth work, no. That is for instructional resource or special education teachers to know and even then, I have taught the intro special education “Additional Qualification” course and there isn’t time for any topic in any depth.
I mean, I did a full years post-doctoral clinical in the Brock University Reading Clinic before I felt ready to open my own practice.
But, the thing is, even my saying these things may look like I am making excuses or defending the status quo. Well, all I can do is share my own views and experiences.
For example, Andrew I believe asked about criteria for testing teachers or teacher evaluation. It is not as easy as many non-educators think and that is not an excuse.
To begin with, you can’t know where you are going if you don’t have a road map. And, so, teachers have to first identify their aims and objectives in any given subject area and unit of study — which is what principals use to evaluate them.
But aims and objectives can vary from teacher to teacher — even though they end up teaching the kids the same skills, they can do that in whatever way fits their personality and training. Aims and objectives set a clear direction, for example, on what content and skills will be taught, what resources will be used and how the students will be evaluated for their report cards.
For example, at the Grade 5 level, there is still a social studies unit on “Flight.” When I taught at that level, the teacher in the next classroom had to teach the same unit. Yet, we did it completely differently. One of my activities was a class trip to the Niagara-on-the-Lake Airport where we would break up into small groups, with parent helpers, and take turns flying over our school. Then, I would have the pilot (I can still remember his name was Ross) come to our class and talk about how the plane gets off the ground. The students worked on projects using research materials from the school library and photos we took during our flight. My neighbour teacher colleague, on the other hand, used only books on flight and having the kids give a speech on their experiences flying (most had). In either case, we ended up with very similar projects and course tests. So, what would the criteria be for evaluating each of us? The fact our aims and objectives were met? Even though we reached them differently?
In other words, there is no one criteria from which to judge a teacher’s instructional behaviour, apart from having covered the expectations in the ministry guidelines. That is why I suggested a paper test and spontaneous visits from a Ministry of Ed inspector (the same ones who visit private schools now and yes paid for by taxpayers).
Plus, if I were to explain that pre-service prospective teachers are taught that professionalism means you don’t ever speak publicly against a colleague or your employer, Catherine would say that was indoctrination –as she did in an earlier comment.Yet, it is no different in the legal and medical professions. You rarely hear any nurse, for example, bad mouth her hospital or another colleague.
Reform for reform sake is not what is needed, apart from moving away from the social promotion and no-fail policies — and that is gradually happening I hear.
Beyond that, I really can’t say because I have been out of the system for several years now.
As I have said repeatedly, go after the politicians, because going after the teachers’ unions is not going to bring about change. They simply do what they do and nothing is going to change that. And, collective bargaining is a right in Canada, something we shouldn’t forget.
Sorry for how long this comment is. Hopefully, it will add to the discussion. If not, I won’t intrude on Paul’s blog again.
“When I shared a personal experience I had back when I taught Grade 5, Catherine accused me of being close to parent bashing”
You’ve taken what I wrote out of context Sandy. Here’s what I wrote
“If parents had a union I could award you with the “parent basher” label for joining the pile-on.”
If some of us here, and we’ve seen it a few times before, ever started talking about our experiences with bad teachers we’d be slapped with a “teacher-bashing” label very quickly.
If we’re going to list by experience as proof of whose fault the failings of public education are I”m sure that parents could give you prime examples of their own, just as you have.
Our experiences are just as worthy and important in this discussion as those of educators. Both should be equally valued but they’re not.
Most parents I’ve worked with and the ones posting here know full well that there’s more to teacher testing and student testing than pen&paper assessments. We’re not stupid.
“Yet, I get the feeling that unless all the students in any given territory get the same type of results on standardized tests, the teachers are to blame. ”
nowhere on this blog have I read anything from anyone whose suggested this.
You’re right – times have changed from when you did many things involving education.
Parent “interference” as you call it is often give to parents who ask very good questions and have figured out just what kind of an education they want for their children….and the kind they don’t want.
I wish ALL parents were as interfering as parents of special needs kids because quite frankly that’s what advocating is all about.
I don’t consider expecting a public system which touts that it’s quality, to be able to educate children and provide proof of that happening.
If you’re expecting parents to lower their expectations or to simply sit on the sidelines forever more it’s simply not going to happen.
Not when in Ontario parents are being paid by their own money to be involved in their schools, and especially not when we’re moving more toward choice…not away from it.
“If you’re expecting parents to lower their expectations or to simply sit on the sidelines forever more it’s simply not going to happen.”
Agreed.
The “reform” crowd would love to bring vouchers to Canada so they can discriminate against special ed kids here as well.
Jo Anne is lost fighting the vast left wing conspiracy to make sure kids can’t read. We must be doing very badly though, Canadian teachers are the world’s best reading teachers but lets see what we can learn from the USA good old #16 in reading.
I bet special needs parents would be the first ones in-line for vouchers, followed closely by the low-socio economic families who are driving the increase in vouchers state side.
It`s a heated subject ,a complex one to get things better,not because it`s not doable,it easily is if we could just get the legislation right.
Reading research from 1995 has to be honoured,like a discovery for a medical condition,again,read Sally Shaywitz,Yale,Overcoming Dyslexia.
It`s the honourable thing to do in every province and If I can speak to Sandy momentarily,going to Politicians we go to leaders without knowledge of specifics.Even there,somehow we can`t get research honoured in school boards and we can`t get proper instruction on subjects that lay the foundation,just read Dr.John Mighton`s books on Math.
It`s a profession where anything goes,whether it`s proven to work or not.In the foundational years,this is extremely dangerous and fails many man ystudents.
The consequences are that from Grade 4 onward,the classes have several levels,more than you can imagine and getting kids to do work becomes a teacher`s nightmare.
Catherine is obviously furious from a long parental journey where educrat paycheques come from the client who is dismissed,given the run around and seldom given the time of day.
A small vignette from my clinic days,a father takes a sabbatical off work to drive a 4th grade child to a reading clinic 4 days a week for remediation;principal complains and says you can`t leave the school every day,father says if you don`t mind,you haven`t taught him to read annd spell,he`s virtually illiterate and now you`re complaining that I take him for lessons every day,my family is completyely stressed out over this matter.
Strangely,the consequence of these failures are so staggering to a child and family`s life,they need immediate attention and the kind of remediation that offers a complete reversal to these problems in 90% of children,for those who wish to read the book by Dinae McGuiness,”whay our children can’t read and what we can do about it”,your jaw will be open for half of it.
Yes,there are many levels in school children,but practically everyone should and can learn to read and write.They need instruction,not just exposure to literature…that`s been a farce that`s been going on for far too long.
Dr. Abe Kirshner was being successful with dyslexic kids as early as the 50s and 60s.
Yes,there`s been great work abandoned for the generalist inclusion model.
He may have been a student of Dr.Orton and Anna Gillingham,since the late 20`s.
Inclusion is okay if they do real intervention in the early grades.They have to do the work.
“Catherine is obviously furious”
No Joanne. Catherine is not furious. If there’s anger to be had by many parents its in assumptions being made by education experts who can’t agree on the very purpose of education or how they fit in to that.
I was trying to establish that when, as parents we want to raise issues based on our experiences we’re marginalized, or lectured, or lied to,
Some parents have as much of more education than teachers, are leaders in their communities and successful managers in their own right. They can read balance sheets, execute assessments, and raise effective questions with the teachers of their children, more so than teachers can. That makes the education of parents one of most powerful tools going.
Oops,I think I`m a reformer not an improver because a radical change in Reading instruction,teacher preparation at the faculty level,early intervention are things I feel passionate about,if the boards can`t be bothered to alter their bureaucracies to do precise teaching and stop their generalizations,ever see an IEP actually be realized,then the vouchers should be given to parents.
Anything else is just not fair!
I pay property taxes to fund PUBLIC schools not private endeavours. I’ll be the first in court to challenge anyone who wishes to do otherwise with my tax dollars.
Maybe if teachers were treated like respected professionals instead of the “bumboys” of public education we’d get a higher level of professionalism in return.
respect on all sides needs to be earned Andrew.
I teach secondary humanities in BC and am studying for a MA at the Centre for Cross-Faculty Inquiries in Education (http://ubc.academia.edu/TobeySteeves).
Without any equivocation, I found this post terribly misguided. While the author attempts to position themselves and their arguments as “in the public good”, what they’re actually doing is arguing on the basis of managerialism: It’s neoliberal ideology masquerading as ‘common sense’.
I’m also unimpressed with the normalization of the technocratization of teachers and teaching. Like Henry Giroux and wide array of others, I find this deprofessionalization narrative worthy of strong resistance.
As well, I suggest that the authors citation of the Fraser Institute and the Gates Foundation as neutral is illustrative of the unacknowledged ideologic investments conveyed through the essay. By that I mean to say that the author has endorsed politically conservative agents and positioned them as “progressive”. But the Gates Foundation defends technocratic interests. They’re corporatists. Their vision and agenda is guided by capital consolidation. And the Fraser Institute? Seriously? Have you looked into any of the critical research into the Fraser Institute’s rankings? Or did you stick with the Official Line™ and look no further afield?The author has made the suggestion that these are legitimate arbiters of “accountability”. I would suggest otherwise.
For research which specifically speaks to the issue of accountability and ed policy, I recommend:
Youdell, D. (2004). Engineering school markets, constituting schools and subjectivating students: The bureaucratic, institutional and classroom dimensions of educational triage. Journal of Education Policy, 19(4).
Webb, T. (2006). The choreography of accountability. Journal of Education Policy, 21(2).
Webb, T. (2005). The anatomy of accountability. Journal of Education Policy, 20(2).
Webb, T. (in press). The evolution of accountability. Journal of Education Policy.
Otherwise, I will make a final note expressing a degree of frustration, in sympathy with Spivak, that people who cannot be bothered to study get to make decisions for others. The accountability agenda is blatantly despotic and undemocratic. If that’s the line on teaching this blog would like to take, I would hope that future posts would be more transparent in their ideologic investments.
Curious. Are you suggesting improved accountability policy should not be put on the public agenda? (blatently despotic and undemocratic)
Are some institutes better researched and legitimate than others?
Or is this a case of which accountability agenda is best put forward for public policy anaysis?
Looking forward to Tobey’s response to your questions.
Here’s a link that worth a look Steve.
http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/blogs/reportcard/archive/2010/12/24/merry-christmas-happy-holidays-and-a-kool-aid-party.aspx
Hi Steven,
I think that’s a very important question, and I’m happy to clarify: I’m suggesting “accountability policy” functions differently than what many seem to think. Here I’m reminded of Foucault, “People know what they do; frequently they know why they do what they do; but what they don’t know is what what they do does.”
The idea that teachers should be accountable isn’t in and of itself problematic. The difficulty comes in contextualizing “accountability”: What are its horizons and lines of demarcation? What are the symmetries of power and whose interests are served? Who shall teachers be “accountable” to? Students? Parents? Society? Democracy? Capitalism?
In the global policy arena “accountability” can be seen as a major component of the neoliberal/neoconservative milieu. One of my favourite discussions of this trend is: Olssen, M., Codd, J. & O’Neill, A. (2004). Education policy: Globalization, citizenship & democracy. London, UK: Sage. The authors situate the “accountability” agenda within a broad international schematic, and provide distinguishing characteristics between different versions. For instance, in NZ the “accountability” agenda is less apparent, or in the UK where competitive neutrality is linked with “accountability” – leading to atomization, alienation, and egotism. There’s some great research being conducted on the effects of neoliberal subjectivation. These aren’t totally unexplored territories, and that makes the neutrality conveyed in Mr. Bennett’s post all the more … insidious.
More critical treatments of the “accountability” agenda worth looking into include:
De Lissovoy, N. (2010). Staging the crisis: Teaching, capital, and the politics of the subject. Curriculum Inquiry, 40(3).
Ball, S. (2003). The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2).
Such poor grammar from a teacher – especially an MA candidate.
Perhaps that speaks rather eloquently to the poor quality of our system?
There are a few things that define professionalism. The first one is control over professional decisions. The reform movement is primarily based on wrestling control of education away from teachers, not giving them control. The second to be to pay them like professionals. Almost every profession with the same level of educational requirement makes more money than teachers.
The only 2 nations that slightly nose out Canada in OECD have a profound respect for teachers, Finland and Korea. Accident? I don’t think so.
If teachers had professional associations like the other professions instead of unions they might be viewed as professionals.
Reform from a teacher POV.
BCTF document.http://bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/Publications/BetterSchoolsForBC.pdf
Link didn’t work.
The “you’re-gonna-blink-first” attitude is working out rather well.
It would appear that the only significant progress that will be made will be at the local school level and it will have to be done in spite of the “authorities/educrats”.
Tobey Steeves – Educrat extraordinaire…
The less there are of them the better public education has a chance of improving.
http://ubc.academia.edu/TobeySteeves
In one reply, instead of making any attempt to engage with matters of substance, you resort to ad hominem. This comment was followed by another in which you position yourself as unsympathetic with intellectual inquiry. Taking both together, you seem to be suggesting that you see anti-intellectualism as a functional worldview.
In contrast, I might side (again) with Girioux, H. (1988). Teachers as Intellectuals: Toward a Critical Pedagogy of Learning. If I were piecing together a rebuttal I’d also pull in Foucault & Deleuze, but there’s a thesis to be written and more research to be done…
I guess if that means in your eyes I qualify as “educat extraordinaire”, so be it.
I agree with you Andrew,please Tobey,phone Dr.Siegel at UBC on this one-no matter how much research is done,the system doesn’t follow through!
It`s unresponsive and unaccountable to the people it serves!
Otherwise, I will make a final note expressing a degree of frustration, in sympathy with Spivak, that people who cannot be bothered to study get to make decisions for others. The accountability agenda is blatantly despotic and undemocratic. If that’s the line on teaching this blog would like to take, I would hope that future posts would be more transparent in their ideologic investments.”
Hi Jo-Anne,
I think you’ve got a common impression here: The ‘divides’ between research, policy, and teachers’ practices are extreme. One of the more … intriguing takes I’ve seen on this ‘problem’ is: Birnbaum, R. (2000). Policy scholars are from venus; policy makers are from mars. The Review of Higher Education, 23(2). The author makes the argument that when policy drives research, research suffers. When research drives policy, no one can decide which research to follow – because there are so many contradictory claims. That’s how, for instance, Mr. Bennett can cite the NEA, OECD, Tony Blair, etc. in defending “accountability” as a means of improving educational outcomes. Just the same, with a little sustained attention the facade begins to crumble.
With that said, there’s a great deal of research which speaks directly to the issue of teachers’ resistance to policy. Here are two of my favourites:
Achinstein, B. & Ogawa, R. (2006). (In)Fidelity: What the resistance of new teachers reveals about professional principles and prescriptive educational policies. Harvard Educational Review, 76(1).
Zembylas, M. (2003). Interrogating ‘teacher identity’: Emotion, resistance, and self-formation. Educational Theory, 53(1).
I am only marginally familiar with Dr. Siegel’s work. My research is more specifically geared towards [critical] educational policy studies, research methodologies, and philosophy of education. Would you like to clarify her contribution to this discussion of “accountability”?
Finally, insofar as “the system” being “unresponsive and unaccountable to the people it serves”, here I think we’re in complete agreement: The educational “system” does not serve The People. This should be apparent, for instance, in all the vocationalist emphasis in educational reform. Nevertheless, I’m somewhat hesitant to blame the “system” for its lack of mobility – it seems to be moving quite quickly from my vantage. As Slavoj Zizek is prone to say, “There is a light at the end of the tunnel, but it is a train and it is coming straight for us.”
Tobey,thank you for your clarification.
I will get back to you later with some links re Dr.Siegel`s work and her frustration in not having been consulted or heard when the recent policy manual was developed.It means another 4 years of instruction that is context based in the elementary reading,literacy foundation years,a philosophy of instruction that only suits about 20% of the class.
One of the areas about education research that`s extremely problematic is the lack of “gold standard’ studies.When you have a gold standard study,they ignore it entirely,they still rule by opinion.
I know why,it`s the marriage of academia and politicians.
Somehow,we need to come up with ways to eliminate leadership by opinion.
I`ve watched the 25 million dollar a year Literacy Secretariat here ,after 8 years,just start to mention phonemic awareness,it`s reprehensible.
Also,in many subjects,it`s not about the art,it`s about the content and the delivery!
I agree with you Andrew,
______________________________________________________________
Which part?
I want to know what caused hell to freeze over.
About a professional organization rather than a Union…
The Americans cannot run their economy due to international competition from the free trade that they themselves wanted. The other nations are killing them on the other end of the “value added” economy due to better education systems that are successul due to very low levels of poverty and respect for teachers. American is running record deficits and accumulated debt primarily because Republicans, who apparently hate the government, haven’t yet noticed that military expenditure is government expenditure.
They need to spend massive amounts on prisons and the police because poverty breeds crime.
This causes an extreme anxiety due to America’s falling place in the world. Someone has to be held responsible for this, it is those teachers.
The teacher union response to reform is based on their experience that education is highly vulnerable to “band wagons” that arrive with great fanfare every decade but are gone just as quickly. They see the reform movement as one more in an endless series of “miracle cures” that don’t work. People soon see that they don’t work. …..NEXT!!!
Unless it’s the union “bandwagon” (one word, Doug), in which case it is the model of perfection.
Excellent response Andrew. I’m a big fan.
Oh the union is permanent, the rest is fleeting. Solidarity FOREVER!!!
Reform?
This to will pass.
Tobey Steeves has got you all with his verbage and all his “sources.” In one of his last comments he gave himself away. He condemns Paul for his neutrality and ideology and yet he says he is following critical theory and its guru Henry Giroux. Talk about ideology!!!
Be wary folks, very wary. Don’t let him fool you. Critical pedagogy is the most socialist of left wing views there are. Extreme. But popular in academia. I worked closely with a “critical” colleague and have heard my share of lectures on the topic. Yet, Doug will love his views because they are very much directed to the disadvantaged. Here is one link on the topic. But, there are hundreds of others — starting back with Paulo Fieire and liberation theology in the church. In other words, its foundation is neo-Marxist.
http://www.21stcenturyschools.com/Critical_Pedagogy.htm
Err… Thank you, Sandy, for providing a strong example of logical fallacy: I cited Giroux in relation to his views re. teachers as intellectuals. I would not agree with Giroux’s approach to educational research, and find serious flaw with his theoretical assumptions. This, no doubt, draws on my affection for Deleuze and Foucault – neither of which could in *any* way be considered (neo)Marxist.
With that said, I did cite Zizek, however, and he’s definitely a Marxist. And I’m also prone to citing David Harvey. (If unfamiliar, google Zizek & Harvey + “RSA animation”).
But I take even greater contestation with Zizek than Giroux (he speaks on so many more topics!), so you can’t fit me in that box either.
The point being that you seem to be making unwarranted claims and linking them with a denunciation for “critical”, “left wing”, “socialist”, “ideological” views. This conflation seems specious to me, but maybe I’m too deceived by the “disadvantaged” or “liberation theology”?
Lastly, out of curiosity, have you actually read Freire? For example, Pedagogy of Hope? Can you name particular aspects of his frame which you find inappropriate?
I can’t say that he’s fooled any one here Sandy. Read through some of his papers and it became very clear to me and others here by the posts so far.
Your comments are dead-on.
Here is a Paulo Freire link. http://www.freire.org/paulo-freire/quotes-by-paulo-freire/
And to Tobey — The Brock colleague I was talking about was none other than Peter McLaren. Here is his bio.
http://gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/pages/mclaren/bio.html
And, another which might be of interest:
http://gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/pages/mclaren/body4.html
Great guy. He probably would not remember me because I had just started teaching at Brock, but I sure remember him.
Another ideologue. Big whoops.
I find this worthy of contesting too. In what way can you imagine people communicating in a non-ideological way? What is the “analytic currency” of the concept of “ideology”? It’s quite popular in (neo)Marxist circles – in which case it implies a very particular relation to truth. This is exactly the point of Marxism which Foucault found most vulnerable to critique. For him there is no dichotomy between “ideology” and “truth”; rather, there are discourses and regimes of truth. I find this a much more agreeable position than the (neo)Marxists. You? In what way do you use “ideology” in this context and in what way does it negatively reflect on my contribution to this discussion?
And how will that teach a 6 year old to read, write, do math and think clearly?
Small world isn’t it? And, this situation is exactly what I have been talking about for the whole five years I have been blogging. There are three major paradigms regarding education — its goals and where you want to take children.
Traditional teaching and standardized testing is the quantitative or transmission orientation.
The multi-disciplinary experiental co-operative learning approach (John Dewey) is transactional and quantitative and guides most practice in schools today.
The critical pedagogy that Tobey is studying represents the transformational paradigm and action-based and phenomenology guides its practice, and is the most left wing and socialist paradigm today. It works well in countries where the citizens are oppressed and illiterate. What it looks like in practice is that when they teach literacy they do so with words and phrases that will enlighten the learners as to their oppression.
So, you see. When you talk about accountability and criteria, it depends which paradigm your world view represents and which research and its sources guides your views and practice.
Sorry to be so heavily academic but I could see where Tobey was taking you with all his “sources.”
“Three major paradigms regarding education”? Really? On what basis do you make this claim?
Does “traditional teaching” equate with ‘scholasticism’? Epicurean communitarianism? Or how about dialecticism? Are you referencing an epistemology or praxis?
Conflating “multi-disciplinary” with “interdisciplinary” and “transdisciplinary” is like suggesting there’s no meaningful difference between wine, coffee and ice cream. In this case it seems to suggest critical differences between these modalities may not be apparent to you.
And suggesting “cooperative approaches” = “Dewey” is like saying that democracy = Obama. It’s just plain wrong.
Then, when you come to characterizing the “transformational paradigm”, you fall off a cliff. “Action-based”? Huh? What? Can you point me to where this is taken up in critical pedagogy? (It’s not one of my primary fields, but I feel well qualified in fending off spurious claims of this caliber.) Do you mean to argue that critical pedagogy makes an effort to ensure that students efforts have real effects in the community, and that they are encouraged to embody active citizenship principles (as contrasted with conservative ones like voting)? If so, are you suggesting that’s a ‘bad thing’?
As well, I would absolutely positively love it if you could show me a single example of critical pedagogs advocating for phenomenology-based pedagogy. If page numbers aren’t accessible I’d settle for a reference or a name – I’ll contact them directly, if needed.
Re. “countries where the citizens are oppressed and illiterate”, do you mean to suggest the citizens of Canada are not “oppressed and illiterate”? Would you like to look at data re. indigenous populations in BC? Across Canada? Or how about ESL graduates?
Tobey — Not going to go there. Sorry. You are just too caught up in your own importance and ideology. Have a nice day.
I drove all the way to Boston to hear Paulo speak, travelled to Nicaragua to see his philosophy in action, and have heard Henry a few times. It is actually a bit to the left of my position being revolutionary. I am a democrat in western terms but I understand the revolutionary impulse when confronted with a dictator.
In one Nicaraguan class the kids were doing grammar, LOL the sentence on the board?
“The former dictator Somoza was cruel and supported by the USA.”
Now which are the nouns, Where are the verbs, Is ‘cruel’ a subjective completion?
You guys love grammar taught in a DI fashion, teacher at the front with a pointer right?
Tobey — Here is a link to my own blog if you want to know more about me. http://crux-of-the-matter.com/
Andrew — We are all ideologues, even you. None of us are without a world view that if traced can be linked to theories. Only some, like Tobey, are just more aggressive about it.
No, as soon as someone starts condemning someone else for their ideology, you just have to know exactly where they are coming from. Because, to a left winger, only those who attempt to be fair and neutral or conservative are influenced by ideology, the rest are influenced by principles, progressive principles.
I am retired Tobey and have had my share of debates with graduate students like you who are completely up to date on the literature.
Good luck with your studies! If you continue on with your Ph.D I would recommend you learn all three paradigms and their sources because you’ll need them for your comprehensives.
“to a left winger, only those who attempt to be fair and neutral or conservative are influenced by ideology, the rest are influenced by principles, progressive principles.”
This is another completely unwarranted claim. It suggests to me that you neither understand what you are critiquing nor the concepts you are employing.
Tobey — Re the paradigms, they are covered in doctoral programs. I did mine at the U of T (OISE) and we had to write 8 hour comprehensive exams on them. Just do a web search. Here is a Google page to get you started. Also, taking a sociology course would help. They guide absolutely everything. Also did my PH.D dissertation on the topic.
http://www.google.ca/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADFA_enCA335CA335&q=the+three+research+paradigms
Ok, so I’m an ideologue. Here’s my philosophy on public education
And how will that teach a year old to read, write, do math and think clearly?
http://www.slate.com/id/2299709/?from=rss
You are back using Educhatter as a Staff Room Bulletin Board, Doug.
You tend to rely on Slate and Education News sites for too many of your re-posts. How about posting something that might surprise us?
Your latest, Dana Goldstein’s Slate piece simply blames Standardized Testing for setting the stage for the Atlanta Cheating Scandal.
Alexander Russo of “This Week in Education” posted the first response to Gloldstein on the Slate website:
“i don’t think that Goldstein backs up her claims that there’s a cheating crisis, that NCLB caused it, or that teachers can’t or shouldn’t be held responsible whatever cheating has occurred ”
Simply posting it without comment or qualification is an open invitation to counter your incurable Bulletin Board tendencies (Smile)
For Tobey and Andrew who asked, so how does all this influence learning to read and write?
Excellent question Andrew. Rather than ideology, let’s simpy call our personal and professional world view, our teacher beliefs or parent beliefs about teaching and learning.
So, depending on which paradigm reflects your beliefs, you develop aims and objectives based on those beliefs. I think the easiest way to understand the differences between paradigms is to read the Miller/Seller book I link to at the end of this comment.
Prior to Hall Dennis, everyone from the teachers to the public were in the transmission/traditional teacher-directed paradigm so there was very little in the way of conflict. Now, as we know, progressivism runs the system, a philosphy that reflects the transactive and critical paradigms. So, the system is going one way and most of the public are going another.
As I mentioned to Andrew, I would recommend Tobey read the book by John Miller and Wayne Seller here http://research.kinasevych.ca/2008/07/millerseller-1990-ch-9-a-transmission-model-gagnes-instructional-design-system/
Miller was my disseration advisor and my research validated their model. The point is that research paradigms need to be broken down into their purposes and what they want to achieve, which in turn affects every field of study, be it education, psychology (e.g., Freud traditional, Adler problem solving, let’s reframe things and move on, and Karl Jung would be in the transformational), philosophy or sociology. Miller and Seller reflect how they relate to education.
The bottom line is that whenever I talk about the paradigms I am accused of being an educrat. Maybe I am. But, it is the basis upon which accountability would have to be built (that criteria Andrew talks about) so understanding how our beliefs about teaching and learning influence everything we think about and suggest, is essential.
Tobey came here with all his sources. Yet, he didn’t know how they fit into the whole picture. That is why I called him on it.
Well, when it comes to most things in my life, I tend to be a mechanic.
Whatever works is fine by me and I’ll gladly do without the philosophies.
Somebody other than me can bankroll the navel gazing.
I would agree, it reeks of “baffle them with BS”. There is no communications happening. The existance of Kumon & Oxford learning centers here in Toronto attest to the fact that the system is broken, dysteachia is harming children. I have gotten my kid out of special Ed back into the main stream by teaching him directly, homeschooling him at night to compensate for professional incompitence. If you want something done right, do it yourself & ignore the windbags.
so understanding how our beliefs about teaching and learning influence everything we think about and suggest, is essential.
_________________________________________________________
Hard, objective research (without today’s political correctness) might go a long way to disproving many “beliefs”.
http://www.nrrf.org/synthesis_research.htm
I only wish people could get out of their own egos to defer to the research.
Wow.
Interesting stuff. Real research in lieu of naval gazing.
Exactly-but the “industry experts” are” busy bees”,ignoring it completely.
When it comes to this kind of research,we need to JUST DO IT.
I recently saw a thesis from a doctoral student contesting this research based on her opinion and 20 kids.
That`s what has to stop.
In medicine,they need to do “real research”,same has to happen here,the ideologies all like tsunamis.
Err… “gold standard”, “evidence-based research” is more a problem than a solution in education. If you think the ‘medical model’ makes a comparable analog, you have misapprehended the nature of teachers’ work. See, for e.g., http://www.csun.edu/~kdm78513/coursework/625/assignments/documents/St.Pierre.pdf
I have read all the posts, and Doug’s last post is either a way to shift blame and accountability, or very naive to think an education system should be composed of two things, high respect for teachers and low levels of poverty. Rather ironic, since reading the news by-lines today that the Nordic countries, including Finland, are more or less producing citizens that are willing to join organizations that are against multiculturalism, as well as acting on in ways that will further oppressed and limit the actions of ordinary citizens by the government policies of the day. Very much like Tobey Steeves, who is more or less advocating for a power shift where the accountability aspect is spread down to the lowest levels, the students and their parents. The teacher is no longer accountable for his or her actions, but the student and in part their parents are held accountable in their actions. because of what they did or did not do in following the educational practices and policies of the day.
Unionists of the teacher kind, espouses low accountability to retain political and economic power within a democratic society based on capitalistic principles. Increasing accountability, such as teacher quality reforms will restrict their freedom and activities in producing education policies that will bring about favourable contracts, salaries, pensions, and ideal working conditions where accountability rests entirely on other parts of society that are not part of the actual policy decisions and the institutions of government. I see it as paying benefits to those who are in the power of position to decide, with the lowest accountability for the outcomes and socializing the costs and accountability to people who do not have effective means and methods to actively participate in the decision making.
Or as Catharine has stated, “If there’s anger to be had by many parents its in assumptions being made by education experts who can’t agree on the very purpose of education or how they fit in to that.
I was trying to establish that when, as parents we want to raise issues based on our experiences we’re marginalized, or lectured, or lied to,
Some parents have as much of more education than teachers, are leaders in their communities and successful managers in their own right. They can read balance sheets, execute assessments, and raise effective questions with the teachers of their children, more so than teachers can. That makes the education of parents one of most powerful tools going.”
As I have experienced, all parts of the education arms resist teaching quality, and not just the unions. Their culture demands it, at every junction, intersection and down to the ordinary teacher/parent interview that accountability rests on the students, the parents but never on the education system actions and practices. It is a culture of Marxist elitism where education policies, dogma and ideology are decided by the few, to control the thoughts and actions of the many. One of the methods that is being presently used within the education systems world-wide are the introduction of critic thinking policies. Steeves is one such breed, and rather a dangerous one to have at the secondary level, spewing out ideology that has many unintended consequences. The primary axes of my research include: critical education policy studies, power, subjection, difference, disciplinary technologies.
My research draws on Bourdieu’s notion of ‘fieldwork in philosophy’, an “intellectual practice that might be true to lived human experience as it considers questions of philosophic import”. The primary ‘field’ targeted by my inquiry is the ‘field of subjection’ – a figurative plane of processes which regulates how individuals are “constituted through discursive and institutional interactions”. In particular, I am interested in the ‘field of subjection’ vis-á-vis the ‘21st-century education’ narrative. I will be using critical discourse analysis to locate the lines of desire which regulate the preferred ‘21st-century’ subject. To contrast this set of transcendent political desires with lived experience, I will conduct interviews with teachers. After generating transcripts from these interviews, I will filter transcript data through a composite ‘conversational positioning analysis’. From here I will be drawing on Deleuze & Guattari, Michel Foucault, Claudia Ruitenberg, and Noel Gough to reterritorialize ‘21st-century’ subjection. ” http://ubc.academia.edu/TobeySteeves
One can easily dismissed it, but it would be dangerous to do so, since most of if not all of critical eduction theory and policies is based on Marxist ideology and where all decisions are based on the subjective viewpoint, experiences and knowledge of the education decision makers.
“Critical Theory is a revisionist Marxist philosophy that interrogates the nature and structure of the social world through the lens of power. Yet it does not simply try to understand the nature of the social world, but also to change it – to make it more humane, equitable and just. Critical Theory therefore has a very close relationship with Critical Practice.”
http://www.tonywardedu.com/content/section/16/120/
I rather have the likes of Sandy or Joanne teaching my child concentrating on the more practical side of education, teaching students the abilities and skills needed to navigate the world – a solid foundation in language and numeracy. Without a solid foundation and a well-rounded education, people will have less ability to determined their own future, and more reliance on others to determined their own future. Very much like the day many moons ago, when a board official determined that as a parent, I should accept the expertise and decisions made concerning my youngest child. And that as a parent, I was found wanting in the number of degrees behind my name, my lack of parent ability and the refusal to accept that the responsibility of my child’s struggles lie at my doorstep, and not at the doorstep of the education institute.
For Steeves to argued that,
“Without any equivocation, I found this post terribly misguided. While the author attempts to position themselves and their arguments as “in the public good”, what they’re actually doing is arguing on the basis of managerialism: It’s neoliberal ideology masquerading as ‘common sense”
And not a teacher like Steeves who is advocating, and espousing Marxist ideology and dogma that eschews accountability away from the decisions makers, and forces the accountability unto the very people who have the least power. Steeves is the one that is advocating and pushing for education policies through the lens of ideology, a Marxist one that the public good is determined by those who are within the education system, and the costs are socialized to the students, parents, and taxpayers. I can only wonder what his response is to a parent, justifying a student’s grade would be?
Now getting back to the original post and questions – “
Why is the Canadian education establishment so resistant to teacher quality reform initiatives? Who is really calling the tune – provincial education authorities or the Canadian Teachers Federation backed by the CEA? Should we put much stock in the assessment of teacher unionists who defend the status quo and still oppose the current student testing programs? If teacher unionists remain cool to testing, then why would we ever expect them to embrace student test based teacher evaluation?
A link, compliments of SQE that should get back to answering the questions in a Canadian context, the more practical considerations on how teacher quality should be measured that would be fair, and still exert accountability of those things that an educator has full control of.
“The National Council on Teacher Quality advocates for reforms in a broad range of teacher policies at the federal, state, and local levels in order to increase the number of effective teachers. In particular we recognize the absence of much of the evidence necessary to make a compelling case for change and seek to fill that void with a research agenda that has direct and practical implications for policy. We are committed to lending transparency and increasing public awareness about the four sets of institutions that have the greatest impact on teacher quality: states, teacher preparation programs, school districts and teachers unions. “
http://www.nctq.org/p/
Anyone making the claim that I’ve adopted a (neo)Marxist framework is clearly not paying attention. If *anything*, I might fall into postfoundationalism, of which Deleuze is an exemplar. And, to repeat, Deleuze (and Foucault) were *not* sympathetic to (neo)Marxism – and neither am I. If these distinctions are unfamiliar, it might be wise to remain silent rather than to demonstrate confused prejudice.
With that said, I’d rather be mistaken as a (neo)Marxist than a capitalist any day.
I recently saw a thesis from a doctoral student contesting this research based on her opinion and 20 kids.
_____________________________________________________________
The flat-earthers weren’t impressed either when Magellan arrived from the wrong direction. After all, their “beliefs” dictated that the earth was flat in spite of the fact that it had just been proven to be spheroid.
I guess you`re right,it`s always a struggle to get there.
Ingrained beliefs, often generations old, are difficult to overcome. It requires admitting that one is wrong.
Tobey Steeves
“People know what they do,
Frequently they know why they do what they do,
but what they don’t know is what what they do does.”
Fourcault
It seems to me you are concerned with the ramifications of public policy as it relates to accountability. I would hope Mr. Fourcault statement reflects similar concerns.
A logical place to start as I think too the “pandora’s box” syndrom may be at play (lots of evidence cited from most contributors so far) when it comes to public policy initiatives.
But the parameters do not have to be constantly changing or in motion in order to deduce policy stasis may not be the answer to our concerns with teacher quality reform, and its relationship with Canadian unionism.
Historically most reformers I have read from the west (my limitations, no one elses) , that is my general appreciation of philosophers, religious leaders, political leaders, social equality leaders and educators etc. tend to step off the bureaucratic merrry -go -round and define the parameters of change as they concern and interest us all.
These people are often relegated to the dustbin of society until later on a place in time vindicates their views and actions. Some are also persecuted, some are heros for a while until a revisionist comes along and challenges their work, activities and subsequent effect on society, whatever the nebulous demarcation is at the time. What I’m saying is humanity moves up and down as well as laterally.
Do our values not vary with the circumstances of its application? Of course they do.
Soon neo-liberalism will be post liberalism and like post modernism few will agree on a tangible definition which explains a collective way forward. That we do not know what what we do does, is a given. So we continue to research cause and effect.
Whose interests are served? How about starting here.
First- students, teachers and parents
second – society, democracy (its collective make up )
third – capitalism
rather a grass roots approach but no one has a crystal ball here.. .
Whose interests are served? How about starting here.
First- students, teachers and parents
second – society, democracy (its collective make up )
third – capitalism
_____________________________________________________________
Welcome to Murrica.
wha?
What does capitalism have to do with kiddies learning to read and write?
What does capitalism have to do with having effective, qualified teachers?
Or with having efficient school boards?
I was responding to the points raised in Toeby’s answers to my questions earlier.
However I would prefer to see a students interest served and improved as a result of teacher quality reform. Toeby was questioning the context?
Murrica, whatever that is, does not mean anything to me.
Murrica, whatever that is, does not mean anything to me.
______________________________________________
George Bush’s “America”.
Seems the land of the free is where Paul started this discussion (NEA).
But Andrew I will not buy into a debate on the Bush years or phenomenonology based pedagogy.
The point is policy is changing in the USA. Guess there is no where to go but up. Should it concern us?
We tend to copy them… 20 years late… so it isn’t very promising for the next couple of decades.
I’m just waiting for Harper’s NCLB Lite.
Capitalism hopes to reshape the next generation in its own image, thus we have the hidden agenda of education, Principal=CEO teacher=foreman(person) student is worker, learn to follow orders, etc, study the stuff I want for you English (functional) math science tech, stuff like that. The liberal impulse says a bit more to it, the individual must enjoy life English for meaning, culture, understanding French, poetry, the arts… the socialist comes along and says, all of this has its place but the highest calling is an understanding of history because equity is the critical missing piece.
According to Herb Kliebard, these 3 forces compounded by biz,labour, environmentalists, equity seeking groups, arts groups, trade groups all struggle against each other. Much like the Treaty of Versailles, the modern public school represents all of the peace making compromises between and amongst all of the contending groups.
Each time one of the groups feels it has a temporary advantage, it tends to push this advantage and try to shift public eduction a bit more, (or a lot more) in its direction. Some of this comes if a different poliical party wins the election but it is more strongly related to the Zeitgiest of the times, 1960’s radical Bill Davis Tories give birth to Hall Dennis, 1990’s conservative restoration led by Bob Rae’s NDP leading to Love of Learning and on to EQAO, OCT, etc.
Your own statement said that some children were more deserving than others.
Careful Doug, “the highest calling” has a rather dubious history in the internal machinations of any ruling party or idiological movement – church or state.
that is why reform usually comes from within.
Careful Doug, “the highest calling” has a rather dubious history in the internal machinations of any ruling party or idiological movement – church or state.
that is why reform usually comes from within.
A bit vague for me? Don’t understand. The highest calling, service to others?
Jesus and Karl Marx agree on that one.
Niether agreed equity was a commodity to be funded at the expense of others.
Tobey was questioning who are the symmetries of power and whether capitalisms’ interest – along with others; parents, students, democracy, were served.
Trouble in paradise? Gee I wonder why unions would oppose charters? I don’t get it.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/education/la-me-lausd-charters-20110725,0,1835113.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+latimes%2Fnews%2Feducation+%28L.A.+Times+-+Education%29
Capitalism? The economic system determines the framework of the education system. Within the education system, the economic system determines the parameters of what is taught, teacher quality, efficiency, and a host of other accounting mechanisms exerts influence on the education policies of the day.
It is laughable to see people who advocate, defend and rationalized all attempts of reform, by denying the reality of human experience, except for their own. For Tobey Steeves to deny his own ideology, and accuse others of being motivated by dogma and ideology, is in fact denying that all humans have beliefs that shape their actions and behaviours.
Tobey Steeves refers to “countries where the citizens are oppressed and illiterate. I would ask: Do you mean to suggest the citizens of Canada are not “oppressed and illiterate”? Would you like to look at data re. indigenous populations in BC? Across Canada? Or how about ESL graduates?” To defend, by omitting facts, to justified the ideology and dogma that excludes all other experiences except their own. Raising the low-literacy rates without informing readers, that over 90 % of the people who have low-literacy/numeracy skills, are not only typical Canadians with English or French as their first language, but are being produced by the public education system who insists on using whole language as their main reading approach.
And no Tobey, I am not about to justified it as you have insisted to others, because the Canadian low-literacy rates are a reality… Sandy is correct, based on my own experience and observation that Tobey Steeves and other like-minded people do not care about how well people learn the 3 Rs, but how well they have the ability to listen and accept the dogma and ideology of those who professed they are the only ones to do so.
“The critical pedagogy that Tobey is studying represents the transformational paradigm and action-based and phenomenology guides its practice, and is the most left wing and socialist paradigm today. It works well in countries where the citizens are oppressed and illiterate. What it looks like in practice is that when they teach literacy they do so with words and phrases that will enlighten the learners as to their oppression.”
Low literacy rates, constricts people in their activities but does not in itself oppresses people. It is rather the actions of others imposing their values, dogma on others to take advantage of minds that have not been taught a solid foundation in the 3 Rs. As Sandy has stated, they do so with words and phrases that will enlighten the learners as to their oppression, in the same way as those who are opposed to reform in teacher quality reforms. Tobey Steeves is a representative of many, who is advocating a form of education that oppresses all thoughts, ideas, except those voices that are within the education system.
How ironic it is that the public education system, at the end of the day, produces and contributes to the economic activities of a country, by not ensuring that all should have good reading, writing and numeracy ability. Two billion dollars in the tutoring industry for remediation of the 3 Rs. This figure is for Canada, and does not include the specialized help dealing with students who have a disability that impact their learning. And yet have the gall to state that they only have the best interests of students in their minds and hearts. And accountability does not even enter into the equation.
The words of Sandy bear repeating, “But, it is the basis upon which accountability would have to be built (that criteria Andrew talks about) so understanding how our beliefs about teaching and learning influence everything we think about and suggest, is essential.
Tobey came here with all his sources. Yet, he didn’t know how they fit into the whole picture. That is why I called him on it.
Capitalism is not “reality” but ideology.
“Steeves is a representative of many, who is advocating a form of education that oppresses all thoughts, ideas, except those voices that are within the education system.”
This statement is so fundamentally mistaken I hazard to guess it wouldn’t be worth contesting.
Capitalism is not “reality” but ideology.
________________________________
Capitalism is an economic system.
Do contest…
Who was it that mentioned the “oppression of the masses”?
How did it work out for that ideologue?
Wow, a whole day long discussion and not one word about how any of this discussion gets us educated students as a result.
Too many are in a real rush to be heard but no one is really, listening.
Had some good stuff going with Jo-Anne earlier.
Wow, a whole day long discussion and not one word about how any of this discussion gets us educated students as a result.
___________________________________________________________
Makes it rather obvious that many aren’t the least bit interested in improving PUBLIC education but interested in making others conform to their dogma.
IMO, we need-
Better teachers who are motivated to teach
Competent management at board offices rather than teachers who get “kicked upstairs”
Parents who are more involved in their childrens’ education instead of blaming the teachers and the “system” (though the system sucks in NS)
Politicians interested in education as much as they are interested in votes. Once elected they forget about those who put them there
Less navel gazing and philosophizing and more honest research, the results of which finds its way into the classroom
Reduce the administrative waste and divert those resources to the classroom
If we’re to have inclusion then fund it properly or forget about it. It certainly isn’t working now
Keep religion out of public education
Feel free to add to the list.
Legislating teaching children to read spell and write explicitly :Letter shapes and printing instruction,phonemic awareness,phonics,fluency training(that means lots of reading of decodable text after instruction of a concept),vocabulary development and using extraction of details and retelling to enhance story comprehension.K-3
The above leads to a dramatic reduction in special ed;right now 94% of special ed is language processing problems,LD,can be the result of no instruction,boys find learning to read and spell very tough these last 35 years or a problem that can be greatly reduced in the early years with proper instruction.
Stop calling children MID in Grade 1 ,2 and 3.The student might be dyslexic and have an 1Q that`s very high but he can`t read,spell without specific intervention,grow in sophistication.
Early reading and math intervention by trained teachers.
Respect each child and his family,it might come back to you,after all you are well paid,not so much annually but look at your hours,holidays,benefits and pension!
Making sure the only research that is considered is gold standard.
Teacher training should be more like a Nursing degree,theory and practice.
Competent teachers motivated to teach eh.
There is nothing more demoralizing to teachers in Canada and the USA than the so-called reform movement calling them lazy, overpaid underworked, pampered, incompetent, and so on. The reform movement makes education significantly worse with ceaseless uninformed attacks on teachers. They call it ‘teacher bashing’. They don’t care what you call it.
Mike Harris caused so many teachers to retire ASAP he even caused a short term teacher shortage. Criticism has consequences, serious consequences.
A bit of Reading Recovery for you, Doug?
Doug’s met his match Andrew.
That’s the biggest drip of “bullocks” I’ve read here so far in this discussion.
If teachers are demoralized maybe, just maybe it’s that they keep getting it hammered in to their brains that there’s nothing they can do about their situations…..that’s usually coming from the spin of union or the strong-arm of those other “blob” members.
Lazy teachers exist who do give the impression of being overpaid. Some may also be incompetent, but we’ll never really know will we Doug because we do not have a mechanism in place to week out those from the very excellent educators.
I think that the union ramps up the “teacher bashing” rhetoric when they’ve got nothing left to say and in doing so actually contributes more to demoralizing their own than helping the situation for individual teachers.
It’s actually the union thugs that seriously sometimes deserve the “bashing” moniker.
Paul – You’re exactly right in your last post by the way.
Improving teacher quality is now driving much of the American education reform agenda and education schools are on the firing line. A recent feature article, written by Sharon Otterman, appeared in The New York Times (July 21, 2011) and profiled a new wave of teacher training institutes now challenging the traditional faculties of education.
Today, about 500,000 of America’s 3.6 million teachers have already entered the field through alternative routes, ranging from Teach for America to New York’s Relay School of Education.
Here’s the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/education/edlife/edl-24teacher-t.html
Former Education Deans like Arthur Levine of Columbia Teacher’s College are actually leading the charge, expressing frustration with the intransigence of the long-established ed schools. Most of the new teacher institutes focus more on producing effective teachers and reject the traditional academic course-based degree program of certification. A 2010 book, Doug Lemov’s Teach Like a Champion, has become a mainstay of such programs.
The new teacher institutes also offer a real alternative to the progressive educational philosophy espoused by most traditional university faculties of education in Canada as well as the United States.
Sharon Otterman’s analysis is particularly perceptive:
“There was no mention of John Dewey, Howard Gardner or Paulo Freire, the canon of intellectuals that tend to take up an outsize portion of the theory taught at traditional education graduate schools. But that seemed fine with the students, who chatted avidly about their own experiences. After class, they told me about the improvements they saw in how they managed their classes.
“I can study Vygotsky later,” said Tayo Adeeko, a 24-year-old third-grade teacher at Empower Charter School in Crown Heights. She was referring to another education school staple — Lev Vygotsky, a Soviet theorist of cognitive development who died in 1934. “Right now,” she added, “my kids need to learn how to read.” ( Excerpted from The New York Times)
Building a better teacher starts in our faculties of education and here too the Americans are ahead of the curve. Educational crises tend to generate some needed “creative disruptions.” Addressing teacher quality has to start in the schools where they are inducted into the profession.
Teach for America is a huge liability, recently denounced by NEA.
The attack on teachers is scape goating of the most disgusting kind, with no substance behind it. The problem is poverty but people want the education problem solved without doing anything about poverty. This is classic denial. It amounts to “give my kid a better education but don’t give me the bill.” Good luck with that. Poverty is as much the cause of education problems as it is the cause of crime problems and health problems.
It is actually cheaper to eliminate poverty than it is to ‘manage’ it.
The fact is that two years from now we will no longer be talking about teacher quality because education reformers have the attention span of kitten with a ball of wool.
The problem is we don’t have testing, ok here is testing, ooops we still have problems, we need charters and vouchers, here are some charters and vouchers but they don’t seem to get any better results than public schools. OK we want teacher merit pay. OK here it is but it doesn’t work and NYC has already abandoned it. OK lets attack the teacher training institutions. NEXT!!
Here is a thought. Why not do what the successful nations are doing instead of drawing inspiration from the educational basket case south of 49.
I think we see what they`ve done and it might make the success of our reforms more effective,we can avoid all the things that didn`t work.Certainly it is true that you can reform all day long but without teaching kids to read we hit the wall quite quickly;try to advance a student who`s stuck there,impossible-same with the foundations of arithmetic to advance in math.
I have been astounded as have some of the key people in the field of research that the reformers leave it to the schools to “figure it out” and race to the top funds offered no guidelines as to what would improve their schools.That`s been the big change since the initial NCLB law,they were pressured by the lobbyists representing the billion dollar publishers to take the specifics out of the equation and make general statements,every heard Rhee say anything specific or Arne Duncan,they`re so political.Yes,the ideology is great,the admission of “dropout factory “is good as is the pressure to get reading scores up but don`t let them buy apricot pits to cure their cancer.
Meanwhile,the U.S. government Department of Education has developed a great site called Reading Rockets,it has tremendous information on it.
I believe what we see over there can happen here,it`s a warning,there`s a lot of pushing students along and a great deal of manipulation.
In our reforms,we`ll have to make sure the Legislation is correct and I believe the NY Times article is spot on,does it take a war to say how can that human being evolve if he can`t read?
There`s also been tremendous manipulation by switching to the word Literacy-they begin their entire diatribes and the core of their excuses with “what is Literacy today?”Off they go,well you can only get literate if you are able to read proficiently.
In our reforms,we`ll have to make sure the Legislation is correct
____________________________________________________
It’s a crying shame that improvements in public education have to be legislated.
It will NEVER happen if it`s not-NEVER-Asking for good will just won`t cut it.
All of us here,especially the parents,Malkin at SQE,will tell you,it just won`t.
Paul and I met in person at the SQE seminar,the development of whole language teachers at University is still the main stay,IN SPITE of the research.
Pre Internet,the professors went unchallenged,no longer possible.
You should listen to them ,I can`t even go there.
The sad thing is,have they ever looked at the written work of these
students?
If they did,they would I hope feel very guilty-visual illiteracy.
If students were actually taught successfully using proven reading and math programs we’d be putting many adults out of work.
There’s inherent interest by “the blob” to prolong education problems rather than solve them because it’s all about feeding the rank and file in the job pool than it is about educating children.
Yes,I think it`s true that the incompetence may be calculated.
Getting rid of the policy-writing wonks at board offices might be a start.
Once there is an “official policy” it’s considered a done deal regardless of the fact that there’s no implementation nor are there any resources for implementation. The funds have been spent on conferences, meetings and politically correct wording.
It’s like buying a Ferrari for a quarter of a million dollars and then having no money to put gas in the tank.
Absolutely true;IEP`S same thing.Costs a fortune for the school boards to type them up,do all the tests and bring in the army of specialists,then away they go,into the filing cabinet.
Not to mention that kids having difficulties are officially “tested” in Grade 2 or 3 – a bit late in the day since they have already fallen behind so much.
Until then, teachers, many of whom do not have proper training for special needs, have to make do with little or no extra resources.
A comment on IEPs… there’s usually a flurry of activity just prior to standard testing. Odd, n’est-ce-pas?
Andrew, from my own experiences the only effective option in Canada to improve public education is legislation. Legislation that forces the arms of the public education system to follow legislation, especially dealing with teaching quality and the training at the teachers’ colleges.
I am totally convinced that the powers to be within the public education structure, will not let go of their precious child-centered practices without laws being enacted. When my child was in grade 5, I remembered reading about Vygotsky, discovering how his social development theory is oozing out of the school walls, impacting the children and their learning in negative ways. “Social Development Theory argues that social interaction precedes development; consciousness and cognition are the end product of socialization and social behavior.” http://www.learning-theories.com/vygotskys-social-learning-theory.html
Vygotsky fits in nicely with the other child-centered practices and in particular whole language reading and writing instruction. The problem that I was confronted with, when trying to get effective help for my child was that the child-centered practices rests on the child and outside factors. When a child is not learning, it is the child that must be corrected, and never the practices of the school. Well in my eyes, some things need to be taught. Reading, writing and numeracy is at the top of my list and no amount of fixing external factors such as culture, parents, children’s attitudes and other factors by the public education system will help to correct the learning problems.
And now parents and the taxpayers are face with the new guys on the block, the social justice parade, creating another layer of learning at a great expense to the taxpayer. And I really question the value of it, when it forces other important learning concepts and practices that are essential to navigate in the world as an adult.
And than there is the Dougs’ of the public education system, where poverty has become the only reason why children are struggling. In one of Doug’s comments, ” The problem is poverty but people want the education problem solved without doing anything about poverty. This is classic denial. It amounts to “give my kid a better education but don’t give me the bill.” Good luck with that. Poverty is as much the cause of education problems as it is the cause of crime problems and health problems.” Throw in the Steeves’ of the public education system, where students must be informed on how oppressed they are in a capitalistic democracy and it is the reason why students are not learning. ” Unlike traditional perspectives of education that claim to be neutral and apolitical, critical pedagogy views all education theory as intimately linked to ideologies shaped by power, politics, history and culture. Given this view, schooling functions as a terrain of ongoing struggle over what will be accepted as legitimate knowledge and culture. In accordance with this notion, a critical pedagogy must seriously address the concept of cultural politics y both legitimizing and challenging cultural experiences that comprise the histories and social realities that in turn comprise the forms and boundaries that give meaning to student lives. (Darder 1991, p. 77)” http://www.21stcenturyschools.com/Critical_Pedagogy.htm
And I should add, critical pedagogy has an extreme bias when it comes to research-based work in the education field. It prevents effective practices from entering the school in the main areas of reading, writing and numeracy. It is where 2 + 2 = 5 can be seen as a legitimate answer, and other foundational knowledge are seen as oppressive tools that keeps students from learning. Learning to read, write and do numeracy well, does not even enter into the equation. It is all about changing the meaning of education theories that are based on the science, that are knocking at the doors of the education faculties, that are confirming many of the practices occurring at our schools, are wrong. It is all about changing science theories to be seen as philosophies, And it is here where critical pedagogy becomes dangerous because it seeks to control what knowledge is learned, and how it is taught. .
There actually is a developmental issue, just as kids walk and talk at different ages, slightly, they “click in” to reading at slightly different times. Nevertheless, grade three is a little late, especially if it comes as a big surprise to the parents.
That`s the developmental theory,flawed hypothesis,not developmental,taught,it doesn`t “kick in”.
That`s what they teach at University,that reading is a developmental milestone like speaking.
Rather funny coming from you Doug – the mere mention of development, are you actually conceding that the present day reading instruction is at fault. Or is it wishful thinking on my part that you no longer think that learning to read, and reading to learn is very much dependent on the SEC factors.
Could it be a bone thrown, because it would switch the picture of discussion of the blob and their tendencies to prolong learning difficulties and as Catharine has expressed – ” because it’s all about feeding the rank and file in the job pool than it is about educating children.”
effective educated students would put “the blob” out of commission.
“the blob” (and I would include those parents in this group who remain uneducated through their experience with their child’s public education career), is the greatest obstacle to reform because they benefit the most for preserving and promoting the status-quo.
“the blob” fears choice, charters and vouchers because it would diminish their influence over the system in all respects including policy discussion and program development.
Not only parents and students would benefit from more choice. Teachers would too because individual teachers would could have a wider range of career opportunities that could include schools where they have the incentive to use proven programs if they wished.
The balance would shift AWAY from “the blob” and TOWARD parents, the school community and local interests.
Ya, its just all those professors in that vast conspiracy again trying to keep the kids dumb. They meet in secret, I think they are all Masons or have secret handshakes.
Get out your tinfoil hat. Too many positive ions.
Paul – Doug’s comment is neither helpful or in-line with the discussion here and is poised to go off-topic and into the sewer.
Ah yes, but under-theorized prejudicial suppositions like “the blob” = perfectly suitable?
The public education system and their practices, sure feels like they keeping kids from learning how to read, write and do numeracy well. Setting up the conditions for the increased jobs in the job pool well into the later grades, dealing with all the various levels of the students, and the skills that they do not have which are essential to do high school math to reading Shakespeare to the understanding of the foundation bases within physics, chemistry and biology.
It is funny how the ones who are the fans of social justice, poverty and other SEC related theories, do not defend their position on the basis of their own supporting evidence, that can be verified by independent sources. Rather a hard task taking the social justice philosophies and turning them into theories based on science.
Take for example a newer educator, a high ranking one that is posed to be making a big splash in North America, just like he is doing in Down-Under and in merry old England. He is one of your own, putting small class sizes as one that no one should be spending money on. As he has stated, not a penny.
“Research by John Hattie suggests that what works best for
students is what works best for teachers.”
Click to access Researcharticle_visible_learning.pdf
“Professor Hattie said teaching children ”how to play the game of learning” produced dramatically higher improvements than solutions typically sought by politicians, such as smaller classes, on which he ”wouldn’t spend a penny”.
”Our job is to help teachers see learning through the eyes of kids,” he said. ”And the great thing is when they do, teachers change.”
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/just-shut-up-and-listen-expert-tells-teachers-20110609-1fv9y.html#ixzz1TEHLhtf9
SQE has a post on John Hattie, where teacher quality is the most important factor concerning the education of students.
ADD/ADHD as well, Doug?
Having trouble focusing on the topic?
http://pdonline.ascd.org/pd_online/strugglingreaders/el199803_lyon.html
“the blob” fears choice, charters and vouchers because it would diminish their influence over the system in all respects including policy discussion and program development.
_____________________________________________________________
True, but you and I part ways at this point. Diverting resources away from PUBLIC education isn’t a solution. That would simply privatize PUBLIC funds and starve the PUBLIC system.
then do what Doug suggests – raise the education budget debt ceiling to Pluto.
Did I say that or anything like that?
Nope.
How is it that it’s what you read?
We all dream of improving the public system-they won`t budge!
What will make them budge?
An educational 9/11?
Seriously, though, the efforts need to be focused on one school in one board and that school needs to be taken by storm, if need be.
All it takes is one and “the blob” will be running for cover.
As things stand, efforts to improve PUBLIC education are scattered all over the map.
Your naivete is showing1!!!!
You have no idea how that`s not true.
I forgive you though,you just started your journey.
When the blob’s in charge this is the outcome. Only in the U.K.? Um…nope.
Can you imagine if the customers who pay for public education were to make similar demands of Canadian schools?
“Correlation Between Spelling Errors and Poor Sails (Sales)
If you were worried that the importance of spelling was going the way of the giant panda (which is to say, endangered but not yet extinct), we have good news. The BBC is reporting that a U.K. entrepreneur has discovered that spelling errors on a website can cut online sales in half. Misspellings, it seems, are a red flag for customers who might have concerns about a website’s credibility, Charles Duncombe says. His concerns were backed up by the Confederation of British Industry, whose head of education and skills said many employers have had to send their staff for remedial literacy lessons. Besides being plain embarrassing, these basic errors are costing online businesses millions in lost revenue. With that much at stake, surely that means a renewed focus on spelling and grammar classes in on the way, right?”. “Andela Hickman, Weekend Post)
“Spelling” = capitalism? Err… Here I’m reminded of Deleuze: “Maybe speech and communication have been corrupted. They’re thoroughly permeated by money – and not by accident but by their very nature. We’ve got to hijack speech. Creating has always been something different from communicating. The key thing may be to create vacuoles of noncommunication, circuit breakers, so we can elude control.”
From the sound of it, for those who position themselves along an axis of democracy and social justice, your views are somewhat problematic. On the other hand, your privileging of capital accumulation suggests great affiliation with plutocratic interests. IOW, you seem content to watch the status quo ravage life through a relentless process of commodification. I see this as a form of misanthropy, or malpractice.
Don’t know if I should laugh or cry at the above nonsense.
I am not smart enough to communicate with you.
If anyone understands what you just wrote,could they kindly interpret?
“On the other hand your privileging of capital accumulation suggests great affiliation with Plutocratic interests.”
Oh, now I realise whose interest is being served. Tomorrow I will give up all my possessions and move my family into a cardboard box neath the underpass.
That will surely help my son learn to read.
truly amazing. So many words, so little relative information.
Caution to the good folks here lest we be the subjects of the scholar’s next paper.
Just call us “lab rats”.
Actually, what drives reform is exactly this kind of mush from the centre of the blob universe.
Andrew, I had to laugh and not cry. It further proves my stance, that some educators live in alternative realities. Realities of what should be, and than force all the people to adapt their alternative reality, regardless of the laws of gravity and other laws that are known to be true.
This is what is happening in some schools, when the Steeves’ of the education world hi-jacks the curriculum and instruction to suit their alternative pseudo-reality, and not the realities of the world. In Canada, over 42 % with low reading, writing and numeracy skills. and sad to say, my youngest is included in the stats in reading and writing. Numeracy was a problem, until I taught her that 2 + 2 always equals 4, and never any other number as well as the other laws in math.
As for the malpractice bit, there is thousands of parents in Canada across all income levels, that have strong cases of educational malpractice by the very ones such as Steeves imposing their alternative realities, their ineffective practices unto children, creating the circumstances so they would always struggle in the act of reading, writing and numeracy. And he has the gall to call correct spelling and grammar malpractice. He really doesn’t know the damage that is being wrought when reality is ignore, the science ignore, the advances being made and the many doors of opportunities being slammed shut, because people do not have the skills and abilities needed for a job. But than again, what does he care – it just means more jobs for teachers teaching adults remediating reading, writing and numeracy skills that really should have been taught in grade school.
(Angela Hickman, Weekend Post)
Jo-Anne Gross
Your naivete is showing1!!!!
You have no idea how that`s not true.
I forgive you though,you just started your journey.
______________________________________________________________
How successful have the “reform” efforts been so far?
Jo-Anne Gross
I am not smart enough to communicate with you.
If anyone understands what you just wrote,could they kindly interpret?
________________________________________________________
You could try Babblefish.
Andrew,this is why your plan won`t work-they don`t care about their results,they care about their egos and their research.
In health sector,we are patient focused and patient driven,here the customer doesn`t even come into the discussion.
They need to be FORCED to care about the children.
I`m listening…
Andrew,
no I said it.
Improved policy and choice will not deplete the public system. Either will teacher quality reform. But an unlimited Blob will certainly deplete the resources, and that is where we are heading.
They do not agree with school choice, teacher quality reform – probably never will, but the NDP in NS are figuring out the Blob is unsustainable.
“an unlimited Blob will certainly deplete the resources, and that is where we are heading.”
That may be where N.S. is heading but Ontario has been mired in exactly that for quite a few years now.
Jennex won’t last long.
Who will if restructuring of education does not take place?
Jennex, More, Purvis, Casey, … Rodney, Dexter, McNeil?
Catharine has raise a valid point in spelling, grammar and other language errors that impacts a person’s life with real consequences, and not only for businesses. A person writing a complaint filled with grammar and spelling errors, will not be dealt with as the one that has no grammar or spelling errors. Many valid complaints not be addressed because of the inability to expressed in writing, clear, concise language, and which spelling/grammar errors will just add to it, increasing the likelihood of the letter being filed, but never addressed.
Surely if students are being taught social justice principles, and to become advocates of fighting for equity, one would surely think that one of the tools would be letter writing being addressed to politicians and others who are in the position to change things. I wonder how many letters with incorrect spelling and grammar are filed away, and the politician dismissing all of the content and points because of the spelling and grammar mistakes.
And as the author Angela has questioned, “With that much at stake, surely that means a renewed focus on spelling and grammar classes in on the way, right?”. I somehow feel that will never be on, given the attitude and current practices of the public education system.
We don’t want 2 tier education for the same reason we don’t want 2 tier health care.
School choice, teacher quality reform, are all distractions used to divert attention from the profoundly obvious problem that the poor do not do as well as the middle class in schools,(the upper class being so small and prviledged that we usually set them aside for education discussions). It is always amusing to me that the right wing says small classes, highly educated teachers, expensive education is not the solution and then we look at elite private schools and see small classes, highly educated teachers, expensive education for themselves.
All I am saying is look very carefully at what the rich give to themselves and then give that to everybody so that nobody can pay for an educational advantage in Canada.
Give your head a shake Doug. We already have a multi-tiered education system in play right this very moment.
That old fear line about 2-tiers is a washed up canard still treading water by the old boys and people for education.
Oh, and those multiple tiers I’m referring to have been created from inside The Blob.
Multi-tiered education system, the more well-to-do the better one can pay for the private tutors to addressed the basics in the 3 Rs that is sadly lacking in our schools. I am beginning to think Doug, that the public education system are being purposely dumbed-down, so no one has the ability and skills to act as independent adults, making good decisions on their own, without ever having the need to hire someone else, or depend on others to do daily activities for them.
without even bringing private schools into this discussion Nancy, and only within the existing public system in Ontario there are multiple tiers already in play in several ways thanks to the divisions in the system.
It’s got little to do with money either.
True Catharine, but having the means gives people options outside the public education system, and the public education system has breathing room to keep the status-quo in the multi-tiers. Basing it on my experiences trying to get help for my child in an area where there is no private services, you are correct that it has more to do with the divisions in the system, and the current practices that are creating the multi-tiers, than the actions of parents.
Back to the class thing again. It is always amusing to me when reforms are simply so called distractions – that is until the Blob elite notice that their budget has been cut by one of their own – as in NS.
Look, instead of us always talking and talking and talking, why don’t we don’t we DO something?
But, what?
I would be willing to take part in a steering committee, online if necessary, where we develop what an ideal school would look like, from the ground up. Maybe we could even start a real school in Southern Ontario?
Malkin? Doretta? SQE? Is there any money out there to start a small private K-6 school — with the hopes that if the PCs will win in October, we could try to be the first charter.
I have often thought of starting an “academic” school but didn’t go any further than that. Yes, it takes guts. Yes, I was once part of the blob. Now, however, I don’t feel I am. Moreover, I have an adult son who is ADHD and with an autism spectrum disorder so I understand special needs. Plus, I ran my own reading clinic doing both psycho-ed testing and rehabilitation.
And heaven forbid, but yes, I taught in a faculty of education and published my share of gobblygook and edubabble like Tobey spouts. And, I lived to tell the tale. I think my blog proves I can be as down to earth as any parent and far more realistic than Doug. LOL
You know, I like Doug. He keeps us on our toes. He is right sometimes too. Poor kids do have a tougher time than middle income and better. But, where I disagree with him is that it is not about more money. It is about clearer academic goals and mastery learning techniques.
So, the long and short of it is nothing is going to happen unless people like regulars here and at CotM want reform AND are willing to stick their necks out.
If anyone wants to e-mail me, first go the Contact Page at my blog: http://www.crux-of-the-matter.com and then I’ll reply and give you the actual address.
😉
There are more folks here from other parts of the country and Ontario Sandy. We here in Ontario might be all talk but the folks in Nova Scotia are just beginning their quest. We need to remember that as Ontario monopolizes the discussion (I’m as guilty of this too).
I think that we are right here an on-line committee that’s getting lots of traffic and hits (as I understand it).
There were several committees at one time, the one mentioned by Paul that wrote two good books on the state of Ontario education, plus the many who contributed to it.
I can’t speak for SQE but you can be pretty sure that if there were money available to open their own school that they’d have done it before now. There are good deals to be had outside of the city on buildings.
However, now that McGuinty has left it up to school boards to decide what’s best for a given community perhaps a better idea would be to find a community within a board that’s willing to open a traditional school, like the folks did in Surrey B.C. successfully. McGuinty’s left an opening and Hudak said the same thing.
The other problem I see is that there is no one under 40 years old – and for anything to have legs groups like SQE need new leadership blood to carry things on because it’s what’s needed in Ontario.
“So, the long and short of it is nothing is going to happen unless people like regulars here and at CotM want reform AND are willing to stick their necks
out.”
Paul, Malkin, and SQE (OQE) and many others have been sticking their necks out for a very long time.
That said, there needs to be a much different approach/strategy if it’s going to be reform that stands the test of the blob.
Speaking of the blob, I came upon a flow chart of the MOE flow chart from 2005 that is stunning in showing how ridiculously large tiered the MOE office has become under McGuinty’s watch. Comparing that to the flowchart I have from 1999 and it’s a wonder the system isn’t suffocating under excess blob.
Oh boy. Silence. I didn’t mean to interrupt the great discussion that was going on today.
Look, just ignore me and my big ideas. I have always been one of those idealists who looked for possibilities.
What is the saying? At ease everyone!
What are your plans for Canada’s first ever School Choice Week next year?
Nancy – I’m looking for an essay that I have somewhere that about how multi-tiered the public school system is.
When I find it I’ll post it here, or you can leave your email address with Paul and I can send it to you?
I especially love the 25 million a year Literacy Secretariat.
They say the scores are up but the grading and exam has changed since McGuinty and the instruction is extremely whole language!
For those from N.S.,your MOE is spending 5 million dollars developing a new reading intervention and instruction strategy…
Will the words phonemic awareness ,phonics,fluency,etc..be present?Will the research be delivered?
School choice week? I have no plans yet. When exactly will it be? You have me intrigued now.
The reality is I’m the worst of the worst. You realize that, don’t you? Put succinctly for Tobey: I am a former member of the blob. Ouch!
How? I have been a rank and file teacher. I have been an education faculty member and education researcher. Meaning, I was as progressively brainwashed as the next guy. I look back at some of my publications now and cringe. Apart from my book which is all practical things parents can do with their kids who have learning disabilities.
However, that all changed when I became a private provider. First, I had to deal with those in the system. Secondly, I had to pay my own expenses — also referred to as accounts payable. Meaning, no appointments, no accounts receivable. And,like all self-employed folks, holidays were on my own dime.
Then, I retired early and became a conservative staffer for an MPP in the Mike Harris first government. My boss the MPP was also a PA to the Education MInister which means I had an office on the same floor of the Mowat Block at Queen’s Park as the Education minister. Now that I think of it, that means I was a member of the blob, although as Catherine says, not nearly as complex as now.
Following all that, I started my blog and started criticizing what the “system” was doing — something rarely done by anyone who has ever been in the system, Paul excepted.
So, choice has grown on me over the years I have had my blog. And Catherine and Malkin and Doretta were part of the choice brigade who changed my mind.
Now, truth to tell, I am totally in favour of choice and the reason I am is because it is, IMHO, the one way to shake the hell out of the system. It’s called competition!
So, if anyone is reading this who is in the education field, be they in the CEA (where I had many articles published), listen up. People here know what they are talking about. Even Doug, unless as Paul says, he starts on his staff bulletin board rantings.
So, for those who don’t know me, that’s where I am coming from. I am influenced by my former experiences but I am completely open minded about reform and, in fact, given my experiences with my own son, know it is long overdue.
But, something drastic has to happen for reform to start. Maybe Alberta and BC can teach those of us in Ontario and the east what has to happen at the political level before we can make choice a reality.
Just thinking out loud.
Sandy – almost all of us have been taken in by the blob at some point in our experiences.
Your post is funny, and I’m glad that we’re able to do so in this way.
I we were all together now I’m pretty sure we’d be on our second pot of coffee/tea or pitcher of beer by now (see – choice even in our virtual meeting).
No beer and I go home. 😉
Yes Sandy, it does take guts when the public education system will be using their full weight to shut you down. In much the same way, when a parent decides to home-school because they are doing things differently from the current practices of the public education system. Or when a teacher decides to go public, openly criticizing the education practices of the day.
As for being an idealist who look for possibilities, we need more of them in the education system, where children who do struggle in learning are seen as broken, and nothing can be done to correct their learning problems. I was called an idealist a few times by educrats that was urging me to accept the limitations of my child. as they did years ago.
Archive for July, 2011
Teacher Quality Reform: Why are Canadian Teacher Unions So Resistant?
Doug,wouldn`t it benefit the PR of teachers and schools to support these initiatives?
Why won`t they/
And have to admit that things aren’t as rosy as they claim?
I was called an idealist a few times by educrats that was urging me to accept the limitations of my child. as they did years ago.
____________________________________________________________
Better an idealist than an ideologue.
The Iowa Education Summit on July 25, 2011 was billed as a battle of the education titans and it lived up to that advance billing. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie faced-off against Stanford University’s Linda Darling-Hammond in a “duel of ideas.” Teacher quality reform sparked the liveliest exchanges.
Check out the NJ Spotlight report at http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/11/0725/2235/
American education reformers get terribly excited about an issue which remains an educational taboo in Canada –the quality of teaching and accountability for what students actually learn in school.
Linda Darling Hammond is of the same mind as Ben Levin,very generic statements and ideologies.
American education reformers get terribly excited about an issue which remains an educational taboo in Canada –the quality of teaching and accountability for what students actually learn in school.
Has to happen,the solution is in this fight..
Mybe it’s time for students to start agitating fore better quality PUBLIC education.
After all, it is their future hanging in the balance.
Andrew, you may mean reports from Cape Breton re student agitators.
I believe it was in the Cape Breton Post.
I don’t speak for teachers especially now that I am retired. I would say that teachers unions work directly with both the government and the teacher training institutions and give their input on teacher quality at that level.
Generally speaking, although anything can always be improved, there certainly is no crisis and not even a serious issue of teacher quality.
They view those who raise the issue as being in one of 2 camps, the uninformed and/or the politically motivated.
South of the border, there is a huge “war on the teachers” that is aimed at so-called quality, pensions, benefits, privatization, and so on.
It is funded by major corporations and charity funds like Bill and Malinda Gates, the Broad Foundation, the Walton family of Walmart, the Koch Brothers and other. These parasites want to make money on the privatization of education. They are sometimes joined by religious fundamentalists who are preying for religious schools to save the flock as it gets smaller every year. There are ideological right-wingers of the Friedmanite types in the mix but it is not a grassroots movement, it is an elite extremist movement and it will fail because it is not strong enough to prevail and its core reform, vouchers as Bill Gates has realized is just too unpopular.
Failing is one thing but it will do a great del of damage in the mean time. The American public has the attention span of a gnat so they will be on to something else soon.
Their are deep well funded forces who hate public education because it is public. These extremists have been around for years. They have more money from Rupert Murdoch who is funding Michele Rhee, but they don’t have the money or the public support to prevail.
They have more money from Rupert Murdoch who is funding Michele Rhee, but they don’t have the money or the public support to prevail.
____________________________________________________________
As supported by hard evidence or the union rumour nill?
If by hard evidence, produce it.
I read your response with interest.
You look at it that way,rather than thinking kids-how can a consensus be reached on instruction-why can you be allowed to do anything you want?
I`ve seen kids improve 3 grade levels in 2 months,why is it so difficult for a professional to strive to honour research rather than their opinion.
Andrew, I was thinking the same thing that students need to start agitating for a better quality PUBLIC education. Especially after reading a few posts of Tobey Steeves sprinkled in the education files of BC, and now Doug’s comments. Both being two tom cats with very different agendas aiming to keep the status-quo. Doug to maintain the status-quo to take advantage of the many opportunities that are opened up when students are no longer served by the public education system and the practices within. Doug’s private school for foreign Chinese students is one such example. Whereas Steeves agenda is to maintained the child-centered practices of the public education system, and that also serves as the main vehicle to the creation of the many jobs that surrounds child-centered approaches.
But are still tom cats, like the real kind hanging around waiting for an opportunity to look after their best interests, and not the interests of the students they are serving. I can very well see my youngest who in the last year has brought up issues in reading and writing in the classroom, regarding things that were never taught, but it is expected for students to know how to do it. The very things that Doug and Tobey considers old-fashioned such as spelling, grammar and note-taking, are some of the things students would be agitating for, as well as the more common things such as less homework.
as well as the more common things such as less homework.
_______________________________________________
Homework?
What’s that?
Steven posted:
Andrew, you may mean reports from Cape Breton re student agitators.
I believe it was in the Cape Breton Post.
_______________________________________________________
I wasn’t even thinking of them, but yeah, something like that. But they need to persist.
they are Capers. It is bred in the bone. They will persist.
Defenders of the education status quo see a corporatist bogeyman behind not only teacher quality reform,but the entire North American school reform movement. Some common front teacher organizations see conspiracies everywhere and even suggest that “plutocrats” are gaining control of the public education system. Such fantasies have even found their way onto Educhatter’s Blog.
Such a notion is truly laughable here in Canada where corporate influence is negligible. The Fraser Institute and AIMS, for example, are run on a virtual shoestring. School board joint ventures and public-private partnerships, like the Toronto Learning Partnership, mimmick the CEA and simply pour more money into existing publicly-funded programs.
A recent commentary, written by Jay P. Greene and entitled “Gates Foundation Follies” (July 25, 2011) dispells some of the hoary myths concerning growing corporate influence over American public education:
The Gates Foundation has invested $5B over the past decade in various school reform initiatives, including small school advocacy and teacher quality reform. That sounds like a tremendous investment until you realize that U.S. school districts spend $600 billion a year.
“All giving, from the Bake Sale to the Gates Foundation,” Greene reports, ” makes up less than one-third of 1% of total spending. It’s basically a rounding error.”
What’s the point? Public spending on education, in the U.S. and in Canada, drives the system. The Gates Foundation learned, the hard way, that institutional inertia can effectively stymie projects like the Small School initiative. All private philanthropy can do is to either fund “lighthouse” reforms or to try to influence future directions. The odds are still stacked against Gates and the champions of system reform.
I am still of the opinion that the biggest culprit in all this is school boards – at least in the Annapolis Valley it is..
“Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.” – Mussolini
Linking education with corporate interest is, by any legitimate measure, fascist.
With that said, any blog which positions the Gates’ Foundation as neutral or “champions of system reform” in their “philanthropy” is serving interests other than students or The Public. (See, for e.g., http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gerald-bracey/dumb-and-dumber-the-gates_b_67648.html)
At the risk of flogging a dead horse, technocrats shouldn’t be guiding educational policy. In the case of the Gates’ Foundation you’ve got a ruthless and suicidal drive towards vocationalism. Here’s some historical context which might help frame this drive more appropriately: Vocation, vocation, vocation – http://t.co/LsMCYhl
Within this thread I’ve been (mis)taken as a (neo)Marxist, positioned as defending the status quo, and construed as a conservative, reactionary voice in the educational reform movement. This is like reading a book by Chomsky and coming away thinking it was a recipe for cupcakes.
We live in a world where fundamentalist Christian fascists can murder youth activists and call them “Marxists”. The same proclivities are very much in play within this thread.
I entered this dialogue at the behest of a colleague (David Wees) who suggested teachers in Canada with an interest in the “quality” debate make their voices heard. I’ve done that to my satisfaction, and I invite any and all readers who have an interest in the “accountability” debate to pursue the references I’ve provided.
Come back when you have a reliable system of measurement for “accountability” and a clear definition of it. Until then it’s all rather meaningless.
You are a brave soul, Tobey. Most teacher-educators are loathe to engage in such open, free-wheeling discussion. You and David Wees stand out as exceptions. You are taking risks and moving out of normal comfort zones.
We have the widest range of opinion you will find anywhere in Canadian education. It’s not an accident. As moderator, you will find that I accept all reasoned and ethical comments and try to avoid imputing motives. We do draw the line when the words become personally offensive to others. Only crackpots and incendiary comments get trashed.
We welcome informed comments from anyone and everyone in education, unlike The Little Education Report, Education Canada, and far too many professional education journals in Canada.
You will find, if you haven’t already, that students in the K-12 system come before adults for most of our contributors. We all admire good teaching but, like Barak Obama, many of our posters are tired of people who make excuses for bad teaching and totally ineffective pedagogy.
We encourage independent thought and opinion in a field not known for such activity.That’s what makes Educhatter such a popular blog, judging from our recent hits.
within this thread of… what?
Dark days Tobey, but not applicable to people with peaceful educational initiatives purveying earnest objectives and ideals.
http://www.rheefirst.com/?p=1439
Yes, corporate Canada could not organize a one car parade in education but it is not for lack of trying. As Kissinger said of Nixon, “even paranoids can have REAL enemies.”
There is a section of the Conservative party that would privatize sidewalks. I Toronto we can see the true face of extreme conservatism now as Ford slashes at the police, the fire dept, EMS, garbage collection, upkeep of parks, the arts, bicycles, daycare and so on.
This mentality in charge of schools is frightening.
The true face of education reform is sinister TOTAL privatization. If you don’t believe it, you have not been invited to the highest level meetings.
The stupid element within biz community sees public education as an expensive tax sucking luxury we cannot afford (Harris Hudak). The slightly smarter version (McGuinty) sees education as human capital formation, in other words public education exists primarily to serve the interests of business. They see the aspects of education dedicated to personal development or equity as frills or worse, socialist indoctrination.
The BIG players in conservative corporate education, Gates, Broad, Waltons, Koch, and others call the shots. Look who has totally populated the DofE in USA (Gates) or who actually has a program to train Supers (Broad).
How do we get better teaching?
Reform Movement = bash teachers, demand ‘teacher testing’ call them incompetent, lazy, overpaid, underworked, self absorbed, heartless. American model
Progressive Movement = smaller classes, demand higher education to enter teaching, pay higher wages, respect, the Finland model.
The enlightened nations of the world that are moving ahead are using the low accountability-high respect model.
Good old USA the laggard in educational progress has all of the wrong instincts. I take a longer view. They will join the civilized countries after every element of the reform movement crashes and burns. It won’t be long now.
Well Tobey, I am sorry to informed you – that the blob called public education are very much tied in with the corporate interests of purveyors of education products. Following your line of reasoning, therefore the public education system is a fascist system.
Certainly looks like it from where I am standing, and all the years of fighting the blob on such basic things such as reading and writing. One would think that I was requesting something at such a high price tag, when that was not the case. The blob rather waste our tax dollars on ineffective methods, but in step with the current progressive methods of the day. One of the reasons why my youngest spent two years in a SE math class, doing work two grades below, and on average scoring a 97 %, while I fought to get her out of there and back into the regular classroom. Than the blob threw her back into the regular grade 6 math class, without any accommodations and expected my youngest to work really hard to maintain a 50 average. That was the day, I officially became her built-in tutor on all things math, but I kept it a secret from the blob for good reason. When they did find out, they used their full weight telling me I was so wrong and direct explicit instruction should not be used. But I was ready for them, because the one thing they could not argue with was my child’s grades which were in the low 80s, or higher in all subjects. The school relented and I only had the blob at the board to deal with.
Now if the education system was truly a fascist system, I, along with my youngest would have been tossed out of the public education system a long time ago. In the same fashion as a true fascist government but instead of being kicked out of the country, I be sent to a slave camp for breaking their precious rules. The education system in Canada, is a product of a typical democracy based on a mixed social/capitalistic economic model. The public education system is no more a democracy based model than it is a fascist based model. What the present day education system is based on is a corporate model, with all the trappings that goes with it. And the blob within has full control and power of what happens and does not happen.
Within the blob, the many different self-serving agendas are in direct competition of each other trying to ensure that their agendas will hold sway. So far fuzzy math, whole language, and the many other practices such as inventive spelling are winning the war, over the real programs and practices that would truly raise the achievement rates of all students. But than again the public education system and its blob would never allow that to happen, because it would end the gravy train of all the jobs created by not properly educating the students, and the profits made within the corporate-based system called public education.
As for this comment, “We live in a world where fundamentalist Christian fascists can murder youth activists and call them “Marxists”. The same proclivities are very much in play within this thread.” That is one of the dangers of accepting the flaw writings of Marx as the truth, and where Marx himself has stated it is flaw, because people by their very nature are creatures of competition and always seeking greener pastures. I would dare say you follow Marxist principles, just as the social justice policies follow Marxist principles. To do so, one has to reconfigure the present reality to accept values that goes against their own values and culture. From where I am standing, it is rather perverse to accept the actions of others, by trying to understand them from their values, their social/economic ranking, and culture when their actions are doing harm to others. Marxism and its principles creates greater inequalities among people, because it needs an elite and a small army to control the people and their natural inclination to be free and act independently. Likewise, in a school system the insertion of Marxist principles within a public school system will do more harm, just like it is happening in other parts of the world, spilling out into the streets.
And let us not forget the harm that it is being wrought on its students, when the elite of the education system, decides what knowledge is learn and what is not learned. How perverse is a system, and how accountable is the education system, when they removed fundamental basics such as spelling and grammar that are crucial to learning how to write well, and replaces it with another round of demand writing, or more reading, to model good grammar and spelling. In my world, it needs to be taught and it clearly shows in the final outcomes of the stats.
But in the minds of a believer of Marxism, it is all the fault of the student and their culture, and never the fault of the public education system and their practices. I have been been given a steady diet of excuses from the blob over the years, why it is all my fault. Marxism only allows accountability to go one way, and that is to the lowest levels of society. Likewise, within an education system where the parents are held accountable at a much higher level, than anyone from the education system. In a school system, accountability seems to go only one way when it comes to the achievement of a child, and it is certainly not in the direction of the blob.
Speaking of paranoia, Doug…
For Doug,
Bash: to strike with a violent blow, smash
Criticism: the act of making judgements,; analysis of qualities and evaluation of comparitive worth.
I came across information today, where I learned a few facts on teacher quality. There has been concerns regarding teacher quality since the 1990s in Canada. Most of the research is being conducted at the higher levels of government organizations that have connections to the international world. I even had something confirmed to me regarding the connection between reading and numeracy. I always suspected that there was a connection between reading and math, but the educrats in my world, would say there was no relationship between how well one reads to achievement in math. But that is a story for another time, and more importantly in Canada, there is far less time spent on professional development for teachers in the areas of math and the sciences.
Below are a series of rather long studies/reports on teacher quality in Canada, and in some cases other countries are included..
Teacher Quality In Canada
Click to access ED482197.pdf
Quality Indicators for Teacher Education
Click to access PUB_QITE.pdf
“The National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC)
in collaboration with the Commonwealth of Learning (COL), set out to develop quality indicators for teacher education. The indicators are the outcome of the recommendations of senior teacher educators and experts in education from eleven Commonwealth countries. Using these indicators, which are introspective, the institutions can create internal quality structures for appraisal of the quality provisions of the system, which in turn would lead
to continuous monitoring and improvement. The main objective in developing these indicators is to provide a tool for continuous quality improvement and to energize and sustain the institutions’ quality enhancement efforts.”
Raising Teacher Quality Around the World
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/dec10/vol68/num04/Raising-Teacher-Quality-Around-the-World.aspx
“All across the globe, countries are trying to improve education. Some countries are in the earlier stages of education development, mainly striving to expand access to elementary and lower secondary education and to ensure transmission of basic skills; in these nations, reformers are less concerned with the quality of the teaching force than with just getting enough teachers into classrooms. Other countries are entering the global knowledge economy and seeking to prepare their students with the complex, higher-order cognitive skills that economy demands; in these nations, the major focus is strengthening the quality and effectiveness of the teacher workforce (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD], 2005).”
Comparative Indicators of Education in the United States and Other G-8 Countries: 2006
Click to access 2007006.pdf
“This report describes how the education system in the United
States compares with education systems in the other Group of
Eight (G-8) countries. The G-8 countries—Canada, France, Germany,
Italy, Japan, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, and the
United States—are among the world’s most economically developed
countries.”
And the last one is a review being conducted presently in the United States, on teacher preparation.
“Amid criticism from education reform advocates who say many teacher preparation programs provide poor training, a national organization is conducting a review of more than 1,000 programs to help aspiring teachers choose from the best. This consumer guide for prospective teachers — conducted by the National Council on Teacher Quality — will be published in U.S. News and World Report next year.”
http://www.npr.org/2011/05/10/136057240/ed-programs-assail-u-s-news-survey
Everybody calls it teacher bashing Steven, you will not be able to redefine it. Nobody will take your lead as teachers are scape goated for the shortcomings of society.
Why would we follow the USA, This is like getting help with your homework from the lowest achieving kid in the class? Why not model our system on those with the highest possible achievement.
Only Finland and Korea score higher than Canada. Korea does it with long hours, after school tutorials and deep respect for the teachers. Finland does it with a 4% child poverty rate, highly educated teachers, a “pull together” attitude almost totally lacking in confrontation, and deep respect for teachers.
Canada #3 has NOTHING I repeat NOTHING to learn from the United States of America about education.
Anybody pick up on that “deep respect for teachers” part common to Korea and Finland?
I agree with you Doug, the US system is fraught with problems. No one is debating that.
But I refuse to be linked to the term “teacher bashing”. And I would not try to redefine something that is ostensibly distorted. It is part of your (not mine) lexicon of ideology. Nothing I can do to change that.
Evaluation is a part of my world that stimulates and improves things such as research, comparative analysis, creativity, communication – verbal, written, and visual. I would not do what I do if my former teachers thought they were beyond evaluation and quality reform. Many teachers are as deeply critical of their proffession as those on this blog. Seems to me many of them are former teachers also.
Have you made a profession out of missing the point and taking everything out of context? or are you simply afflicted with “hyperboleism”?
Refusing to accept a term like “teacher bashing” is hyperboleism?
really Andrew.
I wasn’t addressing you, Steven. That was for Doug.
I have been checking in here and there on this blog topic. I can’t say I have read every word–but close to it. For now I will say that I am saddened and worried about the direction of US education. I am not sure I want to elaborate further here, but I will think about it.
But from my reading this morning, the general picture in Canada and in other countries, having deep respect for teachers is not an indicator for teacher quality. Respect in any profession must be earned, unless one happens to be a famous name with a good reputation. Although, it may not work out as well for Margaret Atwood has discovered dealing with the Fords of Toronto, but it certainly shows the lack of respect for the residents of Toronto, famous and the not-so-famous regarding cuts to libraries.
That said, in my last post, the third link from the top states, “Contrary to what many people assume, a high-quality teacher workforce is not the simple result of some traditional cultural respect for teachers. Rather, it requires deliberate policy choices. High-performing countries build their human resource systems by putting the energy up front; they concentrate on attracting, preparing, and supporting good teachers and nurturing teacher leadership talent, rather than on reducing teacher attrition and firing weak teachers (Stewart, 2009). These countries spend a higher proportion of their education dollar on classroom teachers than the United States does. This often requires trade-offs in terms of class size, special services, or facilities.”
Deep respect is never a part of teaching quality, but respect goes a long way teaching kids in the classroom. Rather ironic, it was the Canadian unions that made sure the deep cultural respect for teachers in the first half or so in the twentieth century disappear forever, through their contracts. Read the stories Doug, where teachers will described the deep respect for teachers in communities across Canada. To the point, where the people in the community thought they were the go-to person for everything in life, and other aspects of the community. The unions manage to squeezed every drop of respect, sorting out what is and what is not a teacher duty, and where today the image of a teacher and their duties are regulated and confined to the normal operations of a school day. Gone are the days, when teachers came knocking on the doors of their charges, as well as the days when students came knocking on the doors of their teachers.
By the way Doug, Korea also has a high rate of users accessing private tutors after school. Even when the schools decided to offer their own tutoring lessons, many refuse based on quality issues. Finland’s poverty rate is now up to 8 % and climbing, due to the economic crisis. As well as dealing with a climbing unemployment rate, and here too there is cuts being made to their social programs. Another thing Doug, be wise to remember when comparing Finland and Korea, please keep in mind the geographic and land mass when comparing Canada and other large countries to small countries. Not too many teachers in Canada and United States are willing to work in the more remote parts of Canada, and for that matter the more populated areas of rural Canada, for various reasons. One of the reasons is, too far away from the urban hustle and bustle, the services, that makes life easier. Why should Canada copy other countries? Why can’t Canada, create a new model that is suitable and ideal for Canada?
That said, from the readings of this morning – There is a feeling among the top tier of the education field, that the teachers’ colleges need to be change because the quality of the training of teachers is not high. Maybe they should be rank and graded as it is being done in the United States, so potential teachers can make their selection on better data.
Hi Nancy,
interesting how Doug Ford thinks Atwood needs to be elected to have a say in challenging cuts to Libraries in TO. (infantile)
Kind of like saying parents have no right to discuss or challenge the current state of the education profession. It always ends up revealing a profound lack of repect for those whose futures are at stake – the students.
Frankly I agree with you (Stewart) in much of his/her analysis. The place to sort out good teachers from bad teachers is at the front door, not with witch hunts after the fact. Finland recruits from the top 1/3 of university classes and insists on 2 masters degrees to become a teacher yet their pay scale is not out of line with northern Europe. I already mentioned the after school tutorial programs Nancy. OK for the ones with the money but a “Pathways” program is needed for the poor ones.
Due to very poor relative wages in the USA combined with lack of respect, the USA (not Canada) has a teacher quality problem. Their inner city and rural teaching situations are so difficult that good well qualified teachers just say “I will not work in that environment, life is too short”. As a result they fall back on people with no choice, also unqualified teachers and Teach for America (here today gone tomorrow) types. We cannot draw conclusions or solutions from the developed world’s (and I use the term loosly) basket case education system.
There was a time when the best paid American teachers made more than Canadian teachers. Those days are gone. Leading Canadian teachers with ten years experience will all go over $100 000 in the next contract (Toronto today $96 000) but yet I consider them still seriously underpaid. Look at what we pay tradespeople, cops, etc and you will see the gap.
Frankly I agree with you (Stewart) in much of his/her analysis. The place to sort out good teachers from bad teachers is at the front door,
___________________________________________________________
But according to you, teachers are 100% blameless.
Doug — Nancy and others are right. The lack of respect for teachers today can be laid at the feet of the teachers’ unions and the teachers themselves.
It started back in 1996 and 1997, in Ontario at least (although each province and the US states seemed to be going through a similar pity party)when the unions made wild allegations about what the Harris gov’t was going to do. For some strange reason, teachers believed the over-the-top rhetoric — teacher testing was the end of the world and Harris personally was going to destroy the public school system because he wanted to “look” at charters and vouchers.
So, the public stood back and said whoa, how come teachers are complaining when they have it so good? Sure, teaching is stressful. I know, I did it. But, not nearly as stressful as many other jobs, like paramedics, emergency room staff and the military in Afghanistan.
To compound it all, there were letters to the editors of major newspapers from teachers going on and on about how tough they had it. Well, they didn’t have it tough at all and the public knew it. The public also was in complete support of some type of teacher testing. Still are.
In other words, the public knew teachers had one of the best gigs going. However, what the hysteria and fear mongering did was cause the public to stand back and pay close attention to the entitlement attitude and react back — which is what you and most everyone in teaching profession today refers to bashing. It’s not bashing. It’s a reaction to you and so many of those in my profession feeling they are “entitled to their entitlements” and for doing less in the job than when I was teaching. More prep time is all we hear about, plus the removal of the very supervisory duties that would allow them to get to know the kids — like hall, yard and lunch room supervision –is disgusting. All jobs have duties people don’t like to do.
Example: I had just gone on leave of absence and had started working for the MPP as his Chief of Staff and EA. I was right near the fax machine as the nonsense that the unions were spewing was coming through. In fact, from then on I asked to see those faxes. I recognized names of former colleagues, teachers that I thought were smarter. Calling Harris Hitler. Making huge exaggerations that I thought no one would believe.
Then, my husband, who was still in the system starting bringing home copies of union notices for the staff bulletin board. It was pathetic, the negative spin and exaggeration. Lies, lies and more lies. And, then the setting things up so the unions influenced the slate of College of Teachers directors. And, don’t tell me that doesn’t happen. I saw the staff memos!
But, what was most disappointing and which you still do here and at CotM today is the BS that the Harris government was at war with the teachers. It was not at war with them. I remember sitting in a meeting at QP with my MPP boss and listening to Harris and other PC MPPs saying the gov’t should respond to the exaggerations.
Harris and his communications people made a huge mistake right then and there because he said something to the effect that “surely no one will believe the nonsense, that my gov’t wants to destroy the public school system.” Well, given all the hysteria coming from teachers at the instigation of the teachers’ unions, they unfortunately did.
Oh, yes, then there was the Snobelen “create a crisis” that the unions exploited. I had colleagues at that meeting. All he said was there are change models in the literature and in order to bring about change, society needs to be convinced change is needed. The “Create a Crisis” is in every management and leadership manual I have ever read. So, more union hysteria and the media went right along with it.
In other words, teachers, who taught kids not to give in to peer pressure, went like lambs to the slaughter, believing everything the unions were saying and none of it, I repeat, none of it, was true.
So, today you are still spewing the teacher bashing bit and as a former teacher I am sick of it. When union officials and teachers finally see what a good gig they have and that THEY are responsible for any backlash the pubic may have, we and they can move ahead.
The crux of the matter is: The unions started it. The teachers bought into it and whined and complained, when the rest of society knew what they had and still have — a ten month job, time in the summer to take a master’s degree (July), time to take a nice holiday (August), time to go their cottage (not everyone works on a masters), time at Christmas, time at mid term break, short hours (8:30 to 4:00), preparation time so little work has to be done at night or on weekends (unlike when I was teaching), a very good salary despite what you say, excellent heath benefits and a top of the line pension plan. And, oh yes, honest to goodness job security at a time when very few have it.
In other words, if you want teacher bashing to stop, the ball is in your court. Stop whining with expectations of entitlement!
Sorry for this comment being so long. I am going to copy it and maybe write a post about it.
Oops. that last comment was not “Jim’s” but Sandy’s. Somehow my husbands blog was open on my desk top and since Paul uses the same wordpress.com as I do, it got posted.
It is waiting moderation and is directed at Doug — teacher bashing is completely the fault of the unions themselves for their never ending whining and entitlement attitude.
That Doug would suggest $100,000 is being underpaid just shows how out of touch with reality he and the unions are. He is comparing apples and oranges. Tradespeople are often self-employed. Cops faced death every day and work 12 hour shifts, as do fire fighters and they are all unionized. I know CEO’s that don’t make that. Just because a few do, is not the reality on the ground.
What is it about progressives that they think there is no limit to spending? I call it the “I am entitled to my entitlements” attitude. Ask the Greeks how that is working for them?
“Although, it may not work out as well for Margaret Atwood has discovered dealing with the Fords of Toronto, but it certainly shows the lack of respect for the residents of Toronto, famous and the not-so-famous regarding cuts to libraries.”
The left likes to trot out Atwood whenever a library issue comes up. She’s been a prop. and proponent at the People for Education events as well.
“interesting how Doug Ford thinks Atwood needs to be elected to have a say in challenging cuts to Libraries in TO. (infantile)”
Actually, there is much more to this than the media and respective mudslingers would have us believe. Everything is on the table and being reviewed in Toronto. Libraries are one of many.
Toronto Public Library has 999 different branches. How close they are to schools which also have libraries? How, thanks to new technologies libraries are facing as uncertain a future as are the print media?
Add those libraries close to the ones in schools and you get an amazing number of libraries.
Those in schools of course are staffed by certified educators…and unionized, as are the Toronto Public folk.
There’s only one taxpayer that funds both libraries in schools and municipally owned libraries.
But Doug, in Canada there is unique characteristics in rural Canada concerning education, that are not shared with their urban counterparts. It impacts teacher quality in a big way, where the more skillful of teachers are more apt to leave, and never stay for very long periods of time. Moving on, where there is better picking grounds in terms of salaries, and access to more services. There is also shortages in specialist teachers in the math and sciences as well, as in the other specialists for rural Canada. And no one receives salaries of $96,000 after 10 years, except for boards who are rich in revenues. And where are the boards located, the heavy populated urban areas that are paying the higher salaries, and where the average salary outside of urban areas is around the $65,000 mark. Don’t quote me on it, since I am taking the numbers from my memory, but I do know many teachers leaves rural areas, for better pay in urban areas.
That said, a Pathway program may be fine for the urban areas, where access to resources and services can be easily obtained, Not so for the rural areas and where rural schools have for the most part a typical split of various income. Very few areas have a large concentration of low-income, like in Toronto and other cities, where a Pathway program can be applied to the whole school, since most students are low-income in the first place. After-school tutoring, and other programs for rural areas should be unique to fit the needs of the local community, to address problems of busing schedules. Last time I check, the Ontario government is ensuring that busing will be no longer strictly a local concern. In the coming school year, watch for the horror stories coming to light of big busing companies working out of Toronto and the metro area that won the contracts over the small local busing companies. This is the second point that I will raise that impacts teacher quality, is the centralization of education services province wide, and the loss of local community control.
And Doug, it is Toronto that is paying the highest wages for police officers. Ontario is not Toronto, and as for trades people the majority works in the private sector. They should not be used when talking about salaries in the public sector. If you want to pushed it, public sector wages are a whole lot higher than in the private sector. Toronto pays some of the highest wages in public sector jobs in the country, on top of offering generous pension and benefit plans. In part, the salaries increases of the public sector in Toronto to cover the cost of living. Isn’t Toronto now the most expensive city to live in, finally topping Vancouver?
As for the teachers’ colleges, from what I have read – the general consensus is from the top levels of education, is reform has to be leveled at the teachers colleges in all aspects. What is being raised, is the poor training in reading instruction, math instruction, as well as the other sciences. They may disagree with the approaches, but what is agreed upon is that teacher training needs to be improve vastly. Pay doesn’t seem to be in question in the developed countries and some would argue that pay has little to do with teacher quality.
Teacher salaries are negotiated by the province in NS.
What I can’t figure out is the fact that for all out “poor reading teachers, methods, whatever” OECD says our 15 year old kids read at the top of the world and many experts in education come here to see how we are doing it. Canada comes up very often in Education Week as one of the very successful reading nations.
Yes, considering the wages of professionals with the same education as teachers, teachers are chronically underpaid.
And yes Sandy, just as arbitrators constantly tell governments “what do you mean there is no more money, you have the power to raise taxes so do it.”
I think we all have learned at this stage of our lives “you get what you pay for.” The reform movement constantly says “we want better teachers” and they also say “teachers make too much money benefits and pensions.” sorry, you cannot have it both ways.
Personally, if it were not so sad, I enjoy watching conservatives in Toronto justify slashing libraries, cops, firefighters, EMS workers, take flowers out of the parks, slash daycare, and at the same time justify a subway to nowhere that all the experts say cannot be justified and a 3% tax hike next year.
What a complete buffoon e have elected, a philistine ignoramus. We are all asking “where is the gravy Mr Ford?”
McGuinty may just be able to parlay our profoundly ignorant Mayor into majority #3.
There is no gravy, there never was. If Ford had been honest about his planned cuts he would have finished far behind Joe Pantalone.
Today I see Malkin over at SQE has launched another teacher bashing piece followed up by another pro faith based schools number. I guess we have nothing to fear from the reform movement so long as they keep raising issues that place them strongly outside of public opinion.
Couldn’t find anything like that.
Have a link?
Guess that was another “misstatement”?
“I guess we have nothing to fear from the reform movement so long as they keep raising issues that place them strongly outside of public opinion.”
based on results from another one of Doug’s polls? He seems to speak for many.
The “teacherbashing” thing is pretty tired. Time to come up with a pithy new “teachers as victims” soundbite…? As to faith-based schools are they any more discriminatory or acceptable than schools than based on economic means, race and so on? There are “academies” which market almost entirely to wealthy Asian expatriates, for example.
Here is the comment I entered incorrectly. It probably ended up in Paul’s spam filter. If he releases it, it will show “Jim” at the top. I have been reading Doug’s self-righteous comments about there being no gravy, etc. A close family member works in a public library. There is always gravy, particularly in Toronto because the staff are all unionized.
[…]
Doug — Nancy and others are right. The lack of respect for teachers today can be laid at the feet of the teachers’ unions and the teachers themselves.
It started back in 1996 and 1997, in Ontario at least (although each province and the US states seemed to be going through a similar pity party)when the unions made wild allegations about what the Harris gov’t was going to do. For some strange reason, teachers believed the over-the-top rhetoric — teacher testing was the end of the world and Harris personally was going to destroy the public school system because he wanted to “look” at charters and vouchers.
So, the public stood back and said whoa, how come teachers are complaining when they have it so good? Sure, teaching is stressful. I know, I did it. But, not nearly as stressful as many other jobs, like paramedics, emergency room staff and the military in Afghanistan.
To compound it all, there were letters to the editors of major newspapers from teachers going on and on about how tough they had it. Well, they didn’t have it tough at all and the public knew it. The public also was in complete support of some type of teacher testing. Still are.
In other words, the public knew teachers had one of the best gigs going. However, what the hysteria and fear mongering did was cause the public to stand back and pay close attention to the entitlement attitude and react back — which is what you and most everyone in teaching profession today refers to bashing. It’s not bashing. It’s a reaction to you and so many of those in my profession feeling they are “entitled to their entitlements” and for doing less in the job than when I was teaching. More prep time is all we hear about, plus the removal of the very supervisory duties that would allow them to get to know the kids — like hall, yard and lunch room supervision –is disgusting. All jobs have duties people don’t like to do.
Example: I had just gone on leave of absence and had started working for the MPP as his Chief of Staff and EA. I was right near the fax machine as the nonsense that the unions were spewing was coming through. In fact, from then on I asked to see those faxes. I recognized names of former colleagues, teachers that I thought were smarter. Calling Harris Hitler. Making huge exaggerations that I thought no one would believe.
Then, my husband, who was still in the system starting bringing home copies of union notices for the staff bulletin board. It was pathetic, the negative spin and exaggeration. Lies, lies and more lies. And, then the setting things up so the unions influenced the slate of College of Teachers directors. And, don’t tell me that doesn’t happen. I saw the staff memos!
But, what was most disappointing and which you still do here and at CotM today is the BS that the Harris government was at war with the teachers. It was not at war with them. I remember sitting in a meeting at QP with my MPP boss and listening to Harris and other PC MPPs saying the gov’t should respond to the exaggerations.
Harris and his communications people made a huge mistake right then and there because he said something to the effect that “surely no one will believe the nonsense, that my gov’t wants to destroy the public school system.” Well, given all the hysteria coming from teachers at the instigation of the teachers’ unions, they unfortunately did.
Oh, yes, then there was the Snobelen “create a crisis” that the unions exploited. I had colleagues at that meeting. All he said was there are change models in the literature and in order to bring about change, society needs to be convinced change is needed. The “Create a Crisis” is in every management and leadership manual I have ever read. So, more union hysteria and the media went right along with it.
In other words, teachers, who taught kids not to give in to peer pressure, went like lambs to the slaughter, believing everything the unions were saying and none of it, I repeat, none of it, was true.
So, today you are still spewing the teacher bashing bit and as a former teacher I am sick of it. When union officials and teachers finally see what a good gig they have and that THEY are responsible for any backlash the pubic may have, we and they can move ahead.
The crux of the matter is: The unions started it. The teachers bought into it and whined and complained, when the rest of society knew what they had and still have — a ten month job, time in the summer to take a master’s degree (July), time to take a nice holiday (August), time to go their cottage (not everyone works on a masters), time at Christmas, time at mid term break, short hours (8:30 to 4:00), preparation time so little work has to be done at night or on weekends (unlike when I was teaching), a very good salary despite what you say, excellent heath benefits and a top of the line pension plan. And, oh yes, honest to goodness job security at a time when very few have it.
In other words, if you want teacher bashing to stop, the ball is in your court. Stop whining with expectations of entitlement!
Sorry for this comment being so long. I am going to copy it and maybe write a post about it.
Doug — Nancy and others are right. The lack of respect for teachers today can be laid at the feet of the teachers’ unions and the teachers themselves.
____________________________________________________________
Please exclude me from the “others”.
Thank you.
I don’t agree Sandy, the attack on public education began in the United States with the new domination of the conservative movement by neo-conservatives with their worship of Friedman and Hayak. This group of Neanderthals (remember Barry Goldwater) had always been held in check by moderate Republicans in the USA and Red Tories in Canada. Many date their rise to the fall of the Soviet system in combination with the shifting world opinions against Isreal.
This new group took over the conservative movement in both countries, witness the Tea Party in the USA and the former Reform Party in Canada.
They had always had nothing but contempt for the moderates considering Bill Davis, Hugh Segal, even John Tory to be offering “creeping socialism”. Their goal was a total rollback of the state to pre-Roosevelt levels.
Privatization and deregulation were the goals, union busting, tax slashing, public sector bashing were simply means to an end. This is a class war at its core.
“America is in a class war. My class started it and we are winning.”
Warren Buffet. (Buffet in fact does not approve and as a result supported Obama).
Harris for both strategic and ideological reasons, is part of this Neo-con revival and hegemony.
I would love to see the union bulletins you husband received, I probably wrote some of them.
You can say whatever you want about it. The analysis of the teachers’ unions is that the Neo-con movement, and they would include Hudak in that, has a goal and that is the TOTAL privatization of education, health and most other social services. In as much as they ever support them, the decision was political due to the popularity of the institution at a point in time.
Paul asks “why are the unions so resistant to change in the reform direction?” It is because they believe that the reform cause is the face of Neo-conservatism in education, that it is the mortal enemy of children, public education, teachers and unions. They believe that the reform movement is the work of the evil forces of the Earth.
You should be scared Doug because Sandy’s closer to the truth. You response is very transparent and hypocritical given your own personal private school role.
How many other former teacher union leaders are as hypocritical?
The unions are losing profile, they’re losing the PR wars and they’re losing the sympathy of voters who likely all went to school at some point in their lives and
know intimately that not all teachers are created equal in quality.
Ya, a lot of people believe they can judge teachers because “after all they we students once”. What a joke.
It is the reform movement that is running out of gas. Especially south of the border, Vouchers aren’t working, charters aren’t working, NYC is abandoning merit pay as are others because “it made no difference.”
People realize watching the idiot Republicans that they are a wholly owned subsidiary of the rich and anybody else that supports them is just a sucker. The Wisconsin governor is now well behind in the polls, Bill Gates is losing heart, basically the air is leaking out of the reform movement as it “fails to deliver”
The biggerst joke is that some of the voucher and charter disasters are pleading for understanding by saying “look how poor the kids are we aren working with”. I thought they were the “no excuses people? Where are the middle class results they promised. Many have been in business 10-20 years now and they cannot deliver.
The reform movement in the USA is a documented failure but like Wiley Coyote chasing the Road Runner, they have run off the cliff but they have not looked down yet.
Doug — You just don’t seem to get it. The more you try to defend the indefensible and make excuses ad nauseum, the more people are losing respect for us, educators that is. Give it a rest and stand back and look at your own role in this “bashing” you keep talking about. Entitlements, entitlements, entitlements, blame the U.S., blame Mike Harris, blame Tim Hudak, blame this group, blame that group. Blame. Blame. Blame.
Well, maybe you should look in a mirror my friend, because that is where the bashing can be traced, directly back to you and your union pals. Whether it is in Ontario, Nova Scotia, or the US, that is precisely where the buck stops.
It is not parents or the general public who picked this fight. I was there at the start and I have to tell you, as an educator myself, it was very discouraging and demoralizing. I spent thirty-five years of my life in education in some form.
To others who have been talking about teachers’ colleges:
Yes, Education Faculties need to reform as well. Why? Because each and every professor started in the classroom. Yup, that’s right. Each and every one of them. Because once you get a doctorate and apply, you have to have had classroom experience. So, what goes around comes around — literally.
Too bad more of us don’t speak out like I am doing. I can only do it because I am retired and far removed from the “system.” If I was still teaching, truthfully I too would be silent. Unfortunate, but the reality teachers and teacher educators face — even if you have tenure.
No Sandy, it is not the general public or the parents that has a problem with teachers, it is far right ideological types and greedy business people who hope to make a buck off the dead body of public education that are the problem.
Now Catherine is making the classic slash the libraries argument. What next,
“Are there no workhouses”… Lets make the disabled pay for the rubber tips on their crutches. The entitlement thing is out of control, next they will want free hospitals and free schools, they probably want us to take the kids out of the mines next. How will we ever afford that?
Captain Hyperbole strikes again.
There are some truisms in life and in education. One of my profs at OISE said “in education reform, any reform must be sold to the teachers well and they must come to accept it. If not it will fail.
I am reminded of a stupid idea known as TAP, Teacher Assistance Program or something. All HS teachers were to take 10-15 minutes out of first period a few times a week to do “group guidance” with the kids. Teachers hated it. It constituted an extra prep, it took valuable time from regular classes, any positives to it were lost on classroom teachers and most concluded “this is guidance function, why don’t they do it?”
You could see teachers setting it up for failure. They complained at every single staff meeting. The raised it at every board committee meeting, they ignored it, they sent around union bulletins on how to undermine it, they told the minister at every meeting that it didn’t work.
Eventually school opened next September with no provision for TAP.
The lesson came home to admin and bureaucrats. If your next brainwave is not congruent with “a teacher viewpoint” on what is needed it will eventually be rendeded useless.
I keep waiting for the reform movement to lauch some idea and teachers say “wow what a great idea.” It hasn’t happened yet and I suspect it never will because, at its heart, the reform movement is an anti-teacher movement. They can smell it off you no matter how many times you try to deny it.
Anyone else find the concept of teachers “setting it up fore failure” anything they disapprove of/disagree with a bit dodgy? It isn’t the job of an employee, whether Doug the teacher or Billy the mailroom clerk to deliberately sabotage mandated duties. I suspect that sort of attitude or misunderstanding of duties is what creates so much angst among the fringes of the teacing profession; they assume they’re co-equal to the leadership in the system, although unwilling to take responsibilty for results achieved.
The TAP program was the brainchild of a well-paid and well-positioned Ministry of Education senior bureaucrat Doug.
It was a stupid idea because as most ideas stemming from the paper pushers it looked good on paper but practically most teachers or students had any use for the program.
As a matter of fact the Report of the Minister’s Advisory Group on the Provision of Co-instructional Activities recommended it be scrapped.
Doug — You still haven’t admitted the role of the unions in why teachers do not have the respect they once had and the unions role in why that is. You go all around the issue. Trace it back. Whether it was in Ontario, B.C. or the Atlantic provinces, all the unions went in the same direction — no standardized testing, no teacher testing, no this and no that, all the why whining that teachers shouldn’t be doing supervion and were underpaid.
The union strategy now should be to change that perception by changing your attitudes — particularly given how tough things are in the private sector generally at the moment.
Teacher, know thyself.
Why oppose reforms? Possibly because they don’t work, would that be a good enough reason?
http://educationviews.org/2011/07/27/voucher-advocacy-shifting-focus-report-says/
Doug,
as the education budget continued to go int outerspace for the last several years in NS., enrolment continued to decline. The more reforms received public attention the more they have created a fear based reaction by unions which is being challenged.
In NS, union strategy was to get involved in a TV propaganda war callling for a halt to cuts and putting kids first. (amazing after the “students first ” manifesto)
Dexter fought back with more of “our” money to defend the cuts and the position of the NDP gov. They also seemed to want to put kids first.
What is truely amazing is when Union head Alexis Allen (NS) suggested there is nothing wrong with our schools, she walked right into her own do – do. By doing so she has brought parents and the public into this debate.
The horse is outta da barn!
A good bit on the spin educators put on test scores.
Click to access Were%20number%2034.pdf
Not to be-labour the point but this post “is” about the teachers’ unions — everywhere — resisting reform. Doug is a perfect example of why they are resisting. He/they just won’t deal with their role in the negative backlash against the entire profession over the last fifteen years or longer — blaming everyone or everything other than looking inward.
In fact, the woe is me attitude and why nothing works better than the status quo seems so ingrained that heaven only knows how anything can be done.
I would imagine that any politician who actually tries to implement reform will be denounced from the rooftops as Mike Harris was.
I mean even Obama tried the “teacher merit pay” issue at the start of his term and he was roundly denounced for it.
Teacher Merit pay is a stupid idea that has been tried over and over throughout history and has NEVER worked. Vouchers do not produce better results neither to charters.
It is the Progressive reform agenda that works, smaller classes, higher qualifications for teachers, ECE/ELP, and outside factors such as poverty mitigation, health, birth weight, nutrition and so on. Summer school after school tutorial etc.
The right wing reform movement based on vouchers, charters, merit pay, testing, etc if falling apart south of the border. You only get a very few years to PROVE education reforms work before people move on. Times up and we get excuses.
Americans now know that NCLB the centerpiece of conservative reform is a total joke based on utopian goals set against a snake pit of poverty related issues. RTTT son of NCLB is also a fools paradise of incentive grants to encourage policies that clearly don’t work.
Conservatives need to face some tough facts. The jury is back. Conservative education policies simply do not work. Nobody else in the world has any time for them except the USA and David Cameron in the UK. He will find out very soon that his policies don’t work either. The bodies are floating to the surface.
http://educationviews.org/2011/07/27/voucher-advocacy-shifting-focus-report-says/
More on the voucher hoax as if we didn’t know it was a joke.
A good bit on the spin educators put on test scores.
Click to access Were%20number%2034.pdf
Some people in the small provinces talk about Alberta and Ontario and Nova Scotia as if they were not talking about apples and oranges. First of all some provinces are rich and others are poor so results are guaranteed to be different. Secondly Ontario is 44% of Canada and so is not only reflected in the average, it creates the average. An Atlantic province can change dramatically and make not difference to the Canadian average whasoever because they are so small.
Excellent example of spin.
Actually “higher qualifications for teachers” would only matter if it obliged them to make use of them. As it is now a teacher with “higher qualifications”, presumably a masters degree, can do exactly the same job as a teacher with a BA/BEd combination next door and receive a higher salary because of their “higher qualifications”.
Credentialism, in and of itself, is meaningless.
Well said John L. Doug’s struggling to stay relevant with same same 1990 union talking points.
Old boys are old news.
Doug, Catharine is pointing out duplication of services in the smaller communities, and was pointing out communities that have only one library, one school with a lousy library, and perhaps a youth centre. All other things requires a trip of 25 kms or more to the nearest centre for such luxuries as a health clinic or an employment centre. The libraries once upon a time had wonderful programs for the pre-school set, and all my children attended. Since the 90s, I have watch the demise of public libraries, their programs for the most part free go bye-bye as public sector unions start to push for their own set of programs. Social services, public education, started to provide their own programs at a much higher cost, compared to the small local parent-run programs, the church kind, or the public library.
By the 1990s, the economy was a different breed, when money became tight for those within the private sector, while the public sector workers enjoy the security of good pay and all the benefits that came with it. The wage gap that is problematic is the gap between private and public sector unions, creating the perfect circumstances for public sector unions to take full advantage. And that they have and still are doing. Increase in minimum wage, there is the pencil pushers of the teachers’ unions penciling in the new figure for the next set of contract negotiations. As Sandy has stated, “Give it a rest and stand back and look at your own role in this “bashing” you keep talking about. Entitlements, entitlements, entitlements, blame the U.S., blame Mike Harris, blame Tim Hudak, blame this group, blame that group. Blame. Blame. Blame”
And especially stopped blaming the political parties for the public sector unions’ woes. Public sector unions are nearing their days of holding the public hostage, and the public does see what eventually happens when one of the public sector unions receives a raise, the taxpayer ends up footing the bill in the form of increased taxes in some shape or form. Speaking about teachers’ unions bemoaning the injustices of government, EFTO has a good one defending their stance, but they should be applying it to all political stripes, because no government can afford their demands, especially the latest demands from the American teachers’ unions. The demand of being paid more for the extended school day and/or school year. They are really upset with some states who are saying no, and bringing in legislation to prevent them from using them in contract negotiations for increase pay. At the end of the EFTO article, “Lessons for Ontario
Clearly it matters which party forms the next provincial government. The leader of the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party has dismissed the suggestion that a future PC government would adopt the budget-cutting measures of Wisconsin. He has, however, consistently pressed the Liberal government to scale back on public sector spending and target public sector salaries. He has also advocated changing Ontario’s labour arbitration system, which is currently designed to ensure fairness when contract negotiations reach an impasse.
We have yet to see the election platforms of Ontario’s political parties, but ETFO members should heed the turmoil south of the border when considering how to vote and ponder the extent to which they can make a difference in the upcoming provincial election.”
http://etfovoice.ca/site/Due-South-Attacks-on-American-Unions-and-Public-Education-A-cautionary-tale-for-Ontario/
Teacher unions resist all reforms, that they can’t use in negotiating new contracts, and on the other side take full advantage to drive the union’s position down the throats of the public by instilling fear. Guess what Doug, the public has had their fill will fear messages, and are beginning to look after their own best interests. Questioning the messages of the private sector taking over public education in Canada. Raising questions such as who and what companies would that be? I can’t think of any companies or wealthy individuals that would undertake that one on a large scale. But many are coming down to the realization that teachers’ unions are more afraid of losing their power and position, than any corporate take-over of public education. As Sandy has stated, looked into the mirror of history that will show how the unions have over reached, ignoring the economic hardships, and the problems that come with it impacting all citizens. What is really rich Doug, in your last post it does reflect that you have not kept up in reading the news. “ First of all some provinces are rich and others are poor so results are guaranteed to be different. Secondly Ontario is 44% of Canada and so is not only reflected in the average, it creates the average. An Atlantic province can change dramatically and make not difference to the Canadian average whasoever because they are so small.” I regret to inform you, that Ontario is the second province to received the greatest amount of equalization dollars to the tune of 2 billion dollars for next year. Of course Quebec comes in first. As for the rest of the provinces it is chump change. Ontario is a have-not province – a poor cousin. The nick-name that some Ontario residents imposed on the other provinces who were receiving equalization payments, the province of Ontario is now wearing the label of a have-not. .
Sorry guys, I could not resist. Since moving to the East coast, from Ontario – It has become really tiresome hearing such remarks like Doug, that are designed to insult, and to create the image of the Atlantic provinces are not contributors to Canada. Pretty soon, Ontario will be looking for advice to the Atlantic provinces how to do more with less money and how to handle public sectors unions when there is no money in the bank, and raising the taxes is not an option.
Parents and communities get it Nancy. We’ve been getting it for a lot longer in rural/small communities for much longer than Toronto.
Social services and affording them is sucking the life out of communities.
Good post by the way.
A government that cuts funding, closes schools, overloads classrooms, eliminates protections for learning disabilities, reduces support workers and on and on and now wants to blame teachers. I’m amazed that we’re doing as great job as we do. I think the teachers if this province do an awesome job and we should take a hard look at who’s to blame.
Billionaires KEEP trying to push policies that don’t work. All part of the “blame the teacher first” crowd that can’t face up to the real reasons America lags behind. Could it be that billionaires don’t pay their taxes so that there is not enough money for schools and poverty reduction? Just a thought.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/where-private-foundations-award-education-cash/2011/07/24/gIQA0M0mYI_blog.html#pagebreak
” $684 million in private grants from 2000-08 to organizations involved in reforming the teaching profession.”
Yeah Doug, a mere drop in the bucket compared to the 600 billion of tax dollars being spent in American schools. According to Gates, private monies would not even add up to 10 billion dollars. Oh yeah, a real corporate takeover on 10 billion dollars compared to the 600 billion dollars of tax monies.
Wonder what Canada’s private monies are being spent on public schools? It certainly would not amount to 1 billion dollars, but I bet in both countries they just love the public monies of the education system, always willing to purchased new text books and all kinds of other supplies and tech devices. Teachers’ unions must be in their glory, making new plans for PD days, going over the new text books, which for the most part are identical to the old text books.
Of course not there is not enough money, when the various arms of the public education system are demanding their share, and than have the gall create new economic activities in the name of meetings, PD days, seminars and so forth to arrange a bigger piece of the pie. And in order to spread the propaganda of the “sky is falling, the sky is falling” to the general public.
I remember when I went to school, how the local businesses supported the school, in turn for advertisements or some type of public credit. A lot of books, TVs and other equipment was brought. Things the school would not have, because the school board did not have the funds. Since unions became powerful starting in the 1970s, they have been chasing out the businesses but forgot when they were sweeping, the parents went to.
It is why I have to laugh, when you sneer at the people who are not teachers, their own individual and collective experiences of their schooling. You really should not mock those because the experiences shapes future perceptions of education. And by discounting the experiences, it is a sign of disrespect as well as telling parents they don’t matter. Just asked a parent with a special-needs child, the educrats have been doing it for years, or better yet go on the LD or the other sites, and read the stories of the elderly parents speaking out, things have not change much since the 1980s. Parents still have to fight just as hard, settle for second or third best, but what is really galling is the dismissive attitudes of the educrats mocking the parent’s expertise and the educrats holier than thou ‘I know what is best for your child”.
Teacher quality reform is coming, and may be coming sooner than you think due to the attitudes of the unions and teachers’ colleges who think they know what is best for the public and the children.
Teacher quality reform is coming, and may be coming sooner than you think due to the attitudes of the unions and teachers’ colleges who think they know what is best for the public and the children.
Teacher quality is the latest reform hooby horse, they last less than 6 months each.
Vouchers have failed, charters have failed, merit pay has failed, NCLB has failed, RTTT is failing, Mayoral control has failed, teacher quality especially in Canada is a red herring, a scape goating and a distraction.
Canadian teachers have given Canada the world’s #3 education system and have actually done the world’s best job under the circumstances.
Lack of respect for teachers from conservative forces actually lowers Canadian results by demoralizing good young teachers and causing incredible numbers to quit. UK has a teacher drop out crisis. When asked why they all quit before 5 years were up they all said “too much accountability, too little professional autonomy.”
I highly doubt it Doug, regarding quality reform. From what I have discovered, it has been on the minds of top level people since the 1990s, along with politicians. I was blown away by the amount of material on quality reform, that the public can view. It also has been on the minds of unions since the 1980s, but to opposed any type of quality reform anywhere in the education system. In fact, the brass of the teachers’ unions opposed any teacher autonomy that cannot be fitted in their contracts as well as practices that are based on the science. As for teachers dropping out of the profession, that one can be blame on unions as well, because it serves their best interests to have a certain percentage of new teachers dropping out every year, to maintained the union political and power base.
But you don’t have to take my word. The Teacher Unions: How They Sabotage Educational Reform and Why, published in 2000, and as the title suggests it will inform readers, on the ways of teachers’ unions. Just scanning the book, I came across how teachers’ unions work towards dis-empowering parents, and to ensure that parents have little options when seeking improvements in their children’s achievement.
“The National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) are among the most powerful interest groups in the nation, affecting the way public policy is made. They are the primary political opponents of all forms of privatization, and overwhelmingly support Democrat candidates for public office. Chapter 1 is an introduction. Chapter 2 is devoted to the history of teachers’ unions. Chapter 3 explains the NEA and AFT political and social agendas. Chapter 4 discusses the way NEA/AFT objectives are implemented. Chapter 5 examines national political operations. Chapter 6 discusses political operations at state and local levels. Chapter 7 analyzes the NEA/AFT opposition to contracting out educational services. Chapter 8 examines the composition of union staff. Chapter 9 tracks union revenues. Chapter 9 analyzes the NEA’s dubious accounting practices. Chapter 10 challenges the distinction between collective bargaining and political action. Chapter 11 explains the unique role of AFT President Albert Shanker. Chapter 12 assesses the impact of the state teachers’ unions on teacher welfare and pupil achievement. Chapter 13 takes up the possible NEA/AFT merger and affiliation with the AFL-CIO and its consequences. Chapter 14 suggests how teachers, parents, and citizens and can address these issues. (Contains 327 references.) (RKJ”
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED468097&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED468097
The next link is the PDF file of the book.
Click to access ED468097.pdf
At the very least, lots of ammo, and rather effective ammo to counter the same tiresome lines of Doug and other unionists.
I really think that folks are being very kind to Doug here. If we were all on par in this discussion and gave back in kind what Doug provokes here THEN it would be a fair discussion.
Just like the McGuinty Liberals in Ontario the glory days of education are over and there’s a shift at play these days. Miss it and well, we move backward instead of catching up with the success that choice has been elsewhere.
Catherine,
You are dreaming in technicolour if you think any of the parties will take on school choice in Ontario.
Maybe next time-my opinion..
Hudak will come in,try to better the system and bring accountability measures;they will watch the inertia.
They will then expose it and suggest choice.Not this time,they will not touch it.
And you misread my post. Did I suggest anywhere that I think any party will take on school choice?
3. My strong opinion on where the problem lies is this: It is government failure —for retaining a monopoly system, for letting unions call the shots, for usurping parent rights and duties in education, for letting teacher training be hotbeds for progressive indoctrination, etc., etc.
Posted by Tunya Audain at SQE
“Hi all,
My school is in the far north of B.C and it serves k-12 students. The student body is almost unanimously ‘at risk’. Attendance in the H.School averages over the course of the year at 50% (no joke) and when the students are there, they are sullen, sleepy, or always attempting to wander out into the halls. As I posted before, many cannot read, and there is evidence of W.Lang. damage in what reading they do have (can’t spell words, not aware of phonemes, guess at words based on onset letter or the shape of the word etc.).
There is constant talk of ‘literacy strategies’ at staff meetings and the Director of Instruction is a bona fide progressivist preaching the wonder of word walls, 21st Century Learning, and differentiation. He has even has planned out our next year Professional (indoctrination) Development already around a ‘reading guru” (his words) named Faye Brownlie (another whole-language phony).”
SQE posting,a week ago.
Teacher Quality Reform continues to animate the policy debates in American education… while we slumber on the sidelines or speculate on the significance to the Ford Brothers latest musings in Toronto.
Some Breaking Education News: The U.S. Albert Shanker Institute has just just weighed in on Washington D.C.s IMPACT system and raised a few red flags.
http://shankerblog.org/?p=3205
The D.C. IMPACT model is drawing great attention because it’s leading edge (or “bleeding edge”?) in the American school reform movement.
Now for a pet theory: Americans tend to be interventionists and Canadians are inclined to stand back and watch “shock and awe” initiatives of all kinds.
Is D.C’.s IMPACT model another example of education reform on the fly or “drive-by” teacher evaluation? I can hardly wait for Doug Little’s response, likely citing his new-found heroine, Diane Ravitch.
Jo-Anne for Tunya,
Jo Anne is quite correct for Ontario. There is no party that supports privatization of education. The PCs flirted with it over the years and got burned. The other 2 watched and learned. Popular opinion in BC opposes the half support they give to private schools and I can’t for the life of me understand why the NDP does not run against it, they could win on that alone.
Charters seem stuck in Alberta without any growth where they are allowed. The rest of the provinces status quo on privatization.
Seems to be going nowhere fast. Catherine if you are waiting for big changes from Hudak you will be bitterly disappointed as he has strongly pointed out no privatization although when he says “choice within public schools systems” he may possibly be looking at faith schools within public boards. I doubt it because it is very unpopular. Of course any schools within public systems would have unions, board supervision, staffing rules etc. They would have to take all students who apply.
Pony Pucks Doug!
when parents see the decay of the public system they look for alternatives. You and your popular opinion. Let the unions continue to monopolize and continue to watch the drain.
Doug – you and Joanne are reading something I never wrote in my post. So please stop suggesting I said something when I didn’t.
However, one way or another the school choice discussion will happen in Ontario….sooner rather than later and parties will be dragged into the debate whether they wish to be or not.
Oh, and that “chance” your speaking of is going to come NOT from Hudak or McGuinty – it’s going to come from an other party.
Groups and organizations looking to capitalize on moving the school choice issue forward have a huge window of opportunity right now to do so.
I’d rather hitch my wagon to THAT train then continue on in discussion among the public school monopoly who seem to take great pride in casting blame outward, while never assuming any themselves.
Well Doug, you seem pretty sure on that one, but than again your assumptions rests on the teachers’ unions ability to maintain their political power, as well as the status-quo of the structure of the education system. The union’s central position, where all policies must go through the lens of the union, as well as taking advantage of being in the middle, to mock and stopped policies that hurt the union’s power and political advantage.
Link the link that Paul provided – “In the meantime, we need to very careful about declaring IMPACT – or any system – a success, based purely on blind faith. Doing so represents either a cynical political gambit or a terrible misinterpretation of data. We don’t need either.”
http://shankerblog.org/?p=3205
IMPACT is an example that would threaten the unions, and so it starts early setting up the circumstances to stopped IMPACT, especially when the data appears to be promising. Much like the union’s position on progressive teaching and practices, blocking all attempts on practices and methods that are research-based on the science. Or as a teacher states in Joanne’s post, “There is constant talk of ‘literacy strategies’ at staff meetings and the Director of Instruction is a bona fide progressivist preaching the wonder of word walls, 21st Century Learning, and differentiation. He has even has planned out our next year Professional (indoctrination) Development already around a ‘reading guru” (his words) named Faye Brownlie (another whole-language phony).” The union brass all too busy, ensuring that everyone – the politician, the administrator, the parent, the community is on the same page, thinking in the same way as the union.
“My school is in the far north of B.C and it serves k-12 students. The student body is almost unanimously ‘at risk’. Attendance in the H.School averages over the course of the year at 50% (no joke) and when the students are there, they are sullen, sleepy, or always attempting to wander out into the halls. As I posted before, many cannot read, and there is evidence of W.Lang. damage in what reading they do have (can’t spell words, not aware of phonemes, guess at words based on onset letter or the shape of the word etc.).”
Teachers’ union must maintain the many different levels of students by high school, because it sets up the future jobs for teachers in adult education. Unions do care about the quality of education that students received, as long as it is poor quality where it will not harm the union’s political and power. More importantly their contracts where progressive instruction and other methods can be figured in under prep time. Where word walls is one of the latest methods introduced in high schools, that requires prep time, and of course it can be justified by the unions, since there is many poor readers at the high school level.
But teachers’ union are busy beavers concerning parents and the outside community. Here parents are treated to a number of strategies, including indoctrination of the social justice kind. If not that, constant messages of the importance of teachers, their valuable contributions, that is tied in with other messages that bad outcomes rests entirely on everything else except the teachers. And than the web sites supported entirely by the unions, working in behind the scenes, using parents and communities as their mask.
One such beast is a site called – Education Action: Toronto.
Respecting Teachers / Deskilling Teachers, is just one of the number of articles stating teachers’ unions’ talking points over and over. When it comes to hard facts, there isn’t any , but this is aimed at the parents to picked up the banner of unions, that the union is the only one that has the best interests of your children.
http://educationactiontoronto.com/home/respecting-teachers-deskilling-teachers-where-do-our-teachers-unions-stand
There is one way and only one way to evaluate teachers. That is multiple visits by principals or SOs. Principal know very quickly where “potential” problems are due to parent and student complaints in HS and parent complaints in ES. New teachers need to be closely monitered for 2-3 years to make sure they are off on a good start. A buddy system works well in ES and heads in HS.
The use of testing is questionable at best for students and is foolish for teachers. Even so called VAA varies wildly FOR THE SAME TEACHER year over year. Washington DC fired many teachers only to find out there was massive cheating on the tests.
Poor kids are not just ‘behind’ they learn less each year so weighing them against middle class kids is frought with problems.
The Americans DO have something of a teacher quality problem of their own making. They pay too little and then expect too much. Many teachers are uncertified. Only people with few options in life work in difficult urban (and sometimes rural) poor schools. There are some dedicated troopers but not enough to staff a school.
We have nothing like this here except some of out Aboriginal schools which are very very difficult. I also had a friend who tried it. He reported to me, “picture the worst behaved demoralized kid in your last class. Now picture 100% of the class is like that.”
How do people figure that the world’s #3 system has a serious teacher quality problem. It is not true, it is a slander. There will always be a tiny % of teachers with problems.
If you want to know the REAL problem of teacher quality in Canada it is middle age onset of mental health challenges amongs teachers. There are clinicaly depressed teachers out there. Both the boards and the unions try to get them onto LTD and out of classrooms but there are return to work issues and endless arguments about a very small % of teachers with mental health challenges. It takes a Soloman to deal with these cases. I have tried and it is time consuming and stressful all around. This is the sleeper issue.
“If you want to know the REAL problem of teacher quality in Canada it is middle age onset of mental health challenges among teachers. There are clinically depressed teachers out there. Both the boards and the unions try to get them onto LTD and out of classrooms but there are return to work issues and endless arguments about a very small % of teachers with mental health challenges. It takes a Solomon to deal with these cases. I have tried and it is time consuming and stressful all around. This is the sleeper issue.”
Poppycock Doug. I heard otherwise from the horse’s mouth after teachers retire. According to them, it is stressful after 10 years of teaching or more using practices and pedagogy that are doing more harm to students’ futures, as well as the demands from their unions, and administration insisting on certain practices, that further erodes the ability of teachers from doing anything that is not in keeping with the present day goals and aims of unions and administration. The retired teachers came up to me, urging me to continue, because I am making a difference in my small corner of the world. The only reason why unions are against teacher quality measures, because the data would point to the curriculum, progressive teaching methods, whole language approaches, social justice themes and other such philosophies being interwoven throughout the school resources and the administration. And who is heading it, and is in the perfect place to ensure that reforms even of the most minor kind such as grammar is blocked? The unions,
But for you to raise LTD, it is the height of hypocrisy. It is only the public sector unions that have all the perks and benefits, compliments of the taxpayers, that most outside of the public sector do not have. But what is worse, is the public sector unions abusing their position to seek more and more benefits to the detrimental of the taxpayer, as well as the public they serve.
Pony Pucks Doug!
when parents see the decay of the public system they look for alternatives. You and your popular opinion. Let the unions continue to monopolize and continue to watch the drain.
There is no decay and there also is no drain. 🙂
doug,
then why the cuts to the system in NS?
Premier Dexter believes the system is unsustainable – as the admin. grows the student population declines – hence the cuts comming from within!
Sorry, but this is a fact. Teacher quality reform has as much to do with sustainability as the mushrooming of the Blob does.
Paul — This is a test message. I have heard from one of your regulars that there are some problems signing in and that you have lost some of your comments. I would suggest a new posting, even if just one sentence as I think you have maxed out what your template/theme can handle on wordpress.com
I have an arrangement with other bloggers like Joanne at BlueLikeYou. If you want me to help with some of the background tech stuff, just give me your username and password and I’ll fix things. I can be trusted! You have my e-mail address.
the posts seem to be out of sync. also.
Good on Jay, a test charters booster to listen to the other side. I have discussed these issues with Bob many X for articles.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/class-struggle/post/expert-vs-me-on-testing/2011/07/27/gIQAWl6QdI_blog.html
doug,
then why the cuts to the system in NS?
Premier Dexter believes the system is unsustainable – as the admin. grows the student population declines – hence the cuts comming from within!
Sorry, but this is a fact. Teacher quality reform has as much to do with sustainability as the mushrooming of the Blob does.
I agree, Dexter is making bad decisions about education. Although I tend to side with the NDP more than others, they to are capeable of making stupid decisions, (Bob Rae made almost nothing but stupid decisions because his instincts are always wrong witness his bone headed Royal Commission that created the EQAO, OCT and his Social Contract).
I’m sure NS has fiscal problems but I would quote another famous NDPer.
“The answer to every single political problem that we have, here and around the world is more education.”
Cutting the budget for education on a per capita basis, is never the right answer.
If there is a sharp decline in enrolement, the per capita should be increased at the same time the overall is slowly managed in line with enrolement.
More education, to maintain the perks and benefits of those who work within it. Perhaps, doormen to open and close the doors of those who work within the system, and slammed shut for the users of the system. Yes, more education but always low quality to addressed the lack of skills for future jobs. Love your accounting suggestions – a sure method of increasing funding when quality of education is set on the low bar.
As for your last link, the only reason why there is complaints of charter schools coming into districts of the the upper middle-class, is the lost of students and their funding goes to the charter school. According to the superintendent, “Millburn’s superintendent, James Crisfield, said he was caught off guard by the plan for charters because “most of us thought of it as another idea to help students in districts where achievement is not what it should be.” He said the district could lose $270,000 — or $13,500 for each of 20 charter students — and that would most likely increase as the schools added a grade each year.
“We don’t have enough money to run the schools as it is,” Mr. Crisfield said, adding that the district eliminated 18 positions and reduced bus services this year.”
““Public education is basically a social contract — we all pool our money, so I don’t think I should be able to custom-design it to my needs,” he said, noting that he pays $15,000 a year in property taxes. “With these charter schools, people are trying to say, ‘I want a custom-tailored education for my children, and I want you, as my neighbor, to pay for it.’ ”
At $15,000 for property tax, the public schools are already custom-tailored in the first place, compared to the schools in the next county. Parents want choice, even in the high-rent district, just like other parents at other income levels. As some education lawyers have stated from time to time, public education is a social contract that goes both ways. It stops being a social contract when the school is no longer providing the educational needs of the students. And when the school breaks the social contract, parents who are against charter schools, are always the first one to sue the school and the district or filing a due-process hearing. Likewise in Canada, but more often than not instead of suing, they also used choice by sending their children to private schools.
Doug,
I did not say what Dexter is doing is wrong. Cuts to the education are wrong when they hurt the students in the classroom but do not address the ever expanding Blob.
The “Nova Scotia blob” actually took the posuition that ALL the cuts would be passed on to the classroom level. That was the direct message from the “Save Grade 2” campaign.
http://www.educationnews.org/ednews_today/159078.html
On the one hand Doug says that “the system ain’t broke so don’t fix it” and on the other he wants more money, more teachers, more this, that and the other thing so the system can be fixed.
That his been his constant message from the beginning.
Reckon objective analysis is irrelevant in some worlds.
Nancy, 15% of parents want choices that they don’t get today.Most of that is religious. The rest of the population is absolutely determined to make sure there is no extension of religious choice. John Tory got just hammered for trying to advocate otherwise. You don’t speak for parents, neither do any of your pals. P4E is 100X the size of all combined conservative parents groups. Look at the difference in size between a P4E conference and a SQE conference just as an example.
Parents in NJ as the link shows, are very angry about charter expansion into middle class areas. There is a very strong “it is not needed here” attitude.
As vouchers have been proven to have no academic advantage, voucher proponents are abandoning that argument and shifting to “values” and specialized curriculum ” a Mandarin speaking voucher school” in other words a “Chinese only” school with 10 white kids from mixed families. They are all the same as our poorly thought out ‘Afro-centred’ school. Separatism is a stupid way to go in education especially racial separation. If you like it, you ought to support the BQ and the PQ.
Our tolerant society is built on schools where Christians, Jews, Moslems, blacks, whites, Asians, Gays and straights, Aboriginals, boys and girls and mixed social classes go to school together. If you want to separate them, there is something wrong with you.
People for Education gets lots of help stacking its event from the unions.
“If you want to separate them, there is something wrong with you.”
Oh, but it’s ok for you to creme the crop of Chinese students to satisfy your enrollment base of your elite private school.
Talking out of both sides of your mouth is as disgusting here as it was over at Sandy’s and as it was over at SQE before they banned you from SFT.
You don’t seem to get it that because you were two conflicting personas
1) the former union cheerleader expounding on the benefits of public education while 2) being the Dean of VIP Academy.
How many more former union reps. in Ontario tout public for everyone else but choose private for themselves?
VIP is visa students only. We are not taking enrolement from local schools. We charge each kid $28 000 but guarantee U of T or the university of their choice. We give them 2 tests one similar to grade 10 literacy and one at grade 11 math level. They must turn in every single assignment on time and never be absent without a Dr’s note. We put 100% of last year’s grad class in UT or their favourite university. It is essentially my wife’s business. I just help out. I do mostly consulting.
Is that true?
According to the website you’re the “Dean” of the VIP Academy, hardly a “help out” position in normal educational institutions…
Anywayyy…rumour has it Ontario Boards are trying to recruit foreign students to offset declining enrollments; granted $28,000 tuitions might be quite a barrier for folks who aren’t wealthy.
As to requiring a note whenever a kid misses a day I’d love to see the howls if that was tried in the public system 😉
Each union sends 1-2 reps to P4E conferences. They offer no help in organization whatsoever. I was the OSSTF rep a few times. The room is 90% parents. Active parents from across Ontario who love the PS system but still want it improved. It is a huge room at York University and I would say maybe 3-400 people attend. Naturally they are very enthusiastic about smaller classes, ELP, PD and all the good things to improve education. They are increasingly anti-testing as they see that it destroys the arts, humanities, and creates nothing good and only problems.
They are increasingly aware that Finland is the model not USA. USA is a reform disaster. It is like watching a slow motion train wreck. As each conservative reform crashes and burns they just move on to the next.
Well Doug, P4E needs some lessons on inclusion. They sure like to practice the art of exclusion, since the teachers that populated that site and the organization (who are also strong believers of progressive methods besides strong union believers) would not want their feathers ruffled if a parent seriously questioned the public education system.. Just more window dressing to cover the rot in the public education system.
The Ontario Teachers’ College is used as window dressing for teachers are not acting very professionally. Of course the only teachers that do get fired, are the ones you received a criminal conviction, but as I found out a few weeks ago, even these former teachers can returned back to teaching. As for bad teachers, the union protects them by using LTD as their form of the rubber room. Hell anything goes, even principals putting a Nelson lock on students, and no charges are laid. But the same educators who like to use discipline techniques like the Nelson lock, would not dare to use them in schools where parents are the well-to-do variety because they face the consequences of a battery of well-paid lawyers and their jobs. Big difference in schools’ environments when income is considered, the higher income schools, the students are treated with the respect under the current legal structure. The art of exclusion under the cloak of inclusiveness is another game unions practice to ensure no accountability reaches their desks. Besides they are far too busy defending bad teaching in the schools, and using schools and the students as their personal rat maze and experiments.
Of course, it is all about limiting accountability of those who work within the education system, and making the public pick up the costs dealing with the final outcomes. As Doug keeps on saying, it is all about the bad parents and the bad kids, and not the public education system.
Where are all the “Bad Apple Teachers” in Canada?
After viewing the Hollywood film BAD TEACHER, SQE’s Malkin Dare wonders why its such a dirty secret in Canadian public education:
http://www.societyforqualityeducation.org/index.php/blog/read/bad-apple-teachers/
She may well be right, but I’d like to hear some more current, up-to-date assessments of the Ontario College of Teachers and its effectiveness.
I think you need to start a new thread Paul
Why do people persist in giving AMERIAN examples of teacher problems and then saying what are we going to do about it here in Canada. Have you noticed any rubber rooms in Toronto, any mass cheating scandals in Vancouver ? We don’t need a Canadian response to an AMERICAN problem. The systems could not be more different.
They have massive numbers of unqualified teachers, an idiotic high stakes test driven NCLB/RTTT system that cries out for mass cheating and then they are shocked when someone cheats. Michele Rhee presided over mass cheating in DC and some of her pets were up to their ears in it. Charter schools all over the USA are in financial trouble due to chicanery. The charter system is overwhelmingly corrupt.
The look like Inspector Renault in Casablanca “I’m shocked I tell you shocked to find out that there is gambling going on in this establishment.” at which point the waiter says “your winnings sir” and he pockets the money.
You have no mass Canadian scandals for a reason, this is not the USA.
For the same reason you constantly spout American examples?
You guys will just love this one. Michele Rhee the Sarah Palin of education reform is one unending disaster for education reform as she stumbles from scandal to scandal. OMG.
http://www.rheefirst.com/
The War on teachers
http://dissentmagazine.org/online.php?id=504#.Tg_5DYYQDEc.twitter
The War on Teachers – after reading it Doug, it struck me how the teachers’ unions are in a time warp, still thinking everyone else is on the same page. How the unions are scratching their heads, puzzled why people of types and various stripes are agreeing on a few things. And one of them teacher quality. The examples used in the article, the schools and principals who declare these things just do not work, we do things differently. Well, I trace one school that was mentioned. Lo and behold, even though the school strives for achievement under the progressive banner and all their lovely practices, and toot about the wonderful school environment which is relatively easy since the school is located in a farming community, and under 500 students. Of course everyone knows everyone else, and at least this part is easily obtained in the small rural high schools. That is an advantage, but they have a couple of problems. And I had to laugh, because it is typical of the people who live in rural farm communities, lack of trust.
“The two biggest challenges that Federal Hocking is faced with are engaging the community and effectively teaching heterogeneously mixed classes. A lack of parental trust in the power of education makes it difficult for the school to connect with this primarily agricultural community. In addition, with students entering the school with a wide range of experience and skills, remaining an untracked school and meeting the individual needs of all students is difficult.”
http://www.ceschangelab.org/cs/clpub/view/ces_sp/493
Somehow the fancy ideas of progressivism doesn’t appeal to the more down to earth farmers, who actually do expect their children to have the fundamentals down pat when it comes to reading, writing and numeracy. A highly value commodity that has gone missing in most public schools.
Yes a time warp, or the blinders on when it comes to the many stories across all incomes and various parts of life, the quality of instruction and knowledge. But more importantly, listen to the complaints of parents who end up paying for the remediation after high school, all things that should have been taught in grade school. People do get tick off, especially at the higher income groups more so, than the lower income groups. Some of them are the politicians and other professionals, and sure like to talk at their get-togethers. But the best part, politicians file all the letters of discontent in the education file, and most of them if not all are dealing with the actual instruction, curriculum and questioning the teacher quality.
Trust is a two-way street, and schools need to earn the trust of their students and the parents. If I left it up to the school, my child would either be failing, sitting in SE class, and never would have graduated with a diploma. I spent far too many nights re-teaching, in the day preparing and learning new knowledge and in the spare moments fighting with the school on every issue. Schools love to label, but they do not want to remediate in the 3 Rs. In part unions have played a big part to ensure students with learning problems never received the proper help in the first place. Too many of the unionists are involved with the SE departments of the board, putting the union’s stamp of approval on programs that are ineffective, but sure keep turning out future jobs, courses to work around the fact that their reading, writing or numeracy has never been remediated. And of course it is far too late at the high school level, but the effective programs are turned down because of costs. I say bullocks to that, there are far cheaper than the ineffective programs presently being used.
No Horse Sense From Teacher Unions
When it was announced that NEA (3.2 million members) affirmed for the first time that evidence of student learning should be considered in the evaluations of teachers far too much was made of this “breakthrough”.
It was NO comfort to anyone who can read the small print.
Their policy approval was loaded with conditions — ultimatums. One critical precondition was that any student testing used in this way was to have the approval of the NEA. NO present test satisfies the NEA.
Furthermore, when it comes time for any NEW test to be used in this way, NEA must be involved in the design.
This is no genuine, well-meaning move to reform. This was a strategic move. NEA had to save face due to their mean, “not for children” profile going viral because of Bob Chanin’s teacher “POWER” speech on YouTube — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwxiRXqH_hQ
Jo-Anne earlier quoted my conclusion about our problems — “It is government failure — for retaining a monopoly system, for letting unions call the shots, for usurping parent rights and duties in education, for letting teacher training be hotbeds for progressive indoctrination, etc., etc.”
I stand by that. I now quote a short section from an excellent book on that topic: “Political Leadership and Educational Failure” by Seymour Sarason.
Horse Story and Common Sense
“If the horse you’re riding dies, get off.” That’s horse sense. In the education business these are the suggestions:
“1. Buying a stronger whip.
2. Trying a new whip or bridle,
3. Switching riders.
4. Moving the horse to a new location.
5. Riding the horse for longer periods of time.
6. Saying things like, “This is the way we’ve always ridden this horse.”
7. Appointing a committee to study the horse.
8. Arranging to visit other sites where they ride dead horses efficiently.
9. Increasing the standards for riding dead horses.
10 Creating a test for measuring our riding ability.
11. Comparing how we’re riding now with how we did 10 or20 years ago.
12. Complaining about the state of horses these days.
13. Coming up with new styles of riding.
14. Blaming the horse’s parents. The problem is often in the breeding.
15. Tightening the cinch [strap holding the saddle]”
It is government failure that causes education failure, says Sarason.
But, another writer goes one step further. E. G. West has written that education has to be rescued entirely FROM the state.
Not only that, he says education must be liberated from “schooling” itself.
A FREE downloadable book on EGWest’s essays on government failure and education is here (an easy read) http://www.iea.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/files/upldbook223pdf.pdf
If we all read this mind-blowing book, I’m sure September education debates will have a very different flavor!
The B.C. College of Teachers has a mandate to establish and to defend professional standards and conduct in Canada’s Pacific province. A recent news report in The Vancouver Sun, written by Janet Steffenhagen (July 5, 2011) demonstrates that the BCCT is doing a woefully inadequate job on all counts.
Here are the highlights:
“Scores of educators who were investigated and disciplined by their employers for misconduct — including inappropriate relationships with students, violence, threats and theft — remain members in good standing with the B.C. College of Teachers.
Documents obtained by The Vancouver Sun show that the college, which is responsible for regulating the profession in the public interest, handled many cases of proven misconduct in a way that left disciplinary records clean. Not only is the public unaware of these transgressions, but so too are boards of education and their hiring authorities, the college admitted.
Dozens of cases were dismissed by the college’s preliminary investigation subcommittee (PISC) without action or settled informally, including some that involved sexual interference and intimate relationships with minors; rough handling of a kindergarten student; slapping, shoving and punching students; consuming alcohol during class; threatening and stalking colleagues; and accessing child pornography on a school computer.
In many instances, the misconduct was considered so egregious that it resulted in suspensions and dismissals at the school level, according to the documents released to The Sun after a freedom-of-information request. But when these cases were referred to the college, as required by law, it took no action or simply sent letters to the member seeking assurances that such conduct would not be repeated.” ….. (Vancouver Sun)
Read more at :
http://www.vancouversun.com/College+Teachers+keeps+some+records+spotless/5049101/story.html
Comment:
The BCCT seems to specialize in keeping their teachers records spotless. How is the Ontario College of Teachers performing? What do we know about the situation in other provinces?
I have done a post related to this topic that many here will disagree with. The reality,for me, is that there is far too much blame on the very people who can’t bring about real reform — teachers, the teachers’ unions and faculty of education staff. Rather, it is the politicians that everyone should be going after.
Which means, that with so many provincial and territorial elections coming up this fall (NFLD, PEI, ONT, MAN, SASK and NWT) — it is time to hold them to account by asking: What exactly is your party going to do regarding education reform.
http://crux-of-the-matter.com/2011/07/31/teacher-faculty-of-ed-union-bashing-will-not-improve-public-education/
As I write in my post, in 2003 and 2007, Dalton McGuinty promised to lower class sizes, reduce the drop out rate and increase the graduation rate. It wasn’t the teachers’ unions who brought about those changes or teachers or even faculties of education. Sure, the latter might be asked by the government to present models but it would have been at the request of the Education Minister.
I have tried to make this case for years now and everytime I try, the argument is pushed back to the classroom or the teachers’ unions. Teachers simply implement what they are mandated to do their boards who are mandated by their governments.
Something to think about.
Tunya and Sandy,
I am out there in the trenches as you know.
What I see daily is the blind leading the blind, that`s why I loved Tunya`s synopsis.
Tragedy exists when there`s a cure and no one can be bothered to render it and the BLOB remains unaccountable to it`s citizens for improvement.The game is all in the spin.Millions of dollars are spent at the top of these educational organizations annually continuing the spin,in Nova Scotia,a recent change in curriculum that proved weak in effectiveness will be replaced with a 5 million dollar literacy strategy that they will create;will it work,is it based on the 5 pillars of literacy instruction PROVEN to effect tremendous results.I know in my clinic I saw kids from Ontario school boards gain 3 grade levels in 3 months with explicit instruction rather than fuzzy context based teaching,something none of the faculties in Canada teaches their teachers,so why not blame the faculties Sandy?
In literacy,the lack of which destroys a human being`s progress and hope for the future , the BLOB refuses and stoically continues to do the same thing year after year ignoring research,it is not I don`t think the the teacher`s union that is responsible nor is it the politicians because how could they know,they are not from the pedagogical field?
Don Jamieson who oversaw the Literacy Network for a few years was trying to ring the alarm bells,he said after he sent out their document across Canada every University was angry at the dissemination of research well accepted in the field and challenged his organizationy.They said to him,who is responsible for these views?
How would we all be doing today had the same fate been met when the discovery of Penicillin or Insulin was deemed to be life saving and the Dr,s refused to prescribe it.
Testing children in Grade 3 is too late,it follows the developmental model which is flawed and by Grade 3 it is often too late.
Arrogance in educators is more prevalent than human care and the disconnect to their clients is so deeply engrained that only a revolution will ever change
the nature of schools and accountability.
Is it the politicians,don`t think so,it`s the neglect of faculties to develop the teacher as a true professional-that can`t happen till research,gold standard is accepted and disseminated.
How do you do that when they all want to do research,no matter how crummy it is.Soft science is no better than unlegislated alternative medicine.
Jo-Anne — I have taught in the classroom, been a reading specialist, taught in a faculty of education and worked in an Education Minister’s office when my MPP boss was his Parliamentary Assistant.
It works like this:
The Cabinet directs the Ed Minister to implement something the political party promised during an election. The Ed Minister then calls in the Deputy Minister and tells him or her to do such and such and bring back a report on how it can be implemented. If a committee of faculty of ed researchers is required (or expertise from other members of the blob), the Deputy Minister arranges that as well. That is how it is done. Everything is directed from the political top down.
The other issue is that it is impossible to make inexperienced pre-service students specialists. That takes time in the classroom which is why I would recommend Additional Qualification courses. There simply is not enough hours in a day and a week to do in one academic year (that is usually the time a practicum component involves) what you know as a literacy specialist.
The system is not perfect. It has never been perfect. In the mid to late 1940’s I was taught to read using an experimental methods called the “Look-See” method. No phonics then either. After a decade it was stopped. Yet I learned to read okay and those who had difficulties were taught at home because there were no resource teachers and no special education.
Plus, whole language became the norm, in Ontario at least, in the early 1970’s. For years, some teachers simply stuck to their old methods but eventually they retired. Which means, in a practical sense, that millions and millions of Canadian children learned to read using that method. And, those who had difficulties had to find help in other ways. At least, by the the 70s and 80s. there was special education and instructional resource withdrawal.
I worry about your frustration. You honestly seem to think that what is happening in education today is worse than it has ever been. Well, it isn’t. It is just that change in the education field is very slow because governments have four-year terms. Plus, a new gov’t takes time to learn what they have to do.
Overall, we actually have a pretty good system. My granddaughter just graduated from Grade 12. She is fine. She has the skills and positive attitude she is going to need to make a living and raise a family. And, she probably represents 95% of the young people coming out of the system today.
So, my advice to you for what its worth:
If you can’t deal with the slow pace of change in your field, I think you need to start considering a career change or to work in a private literacy context. Because teachers are, as a group, compromisers who simply do their job and don’t worry what they cannot change.
However, that can become a problem for the more intuitive forward-looking types, that have a problem with the lack of meaningful reform, or the slow pace of change.
In fact, even in the short time I have been commenting here, I can say that your frustration is palpable. As a teacher “in the trenches”, you can’t lead a delegation to your MPP or the Ed Minister of your province. As a teacher, you can’t influence the faculites of education, unless you take a leave and undertake graduate work yourself. As a teacher, all you can do is pour out your frustration here — which I am glad to you can do.
However, there are other things you can do as well, on a day-to-day basis, by simply helping the children you are given and not worry about what you cannot change.
Good luck.
Sandra,
Your reply is so educratic.
http://www.childrenofthecodeo.prg
I represent the same frustration as 60 percent of the population and I know from training hundreds of teachers that they never learned anything about reading instruction other than theory.
Pathways Canada,I`d say they`re in the trenches too,administer accountability onto themselves,state that lack of ability for students to read,spell and do written work,represents the largest problem.
Don`t start telling me everything`s okay.
Teachers lack the professional skills K-3 to protect children from failure and whole language instruction(Balanced Literacy) has been catastrophic for many students.Ask the dean of Ryerson who states it takes 2 years of remedial instruction to get the students to be able to do University level work.
Finally Sandra,pardon me for being rude but your blog represents a know it all attitude,had I wanted to chat there,I would have done so.Instead I chat here and at SQE.
I think leaving the future of education to politicians is a fatal mistake. Here’s why.
During a political campaign politicians will say just about anything to be elected. They say they listen to the grassroots, but almost like clockwork the portals to those grass roots are slammed shut by the same politicians.
The beginning of the “deer in the headlight” syndrome is continued when, once elected the politician relies more on the advice of bureaucrats, circles of advisors and “experts” (which in Ontario usually come from the OISE stable of educratic political opportunists looking to get the ear of the politician who has become Minister of Education.
All bets of maintaining connections with local on-the-ground constituents are off.
These days as school boards become more of an arm of the government that transformation has made boards even less likely to guarantee local education issues will EVER see the light of day.
In my opinion the biggest lie in education started with the NDP, was continued and legislated under the PCs and continues under the McGuinty Liberals.
What is that lie?
That parents be considered equal partners in public education and be involved in decision-making, setting of standards, and improving the achievement levels of students.
The system doesn’t want parent partners, it wants unconditional and unearned cheerleaders to accept at face value every policy, every decision and every response “the blob” dishes out.
(I also include those parents as “blob” members who too work against parents being the taxpaying customer and “partners” in the system).
Sandy – your posts from 5:02 and 5:29 are very different and send a contradictory message than those from 8:23 and 8:40.
I get what Joanne’s saying, but by the same token you’re seeing the system through your own experiences, just as Joanne is.
When the “experts” like the two of you can’t figure it out then maybe it’s time to the system started listening more closely to what’s being said by parents and communities.
Interesting that both Dalton McGuinty and Tim Hudak have copped out on the whole prayers in school thing and left it up to individual school boards.
If SQE had the money and more front people to manage it, they could find a school board and lobby them for their own traditional model school…..if the gov’t has washed their hands of making those types of decisions then SQE has as much of a chance of developing its own school as does any other group or community in the province.
Jo Anne, illiteracy rates were far higher when phonics was the dominant system. I was also taught with Look Say. Dick and Jane readers were basically Look Say repeat. We would learn “sun”, when the teacher was sure we could all say and understand “sun” we got “fun, gun, ton, pun,run, …..” . We all read Dick and Jane “see Spot run, run Spot run…” I learned to read so did most people. Every decde that passes, more Canadians are literate to higher levels than ever before.There was no “golden age” when we were more literate than today. We are amongs the world’s top leaders in 15 year old literacy.
We can go a bit higher through ELP/ECE, smaller classes and more PD but we are starting to max out.
Sandy is basically right. Ever notice on “certain blogs” there are about 6 members; Nancy, Jo Anne, Chuck, Malkin, Doretta and Mr Ng? You are talking to yourselves in a closed loop of re-enforced outrage.
You need to step outside and notice the high satisfaction rates.
For parents, I recommend a book entitled “Bad Teachers” written by Guy Strickland – educator, principal and educational researcher.
It’s American. Here’s a bit about the book
“Like any profession, teaching spans a wide range of ability, from the exemplary to the incompetent. Unskilled, uncaring, overworked and overly controlling bad teachers can trample a child’s self-esteem and undermine competency. For parents desperate to save their children from inept educators, there has been nowhere to turn – until now.”
“I wrote this book to provide parents with that much-needed advice. Until now, defending one’s child against a bad teacher has been a battle with unfair odds. The entire entrenched school bureaucracy defends its incompetent teachers with a myriad of weapons, including codes of silence, labour unions and contracts, stonewalling, and stalling maneuvres. The poor victimized child’s only allies have been his parents, who have never fought before and who don’t really want to fight at all. The parents are completely unarmed and are unaware of the weapons arrayed against them. It’s no surprise that aggrieved parents usually give up quickly and that year after year, the children lose.”
“As a teacher, I have taught entire classes damaged by a bad teacher’s ignorance and insensitivity. As a school principal, I have had to retrain bad teachers and try to get rid of them(a nearly impossible proposition). Now, as an educational consultant, I work individually with students to patch up the damage of bad teaching. I’ve seen small boys punished for acting like small boys, children who haven’t learned math because the teacher never taught any, children who struggle hopelessly because the teachers never recognized obvious learning disabilities.”
Strickland does, many times credit good teachers and recognizes that there are many terrific teachers out there.
It’s what some would label as “bashing” – it’s giving parents the tools to fight “the blob” in their advocacy for their child.
And we wonder why teachers don’t like charters?
http://www.nola.com/education/index.ssf/2009/09/national_charter_advocate_spea.html
I get the biggest laugh when conservative parents say “politicians need to start listening to parents” when what they really mean is “politicians need to start listening to conservative parents”.
P4E is 100X the size of any conservative parents organization and all three parties are afraid of them.Not conservative parents, they can be ignored (Hudak is ignoring them now) because there are not very many of them, they are totally disorganized, they are unaware of research and promote “crank” discredited views, and they are all over the map internally. When politicians listen to conservative parents they end up in deep political trouble (John Tory), so they have learned not to touch education.
The system is wide open to a traditional school but parents have shown no interest. Of course they could not have the strap and the dunce cap. They probably don’t want to bolt the desks to the floor in rows or hand out little slates at any rate.
The real heavy hitters behind the reform movement are not parents. They are ideologues of the Freidmanite, Heritage Foundation Cato, Fraser, CD Howe variety combined with parasitic hedge fund managers who hope to make a buck from the total privatization of American education.
The traditional people, the phonics people, the special ed parents, the my child was wronged people are simply pawns in a much larger game being played out south of the border. The fact that the rest of the world is reenforcing their powerful public systems and moving ahead is lost on these greedy knuckleheads as they roll around on the floor trying to bleed profit from public education.
Done in two parts, and keep in mind the attitudes of those who are working within the system, and the politicians who do not have the political will to do what is necessary to deal with the concrete realities and final outcomes of society.
Part 1
Sandy, speaking from a parent’s perspective, and years of reading on all aspects of the public education system, the structure, and on top of learning all that there is to learn on learning disabilities to help my youngest, in my world it is called kicking the can to another part of the education system. Politicians are only as good as to the information, knowledge that they hold as well as the people that surround the politicians whose expertise is heavily relied on to formulate policy. In the monopoly called the public education system, kicking the can is a favourite sport from those who work within the education system.
As you have stated at the end of your blog post: “My opinion is, therefore, that no matter which political party is in government or which province or territory is involved, when Canadians are dissatisfied with public education policy and practices, they should lobby and blame those who really are in a position to bring about change and reform — the elected politicians that represent the governing party, no matter which party that is!”
Rather hard to lobby, when the Canadian public education systems is an inflexible monopoly, throughly politicized, steep in ideology and the business of the education of children are seen through the lens of the abstract, rather than the concrete realities of students. Where income levels becomes a magical formula to determine future learning difficulties is an example of an abstract education policy, based on the abstract theories of the education faculties. Politicians have a steep mountain to climb, for those who were not former educators,to formulate good education policy. The politicians have to become experts in much the same way as a parent whose child is struggling in the primary grades. Parents are introduced early on, that much of the struggles of learning rests on the child, and not on the education policies of the day. The progressive ideology is seductive, luring parents into a false sense of ‘every thing will be OK’, as long as my child learns to adapt to the instruction and curriculum. By the time the parents wake up, they only know too well that they have no power to change things, and accept the final outcomes of their children through the positive lens of the abstract education policies. For politicians, it is the same process where they too have to adapt to the public education ideology and dogma of the abstract, as well as learning to compartmentalized the concrete realities of the students and final outcomes of society.
Some of the concrete realities listed below is just a few that Canada is grasping with, but I see them as being very important, since the source can be traced back to the public education system and their abstract policies.
1. The percentage of low-literacy adults in Canada is at 48 %
2. The percentage of low-math skills is 55 %
3. The percentage of low-literacy adults in our prisons is 75%
4. The percentage of low literacy and numeracy skills for children with special needs is approximately in and around at 95 %, depending on the source.
5. The percentage of grade 12 graduates with low literacy and numeracy skills is 33 % to 50 % depending on the source.
The next link is one of the many for Canadian stats, and I chose Canadian Council on Learning, Reading the Future.
http://www.ccl-cca.ca/ccl/Reports/ReadingFuture/Snapshot.html
As Sandy has suggested, and more or less stated that politicians are responsible to reform the public education system. If so, than how reliable is the expertise and knowledge of those within the monopoly of public education that have the best interests of children and their education? Not reliable at all, since there serve their own best interests, and rarely the best interests of children.
Part 2
It is the game of kicking the can, which I have personally experience many times seeking solutions for my child’s reading, writing and numeracy issues. I present the concrete data and research, and no matter what level of the education system, they seek to justified and kick it down or up to the next level. A monopoly is just that, the benefits are accrued to those who work within the monopoly, and the costs and the social costs are accrued to the users of the monopoly. When problems arise within the education level at any level, the solutions always are there to serve the best interests of the public education system, and rarely the best interests of the users. People who are not part of the education system, including the politicians are force to adapt their own behaviours and actions away from what is best to what is best for the collective whole.
Below is one of the many examples in the last 10 years, where the best interests of my child’s learning was ignored to serve the best interest of the collective called the education blob.
In my area, there is a few teachers who have the training and experience to tutor children in systematic explicit phonics. I was willing to pay a teacher $30 a hour, twice a week, as well as providing 10 to 15 minutes of homework daily, to reinforce the tutoring. However, the monopoly rules and regulations of unions and government policies stopped me dead in my tracks. The teachers would have loved to have helped my child, and picked up $240 per month for a year or maybe 2 years, using the prescribe methods and instruction based on the science and research in the learning disabilities, as well as the cognitive and learning fields. But in my province, it is against the rules including the teachers’ union. A teachers’ union trading off one thing, in exchange for something else that would benefit and serve their needs. A few years later, it was confirmed on a series of actions that I undertook to present the concrete data, the concrete realities and knowledge concerning my child, and how the education system, truly does not represent my child, but their actions to serve the best interests of the public education system.
The politicians were angry, but their solution was to kick it down to the lower levels. The lower levels was to kicked it up to the higher levels of the education system. The union brass, was filled with guilt laden responses, but they too blamed it on the education policies, and defended their own practices that have conveniently serve their own best interests, as well as to protect the precious progressive theories of the teachers’ faculties. At the end, the union brass ended up blaming me, my child, and any outside factors to deflect the realities of my concrete data that composed in part hard copies of samples of the state of my child’s writing skills. The school board’s response was another matter, where simultaneously, they defended the pedagogy, the practices, the rules; while giving me lectures why I am wrong from everything to A to Z to where I am no longer working for the best interests of my child. At least the politicians were honest to state, they would do exactly the same thing if they were in the same position, but, and it is the big but, they must think of what is best for the collective whole, and work within the system to change it. A system that is based on the abstract, and not the concrete realities of the collective as well as the individual.
It is why, the politicians are part of the education blob as the other arms of the public education system forms the blob of a monopoly that always seeks solutions to serve their own best interests, and always on the abstract theories and actions, and not the concrete realities that is the result of a monopoly and their actions.
Good reading for Doug who fabricates statements like”literacy scores were lower with phonics”-sorry,I can give you a deluge of information on studies proving otherwise but like all educrats,you`ll know better and you`ll balk in the face of research that is peer reviewed and gold standard.
Jo-Anne, there is longitudinal studies conducted in the 50s and the 60s in Ontario, regarding phonics vs the look and say methods, that confirms phonics is superior to the look and say methods. Much of the Ontario research that took place in the 50s and 60s has been buried by the blob, in favour of the whole language and other progressive pedagogy/practices. If any insiders are curious enough, talk to the old-timers that worked at the high levels of Ontario’s public education system, and especially at the ministry level. No matter the change in government, the employees of the ministry of education remained. A key word to bring up, is the vault and the research studies within the vault, tied to schools/individual students files.
A lot of research took place during the 50s and 60s in Ontario, but it was all buried because it did not work for the best interests or advance the goals and dogma of the education arms of the public education system.
I agree,news stories needed so parents know and government and faculties feel obligated.
A news item, where the Levin report on Nova Scotia is raised, to save money and increase achievement in the New Brunswick education system.
“If we really want to change what happens in classrooms between teachers and students, we need to focus on working with whole school staffs, bringing principles actively into the professional learning process and rooting it in practice so teachers are constantly looking at how to improve their work in the classroom.”
Levin said research has shown one of the best ways to save money and improve academic performance is to reduce the number of drop outs.
“One of the prime recommendations I made to the Nova Scotia government is to try to prevent kids from failing the first time around,” he said.
The focus should be on catching students who are struggling or having trouble in school as early as possible before they drop out, he said.
“It would actually be far cheaper as well as better to hire a tutor for a few hours to help the kid pass the courses than to have them redo the whole term the following year.”
The total average cost to send one student to public school in New Brunswick in 2008-09 was $11,285.
Levin said high schools should develop links to colleges and universities so students can acquire technical qualifications before they finish high school.
“There is what I would call math fetishism in our school. We think all kids need an advanced level of math that virtually nobody uses after they finish high school,” he said.
“Many kids could be in community college programs when they’re 16 or 17, learning real skills with real qualifications that match the needs of the labour market.”
http://dailygleaner.canadaeast.com/front/article/1428116
I could say a lot of things, especially the bit about math fetishism that Levin moans about, but than again he is a not a owner of business, where basic math skills is a skill that is highly valued, but a rarity in the grade 12 graduates.
But note the solutions, based on the abstract reality rather than the concrete realities. What is worse though, the solutions protects the best interest of the public education system, and socializes the costs to the users and taxpayers of the provinces.
Exactly,they never state a specific.
It`s all very Chauncey Gardiner-you can listen to them speak for hours,they never actually say anything.
(I also include those parents as “Blob” members who too work against parents being taxpaying customers and partners in the system.)
Catherine
———————————————————————————————–
This is in my estimation a very factual statement which points toward one of the great problems currently affecting the local School advisory Council system.
It is called “Stacking the Deck”.
The problem you really have to deal with is that there actually are very few parents with your POV. Among those, only a few are active, among those, few have the capacity to move the yard sticks. Conservative parents are treated like the Tea Party nutjobs in the system. They are usually cranky about “their child” not the interests of all of the children.
You really should see a P4E conference. It would swamp an SQE conference 100X over. What do they demand? Check their website. They want more ELP faster, smaller classes, more enrichment programs like arts. They are increasingly concerned that testing is ruining the system narrowing the curriculum, squeezing out anything kids are actually interested in.
They want to help the poor kids and get more resources to the ESL students.
The REAL parents in the REAL system don’t care what reading system is used. They are sceptics regarding testing and shifting away from it. They don’t support charters or vouchers or funding religious schools because they simply see this money as subtracted from their kids and as creating divisions in the system.
The “deck is stacked” because these are the active parents with something to say. “50% of life is showing up” Woody Allan. Conservative parents are AWOL.
The “deck is stacked” because these are the active parents with something to say. “50%of life is showing up” WA
———————————————————————————————-
From my experience, I have noticed a very distinct lack of serious participation in the arena of education from parents who are directed to the fundraising line yet told to avoid contention regarding education policy. Wow – not to mention teacher quality reform.
Catherine’s statement is acurate because most SAC’s are used as pawns to further the Blob’s growth and expansion. The 50% who show up in support of new capital projects for example, are also the ones who are suddenly bemoaning the fact that there are serious program cuts to their schools like reading recovery and special needs.
Really Doug, Woody…
P4E is funded by the MOE,a Ministry PR machine.Kidder supports the status quo,no matter what.
People know about them-
Malkin and Doretta at SQE have to slug it out..
You have lost the debate so often it,s not even funny,you don`t have a leg to stand on.
Yes,you guys rule and bully,you are not even close to accountable;it show the dysfunction in the system.The union gives you muscle,we`ll need to be the strategists.
People for Education claim to be a non-partisan volunteer parent group.
P4E got its start with the financial help and promotion of the teacher unions.
Soon after their initial appearance on the education scene they were listed on union literature as one of the groups supported by the unions.
During the Bill 160 debate both union and P4E logos were used on information sent home to parents and students, and moved through school councils. (via faxes and through school board taxpayer paid for courriers).
P4E’s most prominent spokesperson is Annie Kidder, wife of actor Eric Peterson and sister of actress Margot Kidder).
P4E regularly teamed up with Gerard Kennedy, Earl Manners and stacked
so-called “Bill 160” information nights with union supporters and top-heavy with other “blob” types.
During this time when uninformed and unsuspecting parents and school councils received though, was not “information” on Bill 160. What they rec’d was a one-sided rally against the Harris government. During the course of info. nights a hat would be passed around to receive cash donations from those in attendance.
People for Education, is funding by foundation grants, which has provided them with “a modest salary” – and so not exactly the volunteer parents one would expect. They also receive government money and ask for donations.
People for Education through “help” in networking were often invited guests of school boards to speak at their school council training sessions – (People for Education were once totally against school councils, but by Kidder’s own admission changed her mind about them).
When People for Education tried to set up in my area it was the NDP and the teacher unions paving the way.
“Parents must get involved” they told us “because teachers are in a hard spot because they can’t discuss Bill 160 with students, cannot explain our side of things.”
Get that – they wanted to use parents to get to the students.
It was suggested that supporters of P4E and the unions would better get their message out by “joining School Advisory Councils or the Ontario Parent Council.”
SQE was never in the same ballpark as P4E, have never been given gov’t money and would never be given the kind of fawning access afforded people for education.
I did hear a rumour once that when Ms. Kidder had issues with a child (can’t recall whether it was her child or not) she turned to OQE at the time, AND, OQE has been a guest at their events.
So Doug’s really quite full of it….again.
MOE does not fund P4E.
P4E hardly supports the SQ, she wants huge changes.- that is part of the right wing talking points, label everyone but us as SQ. Who gave you that one, Fraser Institute or Cato?
Lost the debate to who you? hahahahahahah. Please be serious. Even Sandy thinks you are a one trick pony and a crank.
You sell phonics for a living which means you have a conflict of interest and are therefore not credible.
Doug,I can tell you that Sandy`s view of me is of no concern,nor is yours.
We have a mutual agreement here.
P4E-
This report was produced with the support of the Atkinson Charitable Foundation, the Canadian Auto Workers, the Canadian Council
on Learning, the Ontario Ministry of Education, the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario and the contributions of
citizens across Ontario
You’re right Joanne – the fact that P4E has rec’d money is also available on the MOE financial accounting.
Doug and his status-quo defense is rather the outcome of the historical past of our public education, that as early as the 1900s in Canada, progressivism and its dogma/ideology was being used as the means to bolstered the wider society and its elites, that a public education is to imposed the education values unto people who do not have the means, the skills, and the knowledge who do not have the freedom to choose. In a paper, among many discussing the 1959 speech by CP Snow, entitled The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution, “In his 1959 lecture, Snow said that if intellectual Luddites wanted to turn their backs on the benefits of industrialisation, go hungry and see most of their children die in infancy, they were free to make that choice. “I respect you for the strength of your aesthetic revulsion,” he said. “But I don’t respect you in the slightest if, even passively, you try to impose the same choice on others who are not free to choose.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/5273453/Fifty-years-on-CP-Snows-Two-Cultures-are-united-in-desperation.html
The original speech – http://classes.dma.ucla.edu/Fall07/9-1/pdfs/week1/TwoCultures.pdf
Hence the development of P4E among many other educational organizations that have the support of the public education system and government grant monies, are organizations that supports the status-quo and progressivism, its ideology that only the elites of the public education system know what is best for the education of children. It is where science is eschew, in favour of pseudo-theories that represents the best interests of the elites, or the education pinheads, or the educrats. And where opposing forces are seen as Doug has aptly describe in response to Joanne, “Lost the debate to who you? hahahahahahah. Please be serious. Even Sandy thinks you are a one trick pony and a crank. You sell phonics for a living which means you have a conflict of interest and are therefore not credible.”
As Doug plies his trick of the trades, worthy of the best tactics found in propaganda theories, the status-quo in the public education remains where the ones within are still striving to eschew the benefits of knowledge in learning founded on the science, in favour of lose disconnected theories that is immerse and steep in ideology, dogma and subjective premises. Much like the speech by Snow in 1959, The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution, and where he says, “There is only one way out of all this: it is, of course. by rethinking our education. In this country, for the two reasons I have given, that is education is more difficult than in any other. Nearly everyone will agree that our school education is too specialised. But nearly everyone feels that it is outside the will of man to alter it. Other countries are as dissatisfied with their education as we are, but are not so resigned.”
Eschewing the findings of research-based sciences of education, learning, and cognitive fields, ignoring the advancements that has disproven many of the current pedagogy theories of the current public education system, will amount to the same thing as what Snow stated back in 1959. I will paraphrase to fit into today circumstances and actions of the public education system.
“That if intellectual Luddites wanted to turn their backs on the benefits of peered research-base science, the advancements being made in the learning sciences, and use pseudo-theories in its place, they are free to make that choice. “I respect you for the strength of your aesthetic revulsion,” he said. “But I don’t respect you in the slightest if, even passively, you try to impose the same choice on others who are not free to choose.”
And more importantly, the intellectual Luddites – the pinheads pretending that parents who are devoid of power and choices, are contented and happy with the system. Or my little experiment this afternoon at the local independent grocery store, busy with the tourists in town. Asking an innocent question on how they felt about the education that is being received at the public schools. Immediate responses, without ever pausing complaining about the foundational skills of the 3Rs. It all began, because some tourists were comparing provinces and customer, the availability of goods and services. I thought it was an ideal time to asked my innocent question. if other parents from other provinces were happy and contented with the public education system.
You opinion of me is of even less concern. Somehow you actually think things are going to shift in your direction in some significant way. It is your job to make contented people discontented but it isn’t working very well.
Catherine expects the Tories to do something significant for right wing education. Zzzzzzzzzzzz
Click to access nctq_reading_study_app.pdf
Don`t forget this is for enlightenment,we all need to scratch our heads and say,why?
Compared to your alternative reality Doug? Spoonfuls of progressive policies , passive parents, and the chance each and every year to refresh the supply of guinea pigs (students) to test the progressive theories of the top level educrats on students, regardless of outcomes.
Using the search engine effectively, it does not take too long to conclude that ordinary people as well as a number of educators are not happy and contented as you and other educrats love to keep repeating. I have never seen so many numerous articles, connecting the dots to what is wrong with the public education system. As Sandy has stated in another way, the blame game apparently conducted by those who opposed the progressive policies and practices, and not the fault of those who work within the education system,. The fault lies at at the altar of the politicians. If only it was that simple, my problems would have been solved a long time ago, by a simple directive by the ministry of education in a letter that was penned personally by the minister. Here too the minister believe that the correct approach was to provide the systematic explicit phonics instruction as well as direct explicit instruction in math. But the minister forgot to mentioned the quality of said instruction, and my child received the typical dumb-down approaches, with a sprinkled of systematic explicit phonics instruction. I received the smoothing words of progressivism, seductive in their nature that everything would be ok. How conveniently, that much of the progressive methods and practices, rests on and takes advantage of the trust that a parent has for the education system, by omitting crucial facts of progressivism. Why would they do that, because the discontent would begin than, rather than festering for a few years.
It is that festering that you and a great many ignored in the public education system. As long as the festering is contained, you and many others within the education system do not worry about the little outbreaks here and there, even within the education circles. Well, the festering has found a way to come out, that is giving our top level educrats great concern and their precious progressive policies. The use of computers, the Internet and how people are using it to expressed themselves, form opinion, and learning a great deal of knowledge that are exposing progressivism and its practices to the critical eye of people without the benefit of a teacher’s certificate or an education in one of the teachers’ colleges. According to the top level of educrats, computers and the resulting technology is harming the progressive practices of the classrooms, and as a result progressivism is under the microscope by many, including the discontented ones who have been damaged by the education system. The advent of social media, has spurred it on, where people are comparing notes other than the notes of every day things such as the 164 character twitter. To their surprise, people are using the old efficient methods to learn via through the Internet, rather than using the tools of progressive methods. Apparently, it must be stopped to a few at the top level of education, and others would like to control the use and applications of the Internet, that is more in keeping with the progressive methods.
The festering is present within the education system, of people for the most part who are not happy or contented with the present education system. It is shifting Doug, because the top level educators are very concern and are starting a brand new model of progressivism theory, regarding technology. Being self-taught, or encouraging independent learning is not the thing to encourage in the 21st century. The present state of discontent is building, festering underground, where it is being release from time to time from individuals as well as collective groups voicing their discontent through the Internet. A great many people than the collective that work under the public education K to 12, that are using the Internet is ways that effectively undermines the progressive pedagogy and practices of the public education system in so many ways.
Test the progressive theories? We have created the world’s best 15 year old readers. We are one of the very top nations in the world. If we only had Finland’s child poverty rate of Korea’s respect for teachers, parental drive and extended hours we would be so far out in front we would lap the field.
And, of course you always have the opportunity to point out a jurisdiction that is doing better? A system not an one off school somehere that cannot be brought to scale.
Don’t use American problems to establish Canadian policies. We simply don’t have those problems on anything like the same scale. Cat got your tongue?
Your child, your child,your child blah blah blah.
The problem with the right wing reform movement is that the component parts;
1) Greedy fast buck artists running charters
2) Extremist ideologues behind vouchers
3) Traditionalists bypassed by the onward march of civilization
4) Special Ed parents who had plans to send the kids to Harvard
5) Almost no teachers
This posting is offensive and derogatory.
The subject of Paul`s posting is teacher reform.
I deduct that you feel we don`t need teacher reform.
Everything is hunky dory,that`s why Nova Scotia has such high literacy scores.
Let it stand Jo-Anne. It’s a clear example of the mentality too many of us, both educators, parents and communities face.
Remember that this is a guy who likes to tout public for everyone publicly but dabbles in the private school world he claims to abhor.
Parents are used for their children by a system admin. that sees dollars and cents as their bottom line NOT effective education of children.
Parents are used by governments, government agencies and politicians to stoke their partisan fires.
Parents are used by any number of education organizations that mirror the education blob with the same kind of hierarchy and push to either amass support for an agenda or sell the something.
Parents are even used against each other by a system that has honed that craft very well – as Doug’s kneejerk reaction to parents who understand intimately how the system often pushes parents to do crazy things advocating for their children’s education.
That parents took the last three governments at their word and are working to assert their place within a system that has no will to partner with them, means that parents and that local level community is eventually going to be the driver in the school choice issue. AND, it’s going to be sooner rather than later.
I have never yet seen gov’t, or board or even the policy of educational organizations working to educate parents on a scale that would attract mass attention of either media or in our case Ontario.
Sunshine on Schools by SQE, in my opinion is that groups greatest achievement that needs wider marketing and perhaps on a National scale as a source of exposure if nothing else, but also as the premier educational tool for parents.
Here is the problem from the POV of one of America’s acknowledged experts in teacher deveopment.
http://educationviews.org/2011/08/02/darling-hammond-the-mess-we-are-in/
It would be harder to say it better than that. In Canada, we could have much better schools and health care if the national government did not want to spend our hard earned money on new jets and military hardware and new prisons while the crime rate falls again. No need to say federal-provincial, it is all the same. If feds gave far more to universities and colleges (legal) the province would have the funds freed up to spend on K-12 + ELP, it is all a matter of priorities.
You are being ignored because; there are too few of you, your message is all over the map, you are disorganized and your message is unpopular. Even the conservative media in Canada seldon touts your cause (Post, Globe, Sun, Canwest,…..). Nobody in Canada really wants privatization, merit pay, more testing, and the rest of the blather from the broken record of the very far right.
What parents want is more money for public education full stop.
Money money money-for your salaries and pensions,hardly a dime gets to the classroom.
Just wanted you to notice that LDH sites Canada as one of the world’s best. 🙂
Than Doug, how do you explain the percentage of low literacy in the last year, that went from 42 % to 48 %. And than the rosiest reports on literacy, only state by 2030, that it will remain at 40 %.
Funny thing, when you go back to the reports of literacy and numeracy in the 1990s, they stated more or less it will remain at the 42 %. Low numeracy is climbing higher than the low literacy. Worrisome trend, because low numeracy is essentially arithmetic skills. An essential skill in all jobs and daily activities, and there is costs in relationship to the economy, with high levels of low literacy and numeracy.
And I guess it is much easier in your world, to bring all schools down to the lowest benchmarks, and who cares if the graduates do not have the required skills, the most basic skills needed to navigate in life. It really is irritated that you keep using Finland and Korea with two very different distinct education systems. The big difference is that both Finland and Korea, ensures that their students have a solid foundation in reading,writing and numeracy. So very unlike the schools in North America, where progressive methods and dogma interferes with planting a solid foundation in the 3 Rs.
There is unrest within the public education system, and it certainly shows in the adult population, dealing with the outcomes of low literacy and numeracy. If there is not reform in the teacher training, the pedagogy, the low literacy and numeracy will keep going up, rather than decreasing. It is probably not a coincidence that the rising low literacy and numeracy rates are tied to the fact of keeping the status-quo in training, instruction and curriculum.
And keep the insults out Doug, especially the crack on SE children. Would you like me to produce a list of people with disabilities who done very well. Or shall I make my point, by coming down to your house to remove every single light bulb from your home. Or how about all telecommunications devices? Perhaps your autos, which was produced on an assembly line, or a site that clearly shows why parents with children with disabilities should alway reach for the top. Just on the dyslexics, but there is more information on them, since they are particularly harmed by the progressive practices, whole language, and other instruction methods of the public education system. However attitudes like Doug, mocking not only the SE children, as well as their parents is typical in the public schools. Where parents hope, the school strives to squash their hopes for their children, and firmly implanted in the minds of teachers at the teachers’ colleges. By the way Doug, quite a few dyslexics, and autism students went to Harvard, and other ivy-league schools. Even a few presidents of United States.
“They are leaders in business, science, architecture, acting, the arts, have invented things from the airplane to the light bulb to NERF toys, are gold medalists at the Olympics to Hall of Famers in numerous sports and some of the most widely published authors. There is nothing a dyslexic person hasn’t done or achieved and hence there is nothing that YOU cannot do!
Reading through a lot of these short biographies, you will find that a lot of them had something in common. They had someone who believed in them. So, if you are a parent, teacher, relative or just a friend of a dyslexic person, believe in them! They get enough negative comments, sarcasm, name calling etc. from others to damage their fragile self esteem. Love them just the way they are. Build them up, and watch them grow into what they are capable of.
If we can get these dyslexic children through their formative years with their self esteem still intact, the sky is the limit…(or for Sir Richard Branson [famous dyslexic businessman] – space is the limit).”
http://www.famousdyslexicpeople.com/
Ravitch outline why POVERTY is the problem and NOTHING else.
Ms. Ravitch strikes me as mighty fearful of Blob accountability.
Nobody believes the nonsense of Adult Literacy. I was in the movement for many years. It is only level one (15%). It was 19% when I started so it is coming down and even that 15% can read, just not well. Only 1% of over 18 Canadians cannot read. Those that have a real problem are, mostly poor, hinterland, immigrant and old. Our 15 year olds are among the world’s best.
Level 2 inclusion is a joke. These people read rather well. I have met them over and over. Can they start a degree in nuclear physics next week, no they can’t but neither can most of us.
The problem is not the teachers or the admin. The accountability model in the USA (testing kids and trying to test teachers) ruins education for kids turning the schools into test prep fill in the bubble academies.
Finland has fabulous accountability, OECD, PISA Timms, parent satisfaction, grad rates etc.
As Ravitch points out, American middle class schools, are ahead of Finland. Those with 10% poverty equal to Finland but when the school reaches 25% poverty it drops like a stone pulling the entire nation down to #16 on a good year.
This data proves a few points which are no longer really open for debate.
1) Teaching style has nothing to do with results
2) Pedagogy has nothing to do with results
3) teacher quality has nothing to do with results
4) Public-charter-voucher has nothing to do with results
None of the reformer’s proposals has anything to do with results and as a result will have no effect on outcomes.
Only poverty has anything to do with results as has been proven over and over. Non-poverty schools do fine with same teachers, teaching, pedagogy, etc. All reform factors have been controlled for and only poverty is the variable.
The effects of poverty can be mitigated but not eliminated unless poverty is eliminated.
How to mitigate the effects of poverty on school results:
1) smaller classes in poor schools
2) Earlier ECE in poor schools
3) After school help (Pathways)
4) Summer help
5) Health interventions on low birth weight, nutrition, glasses, dentistry
6) Public housing, transportation, income support
7) Parental education
8) more support staff
With the worst education system in the developed world, the USA has decided to slash teachers, increase class sizes to 40-50, close schools, cut the school year, have more 4 day weeks to save on bussing, and attack teacher pensions benefits and wages. What part of a brain dead mentality do they not understand?
Gee, I wonder if not taxing rich people and running 3 wars makes it difficult to fund education and health care?
Even American conservatives now realize they cannot have a military budget greater than the next 20 nations on the list.
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cb_49.htm
Doug,thy protests too much!
Dr.Ravitch has walked away from reform,which was NEVER honoured because the lobbyists killed Reading First.
The publishers were afraid what it would do to their bottom line and they lobbied the explicit instruction out-without it,how can you say reform which pushes explicit instruction in Reading is not working,it was killed politically.
Finally Doug,what are you so worried about?
God,you`d think the sky was falling in.
The forces of greed in corporate America, like the Rupert Murdoch funding of Michele Rhee, Bill Gates, the Waltons and Eli Broad are determined to destroy American public education because they hope to profit from the ashes by making everybody except the very poor pay for a privatized education system. The poor would be given a poor system like public housing, with huge classes and underpaid teachers.
This is the true agenda of “reform” education. The rest is window dressing. One must never underestimate the evil power of American corporate greed but they do lose when ‘the people’ stand up to them and say, “no you don’t, we want to keep out public schools public, now pay your taxes, shut up about education, and get back to work.”
We are beginning to see Americans get tired of schools ruined by reformers who turn them into fill-in-the-bubble test prep centres shorn of art, quality literature, history, geography, asthetics, fitness, and quality for narrow “reading skills” factories that increases the dropout rate and drives good teachers to seek more renumerative work elsewhere.
That is what I am afraid of. The rest of the world knows better but we are past the high tide of education reform and we see much of the Fukishima results as the tide goes out.
Reformers say nothing as mass firings take place, classes reach 50 kids, schools are closed because they could care less about the quality of public schools. They hope to destroy public schools. That is what this is all about.
Ravitch walked away from reform when she saw that reform was a fraud.
Dr.Reid Lyon would tell you that the faculties of education are responsible for preparing teachers superficially and for completely ignoring the pedagogy.
The U.S. has fallen to 48th in the world,we are at 12th.
However,we don`t test our First Nations children,that would have changed the numbers.
Your statement about pedagogy falls in the malpractice category and is what makes many people say,after a 1 year B.Ed,teachers are know it alls,they $%#& in the face of research,they know better.
Apricot pits!
The pedagogy used in schools, the testing, the teacher quality bashing is all of no consequence.
American successful school, average schools and poor schools all use the same pedagogy, curriculum, testing, teacher qualifications the whole ball of wax favoured by reformers is the same in highly successful, average and poverty stricken schools. The difference is the poverty and it makes ALL the difference.
Like it or not,proper instruction makes the difference,many of us know this,not just me.
You can see what a struggle it is,look at your fervour AGAINST it.
It wastes an incredible amont of time and energy that could be used to more productive ends to debunk the reform myths about education.
They have yet to explain how middle class and poor schools get vastly different results when ALL factors are the same except income.
Now poor charter schools are under the gun because they cannot duplicate middle class results using reform methods. They are starting to say “you are expecting too much, these kids are very poor and have a lot of problems.” Exactly.
This is what education reform is all about.
http://normsnotes2.blogspot.com/2011/03/got-dough-how-billionaires-rule-our.html
These guys, Gates, Broad, Waltons, Koch Bros. could care less about phonics, testing, DI, whatever. They care about privatization only. They call the shots in education reform. The rest are mere pawns.
Often wonder Doug, people who think if only we can eliminate _______ (one of the SEC factors) than everyone will achieve, and brought to you by folks who think there is nothing wrong with the instruction, curriculum, and the training. It is just those nasty people, who don’t know what is good for them. If only folks, dream in the world of the Utopians, where the elite, a very small one directs as aspect of lives beneath them. In that world, there would be no creative thinking or technology advances. Just those where the elite can make tons of money, while they dictate to the people beneath them. Even now Doug, you preach, while profiting from the lousy public education systems. Teachers who are too busy profiting from their copyright instruction material, to take a development training courses. The bean counters, sifting through any savings done on the backs of the students, to be redirected to the top levels of the education system, so they create even more profit and crazy theories.
The only reason top level educrats of American like Canada’s system, because the public funding stays at the upper levels, where there is an even spread of the funding, minus the federal funding. The American educrats would love to eliminate the federal level, or at the very least limited their power and authority. In Canada’s system, the parent, the trustee, and the taxpayer has been written out over the years, which will be the downfall of the public education system and progressive pedagogy.
As for the low literacy rate, it is both level one and level two that are considered to be low literacy. The link provided below, should keep you busy that clearly states the low literacy is a problem.
“Adults at Levels 1 and 2 do not have the same fluid and automatic
reading skills with unfamiliar texts and tasks, and thus need to
devote a good part of their cognitive energy to “learning to
read.”
In order to understand what is needed for adults to make the
shift from “learning to read” to “reading to learn,” it is necessary
to develop a more complete picture of adults at literacy Levels 1
and 2—not only by assessing their skills, but also understanding
them on a more personal level.”
Click to access LiteracyReadingFutureReportE.PDF
“The hidden truth about literacy in Canada
Many people find it difficult to believe that Canada—one of the leaders among the G8 industrialized nations—has a literacy problem. However, statistics show that nearly half of all adults in Canada lack the kind of prose literacy skills
that are required to cope in a modern society. The Canadian Council on Learning (CCL) first drew attention to this situation more than three years ago in the pages of its State of Learning in Canada: No Time for Complacency report. That report revealed that more than 48% of all Canadian adults (those over the age of 16) had low prose literacy skills, meaning that they have
difficulty reading, understanding and functioning effectively with written material, according to the OECD’s International Adult Literacy and Skills Survey (IALSS). In 2008 CCL went further, challenging the common belief
that adult literacy rates in Canada were improving. Its landmark report, Reading the Future: Planning to meet Canada’s future literacy needs, explained that as a result of a number of demographic trends (population growth, aging population and immigration rates) Canada will likely witness little to no overall progress in adult literacy rates over the next two decades.”
Click to access FutureLiteracyLargestCities2010_EN.pdf
http://www.ccl-cca.ca/ccl/Reports/ReadingFuture/Snapshot.html
And Doug, level two is low, and the links provided will tell you why. Lots of kids at the high school level,sitting at this level, who do not have a learning disability. I have had my filled with educrats, who think their only duty is to teach them to read, but not the second stage, reading to learn.
The only good news coming from the literacy agencies, but bad news for the Dougs of the world, is that they are now calling for change in reading instruction in the public education system, as well as better practices in reading, writing and numeracy. Of course the ones that do not have their funding directly tied to public education funding are brave enough to speak against the public education system and their terrible practices.
Many politicians and educators would have you believe that unions are politically powerful institutions that protect incompetent teachers. Former U.S. education secretary Rod Paige went so far as to call the National Education Association, the largest teachers union, a “terrorist organization.” Political conservatives are attracted to charters, vouchers and privatization in part because they would break the unions’ power, and even some liberals have grown critical of the groups’ influence; Barack Obama mildly rebuked the unions during his presidential campaign for their opposition to merit pay for teachers and limits on tenure.
But the evidence doesn’t support the harshest allegation: that union contracts make it nearly impossible to fire unsatisfactory teachers. School administrators have plenty of disciplinary authority, but surveys of principals show that they often don’t exercise it — not because of union rules, but out of a sense of collegiality and because of bureaucratic inertia. Last year, the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute analyzed the contracts in the nation’s 50 largest school districts. For most of them, the institute concluded, “the depiction of [collective-bargaining agreements] as an all-powerful, insurmountable barrier to reform may be overstated.” What’s needed is less scapegoating of unions and more gumption on the part of education policymakers and administrators.
Just wait to see like all other “reforms” (actually bad old ideas that have been tried and failed many X before) charters vouchers, no improvement whatsoever, merit pay fails (Vanderbuilt U and NYC studies), testing? NCLB and RTTT are a joke across the USA. Nobody can meet the idiotic targets contained within AYP. Instruction reforms, if they take place or are allowed for major studies will make no difference once again.
All of the panacaes of the reform movement crash and burn, one after another because they are all built on the false premise that education results can be significantly improve while poverty can be ignored. Why is poverty always ignored although it is the 400 lb gorilla in the room? Because education reform is sponsered by rich people who do not want to reduce poverty because they will be expected to pay the taxes to mitigate poverty. They can never be rich enough no matter how much poor black and hispanic kids suffer to make them rich.
They hate the very idea of getting rid of poverty. Therefore, no matter how many X it can be shown that poverty reduction is the secret, Gates, Broad, Waltons, Koch Bros and their ilk just keep saying “we can’t hear you” and “what is your second best solution”.
Reply to Doug Little
Our friend Doug has been having a field day lately, posting Diane Ravitch’s recent speech and providing embedded NEA clips from the Save Our Schools Rally.
I regret to say he missed this report from the frontlines:
“Save the Status Quo, March Against Freedom
Commentary by edspresso, July 29, 2011
By now, you’ve likely heard that the anti-reform establishment will be marching the streets of D.C. this weekend in an effort to “Save Our Schools.” The participating groups want to restore parent and student influence in education.
There’s only one problem with that – they don’t.
The National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers – two unions that have done everything in their power from distorting the truth and lying to intimidation and lawsuits to stop any reform that takes their control and gives it to parents – are driving this rally.
These groups fight charter school openings across the country. For example they are currently stumping against a Mandarin immersion charter in Milburn, New Jersey.
They’ve sued multiple times to stop or delay school choice bills from taking effect. The teachers association now has a lawsuit in Indiana to stop low-income students in failing schools from using a voucher to attend a different school of their parent’s choice.
They are even fighting the “Parent Trigger” law that was passed in California and allows parents to initiate changes to a school, like converting it to a charter, if a majority of parents agree and sign a petition.
It’s the same coalition of the past 35 years that just wants the status quo. Reform to them is about money, control and no high-stakes tests or accountability.
In each case above, and the dozens of ones not mentioned, these groups are eliminating the influence parents and students have, not moving it forward.”
(Reprinted from edspresso)
Comment:
There are two sides to every war, Doug, even the current American “School War” unfolding before our eyes. I’m a longtime admirer of Diane Ravitch, but it pains me to see her reduced to a shill for the American teachers movement. Andrew Rotherham ( Eduwonk) shares that view.
Educhatter is achieving its objectives, inciting lively discussion on and about critical issues in Canadian education.
The latest example: Sandy Crux’s July 31, 2011 post entitled Teacher, “Faculty of Ed & union bashing will not improve public education!”
“Contrary to the opinions of many parents and Canadian taxpayers today, teachers, the teachers’ unions and faculties of education staff are NOT to blame for everything that is wrong in schools today. Yet, if you read the 300+ comments on a thread at EduChatter, it is obvious that there is an intense public anger and disdain against anyone and everyone within the public education system – including all those dozens of groups that are part of the Education Blob (Big Learning Organization Bureaucracies).
Perhaps, the anger and disdain are caused by looking through rose coloured glasses to a time when kids sat in rows and were taught the same traditional curriculum from itemized government documents. In fact, I still have a copy of the Ontario Department of Education’s “Grey Book” from the 1940′s through to the 1960′s where lists of content and skills could be quantified. Now, with the advent of the personal computer, the Internet, E-Books and Smart Phones, that is simply no longer possible!” (Sandy Crux)
For the full story, go to http://crux-of-the-matter.com/2011/07/31/teacher-faculty-of-ed-union-bashing-will-not-improve-public-education/
Comment:
Debating issues across the battle lines is far more rewarding than running a echo chamber, soap box in cyberspace. We not only welcome cross-overs, we depend upon them to animate the discussion.
I responded to Sandy’s post on Crux-of-the-Matter and asked what I believe to be a fair question.
I asked her, based on her the first few lines of her post exactly what teachers, teacher unions, faculties of education are accountable for and how would we know IF in fact she absolves them all of taking no responsibility for the state of public education?
Moderated Comment: Edited to remove personal comments…
Moderated Comment: Edited to remove personal comment:
A comment on the shutting down free expression of opinion: “This is also how the education establishment deals with parents it doesn’t agree with or who challenge the status-quo….”
Moderated Comment: Edited to remove personal comment:
….(Educrats) speak down to parents and justify a very significant lack of service and effectiveness. Clients should have customer satisfaction.
““Faculty of Ed & union bashing will not improve public education!”
The title in itself is uses the same language used by some to shut down discussion. It should have been the first clue as to where Sandy was lining up on this issue….
Moderated: Editor removed personal comments.
Why, on July 27th on this very forum Sandy wrote
“Not to be-labour the point but this post “is” about the teachers’ unions — everywhere — resisting reform. Doug is a perfect example of why they are resisting. He/they just won’t deal with their role in the negative backlash against the entire profession over the last fifteen years or longer — blaming everyone or everything other than looking inward.
In fact, the woe is me attitude and why nothing works better than the status quo seems so ingrained that heaven only knows how anything can be done.
I would imagine that any politician who actually tries to implement reform will be denounced from the rooftops as Mike Harris was.
I mean even Obama tried the “teacher merit pay” issue at the start of his term and he was roundly denounced for it.”
Moderated to remove personal comments…
Clarification:
…. the topic of Paul’s original post was why teacher unions resist education reform on teacher quality by being measured. You can see where my confusion lies.
“Teacher evaluation is the last frontier of non-accountability. Leading educators who resisted “standardized testing” have no interest in seeing the same principles applied to their own profession. That is the main stumbling block and the teacher unions are still on sentry duty protecting the fortress.”
Paul had it correct here.
When education becomes less about “I”, “me”, “my” and more about accounting to the people who expect an educated child, at the very least equipped with basic skills, then we can dialogue on equal footing and attempt progress.
Too many of the lines about parent expectations and advocacy are drawn in the sand by the education establishment.
The discussion here needs to go on as long as necessary. It’s a truly open forum for those with an interest in effective reforms and recognize that parents come to the table as leaders in their communities, who are doing a great job in asking exactly the right questions and making the choices for their children that they need to make.
If that means challenging an overwhelming school system so-be-it….because
it certainly does need challenging.
On July 27th Stephen offered a great, short post that deserves repeating
“Bash: to strike with a violent blow, smash
Criticism: the act of making judgements,; analysis of qualities and evaluation of comparative worth.”
“Bash” has no value in the discussion of the improvement of education. It’s never been my observation on this forum that parents ever lead with that term. However parents are fully able and educated by far enough to make solid judgements, make analysis of questions and evaluation. They are equally able to recognize and distinguish good teachers from bad ones.
Unionism and its relationship to teacher accountability strikes me as the apogee of educational self confidence – a utopian theme excluding a remarkable range of ideas/principles, based on the history bequethed to us – one added to by the participation of students, parents and educators all around.
The research done by Paul, and regular posters – Nancy, Catherine, and Jo-Anne constitute enough proof for me (so far) as I sit on this side of the fence, that the system ain’t working.
As a parent I appreciate the effort and look forward to more.
There seems to be a contemporary claim by progressivists, that this is a time when our old system of education has been proffered up as an occasion to advance a better model – without the contributions of parents, students or generally what we commonly refer to as citizens.
Pony Pucks!
I do agree however, no system can escape the social corruption of capitalism (big Government). But we can recognise the advantages of sincere contribution. That is the challenge today.
It is part of the challenge to make what we consider a necessary qualiy for a better system.
Currently I sense we are experiencing an education for education’s sake system. This needs to change.
A powerful, bureaucratic, materialistic enviornment governed by an aceppted elite (so call it the Blob) is an impediment to sustainability.
Bureaucracies are capable of supreme self confidence. We however, can take what useful lessons they offer up – that is from the degree to which education is virtically conceived and administered from the top down, and then judge it for what it is worth.
PS Jennex will execute a governance audit/review of the South Shore Regional School Board.
Steven – very well said. A question – what constitutes a “governance audit”?
Sounds interesting.
CLOSED to Further Comments: We have exceeded the Blog’s capacity for comments on this theme.
Of course teachers’union fight reform. Would anyone expect anything else? Giant mistake to equate “Parents” with “parents who like charters” the NAACP is fighting charters because they make segregation worse and add nothing to the quality debate. Teachers fight charters, depending on the rules for charters, because they are a distraction from real issues, they are divisive, the spread resources too thin and on and on.
Attempts to ‘hive off’ sections of the education system and even attempt to provide enriched education to a few at the expense of the many has an evil intention within it that needs to be exposed. Like Dracula, the reform agenda cannot stand up to the clear light of day.
People like Andrew reason like this 1) Charters are good 2) teachers unions fight charters so therefore 3) teachers unions are acting badly.
The teachers unions, the spokespeople for the profession of teaching reson like this.
1) charters are bad, 2) fighting them is honourable therefore 3) people who fight teachers because teachers fight charters are misinformed, or sinister.
There is a playbook on the right not very well disclosed BTW, I have written about it, to destroy public education through privatization. Finding vouchers very unpopular (ask Bill Gates) they have shifted to charters in the main. The fact neither can demonstrate academic achievement after many years has them shifting gears to other excuses, choice for its own sake etc etc.
Vouchers, charters, merit pay, testing attacks on democratic boards in favour of corporations are all planks in a platform for the radical transformation of public education in an extreme right wing image.
Luckily, the Americaan people have some strong institutions to slow and blunt the attack and turn it around. Teachers unions are the bulwark of the progressive anti-reform forces. There is no need for reform of any significant type. There IS a need to end deep and totally unnecessary poverty.
and for the record it was not me who referred to Sandy as an educrat, so she’s wrong on that point as well.
So what do you expect Catherine? The system runs on democratic principles. It attempts to meet the needs of the majority of parents and citizens. When some people place THEMSELVES outside the mainstream, they cannot be really surprised when the system tends to ignore them or marginalize them. They have, in fact marginalized themselves.
No, nobody is going to build you a traditional school let alone where you would like it. It is not their job. Go see the giant corporations that fund CD Howe or Fraser Institute.They could fund you a school on plutocrat lunch money.
Not on topic.
Moderated Comment: Edited to remove personal references.
Edchatter is really very refreshing and quite without the lectures too many here have heard a few times too often on their quest for something better and accountable.
If I have to visit an education forum to learn something this one would be it.
I have never posted previously but may I say that this is the discussion that should be happening everywhere.
Has poverty become the magic elixer of the Blob?
Poverty explains pretty much everything when it comes to gaps in educational achievement.
If we solved the poverty education gap we would be still left with about 10% of the education gap problem we have today which is based on personal ability and personal motivation.
‘Poverty Elixer – take once a day and do not return with questions; 90% of public educational woes will magically disapear! (Side effects commonly refered to as the “Blob” will occur.) ‘
Looks like a flim-flammer to me.
Moderated Comment: Edited to remove personal comments
…..As Paul has stated, “Debating issues across the battle lines is far more rewarding than running an echo chamber, soap box in cyberspace. We not only welcome cross-overs, we depend upon them to animate the discussion.” …Confinin discussion within certain parameters, and it sort of reminds me of a typical IEP meeting. A parent strays beyond the parameters, the parent receives a lecture done in smiles and laughter, that the parent should leave it up to the school, since they know what is best for their child, and the parent does not. ….
…(at) IEP meetings, some parents will ask the question of how the school will addressed the IEP, if targets are not met, or anything along the line that implies accountability towards the school. I did once, after I became wise, learning all the tricks on the Wrightslaw site, It did not go well, and the educrats from the board put on their nicest smiles, in the most civil language that it was all mine responsibility. Although, those were not the words used, it became clear that it is my responsibility and not their responsibility. Few weeks later, the child’s advocate was on their back, which is another story that might answer Sandy’s question why parents and taxpayers are angry and fill with disdain at the public education system. The lack of respect, one-way communication, and utter contempt for parents’ abilities, skills, and experience in their minds do not measured up to those who work within the system.
Open discussions, even frank ones when the other side is not at all open, in a two-way conversation that has opposing views, or wants to discus the many facets of an issue,….Yes, I too would like to know the what teachers, unions, faculties of education are accountable for in the many aspects of a job where the future of a student is in their hands. Reasonable enough, since it is clearly stated in the laws, the acts, the school’s communication, the blogs of teachers, and other written material what the parent’s responsibilities are. Accountability, a bit more vague for parents but it does appear parents and the taxpayers becomes accountable for all the bad and good within the school walls.
(We have to guard against) the use of the Delphi techniques…. Delphi techniques are regular fare in the public education system, to reach consensus on budgets, policies, research. However, the Delphi techniques are widely used for the IEP meetings, school board meetings, parent-teacher interviews and where ever parents gather. It has become a big issue for parents to the point where the Wrightslaw site are conducted seminars during the summer, to educate parents on the Delphi techniques and how to over come it.
For the background, see: “Wrightslaw: From Emotions to Advocacy, including Playing the IEP, Understanding the Power Structure, The Art of Negotiation, When the answer is “No”, The Rule of Threes, and
The Delphi Techniques” http://www.wrightslaw.com/speak/reg/06.06.pa.flyer.pdf
From the Long Island Press – “Many parents are intimidated by this process,” says The Long Island Press Guide to Special Education. .” They show up for meetings where there’s a group of staff they perceive as professional. It’s not uncommon to be intimidated,” says Cuddy, who is diligent in saying that parents should not be afraid to make changes for their child, under any circumstance.
He brings up a method he’s known schools to employ to stultify and confuse parents, as in the Burners’ case. “Schools use the Delphi technique, intended to stifle and demean the vocal parent by confusing them,” says Cuddy. Again, he reminds parents that the IEP should be a cooperative effort, developed and agreed on by both the school and the parent.”
http://www.longislandpress.com/2007/09/27/a-guide-to-special-education/
The next site, is my favourite because it informs readers on the little known technique of the teachers’ union called the Alinsky techniques, as well as the whole picture and the many facets of the Delphi Techniques.
http://www.learn-usa.com/transformation_process/~consensus.htm
“The method works. It is very effective with parents, teachers, school children, and any community group. The “targets” rarely, if ever, know that they are being manipulated. Or, if they suspect this is happening, do not know how to end the process.” http://www.learn-usa.com/transformation_process/~consensus.htm
There’s lots more on the web by parents, lawyers, special education consultants on how to overcome when the Delphi techniques are operating in your school and school board.
….Straying beyond the defined parameters that are set by the school, school boards, ministries and others who set the education agenda, does indeed…. marginalize us in the eyes of Doug (Little) and other educators. …what lies underneath such statements, is the utter contempt (they)have) for those that have differing viewpoints but do not work within the education system. …. It is at this juncture that parents become angry, filled with disdain, utter contempt, and could be the reason why parents are no longer engaged in the schooling process by high school, as they once were in the elementary years.
Poverty and LD
You figured it out.
Their excuse for failure and refusal of accountability.
It looks like flim flam to you because you have not done the research. Google yourself around the public research and you will see the overwhelming amount of research on the topic. It is not even close.
The long term vouchers and charters in the USA are being hammered by their parents because they cannot produce middle class results. Their answer? “what do you want, these kids are so poor, they have so many problems.” Duh. One is a little tempted to say “we told you so.”
Fascinating Leger and Leger poll in Canada yesterday reported in the Sun of all places. A number of city services were listed libraries, snow clearing, roads etc and the public asked who they prefer to deliver the service public or private. With the exception of zoos, an even split, Canadians overwhelmingly, I mean 85% chose public sector.
We did similar polls on education for OSSTF on schools. Same results 85% public 15% for any private at all.
The excuse of not teaching the poor to read spell and write is educational malpractice.
I do it every day.
Moderated Comment: Edited to remove personal comment:
There is this deep faith in the education reform community that we ought to be able to get our public school taxes back to educate our own children in our own way. The vast majority of the public does not agree or understand or support that POV. When you pay taxes which includes revenue for schools, you are not paying a user fee to educate your own children. You are paying to educate ALL of the children. This is why we continue to tax childless people or people whose children have long since graduated. When you object to government expenditure you don’t get your money back. I object to the war in Afganistan but Harper will not return my money to spend on education instead.
If you buy books and do not use the public library you pay for it anyway. If you hire your own security you still pay for the public police. If you have a swimming pool, you still pay for the public pools. If you drive a car you still pay for public transportation.
If you choose to go outside of public education you pay for your own schools and your share public education as well. Nobody is being “double taxed” this is your own free choice and there is an empty desk with your name on it in the public system.
Why does the public not support public funding for private schools? People who even ask for it make the rest of the citizens angry. There is a “who do you think you are?” response that arrises. Whether the motivation is religious or snobbery or pedagogical or specialization, it strikes the public as self indulgent. So you are religious, big deal, many public school supporters are religious but keep it outside of schools. You want a pedagogy or curriculum that is outside of PS? OK pay for it yourself. You think you and your family are special and should not be educated with ‘the great unwashed’ fine, pay for it yourself.
http://www.educationnews.org/ednews_today/159368.html
Actually she is correct Catherine. The government, the teachers unions, the admin and the informed parents who have educated themselves like P4E understand education. Those without professional training AND unwilling to dialogue with those who have it, make complete fools of themselves daily.
Do you tell your dentist, doctor, even plumber what they are doing is wrong and you know more. PLEASE – just because you went to school does not qualify you as an education expert any more than a trip to the GP gives you a medical liscence.
The government does know. You don’t.
I can chose my dentist and doctor. They are accountable to me for the work they do – the outcome.
Catherine
I can chose my dentist and doctor. They are accountable to me for the work they do – the outcome.
In Toronto TDSB you can choose your entire public school. Even better.
Time to stop second guessing professionals. It is insulting to them and alienating. No wonder reform has so little professional support. They are seen as rubes and know-nothings.
Reformers go on and on that the blob does not support parents. Don’t confuse “conservative parents” with “parents in general”. The system loves mainstream parents who don’t have an agenda beyond an excellent PS system.
There is a spectrum of professional debate about education. Reform is outside that framework due to a profound ignorance of education.
When OSSTF tested for public support for private education, 15% supported public funding of private religious education. Of that 15%, 13% were PC, 1% Liberal, 1% NDP.
Hudak is polling about 38% these days. This means about 1 in 3 Tories supports the John Tory plan but 2 in 3 oppose it. This means the Tories have an ongoing internal struggle with the issue while the other 2 parties can beat them over the head with a table leg for “giving away the public’s money to support religions that the public in general does not support.”
Can the reform movement not see the pickle they put the Tories in by raising the issue?
Sandy pretty much had it right a few days ago here. I said so then and it’s my response to your provocation now. The whipsaw effect of your posts simply adds fuel to the reform and school choice fire.
““Not to be-labour the point but this post “is” about the teachers’ unions — everywhere — resisting reform. Doug is a perfect example of why they are
resisting. He/they just won’t deal with their role in the negative backlash against the entire profession over the last fifteen years or longer — blaming everyone or everything other than looking inward.
In fact, the woe is me attitude and why nothing works better than the status
quo seems so ingrained that heaven only knows how anything can be done.
I would imagine that any politician who actually tries to implement reform will be denounced from the rooftops as Mike Harris was.
I mean even Obama tried the “teacher merit pay” issue at the start of his term and he was roundly denounced for it.”
Of course the Jo Anne’s and the Catherines and the Nancys will dispute the figures but perhaps it is time for the reform movement itself, perhaps paid for by Frontier or Fraser I or CD Howe or AIMS or all 4 to do a real legitimate poll of public attitudes to reform ideas. Not a push poll to get the result you want.
Go to a reputable polling firm of your own choosing and test reform ideas. They will show you polling questions that both reformers and progressives would agree are fair.
You will be shocked at how little support reform ideas have beyond a few zealots.
Doug, your own flim-flam is at issue, when one implies that 85 % of the public choose the public sector over private, except for zoos.
From what I have read, several articles it is libraries are the only public service that has 85 % support for libraries under the public sector.
http://www.torontosun.com/2011/08/03/we-want-our-public-libraries-poll-finds
Furthermore, rather convenient using poverty, low-income, race, gender, disabilities and other SEC factors, to explain low achievement, behavioural problems, and all the other things, on the backs of students who can do little to change their circumstances, when the public education system and its structure does little to support and remediate the learning differences, that are effective and impacts achievement/learning on the individual. How many teachers would have the nerve to say to a parent, little Johnnie is doing poorly, because of the parents’ low-income, which cause the low achievement. Not too many, but it is done on a regular basis with children who have disabilities that impacts learning, Apparently here, according to income, education levels of parents, and other factors, some parents are told it is their responsibility,if they should be raising the issues of remediation for their children’s learning, and others are told that the school knows what is best for their child. There really should be study, comparing income levels and what parents are told by the school officials, relating it to the laws, the rights and so forth. Actual achievement would not be a factor in the eyes of the public education system, but rather addressing the inequities via through accommodation, and other methods where the student is given the opportunities, creating the conditions for the student to perform. The accountability rests on the students, and where the public education system, avoids accountability in achievement.
Or as Jeff Moore’s father who said it best, after hearing the announcement that the Supreme Court of Canada will be hearing the LD case. “The special tuition cost around $100,000. “How can the average working person afford that?” Moore said. “They can’t.” At the heart of the case is the degree of responsibility the school system bears to help special-needs children succeed.
“It’s not enough to say all children are entitled to a free public education if 20 to 25 per cent of those children are just taking up space in the classroom,” said Moore.”
http://www2.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=57aaf0ef-d40c-435f-84e9-0aaa7cd5f6d0
It is all about the accountability and responsibility of the public education system. On the Education Law E-Bulletin – A newsletter for educators, the BC appeal court, found that the public education responsibility and within the legal framework is to provide a general education. http://www.cpco.on.ca/LawLibrary/Shibley/2011/January.pdf
On another site, reporting the cases of the Supreme Court of Canada, and their motto is, “Think of us as 911 Supreme Court: we specialize in helping lawyers win Leaves to Appeal and Appeals at the S.C.C”, has the legal essentials and background information regarding the Jeff Moore’s case. “Two complaints were filed by the Applicant alleging individual and systemic discrimination by The Board of Trustees School Division No. 44 (North Vancouver) (the “District”) and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia as represented by the Ministry of Education (the “Ministry”), for failing to accommodate his son’s severe learning disability (dyslexia) in the provision of his education program, contrary to s. 8 of the Human Rights Code.”
http://www.supremecourtlaw.ca/default_e.asp?id=113&lid=535
Now my question, how many education ministries across Canada and the other arms within the public education system, are requesting standing to be heard in the Jeff Moore’s Supreme Court of Canada hearing? Probably quite a few, because it threatens to change the foundations of what constitutes an education under the public umbrella, as well as the responsibilities and accountability that the public education system has to the students and society throughout.
No doubt, many issues will be raise and one of them will be the attitudes of our educators. Doug is typical and in his last post, he states “Those without professional training AND unwilling to dialogue with those who have it, make complete fools of themselves daily. “ Typical, and the very same attitudes that have driven, costing the BC taxpayers a pretty penny, to defend their discriminatory practices because they are the professionals that know what is best, providing there is no undue hardship, all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada.
It should be very interesting how the other side will dodge the responsibility and accountability of those who work within the education system, against the resources and legal minds of Canada’s Supreme Court Justices. Even more so, the arguments used to support the contention that some students are not entitled to learn how to read, write and do numeracy well or the other argument used often and presented to parents, that it is not necessary to read, write and do numeracy well in the 21st century.
But as Jeff Moore’s father stated in many different ways and his response – “”It’s not enough to say all children are entitled to a free public education if 20 to 25 per cent of those children are just taking up space in the classroom,” said Moore.”
Paul actually initially nailed it with this from a few days ago also
“Most educators have great difficulty addressing “school accountability” because it is so rare in the field. Since the 1960s, students have been assessed more for “effort” than actual achievement and that is when it started and became ingrained in public school culture. How much effort you expend has come to mean more than what you actually achieve in the peculiar world of public education.
Defining teacher accountability is a little like trying to nail jelly to the wall under the current regime. Teacher hiring, evaluation, and tenure all support the prevailing view that “process” and “effort” mean more than ” content” and “achievement.”
Clearly we still can’t define what it means for those we put our trust in to educate our children to define their accountability to those kids and their parents.
Many posts but very few answers and even some flipping of opinion from time to time.
“Defining teacher accountability is a little like trying to nail jelly to the wall under the current regime. Teacher hiring, evaluation, and tenure all support the prevailing view that “process” and “effort” mean more than ” content” and “achievement.”
How very true Catharine. As I have discovered dealing with the educrats on the issues of my child’s reading and writing abilities. The effort matter more than the actual content, and here content is thought of the ideas expressed, and not on the mechanics, the ability to express in clear language. the ideas and thoughts.
Same 3-4 zealots talking to each other trying to look like a crowd, LOL.
The world’s #1 top nation knows how to get the best teachers into the classroom. You simply demand that new teachers be straight A teachers with 2 Master’s degrees. The place to put accountability is right at the front door. If you do, problems down the road are tiny. If you want better teachers, you also need to put your money where your mouth is. American estimates are that A level university grads will simply not accept jobs that pay less than $100 000.
Teachers expect to be paid more than engineers, phamacists, optometrists, and other professionals with the same level of education.
What you can’t seem to get through your thick heads is that the vast majority of parents are highly satisfied with the system. That is your accountability. If you think it will be tied to testing in Canada, think again. There is no ‘science’ to this, simply observation of principals and SOs.
Witness the famous “divide and conquer” technique used so often to pit parent against parent or to trivialize/quell discussion. It’s right up there with other strategies used on parents that Guy Strickland identifies such as:
– Blame the Victim
– “The Mr. Chips Defense”
– “The Stonewall Defense”
– “The Dr. Jekyll Defense”
– “The Old Lady in a Shoe Defense”
– “The Large-Mouth Bass Defense”
– “The William Buckley Defense”
“The purpose of most of these defenses is to shift responsibilty: to shift responsibility for causing the problem from the teacher to the student; and to shift the responsibility for solving the problem from the teacher to the parent.”
Parents of all stripes have learned their lessons very, very well.
“My next suggestion to concerned parents is that they trust their own instincts about the teacher. That is not always easy. Parents have been led to believe that American schools are like Emerald City, where magical things can happen to transform our children into more perfect beings. Parents are also instructed, “Don’t look behind that curtain!”. In other words, don’t ask whether the educators are real wizards or only masters of which you know nothing about. Since parents are not “trained educators,” the assumption is that they are not qualified to judge a teacher’s performance. As the school year moves along you may or may not learn about the teacher. But you will certainly learn a lot about the teacher’s impact on your child. And that, of course, is what education is all about; not about the teacher’s performance on Parents’ Night or in an administration’s eyes, but about the teacher’s ability to get the children to perform on a daily basis.”
(Strickland)
The purpose of the book is to help parents help their children and help educate parents on some of the tricks of the trade so to speak.
I’ve written before that parents can indeed be help responsible and contribute to the state of the public system, but compared to the old tried and true strategies parents in Ontario and Canada in general are just starting to develop their wings and voices.
Educhatter and School For Thought allow that to happen.
Given the hordes of folks being churned out by Faculties of Education and very poor job prospects the last thing we need are big salary increases to attract people.
As to what “teachers expect” in the way of salaries they can compare themselves to whatever profession they like. Maybe what need are for tens of thousands of teachers to actually leave the profession and go somewhere they’d be paid what they think they’re worth. The good news is that we’re awash in folks qualified to replace them.
Here is another twist on the power and influence of those who strive to eliminate the corporate presence in the classroom, right down to the farmer who is selling eggs.
“Mr. Robinson, the son of Scholastic’s founder, said the company had decided not to end all corporate sponsorships because “there are corporate programs that have some value, that spread information that otherwise might not be heard.”
He said Scholastic was forming a partner review board, made up of a curriculum editor, a teacher, a school administrator, a child psychologist and a parenting expert, to vet the InSchool partnerships. Going forward, Mr. Robinson said, most InSchool sponsors would be entities like the Census Bureau, the National Fire Protection Association and the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
The InSchool marketing division is to be cut by about 40 percent, with corporate programs shrinking much more. ”
What will be next, to target the novels and other books that are targeted to the children, by completely erasing any corporate presence found in the books? Or go after all information that does not match to siren call of the social justice values? How responsible is it, when your actions although may be seen as noble, will cost jobs in the private sector. According to Scholastic, their InSchool division represents less than 1 % of their 2 billion dollars business.
According to the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, ““We appreciate the significant steps Scholastic is taking to restore the trust of parents and educators,” said Dr. Susan Linn, Director of the Campaign for Commercial-Free Childhood. “Distributing corporate PR disguised as teaching materials undermines learning and is one of the most insidious forms of in-school commercialism. As a result of this decision, students will be exposed to less corporate PR in classrooms this fall. It’s an important victory for children and anyone who believes that education should be commercial-free.”
Scholastic’s InSchool Marketing program has been used to market everything from ice cream to Hollywood movies in children’s classrooms. Clients have included McDonald’s, Cartoon Network, Shell, SunnyD, Nestle, and Disney. According to Scholastic, the program was designed “to promote client objectives” and “make a difference by influencing attitudes and behaviors.”
http://www.commercialfreechildhood.org/pressreleases/scholasticvictory.html
And the public schools do not influence attitudes and behaviours of their students? I would say that they have the greater influence, than some egg farmer selling his eggs, or the local ice-cream shop.
Huge difference between “parents with the best interests of their children and public education at heart” and “reformer parents who hate public education and all it stands for parents”. If you expect the system to treat both with respect, keep dreaming.
You can pick up Guy Strickland’s book ‘Bad Teachers’ on Amazon for $1.99. I guess it wasn’t that big a seller.
And worth every penny to parents, because you see Doug, it’s parents it helps. Not to mention that it’s been in print since 1998.
Given the hordes of folks being churned out by Faculties of Education and very poor job prospects the last thing we need are big salary increases to attract people.
As to what “teachers expect” in the way of salaries they can compare themselves to whatever profession they like. Maybe what need are for tens of thousands of teachers to actually leave the profession and go somewhere they’d be paid what they think they’re worth. The good news is that we’re awash in folks qualified to replace them.
More teacher bashing from the “reform crowd” and they actually wonder why teachers’ unions resist reform. What a joke. They know who is behind “Reform” – the teacher haters.
Much like the cop haters, somebody had a bad experience with a teacher.
Why would teachers and their profession, not want to support charters?
Read and weep.
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2010/10/are_charters_the_silver_bullet.html
Doug, attitude is showing – “Huge difference between “parents with the best interests of their children and public education at heart” and “reformer parents who hate public education and all it stands for parents”. If you expect the system to treat both with respect, keep dreaming..”
Your comment is typical of school culture, no matter what income level. But the saddest part of your remarks, is how many parents learn the art of disengaging and by doing so, the school looses out and have denied the school’s community skills, talents and abilities the parents processes. Even sadder is the attitude that parents who seek changes concerning their children’s education, that are not in keeping with the administration goals, as well as the overall goals and conflict with established practices are considered not to have their children’s best interest at heart in so many ways.
As Catharine states – “The purpose of most of these defenses is to shift responsibility: to shift responsibility for causing the problem from the teacher to the student; and to shift the responsibility for solving the problem from the teacher to the parent.”
Parents of all stripes have learned their lessons very, very well. ”
Of course instead of speaking about the ideas, you demean the author of those words. On a Wrightslaw page, numerous articles describing the attitudes and cultures of the public education system by parents and how to overcome the attitudes. Note the anger and all other emotions the parents are experiencing due to the actions of the school, and their bitter disappointment that a public education is only for those who serves the needs of those who work in the education system, and not anyone who dares to asked for services that would bring achievement, and future doors being open to their children.
http://www.wrightslaw.com/info/advo.index.htm
Disestablishing The BLOB
Of course, teacher unions resist, obstacle and block education reform. They have achieved many of their calculated aims as first articulated in the ‘70s. Now, they’re sitting pretty with enormous power and political capital. They are the ultimate political capitalists! Growth of “teacher power” is well described in articles and books.
The teacher unions have their international playbooks and in most jurisdictions have achieved great control over education and their senior governments in general. “…teachers’ unions all around the world pursue similar goals and activities.” (p 9, Political Capital, Teachers’ Unions and the State. Value Conflicts and Collaborative Strategies in Educational Reform in the United States, Canada, Japan, Korea, Mexico, and Argentina, 11/27/00 http://www.international.ucla.edu/lac/cat/montim.pdf )
“Union leaders understand clearly that to challenge the government agenda they have to mobilize the general public on their education mission.” (p17)
‘…teachers’ unions are different than other unions because there is a sense of teachers building the nation, constructing the soul of the nation by working in locus parenti with the children of the nation. In short…teachers’ unions could be considered part and parcel of the state through an alliance for the constitution of citizenship.” (p33)
“Unions challenge the notion of consumer-based education and retain the key liberal principle of the enlightenment that education constitutes citizenship’. (P36)
“The process or privatization and the international agenda of neoliberalism are pills difficult to swallow for unions if they are going to fulfill their self-assignment functions in education.” (p38)
“…emergent units of civil society like unions may be able to accumulate political capital at the expense of the political capital of the state.”
I come back to my earlier conclusion about government failure — “My strong opinion on where the problem lies is this — It is government failure — for retaining a monopoly system, for letting unions call the shots, for usurping parent rights and duties in education, for letting teacher training be hotbeds for progressive indoctrination.”
Notice how this left-wing document mounts the identification of teacher unions “in their self-assignment functions”. Now, this no doubt happens because governments, by and large have left a gaping vacuum into which aggressive unions have jumped in. But, let’s remember, the senior government ARE part of the BLOB in that they also, through sweetheart deals and concessions and appeasements show that they want the system to remain largely the sandbox they know.
Only in New Zealand, for the purposes of massive savings, did the government devolve the central system by abolishing regional school boards to 2460 local individual school boards. When these boards have conferences and workshops these are some of their topics and training:
– tools to improve student and teacher motivation – how to improve our local school – trustee performance appraisal – principal appraisal – success for every child, etc.
What happens when these parents become part of the trusteeship of individual schools? When, as trustees, they become accountable for budgeting, hiring and firing and results? Why, the whole community benefits. Students especially. And their achievement scores are equal to Canada’s!
Have not finished reading it, but on page 9 the goals – “In spite of their national, ideological or political differences, or the legal
environments in which they operate, teachers’ unions all around the world pursue similar goals and activities. Historically, teachers’ unions have been active (either proactive or reactive) participants in redefining, among other things,: a) the way schools work; b) decision-making processes; c) hiring, evaluation, and firing criteria, including grievance procedures; d) resource allocation (pay, benefits, promotion, increases, and supplements);
e) teaching methods; f) career ladders and on-the-job training programs; and g) setting educational goals and standards and ways to evaluate them. In addition, unions are active in shaping the political discourse, and taking stands on key local and national issues. Teacher unions also provide special benefits for teachers, including trips, discounts for cultural events, insurance coverage, professional development, newsletters and other
publications, and sometimes banks or credit unions with low interest loans. Furthermore, teacher unions often build alliances with other unions in the public sector, with industrial unions, and with political parties. Indeed, being part of a labor association or a political party provides teacher organizations with class and ideological identities, and with greater power to influence educational policies.”
Some of the very things that teachers’ unions constantly denied, that they have no say or influence on education policy and must do what they are told. No wonder they like the principles of social justice and SEC factors, an easy route into the political arena, shaping key messages that benefits the unions, in power and political capital. Political capitalists a good name for teachers’ unions, who are denouncing at every turn the evil intent of those who produce some product or services, no matter if it is the local Mom and Pop variety store.
I see we can now add “teacher haters” to Doug’s lexicon of “teacher bashing/bashers” as throwaways when he can’t resist responding. FWIW I think the whoole Teacher basher” thing has pretty much ran the course, sorta like whinging about Mike Harris upwardsw of a decade after he left office.
As to the “thousands of teachers” who couldn’t wait to retire no doubt they’ll find something useful to do. Most workers do tend to retire when able to; nothing teacher-specific there.
Moderated Comment: Edited to remove personal comments.
Catherine, you stated: “That’s why I asked a fair question based on Sandy’s notion that somehow, the folks here have it all wrong and that government has all the answers because don’t look at the folks who we’ve learned over the years really call the shots…and it’s not the politicians. It’s their minions and experts and advisors who include the teacher unions, school boards and administration.”
Clarification:
I simply wrote that the thread indicated the extent of the anger against all those involved in the public education system today — which it does. ….
Clarification:
Moreover, your question about accountability of those in the system was completely unrelated to what I had written and of which I sure don’t have all the answers. However, how do you measure accountability could be asked about most jobs and services in the public and private sector.That said, IMO, there are many ways to measure accountable other than test results or something quantitatively similar. At the university level for example, if you are not a good teacher, you won’t get any students signing up. Then, there is the fact that the majority of our students go on to live productive lives after graduating from high school. That is showing that the system, as bulky and problematic as it is, really does works. Could it be better? Of course.Do some graduates have trouble with spelling later? Yes, but that is why we have spell checkers and has always been thus — or worse.
To JoAnne — re literacy statistics quoted last winter were bogus because of the criteria used — such as understanding the chemicals on medicine bottles. . In fact, they used performance equivalents that were at the “functional” literacy where most Canadians read. The whole purpose of the federal study was to get money for more adult education programs. Here is a post I wrote about the OECD and Stats Can numbers. (http://crux-of-the-matter.com/2010/12/13/one-in-6-canadians-illiterate-or-10th-best-readers-in-world/)
Anyway, we live in a democracy which means that after all is said and done,the buck stops with the Premier and governing party. To ignore that reality is to ignore how real reform can and should happen.
Concerning literacy rates, I have a question, if the rates are bogus, why the growth in remedial in reading, writing and numeracy courses at the adult stage, if there was not a problem in the first place. Millions of dollars are being poured into the retraining programs of all levels of governments, to addressed the low literacy skills. If the purpose was to get more money for the adult education programs, the only programs that did received the extra funding were government retraining programs. Before entry into retraining programs, people are tested on their literacy and numeracy skills. Are you implying the assessments are bogus as well, and if so, how does that squared with government wasting tax dollars to buy a few votes.
That said, the definition of literacy has change dramatically over the years. The ability to read the labour standards, to the regulations of Workmen’s Comp to reading the instruction manual to reading the mortgage or rental papers to reading a newspaper or an magazine article with complete understanding and the implications are daily tasks that the majority of people must deal with. Level 3 is the bare minimum in today’s world, and it needs to be addressed in the adult population as well as the public education system. In my province, the pharmacist must read the warnings of the medication, dosage and so forth, because it is the law. A couple of years ago, I had the experience where the pharmacist read it to me, and I did stopped him, and told him I was quite capable of reading. He explained and the reasoning behind the law. He did insist to me, and has been his experience that there is quite a few that have lower reading skills than others. Since than, I too believed the literacy rates are correct under the new definitions, and there is a serious problem in low literacy and numeracy.
You absolved the education establishment of any blame for the current state of education.
My question asked you to explain what you DO feel the education establishment IS accountable for.
It was very much related, and as yet left unanswered to my satisfaction.
“Anyway, we live in a democracy which means that after all is said and done,the buck stops with the Premier and governing party. To ignore that reality is to ignore how real reform can and should happen.”
Except anyone familiar with how education decisions are made know that in fact the Premier and governing party get their direction and inspiration from their very well-paid bureaucrats and education “experts” they surround themselves with. Politicians stop listening to the public upon election…or so it seems. The blob then takes over.
We may live in a democracy but the blob is firmly in control.
You had it right when in response to Doug you wrote:
“So, today you are still spewing the teacher bashing bit and as a former teacher I am sick of it. When union officials and teachers finally see what a good gig they have and that THEY are responsible for any backlash the pubic may have, we and they can move ahead.
The crux of the matter is: The unions started it. The teachers bought into it and whined and complained, when the rest of society knew what they had and still have — a ten month job, time in the summer to take a master’s degree (July), time to take a nice holiday (August), time to go their cottage (not everyone works on a masters), time at Christmas, time at mid term break, short hours (8:30 to 4:00), preparation time so little work has to be done at night or on weekends (unlike when I was teaching), a very good salary despite what you say, excellent heath benefits and a top of the line pension plan. And, oh yes, honest to goodness job security at a time when very few have it.
In other words, if you want teacher bashing to stop, the ball is in your court. Stop whining with expectations of entitlement!”
It’s no secret therefore when we get back to Paul’s question as to who, and/or what is standing in the way of effective teacher evaluation and accountability.
Thanks Paul for an excellent blog! At the very least it gets people talking, if somewhat heated at times.
Real life education for parents gets very heated at times Sandy. Educators have had years to perfect their strategies.
Parents are just getting started in Ontario.
Sandy,
I feel literacy proficiency and mathematics can be tested for accountability purposes..Sure,10 % of kids will fail because they don`t have home discipline,go through a divorce etc…
What we see in the EQAO tests is failure rates in some boards close to 50%-and 40% and I know from many friends in the System that the tests are already scored very generously.
It`s really very important to be accountable in those subjects.We know without a strong foundation,we are doomed from the onset.
Tunya acts as if these operations of teacher unions and other unions are some sort of secret like the Masonic rituals or something. They are all out in the open. The teachers are usually a member of the local Labour Council where locals represent teachers, the provincial Labour federations where provincial teachers’ federations represent teachers and national Labour centres in Canada’s case the CLC. Teachers also debate their common positions in OTF and CTF but the residual power is in the unions themselves.
Do they support political causes, of course they do. Do they support political parties, yes but not in an affiliated way. Part of all the dues collected in most unions goes to the NDP. Not the teachers, they donate directly at election time and through yerly donations. In Ontario the feds tend to support both the Liberals and the NDP. In BC I suspect just the NDP. There is pressure on teachers from some other unions to support the NDP only but so far no deal. Teachers support the OLP as well. Teachers also attend many political fundraising dinners golf tournaments etc buying tables at Liberal and NDP dinners and those of candidates.
They lobby the government to include more Labour studies in the curriculum and support members with classroom ready materials. They fight corporate interests in schools. They support a huge number of progressive causes, publications websites and similar by purchasing ads.
I am only surprised that anyone thinks this is a secret.
However as the Supreme Court ruled in the Levine Case and others, this is nobodies business except the unions.
The unions receive $1000 per member per year. There are 100 000 some odd teachers in Ontario and 250 000 perhaps across Canada. You do the math. They tend to give the legal limit to the parties and candidtes they support. They notify the parties if an MPP attacks teachers and public educations interest.
OSSTF is smaller by a great deal than ETFO and roughly the same size as OECTA. OSSTF is $50,000,000 per year operation which can find a few bucks here and there to fight education reform as described by conservatives here. The union reserve fund or strike fund as it is known to some is $75, 000, 000 but it is often in the form of many properties and buildings that can be mortgaged if necessary. They support their own version of education reform, (smaller classes, faster deeper ELP, bigger education budgets, more special ed and so on).
I just assumed you knew all of this.
Keep in mind that parents have nevwer given the various teacher unions a mandate to impose their union issues on their children nor to impose “their own version of education reform” on kids or parents. At the end of the day teacher unions, as all unions, act in the best interests of their members. That may or may not be in the best interests of kids. When what happens in the union is allowed to leak over into children’s education parents certainly do have a mandate to pay close attention. As to using “assuming” so much of the folks here keep in mind that most of us do ex-teacher 24/7, indeed I suspect most teachers don’t immerse themselves to the extent of some who contribute si much here.
Seems the Ontario government says 85% of students pass the grade 10 literacy test which would mean, like PISA, our 16 year olds are 85% literate.
Anybody who works in schools and sees the names of the kids who did not pass is not surprised by any of them. They are usually already in spec ed, come from very poor families and have attendance problems, are fairly recent immigrants from non-English/French countries or various combinations of all of the above.
Click to access DoubleJeopardyReport040511FINAL.pdf
Doug,you know not of what you speak and your desire to cover up the sins of the System,painfully obvious!
I know many teachers,the numbers of kids struggling are very high,and the teachers don`t know why that is.
Open your ears.
In a class of 20,10 are easily not doing grade level work in this day and age.
Ask the profs of first year students at University Doug,they will tell you.
All teacher material meets curriculum guidelines of the province. Naturally teacher produced material stresses, women are equal, Being gay is fine, the environment needs more protection, world peace is a good thing, unions are the historic best friend of workers, all races are equal, Aboriginal have been badly mistreated by the rest of us, Canadian history is rife with racism, there are a lot of greedy rich people in our history, that kind of thing. They are careful not to cross any lines.
Hey Doug, another group that has been badly treated are the kids with special needs. The educrats along with the support of the teachers’ union, must take special delight in the Chinese torture version of inclusion for kids. It is what my 16 year old called inclusion, Chinese torture. I asked her what does she mean, and she told me stories running along the theme of let us all pretend no one has learning problems.
Another set of people missed of the adult world, is the power hungry, sometimes rude people in the public sector. The lack of customer service and quality of service is appalling. More so, for the public sector unions who have entitlement issues. No wonder Ford is contracting out, and meanwhile a small town in the United States is going bankrupt, because they can no longer afford the rich salaries and pensions of the unionists. Probably, will not end there, and the list will just grow. As for the aboriginal peoples, the education ministries along with their unions should own up to their own actions, instead of stating, it is a federal responsibility. Kicking the can, another favorite sport in the public education system.
However, Doug it is quite tiresome how you justified your stances on rhetoric, rather than using the facts. Tunya’s link is very interesting, and balanced, on what I have read. I certainly hope the brass of the teachers’ unions start to own the label of political capitalists, because it certainly fits you, and blends in nicely with your other capitalistic venture, the proud owner of a private school, making money off the problems of the public education system.I bet in your private school, you do a lot of direct instruction on grammar, spelling, and all the other good things, that are missing in today’s public schools.
Seems like your study supports everything I am saying. the poor do badly in school. The poor don’t read well by grade 3 because they are poor, this limits their future. Where is the new part?
I have been the one saying over and over, the data all shows that the problem lies with the poor. It is our fault because we know what to do about it but don’t do it.
The answer is eliminate poverty. If the poor do badly but we eliminate poverty, there are very few left to do badly.
Finland has child poverty down to 4% which is the main reason they lead the world. The USA is 20% what are we about 15%?
Nancy — I was only saying the criteria of 1 in 6 illiterates in this country was bogus because of the select group of adults Stats Can used, as well as the fact that they used reading a medicine bottle’s instructions, including understanding the contents. Even I can’t figure those out sometimes. What was also suspect is that the study was presented in order to get program funding — meaning it was imperativethey present high illiteracy rates. Plus the was pertaining to adults. The point of my CotM post was that we couldn’t be both the tenth best readers in the world and also the most illiterate at the same time.
I am trained in psycho-educational assessment and one of the services I provided in my private special education/reading clinic was assessment. I also provided reading and written language upgrading and enhancement. Plus, I was a parent advocate by preparing reports for parents on what kind of classroom accommodations would help their child– often attending case conferences with them. What helped was that I had also been a classroom teacher and could specifics.
In any event, one hopes that if children get help when they are young, they are literate as adults. I don’t know if I answered your concerns, but I hope so.
Beyond saying that, I’m done with this thread because its 400+ comments is making this writing painfully slow.
Moderated Comment: Edited to remove personal comments.
Up late having just finished a great book. That’s one thing nice about retirement. I can sleep in.
Anyway…What I wrote about the unions did during the Harris years is not connected to what I said in my post….I still completely agree entirely that the unions are responsible for the lack of respect the public has with teachers nowadays.
But, my most recent post, does not disagree with anything I said here apart from who holds the full deck of cards when it comes to reform. In fact, I have been saying the same thing for five years. Similarly it doesn’t change the problems we all know the system has.
So, it ime not only for me to go to bed but to put this so-called disagreement to bed as well. If I offended anyone, please accept my apologies. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.
But, I still believe that public pressure on the politicians is what brings about change and not always the best kind.
Imagine though , if we disagree on so many issues, all of us on this thread, imagine what public consultations would be like. Perhaps that is another reason change and reform is so slow. Agreement is almost impossible.
Sorry Paul to continue this conversation but Catherine wrote at 7:19am August 4th that my post at Crux of the Matter and comments here had “absolved” everyone in the education system of accountability. That may be how she interpreted what I wrote but that was not my point at all. I wasn’t talking about accountability or who does what. We all know there are problems within the system.
Rather, my point was that the reform of policy is at the top with the politicians.
So reformers, inside or outside any education system need to clarify whether they are concerned about those who implement policy or how they implement policy or those who make it (the politicians). I used to teach a course on the “sociology of education” and that is how we broke it down — how those in society put pressure for change on the politicians and how they in turn put pressure on those in the system to change. At least that is what I remember.
Anyway, It just goes to show how widely different our words in print can be interpreted by others.
The bottom line for me is that a moderate approach to changing education practices works best because education systems, like all social systems are made up of people doing the best they can.
I know what it is like, for example to be blamed for my son’s autism. That was the norm in the 1960s. The term was “refrigerator mothers” and it was awful. Imagine. It is your second child and you are not getting any rest but are blamed because your baby cries constantly and stiffens when you try to comfort him. In Kindergarten, I actually had a special education counsellor suggest that since I was the problem I should give him up for adoption. I was outraged. And, remember I worked in that same system. Years later that counsellor apologized. But, it was the policies in both the education and health care systems that were misguided.
Now, provincial government’s fund ABA treatment and the school system provides teaching assistants and accommodations — as they should. Yet, parents today still complain not realizing how far we have come as a society.
My point being that change came about by getting politicians to listen and agree to fund research. And, while things are better today and we still have a long way to go about diagnosing and treating autism spectrum disorders things have actually changed for the better in many ways.
You didn’t end the discussion Paul.
I’ve already explained why I don’t believe politicians and governments have the answers to or are able to deliver effective reform.
The moderate approach has been tried for years, but hasn’t worked from what I can tell because there quite simply is no will on the part of the blob, (and we know who they are) to improve. Why?
Because there can be more jobs for those who make up the blob if we keep the students mediocre and under-achieving. Nothing at all about what’s good for students…..even at the gov’t level I’m afraid.
The answer for me and to be honest other parents I’ve worked with and yes, even educators and administrators is that the less interference by government and central command the better when it comes to education policy and decisions.
In a perfect world those same politicians who eventually make up government would be listening to the customers who are at the receiving end of the deliver of public education….parents, communities, employers, post-secondaries etc. – but instead the 22floors of bureaucrats and the politicos as OISE plus the unions turn governments head and their cranks.
Government and even school boards are so far removed from what’s going on in local schools it’s really quite pathetic.
The bigger is better notion of government has morphed to local communities. It’s expensive and it no longer guarantees that local education needs are being met.
Sandy,you said
“Rather, my point was that the reform of policy is at the top with the politicians. ”
I thought about this,if accountability measures are brought in,then politicians can serve up consequences for low literacy and numeracy scores and high drop out rates.
Without accountability,we are serving up an all you can eat buffet for the BLOB.
the following from a post by Doretta over at School For Thought is worthy of consideration
“Readers may be interested in the work of the late Dr. Kline of UBC, a clinical psychiatrist and an expert in treating children with dyslexia.
He said about 90 percent of reading disabilities were CAUSED by ineffective teaching and poor methodology. Only about 10 percent of the school population where true dyslexics and the rest where the products of whole
language style teaching.”
This could be the biggest cover-up ever.
Doretta’s original post from yesterday can be found over at School For Thought but if there’s proof of a misuse or misdiagnosis of dyslexia who’s paying attention to that research? (Crickets chirping)
Doug, I saw a dead horse in a farmer’s field the other day… want the address?
I said “sorry Paul to continue this conversation” because the thread is at 488 comments and we should all stop and give Paul a rest. So, on that note, that’s all folks!
One of my hobbies is also a small business –desiging jewellery. I have decided to take part in a craft show in Niagara in October and, therefore have lots to do to make enough items to make it worthwhile to pay the entry costs. I used to have a website but took it down because few knew about it and it was a lot of work. Howevere, may do that again.
So, time for me to move on and return to my summer hiatus. Enjoy the nice weather while you can!
“If alliances of parents and teachers cannot restore common sense and common purpose to public schools, then the institution will continue to fall to pieces. In this regard, the worst enemy of the public school system remains its quisling-like managers. For the more they resist populist calls for accountable governance, basic curricula and good teaching, the more they invite a future that will not include public schools. “It is obvious,” wrote Horace Mann nearly a century ago, “that neglectful school committees, incompetent teachers and an indifferent public may go on, degrading each other, until the noble system of free schools shall be abandoned by a people, so self-abased as to be unconscious of their abasement.” We have reached this point so insidiously that even more school administrators don’t realize the barbarians are now within the gates or that they, in many cases, are the barbarians.”(Andrew Nikiforuk – School’s Out)
Joanne makes a good point about a government having the ability to deliver consequences to under-performing schools. It’s an ability they always have had but have never acted on. Why do you suppose that is?
If gov’t started paying more attention to what business leaders, employers and post-secondaries are saying about the quality of the results of what mediocre education sends them, their may be hope for government, but as gov’t’s have been in charge thus far, I’m not holding my breath.
Harris came closest to actually hearing what the public on the ground was saying and he acted on it.
Catharine mentioned that parents are just getting starting in Ontario. Somewhere in the middle, a poster mentions the differences between American and Canadian parents. Of course, there is Doug who claims that the Canadian public is satisfied with the public education system, unlike the American parents. Too many within the Canadian public education system think along the same line as Doug does, that everyone is a happy camper. For years, messages coming from all parts of the education system have been consistence that for the most part that Canadians are contented with the services of the public education system and what problems there is, are isolated.
Compared to the American parents, parents do appear to look like a bunch of pacifists, choosing to have the public education system, act on their behalf to make the decisions for their children. It could not be further from the reality, but that has not stopped the public education systems in Canada from take advantage that parents have very little legal recourse and protection that American parents have in the United States.
Americans have options, and Canadians do not. Or otherwise, I would have had the school board in court a long time ago answering to the discriminatory actions that were undertaken, to prevent the remediation on my child’s cognitive weaknesses. But, I was force to play the game created by those within the public education system, using their play book (the rules), the laws governing public education which amounts to a very unfair game, with the public education system winning most of the time. Parents and their children must take second, third best option, or a straight denial, in a system that is loath to treat parents on equal footing, with their skills, abilities and experience. In Sandy’s last post, “Now, provincial government’s fund ABA treatment and the school system provides teaching assistants and accommodations — as they should. Yet, parents today still complain not realizing how far we have come as a society. ” Crediting the actions of the provincial government, when the credit should go to the ordinary parents who file suits on behalf of their autism children. The rulings, led to the changes to the public education system and the provincial government because they were force to.
Click to access autism%20and%20the%20law%20-%20themes%20in%20recent%20litigation.pdf
Changes within the BLOB, concerning rights of parents, their children are heavily regulated in the provincial school acts, rules/regulations, in the legislative laws that more or less grants the public education system the final say in all education matters. It is not a coincidence in the education acts, that the legal requirement for the public education system, is to provide a general education. Nor is it a coincidence that courts are loath to order provincial governments to change their laws, especially when there is financial burden imposed on the government. As for the politicians, they too are loath to correct the inequities and discrimination by placing the burden or onus on the government institutions, because of the financial costs to the government. Changes do not happen within the public education system, unless there is outside pressure that carries a bigger stick than the public education system.
As I have discovered, the local school board never change their ways and actions, regarding my child, until the full weight of the ministry was looking over their shoulders. But that is all part of the game, rigged to fully protect the actions of those within the public education system, and the bad outcomes of policies. No matter what it is, a change to another classroom, a change to another bus stop, or a change regarding instruction, most of the policies and the accompany rules, parents are forced to followed the protocols, designed to discriminate whenever the power and authority of the education system is threaten. The BLOB does an excellent job, keeping parents and children in their place,
And going back to my first line, parents are just getting started in Ontario, likewise across the country. What is so ironic, is the very same SEC factors are at play, the ones that the public education system love to used as their favourite excuses for low achievement. With the help of the Internet and social media, ordinary parents, taxpayers, children are exchanging information, much like this blog or SQE which is still the number one place to go to for solid information and advice on education. Parents are discovering that it is the public education system is at fault, and not the SEC factors of Canada. Waking up that dyslexics stuck in the public education system, no matter what province have a 5 % chance to come out of grade 12, with reasonable skills in the 3 Rs. As was discovered by a couple in Ontario, that their son did not have the skills, after 10 years of a public education, and send their son to an American private school for learning disabilities. Skills that are absent in what they call a general education, and if present, poorly done, and not much of it. Or the bully policies, where parents are now bypassing the school, and bringing in the police. Parents are waking up to the realization that their children are not receiving a quality education, a solid foundation in the 3 Rs, and it is festering.
To end, Catharine has hit the nailed in her posts this morning, there is no political will, and no one paying attention to the final outcomes of a public education. All too busy protecting their turf, rather than the best interests of the students they serve, and the communities.
Catherine,
It is all well and good to take hardline “take no prisoners” positions but have you ever noticed that the more you do that, the fewer people there are in the room?
Doug, have you notice how people are waking up to the pseudo-beliefs of the unions. You know the constant messages from the teachers; unions, that they have the best interests of the students. If so, rather comical when London parents decided to used the small claims courts to addressed bullying concerns, the union and the board were singing on the same page very concern why parents went to small claims court, rather than using the overly-complicated process and protocol designed and rigged to protect the actions of the school and school board from being held accountable.
But than again, what do you know about accountability. You are far too busy denying accountability, and placing the accountability unto the people who have no say in the public education system.
Nope, has never happened. Andrew’s on to something though with his dead horse theory.
Doug, have you notice how people are waking up to the pseudo-beliefs of the unions. You know the constant messages from the teachers; unions, that they have the best interests of the students. If so, rather comical when London parents decided to used the small claims courts to addressed bullying concerns, the union and the board were singing on the same page very concern why parents went to small claims court, rather than using the overly-complicated process and protocol designed and rigged to protect the actions of the school and school board from being held accountable.
Bullies come from bad parents. Schools can only do so much. Bad parenting is at the root of many problems.
Go figure, Doug certainly expects parents to be obedient and accepting of all education policies and practices.
Catharine posted about Dr. Kline, which is today’s post at SQE.. An abstract,on Dr. Kline’s work.
” The Adolescents with Learning Problems
How Long Must They Wait?
Abstract
In a sense, adolescents with learning problems are at the end of the learning disability gauntlet. Often undiagnosed or misdiagnosed, misunderstood, and ineffectually treated, they are already battered and bruised by the time they enter the stormy adolescent years. After years of frustrating underachievement and failure, it is hardly surprising that they end up with serious personality problems or psychiatric symptoms, often becoming dropouts or frequent attenders in juvenile courts. An attempt is made here to understand the manifestations of learning disabilities in this age group. A developmental approach is advocated, with special emphasis upon the child in the total society. Learning disabilities are seen as being basically societal problems, fostered by the society which has created an educational system which often fails to educate. Some practical suggestions are made for helping adolescents with learning problems, and possible approaches to meaningful prevention are discussed. ”
http://ldx.sagepub.com/content/5/5/262.abstract
Already battered and bruise by the public education system.
Where the public education system, sees LD as a society problem.
Thus, the public education fails to educate.
And Doug, sings the standard tune, of blame it on everything else, except for the practices and policies of the public education system.
Many of the researchers would state otherwise – except those who will profit by the poor policies and practices of the public education system. They make their living off these children, just like Doug is profiting from the policies and practices of the public education system.
Its OK because the “blame teachers first” crowd has the attention span of a gnat. Throw the reformers a new ball of wool like a kitten.
Vouchers are the answer (proven to be very unpopular with no academic improvement).
OK
Charters are the answer ( again no academic improvement and plagued with scandals all over America)
OK
Testing is the answer (NCLB, RTTT, NAEP says no improvement fro massive testing effort)
OK
Mayoral control of schools is the answer (Now all the parents hate Bloomberg in NYC and Rhee got Washington DC mayor dumped)
OK
Now teacher bashing is the answer (of course good people will refuse to go into teaching in this environment).
The joke in the USA is that reformers decry the fact that the USA is number 16 in OECD rankings for PISA TIMMS etc but they refuse to do what #1-15 are doing to improve. They go 180 degrees in the opposite direction. The others are strengthening their PS systems, respecting teachers, investing in education, upgrading teacher credentials, and so on. America is attacking teachers, laying off thousands, underfunding public schools, testing the kids little heads off and making no difference, privatizing as fast as they can and making no progress.
The problem in the USA is that they actually listen to reformers and Tea Party nutters which means they are doing almost everything wrong.
The proof is in the pudding. Reformers are going nowhere while Finland, Korea, Singapore and Canada are doing very well because they read Diane Ravitch, Linda Darling-Hammond, Jonathan Kozal, and other progressives.
Canadians take one look at JP Greene, Checker Finn, and the other know Nothings in the USA and realize “this is nonsense and will not work.”
Doug, I am a primary teacher in New Zealand and have just followed this old thread. We are getting the same treatment and nonsense from our neo-liberal government.
We have a major child poverty situation here, especially among Maori and Pacific Island families, and have done for years. Guess what! They have very low achievement figures! So, we have a ‘crisis’ in education.
Well, we happen to be up there, very close to Canada and looking at Finland with its monocultural and essentially egalitarian society-they tax the rich at a meaningful rate. We punch above our weight as I am sure your teachers do.
And yes, we are trying to maintain the cornerstone of our success-co-operation, not competition. We are not well paid but it is adequate and we certainly have no great pension scheme for teachers.
My blood boils when I see our members and system being attacked and undermined by the selfish neo-liberals, who believe “there is no such thing as society”.
All strength to you, you must have fantastic teaching in your country.
This one really is a MUST WATCH
http://www.rheefirst.com/?p=1575
Yeah Doug – that person sends his children to a private school, while presenting speeches how great the public education system is. Wonder how much it cost the Save Our Schools to come to the rally.
“The following article is adapted from an address Doretta Wilson, the Executive Director of the Society for Quality Education, delivered recently to the Institute for Liberal Studies.”
http://www.freedomforum.ca/schools-and-choice/
500 comments
Not one recommendation from Doug on what would make the schools and teachers better.
This is a sample of what we`re up against.
Not one instinct on their part is child centric.
Not one admission that research is completely ignored.
US Teacher Unions Oppose Genuine Parent Power
While the NEA still has on its books — opposition to home education — the AFT has published for it’s activists how to undermine Parent Trigger. This has now been deleted from their site.
Here is the full text of the Wall Street Journal editorial for today on this issue:
“REVIEW & OUTLOOK AUGUST 4, 2011 WSJ
Teachers Union Honesty
An internal document explains how to undermine school reform.
Never put on the Internet anything you wouldn’t want to see in the newspaper, right? Tell that to the American Federation of Teachers, which recently posted online an internal document bragging about how it successfully undermines parental power in education.
This document concerns “parent trigger,” an ambitious reform idea we’ve reported on several times. Invented and passed into law in California in early 2010, parent trigger empowers parents to use petition drives to force reform at failing public schools. Under California law, a 51% majority of parents can shake up a failing school’s administration or invite a charter operator to take it over.
California’s innovation caught on quickly—and that’s where the AFT’s PowerPoint presentation comes in. Prepared (off the record) for AFT activists at the union’s annual convention in Washington, D.C. last month, it explains how AFT lobbying undermined an effort to bring parent trigger to Connecticut last year. Called “How Connecticut Diffused [sic] The Parent Trigger,” it’s an illuminating look into union cynicism and power.
Facing the public call for parent trigger—mainly from minority groups like the State of Black CT Alliance—the AFT’s “Plan A” was “Kill Mode.” That failed. So it was on to “Plan B: Engage the Opposition.”
But only some of the opposition, it turns out: “Not at the table,” notes the AFT document, were “parent groups” who supported the reform. Engagement meant pressuring legislators vulnerable to union muscle. That’s most of them—and the AFT’s muscle worked.
The result was a reform in name only. Out were simple parent petition drives, in were complex “school governance councils” of parents, teachers and community leaders. Most significantly, as the AFT’s PowerPoint brags, the councils’ “name is a misnomer: they are advisory and do not have true governing authority.”
Called about the PowerPoint presentation, the spokesman for Connecticut’s AFT said he knew nothing of it so couldn’t comment. Perhaps it was comment enough when the AFT took the file off its website Tuesday night. Good thing blogger RiShawn Biddle, who first discovered it, made a copy.
http://www.childrenofthecode.org/Tour/c3/dysteachia.htm
Sounds good Steven,we all worked hard.
It will be interesting to follow this process.
I wanted to leave this with you as ammunition on the poverty angle excuse!
facinating Jo-Anne…
“they could have learned with better instruction; better support…”
The arrow on the sign post in retrospect.
Her is an article on it.
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/1256754.html
The interesting thing is the review was requested by one of the board’s own members.
Steven – you wrote below about a “governance” review yet I’m reading “performance” review here.
Are we talking about the same thing?
“The minister admitted the performance review is “an unusual situation to be in” because she was not aware of any other occasion when a school board had been called into question for similar actions.”
This has happened in Ontario. I know of one particular case that saw a school community take the board to court for failing to abide by the legislation that included full inclusion and discussion by ALL. The community won the case that time – the school eventually closed and of course the school board and next provincial government did their usual of making the process soooooo unbelievable prescriptive as to be suspicious and sometimes ridiculous in scope and how much it costs to administer.
The minister mentioned the need for a review to ensure there is “good governance” by this particular board.
As far as I know this review is a first in the South Shore region. Would calling it a performance review get around other aspects of accountability? For instance issues related to the board administration in this case.
Actually, there is a “system” in place – the annual performance appraisal of teachers by the school’s principal.
That’s the “system” where teachers are rated for political correctness and for compliance to the latest trendy offerings from corporations purchased by the school boards.
Whether the teacher is effective as a teacher never enters the discussion. If s/he is buddy-bubby with the “blob”, all is well.
Tunya’s post reflects how teachers’ unions can undermined reforms that empowers parents to act in their own best interests and their children. Steven, states ” There seems to be a contemporary claim by progressivists, that this is a time when our old system of education has been proffered up as an occasion to advance a better model – without the contributions of parents, students or generally what we commonly refer to as citizens. Pony Pucks!”
What the AFT did in Connecticut, “Out were simple parent petition drives, in were complex “school governance councils” of parents, teachers and community leaders………..they are advisory and do not have true governing authority.”
Remind you of anything in the Canadian public education K to 12 system? The school or parent councils, found in every school coast to coast. All working to advance the goals and aims of the public education system, and rarely the goals of parents, and the communities. Purely advisory, to provide advice, in a narrowly define set of criteria defining the role of parent councils.
The next link is the ETFO on school councils.
http://www.etfo.ca/issuesineducation/schoolcouncils/pages/default.aspx
How does the ETFO undermine the parent councils? By working around the regulation, that school councils, parents must constitute a majority, and prevents school board employees from seeking election as parent members in schools where they teach. “This excludes a number of teachers and other school board employees from participating in their children’s school, particularly those in single-school and inner-city communities. There is no evidence employees dominate school councils. It is ETFO’s position that this regulation is discriminatory and anti-democratic. In other cases, school board employees may only seek election to school councils if they take “reasonable steps” to inform those eligible to vote of their employment status.”
Effective way of controlling the agenda, and keeping parents in their place. The messages of the school councils, will become the messages of the unions, and eventually the ministry of education and the school boards.
On the ETFO site, there is teacher accountability.
1. “The New Teacher Induction Program includes orientation, mentoring, professional development and training, and a streamlined performance appraisal process.”
2.Performance Appraisal
3. Professional Activity (PA) Days
4. Ontario College of Teachers
“Teaching is a highly regulated profession. As well, teachers continually enhance their practice by:
•assessing their own learning needs and developing annual professional growth plans;
•participating in professional development activities at the school, school board, and provincial level;
•addressing critical issues, sharing ideas and working on grade activities in divisional meetings;
•attending curriculum meetings;
•presenting workshops;
•taking courses to enhance their learning;
•mentoring peers;
•writing curriculum; and
•serving on in-school, board and provincial committees”
http://www.etfo.ca/issuesineducation/teacheraccountability/pages/default.aspx
All about serving the best interests of the teachers and their unions, but not necessarily the students they serve. Accountability to the parents, students and taxpayers are placed secondary, to the needs of the teachers and their union’s objectives. Undermining all reforms, that moves away from the objectives and goals of the unions, and to seek more power and authority over the education of students. The biggest threat to a teachers’ union, are the parents, the taxpayers and other citizens who as a group cannot be define as having unifying goals and objectives but rather a group that has many differing goals and objectives composed of the individuals, and smaller groups with like-minded goals and objectives.
A lot of tax dollars is being spent by the public education system to control the parents, taxpayers and other citizens outside of the public education sector, undermining current economic, political, social thoughts and ideas that lie outside of the public education system that are not in the best interests of the public education system.
Here is another area of accountability that has not been really been discussed deeper. On the ETFO site, I came across a CURRICULUM INSERT entitled – Celebrating Rights and Responsibilities.
Click to access Celebrating-Rights-and-Responsibilities.pdf
Shouldn’t accountability also rest on what is being taught to our children? I would have gone to war, if one of my children came home speaking about rights and responsibilities, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, where the message is group rights overrides individual rights. Thankfully, my children learned individual rights and the responsibilities that comes with the rights, without the dogma and beliefs that rights and freedoms of the individual rests on the ability of the wider group granting the right and freedom. Wikipedia has a short version on individual rights and groups rights.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_and_group_rights
It irks me, that there is very little accountability in teaching complicated political, human rights, justice, civics, governments where the messages to the students run counter to the realities of society. And the more damaging one, that those who are your equal and those who are above, have your best interests. In my opinion, it leads to greater inequalities, and allow those who are in a position of power and authority to control the processes, to ensure compliance that all are following the rules and norms of the group. A public education system is such a beast, where accountability to the taxpayers and the students they serve, is contingent on the best interests of the public education system.
We, in the AVRSB area, in even worse shape than you are, Steven.
From the Great School site on teacher quality –
“The law has caused administrators to focus more on recruiting efforts, particularly for hard-to-staff schools, and to focus on assigning teachers to classes in their areas of expertise.
However, the law has also had some unintended consequences for some experienced teachers without the proper credentials. For example, Jefferds Huyck, a Latin teacher with a doctorate in classics from Harvard University and a teacher for 22 years in high school and college, is not considered “highly qualified” under NCLB because he doesn’t have a teaching credential. Along with two other teachers with doctorates at Pacific Collegiate Charter School in California, he decided to leave the school rather than spend two years and $15,000 on a teacher credential program geared to beginners..”
http://www.greatschools.org/improvement/quality-teaching/495-teacher-experience-and-credentials-issues-to-consider.gs?page=1
“What Makes a Great Teacher?
Study after study shows the single most important factor determining the quality of the education a child receives is the quality of his teacher. ”
http://www.greatschools.org/improvement/quality-teaching/79-what-makes-a-great-teacher.gs?page=1
“Hanushek: I find it difficult to see what we can take away in specifics. There are so many differences: Some countries have more homogenous populations, some countries have higher levels of parental involvement, some have large class sizes, some have smaller ones. There are nations with each of those characteristics that perform better than we do, so how can we know which specifics can make the difference for American schools?
There was one thing I got out of the McKinsey study [a 2007 report that analyzed high-performing school systems worldwide]. There was one line, I recall, to the effect that countries that perform well don’t let a bad teacher stay in the classroom very long. Somehow a lot of other nations have figured that out. ”
and just a little more on Hanushek – “Parents need to be more involved in how we make decisions about which teachers stay in the classroom. By tradition, a lack of aggressiveness [around firing teachers] and union contracts has meant that most of the decision making about who stays in the classroom and who doesn’t is the teacher’s own decision. We need to change this — we need to be more actively involved.”
http://www.greatschools.org/students/academic-skills/2458-Eric-Hanushek-interview.gs?page=1
“What Makes a Great Teacher?
Study after study shows the single most important factor determining the quality of the education a child receives is the quality of his teacher. ”
http://www.greatschools.org/improvement/quality-teaching/79-what-makes-a-great-teacher.gs?page=1
____________________________________________________________
“Study after study” is completely meaningless and turns the entire article into insignificant nonsense.
What studies?
Why are they not referenced?
Who conducted them and what was the methodology?
What is the definition of a “good teacher”?
How is it measured?
The Great Schools site, is for parents. Traffic alone, a million hits per day, where parents are putting to bed that parents do not know how to choose, or are not very good at deciding what is best for their children. That said, the article is directed at parents to help them sort out the teacher factor. As for the studies, google it, a wealth of studies coming from the United States, with the latest from the Bill Gates Foundation.
I can only wish to have a Great Schools site in Canada, which would upset the apple cart of the Canadian education systems, like it did in United States, when parents are armed with the necessary ammo to become involved parents, and not necessarily the marching orders of information coming from the education system.
The About Us link for Great Schools – http://www.greatschools.org/about/aboutUs.page
One of the greatest problems in Canada’s education system, is the lack of the exchange of information and knowledge directed at parents, without it being heavily edited and shaped to reflect the goals and aims of the education institutes and the education systems. The article, What Makes A Great Teacher, is directed at parents what to look for, that may not be necessarily the same values being used within the education system.
A person with knowledge and integrity who actually tests themselves in the classroom to see if they`re effective.
If they are not,during the summers they take courses to improve their methods.
In any subject,it is all about the integrity of the individual.
Many many teachers fall into the above category but if you remained brainwashed and untrained in something fatally flawed,you can`t be effective,whether you`re a good person or not.
Oh, so now it has gone from testing teacghers and firing the bad ones to self-testing and hoping they do so with integrity.
Back to square one.
I wasn`t talking systemic change and absolute need for accountability,I was talking about what good teachers are like as individuals.
As far as accountability,the system needs to be accountable to it`s citizens and it`s clearly not,not just as far as results but fiscally.
As one individual chatting here,I hope someone cares enough to figure out how to take away the fundamental failure and replace it with efficiency.
We basically need a bomb.
An educrat`s greatest flaw is their arrogance.
I read it differently Andrew, in the sense that teachers will undertake training, when they see they are not effective in the classroom. I don’t know how many actually have that integrity, but two SE teachers in my area about 15 years ago or so, undertook training in the Orton-Gillingham method, on their own dime. As it was told to me by the teachers, there felt they had to do something on their own, to support the students who were struggling in reading and writing. When my child came around, the training of the SE teachers took on significant meaning for me, as well as the school’s ability to help my child in meaningful ways. However, that does not mean it was not difficult to do so, given the upper levels of the education system who are well-versed on the many ways of dumbing down the education of those who struggled in learning.
Teacher reform remains a hot topic on leading American education blogs. The latest post by Joanne Jacobs, ” Public, teachers’ views split on reform,”
August 5, 2011, is a fine example. It is a response to the recent Harvard University study looking at teachers’ views on education compared with those of the general public.
“Teachers’ views on education issues have diverged from public opinion in the last year, concludes a Harvard survey.
The public splits on whether teachers’ unions have a positive or negative influence; teachers defend their unions more strongly.
Public opposition to teacher tenure edged upward; teachers support tenure more than ever. Public support for basing tenure on student academic progress increased from 49 percent to 55 percent, but only 30 percent of teachers agreed.”
For the full post, see:
http://www.joannejacobs.com/2011/08/public-teachers-views-split-on-reform/
Comment:
Teacher’s views on education appear far more diverse in the United States than they are here in Canada. While promoting my current book, I run into the prevailing attitude all the time. After showing initial interest, they too often say “I’m a teacher. I’m not allowed to have an opinion.” Readers of this Blog know why.
“I’m a teacher. I’m not allowed to have an opinion.”
_________________________________________
… and I’ll be forced out of the system by the educrats while the union watches it happen and does nothing.
I do think the same thing is happening in Canada, but the teachers are not allowed to expressed their thoughts that run counter to the educrats.
““I’m a teacher. I’m not allowed to have an opinion.”
Teachers portraying themselves as victims isn’t getting the sympathy it once did. I think that quote above is a direct reflection of the herd mentality teachers unions uphold and pass on to its members.
That individual teachers feel they can’t speak up on their profession in ways that would bring them out of the union’s flock is a sad insight as to the true story behind the feelings of low morale and teachers who give up on improving education for the sake of the children.
One small question for the educrats then.
Universitiy Education faculties charge multi-thousands of dollars to allegedly train teachers. If they are so good at it that they can charge these huge sums how is it that they constantly complain about the lack of preparedness of the students starting university?
They trained the teachers, didn’t they?
Catherine
““I’m a teacher. I’m not allowed to have an opinion.”
Teachers portraying themselves as victims isn’t getting the sympathy it once did. I think that quote above is a direct reflection of the herd mentality teachers unions uphold and pass on to its members.
That individual teachers feel they can’t speak up on their profession in ways that would bring them out of the union’s flock is a sad insight as to the true story behind the feelings of low morale and teachers who give up on improving education for the sake of the children.
______________________________________________________________
I personally know several competent teachers who were hounded out of the AVRSB by the educrats and their little circle of unprincipled principals.
Ego is the culprit-if we can depersonalize the curriculum K-3 and get them to legislate the needed instruction,it will be more about pedagogy.
Not following what the research recommends would be reason for dismissal or PD that they pay themselves..
If you cure the K-3 horrendous instruction,you`ll find a lot more people succeeding.
I see your above statement as weak-Martin Luther King took the reins and changed a nation`s view and response by speaking clearly and standing up to everyone,Presidents included.
You have to be willing to stand up and willing to lose your job if that`s what it takes,you`ll get a new job starting a new organization for teachers who want to be free from Union rule.
You bought a pension but you lost your soul.
Of course, the teachers union sat around and watched it all happen.
I should think, though, that if teachers wish to seen as professionals then they need to act like professionals.
I don’t see very many engineers, doctors, architects etc. compromising their standards and going along just to get along.
I believe that Andrew. I’ve known many a teacher who has admitted to closing the door to the educrats and have come away with the respect of a school community and nicely educated graduates. Not all teachers fall into the trap. Some learn to play the game much like parents do, and at the end of the day ignore “the blob” and get the job done and done well.
Many of those with integrity don’t bother. They simply move on to other careers.
And who is responsible for teaching these unprepared students?
http://www.virtualbookmark.typepad.com/the_virtual_bookmark/2009/04/lazy-and-unprepared-for-university-the-star.html
Hi everyone,
have a look at this and please provide analysis if it is of interest.
http://www.thethirdteacher.com/
I came across it on the well known designer Bruce Mau’s site. One can only imagine…
[…] it was quite an eye-opener when I recently took part in a comment thread at the EduChatter blog (expect slow loading) where there are some 500+ comments, most of which are criticising every […]
Canadian teachers are an essential service and should not be able to strike, while students they profess to care for are in school! If they want to whine then strike during the summer holidays not when students are in school! Not to mention Canadian teachers are paid very well, an awesome pension and summers off! Fire the ones that keep whining and hire the ones that want to work!!!! Sick and tired of over paid teachers that complain all the time! come to the states and see what its like! then you would shut up and be happy!!!
Moderated Comment
(The Toronto District School Board is the scene of recent civil actions aimed at silencing critics). A strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of legal fees. It refers to a lawsuit filed in retaliation for speaking out on a public issue or corruption in an organization. In this case, the public issue is about alleged incompetence, nepotism, corruption and covered up scandals in the Toronto District School Board
(Two examples are the cases involving comments made on Topix (a Blog based in California) and a second legal action involving the Ontario Principals’ Council)
…. Even when the lawsuits have little credibility whatsoever, they often result in a chill on free speech because people will be more hesitant to post online about the scandals and corruption going on in the Toronto District School Board. These types of lawsuits prevent journalists from investigating matters of importance because they will have to be careful of what they post and they will be more of a target if the journalists ask questions….
These allegations were sworn as truth by the whistle-blowers who wish not to be mentioned or identified.
It is time to protect Canadians right to free expression on public issues and demand that public government institutions such as the Toronto District School Board become more transparent when dealing with teacher misconduct and scandals. After all, hiding everything from the public and journalists only amount to whistle-blowing and speculation, which increases the risk of malicious SLAPP lawsuits by the accused teachers……..