American educational blogger Tom Whitby, initiator of #EdChat, recently posted a thought-provoking commentary (August 17-18, 2011) on the intriguing topic of “Leadership Accountability” in public education. In the immediate aftermath of the Save Our Schools Rally in Washington, D.C., Tom began asking why so many were inclined to blame the perceived “failure” of the whole education system on regular teachers. Without the media attention garnered by “Super Matt” Damon, he suspected the entire event might have gone unnoticed. “Teachers,” he wrote,” are in a no-win situation with targets painted on their backs.” Most significantly, the only recognizable national educational leader visible at the SOS Rally was Diane Ravitch, a recent convert to the cause. http://edupln.ning.com/profiles/blogs/leadership-accountability
Educational progressives like Tom Whitby are beginning to ask the right questions. If the North American educational systems are faltering, the responsibility should not be borne solely by the teachers. Just because the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is now fixated on “Teacher Quality” reform doesn’t mean that improving teacher effectiveness is some kind of silver bullet for what ails the system. Surely the current and past educational leadership had some role in aiding or possibly abetting the slide of public education. http://www.sunypress.edu/p-3730-educational-leadership-in-an-ag.aspx
Who’s raising the critical issue of educational leadership at a time when public education is under fire? American and Canadian teacher union bosses seem to be the only ones defending teachers and their legitimacy. It’s been left to Tom Whitby to ask the critical questions: “Where are our local educational leaders in this? What responsibility are the superintendents, assistant superintendents, directors, principals, and assistant principals taking for the ‘demise’ of our education system?”
Educational leadership has become a perilous venture, but much of the research is self-serving, futuristic in orientation, and reflecting short-term memory. Since the early 2000s, the American education bible Education Week and the ADCD’s magazine Educational Leadership have both reflected the reigning confusion over how to respond to ever-increasing demands for public accountability in education. Craig Jerald’s “Beyond the Rock and a Hard Place” (Educational Leadership, November 2003) recognized the problem and urged aspiring leaders to “stop lamenting the challenges of accountability and start making improvements.” Most educational administrators, on career tracks, safely ignored his early warnings about the dangers inherent in “an unveven hodgepodge of instructional aims,” “a scattershot curriculum,” and “unequal expectations.”
One of the first to clean-up his act was Michael Fullan, the school change theorist, then Dean of the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Education. The renowned School Change wizard and one of his OISE allies, Ken Leithwood, responded to the rising tensions with an ingenious but ultimately diversionary strategy.
A Toronto protege of the Fullanites, former Superintendent Bev Freedman, summarized the essential conundrum in December 2004: “The stakes are high, as schools and school systems are increasingly held responsible for increasing student achievement. Educators face competing interests and competing agendas: accountability, standards, teacher testing, high-stakes assessments as well as decentralization: distributed leadership, relational trust, and the development of learning teams.” http://www.aare.edu.au/04pap/fre041066.pdf
Forward-thinking Canadian educational experts, like Fullan and Freedman, attempted to turn the educational ship around by catching the “accountability wave” and turning it to new purposes. New research from the International Academy of Education confirmed their analysis that “Accountability in Education” would not blow over. Indeed, the whole concept of accountability based upon “compliance with regulations” and “adherence to professional norms” was being challenged by “results-driven” initiatives. Some accountability for “student learning” could no longer be ignored and may have some residual benefits. http://www.iaoed.org/files/Edpol1.pdf
Central to the Fullanite strategy was the friendly takeover of the Ontario student assessment agency, the Education Quality and Accountability Office, (EQAO) created in 1994, originally to restore standardized testing. From 2002 onward, Fullan started preaching a born-again message that “school improvement” now required “accountability and capacity building” and Fullanites sought to “reframe the principal’s role” as an “instructional leader” rather than a “neo-manager.” Millions of public dollars were generated in 2002 and 2003 for comprehensive training and “resource packages” to assist principals in “instructional leadership” focused on preparing students in Ontario K to 3 for the reading, writing, and mathematics tests. http://www.aare.edu.au/04pap/fre041066.pdf
The Ontario Instructional Leadership initiative was, at best, a mixed success, but it did stave-off further calls for genuine public accountability and immunized principals against the appeals of the Society for Quality Education and other smaller school reform groups. In the United States, the initial response was more feeble even though the system was demonstrably in crisis. Much of the school reform drive was focused on introducing charter schools, so public school accountability efforts essentially mimicked the No Child Left Behind agenda. Margaret Grogan and Daniel L. Duke’s 2003 book Educational Leadership in an Age of Accountability focused on the Virginia experience and documented its purported successes and pitfalls.
Public education is still, by and large, not a field that welcomes either public scrutiny or accountability for results. School reformers calling for “Teacher Quality” assessments or an end to LIFO tenure rules are routinely dismissed as “teacher bashers” and anyone like Tom Whitby calling school administrators to account does run the risk of being labelled an “Admin. basher.” That’s a shame because Tom is actually a genuine “reflective practitioner” and an experienced educator well attuned to the major trends in American school reform. Like Roland Barth before him, he recognizes that geniune, meaningful educational change “comes from within.” http://edupln.ning.com/profiles/blogs/leadership-accountability
Most of Canada’s teacher unions remain on a completely different wavelength. While claiming to be educational progressives, they continue to be the spear-carriers for the status quo. Some of the most politically active unionists, based in the BC Teachers Federation, are even attempting to blunt school accountability by totally redefining it. They are promoting an “opportunities to learn” model of accountability focusing instead on the same old message – “maximizing students’ opportunities to learn.” http://bctf.ca/IssuesInEducation.aspx?id=5724 That’s the same song sung by Canada’s official voice for administrative leaders, the Canadian Education Association.
Few of today’s leaders in the public or the private sector are prepared to accept responsibility for the impact of their decisions and actions. What does true leadership accountability look like? American leadership guru, Michael Hyatt, puts it bluntly: ” First and foremost, it means that you accept responsibility for the outcomes expected of you—both good and bad. You don’t blame others. And you don’t blame the external environment. There are always things you could have done—or still can do—to change the outcome. Until you take responsibility, you are a victim….Leaders are active. They take initiative to influence the outcome.” http://michaelhyatt.com/leadership-and-accountability.html
Does today’s public education system face an underlying problem of leadership accountability? When the Canadian and American systems of education are under fire, why does it fall to the most outspoken teacher unionists to defend teachers and fend -off the legion of critics? Where are the school administrators when it comes to accountability? To what extent are the leading administrators playing both sides of the fence? Does careerism and respecting the pecking order still rule in the so-called “age of accountability”?
I’ll have to think on this one but, in my opinion, poor management is the root cause of the decline in public education systems.
A bit dated, but…
http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2008/09/10/are-canadas-principals-underpaid/
I have a few more-I love this post because it hits the root cause of failure;
adding to Andrew`s thoughts-the development ,training and encouragement of teachers to be facilitators and not instructors,the goods some publishers promote and sell to school boards that have no effectiveness,the adamant refuting of widely accepted empirical research,the excuse of demogaphics for failure,the absolute shame of lack of intervention for students with a learning disability,the name should be changed,they hide behind it for their instruction failures,the overall lack of accountability to the client,the children and their parents.
If you’ll notice I’ve been harping on different aspects of our deteriorating public education in Canada. The majority of my beefs, if not all, are related to THE BLOODY AWFUL MANAGEMENT at our school boards and the go-along-to-get-along trustees.
Furthermore, the teachers unions encourage the poor management. That way they can hide behind the school boards and not have to do much other than a bit of PR during contract negotiations.
I would say so, a lack of leadership accountability. And what measures there is, are internal measures that really only holds everyone accountable to the lowest benchmark, where moving beyond the lowest benchmark is not rewarded. There is also problems with rewarding, that results in external pressures such as parents increasing their expectations. For example, schools are rewarded to identification of learning problems via through the funding formula, but are not awarded in the elimination of the learning problem via through remediation, to where it is not longer impacting the learning of the student. If any school decided to do this by working on the weaknesses of the student using effective research-based methods the school ends up being penalized in a number of ways. One major way, is that many of the instruction methods for learning problems are not the recommended methods that is practiced inside the school, nor are teachers trained The school ends up in trouble with the board for not following approved practices, and therefore effective practices for learning problems are discouraged, and in place are the usual behavioural and ‘blame the student’ practices that does nothing for the learning weaknesses.
Tied into this, the low achievers and other groups known for low achievement using the same progressive practices that are taught in the teachers’ colleges, are not track. There is no tracking of students who move from low achievement to high achievement at the micro-level, from the administration of the boards. No tracking of what cause the improvement, or even to answer the why part. Although part of the final outcomes, and it is largely ignored by the leadership it is also largely ignored by the schools. From drawing from my own experience and observations, final outcomes of students are to be used to benefit and manipulate the education arms, as well as the special interests groups to serve their own best interests, and not the students. It is probably why the school board staff, and sometimes the school went after me for re-teaching my youngest, because other parents and board employees were asking questions. The board employees were easy by blaming it on me, but not the parents who was under the impression, and holding the typical stereo-type of LD, that my child was dumb, was asking much tougher questions. The first thing thrown down my way, I was teaching my child to cheat, because I was not following the approved practices and curriculum of the school. I threw it back to the parents, by educating them on LD, and all the wonderful advancements being made in the science of learning. I wrote my child’s notes, so she could be attentive in class and start to participate, instead of worrying trying to remember how to write out the letter ‘j’, or the spelling of a word. Today, she is an excellent note taker, but it was lessons I taught her that school did not provide in any meaningful way.
I had no choice but to take the responsibility, as the school refused to remediate my child’s learning problems. The reasons why do not matter, it was the actions of the school and the school board that force me down the pathway to the fork, to remain a victim or take the reins and lead my child. Michael Hyatt states, “Until you take responsibility, you are a victim. And being a victim is the exact opposite of being a leader. Victims are passive. They are acted upon. Leaders are active. They take initiative to influence the outcome.”
http://michaelhyatt.com/leadership-and-accountability.html
Very true statement, where the leadership including unions have chosen to take a route, that forces accountability to the lowest level the students, and where any leakage moving upwards, usually ends at the individual teachers, rather than where it belongs, with the principals and the upper levels of the education system.
As citizens and tax payers, however, we have to stop being so wimpy.
Name the people who are messing up the system.
Name the school baords that are screwing up.
Name the trustees who are acting in secrecy.
Point your fingers directly at the wrongs and be public about it.
Lawsuits?
Bring ’em on!
Philadelphia charter school mismanagement
The Philadelphia Inquirer reported today that a soon to be released report says charter school mismanagement appears to be widespread in 13 Philadelphia schools investigated. In one case, a charter school building was doubling as a nightclub on weekends, but the story details many other areas of mismanagement, including high salaries for charter operators and principals that appear unrelated to the size of the school or the salaries of teachers, incomplete or missing records and conflicts of interest.
The story highlights the need for more accountability and perhaps better oversight by the school district.
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/education/blog/2010/04/philadelphia_charter_school_mi.html
Statewide grand jury attacks ‘gross mismanagement’ and corruption in Broward Schools
February 18, 2011|By Megan O’Matz and Paula McMahon, Sun SentinelA statewide grand jury probing the Broward School District issued a devastating final report Friday evening, saying there was evidence of such widespread “malfeasance, misfeasance and nonfeasance” by elected school board members and senior managers alike that only “corruption of our officials by contractors, vendors and their lobbyists” could explain it.
Leadership in the district is so lacking, the jurors said, they would move to abolish the whole School Board if only the state constitution would allow it.
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2011-02-18/news/fl-broward-school-board-corruption-20110218_1_grand-jury-beverly-gallagher-mismanagement
Andrew, I often thought about it, especially on the days when I was really down. But at the end I talk myself out of it, because there would be consequences that would hurt my best interests as well as my children. I was alone in my battles, but it sure would have been nice to have a group of parents standing behind me. One can take comfort in numbers, and where school boards will often think twice, even five times, before responding to the allegations of a collective group. Why I have never aired my complaints in a public way, is that I am waiting for my youngest to leave high school, than the second problem is the message and how to quickly educate people in the process. I have a couple more years, to work on it, but I cannot name names because the media does not like law suits. Rather funny, in my private correspondence I named names of the educrats, but never my child names or any other private individual, The educrats certainly know who they are, and how my child’s education was impacted, but the same educrats have never defended their actions, nor threatened me with law suits. The reason being, I still retained the winning cards for a slam dunk civil case, concerning my youngest child. It is why at the moment, the board is following strict protocol concerning my child, and has kept me quiet at the moment, where the ministry of education and other outside concerns such as the child’s advocate office is not down on their backs. A stalemate as one would say in chess,
Reading the BC article, is a real treat on twisting accountability to where it no longer represents accountability. The BC unionists would not last long on an assembly line, they be fired before the day is out. Kicking the accountability to another person, which is what the piece is all about, is based on the faulty premise that teachers are all equal in training, education, and traits.
“Teachers are responsible and accountable for teaching the curriculum, planning and delivering instruction, choosing learning resources from those available in the school and district, and assessing and reporting student progress. Teachers cannot be held accountable for the diversity of the students who walk through the doors of their classrooms, large class sizes, cuts to programs, the lack of textbooks, or the long waiting list for diagnostic testing to identify students with special needs.”
http://bctf.ca/IssuesInEducation.aspx?id=5724
The BC teachers do not want to held accountable for the final outcomes of students, who are greatly impacted by the curriculum and delivering of instruction. I can’t tell how many debates I had with teachers, and the questionable instruction methods, which was the reason why my child did not participate in class. Teachers may not be held accountable to the diversity of the students, but they should be held accountable for the instruction methods and planned lessons, that actual hinders student learning. The answer is not to dumbed down the curriculum and outcomes, but to change the instruction method that is more suitable for the student.
Nancy`s right on 2 counts-there is a reward for failure in the funding formula-
As well,she notes the recriminations of being a parent who sues-
There has to be another way-the FEDS have to show up and DEMAND better-consequences and loss oj funding and jobs have to come to the table.
Accountability needed.What a mess.
Quand on est dure de comprenure…
As well,she notes the recriminations of being a parent who sues
__________________________________________________
Not parents suing.
Lawsuits against those who have the backbone to speak out and name names.
“Statewide grand jury attacks ‘gross mismanagement’ and corruption in Broward Schools”
Andrew, and there will be no recriminations or anyone being held accountable because the district is an “A’ district. “For the fourth consecutive year, Broward County Public Schools has earned the highest grade of ‘A’ from the Florida Department of Education in the 2010/11 school accountability results under the state’s A+ Plan.”
http://coralspringstribune.com/?p=4750
Apparently it is ok to pay a janitor over $100,000 in salary. “For nearly five years, the Broward County School District has been paying a former head custodian more than $100,000 a year to teach school janitors the finer points of cleaning. Reynolds Hedland III, 52, has no college degree or state teaching certificate, yet earns more than 99 percent of Broward County’s teachers. His lessons include how to mop and scrub bathrooms, strip and wax floors, and “maintain the cleanliness, orderliness, appearance and safe condition of schools.”
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2011-05-26/news/fl-broward-schools-votech-20110526_1_head-custodian-broward-teachers-union-janitors
Than there is the $500 bonus for teachers. “Teachers in Broward have reached a contract with the school district, granting instructors a $500 cash bonus and no unpaid furlough days. The South Florida Sun-Sentinel reports the one-time bonuses will cost the district about $7 million but the contract will help secure $30 million in federal funding from the Race to the Top grant.”
http://www.theledger.com/article/20110819/news/110819320?tc=ar
Still looking for a new superintendent to take charge of the board and fixed the corruption. From what I have read, accountability is only directed at the standard testing, and not at the operations of the district. So it is okay somewhere at the top, to pay out millions of dollars in civil suits started by parents. Paid out one million dollars in a suit, concerning a teacher who is not sitting in prison for 15 years. “The Broward School Board voted during its meeting Tuesday to pay the survivor $1 million, settling a federal civil rights lawsuit brought by the young woman and her family and charging that the school district did not do enough to protect students from a predatory teacher.”
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2011-05-17/news/fl-broward-schools-settlement-20110517_1_teacher-conraad-hoever-liability-in-civil-cases
As long as the district keeps their A-status, accountability will never become a reality. As for the taxpayers and parents, I cannot find any talk regarding the going-ons at the Broward Country School District.
There has to be another way-the FEDS have to show up and DEMAND better-consequences and loss oj funding and jobs have to come to the table.
Accountability needed.What a mess
______________________________________________________________
Education is provincial jurisdiction. The FEDS would be told to butt out, and rightfully so.
SQE has been at this for years,they feel school choice is the only way,give mom and dad power over their children`s education if the school isn`t effective or responsive.
I know you are against it.
I can`t contribute much to this subject other than denigrate,which is not a solution.
I`ll read your thoughts.
You’ll not get my tax dollars and privatize them. Not in my lifetime.
Much as I am a union guy, I am not going to blame management (VPs up to director). Yes they can be an invertebrate species and “I was only following orders” the Nurenburg defence is alive and well. They have all seen before their very eyes, that the nail that sticks up will be hammered down.
Lets take two schools of my intimate experience, School A PS and School B PS. A is in the richest neighbourhood in Toronto, B is in the poorest, possibly still Canada’s largest public housing project. Do you seriously expect them to acheve the same results? What if we switch principals? Those who place too much emphasis on admin accountability would expect EQAO scores to switch places next year. They would be sadly out of touch. The teachers at School A seem to get outstanding results. Almost every one of their students ends up in grade 9 in an academic program and eventually goes to university. At School B , the reverse is true. The teachers at School B must be lazy or incompetent or both. Those who actually know the scene, understand that you can switch the entire staff and next year, School A will be near the top and School B near the bottom.
This is not “Toronto centric” I have toured the province and can name the schools in Sudbury, Ottawa, Belleville,Waterloo, Niagara, Bluewater.
Am I saying we cannot improve due to poverty? No we can do better but the route to better results is smaller classes, ECE/ELP, summer school, higher educational standards for teachers, more emphasis on the actual lower achieving schools and not a scatter gun approach.
Oh I know the corporate education reform agenda doesn’t like this direction. It costs money (although it saves far more than it costs) it doesn’t attack unions, it doesn’t privatize, it doesn’t sell much more technology, it doesn’t damage democracy, and it doesn’t need testing.
Where is the fun in that?
You do know that the whole “corporate education reform agenda” routine is a little dodgy, right? Who actually came up with that schtick?
But Andrew the feds are involved, in ensuring professional standards and measures in the fields of accounting, building codes, environment, and other such areas, where the feds overrides provincial laws. The feds can step in at any time as they do in health, to protect the public, and should step into the world of public education to enforce standards and accountability into a system that is pretty well making it up as they go along, where standards in one province can be very different, than the standards in another province. Where a grade 12 education has more value than a grade 12 education in another province, and very important if a student is thinking of going to a post-secondary institution in another province. Where SE varies drastically from one province to the next, and yet all provinces and territories only hallmark that is shared, is to provide an education for SE children under federal laws, but the quality of the education is left up to the provinces. Rather easy to meet the conditions of the federal law, when the quality and redressing of learning weaknesses is left up to the provinces. In turn, today any parents needs to have the money and the personal determination to see it through. And you do need the determination, just like the father of the Moore boy, who is a blue-collar worker working in Vancouver, who spent a pretty penny going through the court system, and where the case rests at the Supreme Court of Canada. A case that shows all the aspects of a typical public education system, and the lack of accountability as well as not providing a quality education for the dyslexics of Canada.
If anything, unions do not want standard testing as an accountability measure, and as in the BC article, the BC union would like an internal accountability measures to be the emphasis. I would state otherwise, external accountability measures are needed, to enforced the public education system, to go beyond meeting the legal definitions of the law. As it stands now, the education system barely meets the definition legally, but does not meet any of the mandates, mission statements, and goals that deals with the quality issues. After all, the public education system does not have to provide a quality education, beyond meeting the very basics of learning how to read, write and do numeracy. No where does it state anywhere in the provincial education acts that students must obtain proficiency and fluency in reading, writing or numeracy. For Doug to pull out the tired line of (and Doug, you really need new material) of switching schools, the reason why the school in the rich district does better, is that the parents are willing to spend their excess cash on the tutors and whatever is needed to ensure their children will not fall behind, and is the choice that most parents take, instead of dealing with issues of a public education system that makes red tape at city hall look like a simple task compared to the education system. This is also expected of parents from other income groups to do as the wealthier parents does, no matter the circumstances. Than throw in the words of equity and opportunity in replace of accountability from the education system, we now have a system of education where quality of education, the resources is governed by area code, income, and type of people. To where the unions play both sides to serve their own best interests. So cracked windows, peeling paint, leaks in roofs will served the union’s interest just as well as tending to the busy lives of parents fundraising huge amounts of monies to finance the extras over and above. After all, the parents in the high income school, have already let the school off, the board off by supplying the tutor lessons, and other services that the public education system is no long supplying.
All done on the faulty premise that all teachers are equal in training and quality, and any failings is blame on outside factors. First the laws retaining to education at the federal level need to be revamp and than the policies of the education system to ensure a balance between internal and external accountability measures are enforce, and outcomes track. And independent oversight to ensure each part of the system is living up to the spirit, and not have it serve their own best interests, and as well to keep folks honest. School boards are not doing their jobs in serving the needs of their students, but rather tending to the needs of the adults and their best interests.
But Andrew the feds are involved…
_________________________________________________________
I never said they weren’t.
Implement sound management practices. I’ve already stated that.
How is it that you see everything backwards? See things that aren’t there and miss the things that are there?
“Implement sound management practices.”
Whose the idealogue now?
When administrators come out of hiding they will invariably encounter the community. When the community comes out of hiding it will invariably encounter the administrator. Both must be engaged in order to create a genuine educational experience.
We refered to this five hundred years ago as the renaissance.
So are you against sound management?
All management practices make me consider the consequences.
For me it is not a – “are you for me or against me” kind of state of management. For me it is entirely connected to the community, and whether our public system can provide a responsible past, present, and future educational management role in a certain community’s life.
This would invariably entail at times going against the progressivist role in undermining a certain community in question, owing to a centralist preoccupation with the big carrot.
When a superintendent comes knocking and muses on little johnny’s transfer to another village, I may consider what is sound management.
Good management doesn’t take any isms into consideration. It attempts to find the best possible solutions to problems and objectives. I’m not talking the quick fix band aids either. That’s the current practice. That or coverups.
There’s no great mystery about it.
Note that I said “best”, not “cheapest” nor “most expensive”.
That really wasn’t what I asked, but ok.
However,without a deep understanding of the whys you will be shooting in the dark.
I do agree with you though,doing without a consultant who shuffles paper and assigning a part time principal rather than a full time to save a community school is good management.Cronyism and unions so powerful at the top,I think the executives absolutely must be non union.
However,without a deep understanding of the whys you will be shooting in the dark.
———————————————————————————————
That would be poor management.
Ethical Leadership” is all the rage among the most professionally-engaged Canadian school superintendents. It is now a major focus for the Canadian Education Association and is being strongly promoted by Carole Bryant, Executive Director of the Manitoba Association of School Superintendents.
What’s the purpose of the initiative? Does it speak to the need for accountability or is it confirmation that school leaders are searching for salvation? You be the judge:
Exploring Ethical Leadership
Carole Bryant
“Increased accountability for student achievement and the implementation of provincial priorities, changing demographics due to growing immigrant and Aboriginal populations, and the necessity for ever greater fiscal restraint – all contribute to the growing complexity of the school superintendency. In Manitoba the challenge and opportunity for leadership at the local level remains strong compared to many other jurisdictions, with superintendents and boards still able to exert significant influence over the quality of education.
There is, however, no formal provincial preparation for this role; individuals seek out academic post-graduate programs or depend on the Manitoba Association of School Superintendents (MASS) or conferences outside Manitoba for much of their professional learning. The Association saw the need for a new kind of sustained professional learning for its members and elected to launch a study of ethical leadership, modeled somewhat on a similar program run by the Superintendents Association of Iowa (SAI).
Why ethics? The answer lies in part in MASS’s commitment to public education, its stated sense that “the challenge for educators is to define what we believe about education in a manner that encompasses the values of a democratic society, respects the inherent uniqueness of the individual student, and at the same time provides equity of opportunity for all.” The Association’s Statement of Beliefs in Public Education has codified the values that have grounded its work for the past 15 years (see http://www.mass.mb.ca) and reflect Robert Starratt’s “ethic of justice” and “ethic of care”, as well as the “ethic of critique”, which is crucial for the constant renewal and change required to create and maintain a strong democracy.
If individuals hope to provide the leadership necessary for such change and renewal, and to establish cultures where justice and care are at work, they require clarity around values, the ability to articulate those values to others, and the ability to make judgments based on them as they encounter ethical dilemmas. A sustained dialogue on the centrality of those values formed the base of our work on ethical leadership begun in 2008. As we said at that time, “ethical leadership gets at the heart of the superintendent’s work – not only to provide a moral compass for individual decision-making and relationships but to lead in establishing an ethical culture where children and learning, equity and justice, are central.” ( End of Excerpt)
The CEA is heavily invested in promoting Ethical Leadership. Here’s the llatest example:
http://us1.campaign-archive.com/?u=ad36f7933a&id=8d8d988085
Comment:
With the public clamouring for administrative accountability, it’s amazing what the school superintendents are up to when it comes to “professional development” to meet the challenges of the new century.
“Ethical Leadership”
Nothing more than meaningless, politically correct nonsense to cover-up the real problem in public education – management failure.
It sounds good, though, and fits on a bumper sticker.
Christopher L. Doyle’s Education Week commentary “Let’s “Stop Forecasting 21st-Century Skills ” is a zinger because it suggests that today’s educational visionaries are much like “Emperors with no clothes.”
Tony Wagner and the “21st Century Skills” movement openly espoused in recent editions of Education Canada ( the official CEA organ) comes in for withering criticism. The sub-title says it all: Why educators should stop forecasting 21st-century skills and get on with teaching.
Here’s a great line:
“The problem, then ( in the past) and now, is that the architects of futurist school reform are too invested in the status quo to tolerate, let alone foster, much subversion, criticism, or free thinking.”
For the full piece, see http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2011/09/14/03doyle.h31.html?tkn=XWXFUItaaVnD5Ec%2F8mLakKqrzhXg9Po6wHlY&cmp=ENL-EU-VIEWS1
If Christopher Doyle is right, then the educational futurists and their Canadian mouthpieces are truly leading us astray —and it’s just as well that most rank-and-file teachers continue to tune them out in the schools.
“If Christopher Doyle is right, then the educational futurists and their Canadian mouthpieces are truly leading us astray —and it’s just as well that most rank-and-file teachers continue to tune them out in the schools.”
____________________________________________________________
Except that now the teachers have to spend half their time on appearing to be complying to the ludicrous fads being dictated from on high.
Yes,amazing,they`ve been destroying education;did you see this piece as well?
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/sputnik/2011/09/what_would_evidence-based_policy_look_like_in_education.html?cmp=ENL-EU-VIEWS2
I agree Andrew,teachers are dictated to,not asked if the fads are working and they are delivering a lot of stuff they know doesn`t work.
Joanne, glad to see articles that results matter more than the processes and methods. “Policymakers should not care whether it is charters, vouchers, homeschooling, non-union or unionized schools, reading programs, or professional development that achieves the desired goal. They should only care about demonstrated results. I agree with Rick Hess when he argues that, “The proper measure of whether proposals are consistent with public schooling ought not be whether power, politics, or finances shift, but whether we are doing a better job of educating all children so they master essential knowledge and skills, develop their gifts, and are prepared for the duties of citizenship.”
In my small corner of the world, I eventually got the teachers on my side because it was the impressive results of my dyslexic child, using explicit instruction and other methods that are not normally associated with a typical progressive education system. Concentrating on the essential knowledge and skills is the key to develop the talents of students, as well as preparing students for adulthood. A lot of the stuff being used in the public education system, are not effective for a lot of the student population. Anywhere between 40 to 60 % and it goes across all income levels. All based on politics, power, funding, and beliefs of the policy makers, and not if the stuff can prove results. Reading Recovery is one such beast, that does absolutely nothing regarding improvement and lifting the level of students by the end of grade 3 to grade level or above. Reading recovery and the decision to have it in a school, is about power and the belief systems of the decision makers. The awful math curriculum is another example of power, politics, funding and once again belief systems of the decision makers. The policy makers should hang their heads in shame, when it comes to math scores, but they are too busy proving the accountability lies with the SEC factors, and/or defending their decisions.
Here is another example, compliments of the Toronto Star investigative reporter who went undercover to exposed the shenanigans of the Ontario Education system. http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1055379–star-investigation-slacking-off-gets-high-marks-at-this-high-school?bn=1
“they are delivering a lot of stuff they know doesn`t work.”
_____________________________________________
Those who knuckle under do that. Those who don’t either get hounded out of the system or get terminated for doing that for which they were trained and paid.
The teachers who do stick to their principles find other careers, bide their time to retirement while keeping a low profile (faking it) or fight the system. The latter get little to no support from their co-workers and unions.
Where are Cutting Edge school administrators trying to lead us?
American school superintendents must be suffering from digital shock. Will Richardson’s October 2011 District Superintendent article hails Cathy Davidson’s book Now You See It as a work of genius. The true mission of 21st century education is supposedly “unlearning” — and superintendents are exhorted to join in a new version of Deschooling Heaven (a la Summerhill with freedom from accountability of any kind).
The opening passage is alarming:
“Are you an “unlearner?” If not, you need to become one—fast. Of the many important messages articulated by Duke professor Cathy Davidson in her newest book Now You See It: How the Brain Science of Attention Will Transform the Way We Live, Work, and Learn, that may be the one that is most relevant for educational leaders at this moment.”
He goes on to quote Dr. Davidson approvingly:
” Unlearning is required when the world or your circumstances in that world have changed so completely that your old habits now hold you back. You can’t just resolve to change. You need to break a pattern, to free yourself from old ways before you can adopt the new.”
Read on at http://www.districtadministration.com/article/lifelong-unlearning
The Canadian band of “21st century skills ” apostles are tweeting this article as if it has descended on tablets of stone. It raises a fundamental question — Have some North American school administrators completely lost their minds?
“We could do much better by asking artists, developmental pychologists, ethicists, enviornmentalists, and the physicists, to chime in about what kids need to learn. if the past is any guide, it seems much more likely that those on the margins of power and wealth, should have better insight into the future than those who have defined the status quo.”
CD
Mule muffins!
NS has developed community based programs for quite some time which recruits the various …ists – like art(ists) (Art Smarts or artist in the schools), enviornmental(ists), physic(ists), and so on to expand the public education horizon. However, there is no educratic desire to see these “ists” chime in on the future here folks. Free thinking is and always has been problematic for administrators.
The challenge comes when those community based programs reveal the weakness in the status quo, and in the implied arena of critical thinking fostered by progressiv(ists) that these programs may have been idiologically intended for. Many of these programs incidently are the watered down versions of cuts to general education while the “Blob” has consistently expanded until recently in NS.
Sure, why not stop forcasting 21st century skills – it gets rid of the problem for those wanting to avoid accountability.
Flawed management practices and education policies may stem from faulty assumptions. On the Accountability question, consider the highly original thinking of Sherman Dorn
American education watchdog Sherman Dorn can usually be counted upon to challenge your critical assumptions in the field of education. His EduBlog (http://shermandorn.wordpress.com) is full of surprises.
Sherman Dorn’s 2007 book Accountability Frankenstein is an out-of-the-box creation. In it, he attempted to explain how we have come to distrust schoolteachers but trust test scores. In each case, he documents the inconsistencies in education policy and how popular thinking leads us completely astray.
His book Accountability Frankenstein is summarized at http://shermandorn.com/wordpress/?page_id=1961
Could it be that Accountability is a Monster that can lead to ineffective education policy? (Sorry to muddy the waters)
Yes the Corporate Reform Agenda calls everyone else “status quo” if you call a lot more money, smaller classes, ECE/ELP, summer school, higher teacher education, and the elimination of child poverty “status quo”.
Very few workers wouldn’t be in favour of “a lot more money”, lower workloads, blah, blah, blah or the “elimination of child poverty”.
Public education systems are neither intended nor designed to eliminate child poverty or any other kind of social ills. They have enough problems providing a quality educational opportunity to all the legal residents under their jurisdiction.
Yes, Doug there is private agendas to considered. The best interests where more money = smaller classes + ECE/ELP + summer school + higher teacher education – child poverty is the equation for the progressives. A whole lot of money and for what, to move achievement up by 5 points or so, to produced the same percentages or the 60/40 split in the 3Rs, without changes to the instruction and curriculum that are far more effective than what teachers received at teachers’ colleges, and what is currently being practiced in today’s school. No changes to the current management model which should be change post haste, in the same way current practices where children who are currently experiencing learning problems in the 3Rs, are sent to a waiting line while the staff, unions and other interested parties are focusing their attentions and using the children as excuses to blame it on the SEC factors.
That side, and the other side, the Reformers have no intention in going against their best interests when it comes to curriculum, instruction and management. The education system is set up to tend to the best interests of the adults, and not the students. Fullan, when he set up the Ontario Instructional Leadership, as well as the teacher collaboration model, what did not change was the practices and curriculum or even the current structure of the top to the bottom model. It certainly made teachers’ work more complicated, increased watching to ensure compliance of decisions made at the teacher collaboration meetings, as well as the head literacy and numeracy teachers. If anything it is model of sorting out the weak from the strong academics, and solutions are based on what works great for the strong academics. There is no interest in improving achievement for the 40 to 60 % of the students, because it does not serve the best interests of the public education system. Its structure is built around the needs of the adults, profit, and jobs. Responsibility and accountability that does not serve the best interests of those who work within the public education, are downloaded to the parents, taxpayers, community, who are least able, and have little power but to live with it without protest, since they have limited power and choice. The pocket book rules, instead of common sense where accountability and responsibility is taken seriously.
It is all about downloading the social costs to the public, making citizens accountable for the education of the their children in the foundation of the 3Rs, by the manipulation of the SEC factors that will served the best interests of those who work within the education system. In other words, if parents want their children to do better than the minimum of 50 % pass rate, they are force to walk down a pathway of many forks, where they have to negotiate the many special interests within the education system, to determined the best interests of their children. For good outcomes to occur, the information, knowledge and values of the parents are critical to determined best interests, because of the manipulation of knowledge and information by the special interest groups within the education system. The lack of accountability and transparency within the education system allows those who work within the education system, to manipulate the information, knowledge and values of the people outside the education system, to protect their best interests.
I have been exploring the emerging theory of socialization costs, where accountability and transparency are downloaded to people outside of the organization in either public or private sector to protect best interests or to limit high risk activities. I came across an interesting, and very informative doctoral dissertation titled, “Conceptualizing Accountability for Education “. “The call to enhance accountability has provided a central focus of recent educational reforms. The increased attention given to accountability by scholars and practitioners reflects its perceived importance for education. Yet, accountability reforms have often been at the centre of controversy and debate. For some, they represent the best way to improve the quality of public education. For others, they restrict and narrow what is taught in schools, and serve to undermine hard won educational improvements of the past.
This study was an inquiry into the idea of accountability. It was undertaken to develop a better understanding of the concept itself, and to develop an accountability model for use in public education.
The report, (1) provides a brief history of accountability reforms in public education, (2) reviews what an accountable education looks like from the perspective of the four strands of liberalism that have shaped public education in Canada, (3) outlines three accountability principles, and (4) suggest practical applicants for those assigned and the task of enhancing accountability in education.”
http://www.saskschoolboards.ca/research/evaluation_and_reporting/02-08.htm#Introduction
Says who? School have a vocational role, a personal growth aspect and a citizenship equality of opportunity aspect that must be kept in balance.
How did all that work out for the Soviet Union?
Doug read my link in my last post. “Manzer (1994) contends that education in Canada has been “dominated by liberal conceptions of the purpose of education, liberal understandings of the proper criteria of political evaluation, and liberal principles of state organization” (p. 255). Yet, he notes, liberalism has changed in significant ways over the last 150 years, dividing into distinctive and even opposing doctrines that changed and expanded the purposes of education, and the problems that schools were expected to resolve. In addition, Manzer notes, the interpretations of (and importance given to) each of the criteria used to judge the goodness of public schools have changed over time. Those criteria are justice, legitimacy, effectiveness and efficiency.”
Ethical Liberalism is Doug’s dogma, which as the author has state is still present within the education system, as well as the newer one called Technological Liberalism.
Both are seeking control, but so far ethical liberalism is winning the day because of the unions and their position. The unions are very determined to bring in the old USSR version of the state run grocery store.
Nancy, the progressive agenda is the proven agenda to get significant results.
The corprorate agenda is the agenda to make profits for Bill Gates, privatize, experiment with failed charters, vouchers, testing union bashing and so on. These are all failures.
The progressive agenda is beginning to prevail as all of the CERA reforms crash and burn. The truth will eventually become clear.
Yes the progressive model eh Doug? About time to stopped looking at the forest, and study the individual trees of the progressive model. Quite the model, where children with learning difficulties are labeled ‘hard to teach’, parents are given lessons on how to educate their child the progressive way, where math lessons is a series of mind boggling expeditions to morphed math theory and the math laws into progressive dogma where 2 + 2 = 5 sometimes. If not that the practices of accountability and transparency are morphed into keeping the best interests of the public education and the progressives within it.
You have not read my link, or stopped at the first paragraph, otherwise your last post would be a bit thoughtful on accountability and transparency. You really should be reading articles that are coming from the globalists, including the OECD that you love to repeat their stats, to support your progressive agenda. However, things are changing there as well, where there is cracks and divisions developing because of new found knowledge and data coming on stream, that are telling them a different story. Accountability is of a great concern to the top level global elites of the OECD kind, as well as a concern to the political elite. More negative outcomes, and no one minding the shops overseeing and ensuring accountability mechanisms are enforce, to prevent those who rather download the accountability to those who have little power and choice, because it does not serve their best interests.
Another paper read today, is a fascinating look at how the progressives and reformers where the public sector uses political clout, and the reformers uses narrowly defined targeted accountability measures, through a mixed of political and economic clout. What the public and private sector share is to repress information and knowledge that is not in keeping with their goals and best interests.
All kinds of agendas are at play, and the general public is left to sort it out, and bears the brunt of responsibilities and being held accountable at a much higher standard than those who are in charge. This brings my mind to the recent news of China, closing down the schools for the migrant children, where access to a public education for migrant children is as restrictive as access to health care, and other government services that the newly formed professional middle-class takes for granted. Much like the progressive model of public education in NA, where the public are restricted to the kinds of education, and bears the responsibility and accountability of the state of education. In other words, whatever bad outcomes are, society is to be blame, and not the self-proclaimed experts of the progressives and reformers.
Egalitarianism may be a lofty ideal (a questionable premise in the first place) but it is contrary to human nature. All, and I mean all, attempts have failed miserably.
Egaliterianism should be the first and primary goal of an education system.
Your comments Andrew were often made:
Before women could vote;
Before all races have equality;
When only ‘property owners’ could vote;
When the children were still in the mines;
What’s up with all this equality talk anyway?
We will know we have reached educational equality when there is no statistical relationship between educational success and parents income, level of education, gender, race etc. Until then we are dealing with unfinished equality business.
Equality and egalitarianism aren’t the same thing at all.
I’m surprised you don’t know that considering the way you toss the words around.
If “egalitarianism” is the “first and primary goal” shouldn’t that rule out elititist “academies” marketing mostly to wealthy Asian students?
How accessible is it to the non-affluent?
BINGO! Both sides of mouth talking at once is mastered once again.
Looks like a brilliant move by McGuinty to slash tuition costs by 1/3 for all families making less than $160 000. Now Mr Hudak can tell us why this is a bad idea. 🙂
Progressive policy at its best.
Who will be making up the shortfall to the universities?
Doug, egalitarianism is impossible in an education system, where each student has their own unique set of variables, that plays havoc with the so-called equality theory. Using women, Doug is not a good example, because before women were not allow to vote, the working men without ownership of land was not allow to vote. Essentially, allowing women to vote, or for matter people who are not property owners, are the values that involve over time, with the laws changing to reflect the new values. In the public education system, education equality cannot be accomplished, since no part of the system, the structure caters to the unique make-up of each individual student, and therefore equality in the education system, is a man-made construct where school variables such as instruction and curriculum are standardized, to create a pseudo-like equality atmosphere. The students are forced to adapt to the instruction, the curriculum, where the system controls the equality factor. Equality in school has never existed, and it has never existed from the time man began walking on the earth. What should happen but does not happen because it goes against the best interests of the adults in the education system, is the school and the system to adapt to the individual students, catering to their strengths, and remediation of learning weaknesses, as well as having the curriculum and instruction methods adapting and changing as the student progress.
It is why the favourite tactic of the public education is to dumbed-down the curriculum for a student who is having learning difficulties, labeled them, without effective remediation of the learning weaknesses. Remediation like accommodations are seen as unfair advantage by the education system, to students who do not require remediation or accommodations. But dumbing down the curriculum, lower expectations is seen as leveling the playing field making students more equal than unequal. Tight control over accommodations, remediation so students are not obtaining an unfair advantage over other students who do not have access. Another reason that was given to me by the educrats why I should not be re-teaching at home, since it was giving her an unfair advantage. Equality does not exist at the school, since the education system controls the variables that would cater to the unique learning needs of students, which is dependent on the needs and serving the best interests of those who work within the system.
Doug your last comments, “We will know we have reached educational equality when there is no statistical relationship between educational success and parents income, level of education, gender, race etc. Until then we are dealing with unfinished equality business.” It will always be unfinished business, since each student is unique, unlike women obtaining the right to vote. Nothing unique about being female, and something that no one can do anything about it, and voting became a right for females. A right was granted, and one of the outcomes, was the equalization of females and males when it came to voting in an election. It will always be unfinished, since the public education system, controls the variables and opportunities to access the education gates.
It is why I have to laugh at your comment, “Progressive policy at its best.”
A move by the Liberal party, to support the down-trodden middle-class, without the bother of telling them, rising tuition rates will be the result.of this policy, if elected. While last year, the international students received a gift of $40,000 yearly, for 4 years, to studied in Ontario, and the Ontario students get left out. “Foreign students win while Ontario students get left behind. McGuinty has clearly lost touch,” tweeted Wilson, the Progressive Conservative critic for colleges, universities, research and innovation. “While Ontario families struggle to pay for school, electricity, auto insurance and sales tax hikes, the McGuinty Government is focussed on paying the tuition of students who don’t even live in this country, let alone this province.”
http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2010/11/04/mcguinty%E2%80%99s-solutions-aren%E2%80%99t-in-china/
Progressive policy at its best eh Doug? Sounds more like the equation of progressive policy = inequitable policies
“Foreign students win while Ontario students get left behind. McGuinty has clearly lost touch,” tweeted Wilson, the Progressive Conservative critic for colleges, universities, research and innovation. “While Ontario families struggle to pay for school, electricity, auto insurance and sales tax hikes, the McGuinty Government is focussed on paying the tuition of students who don’t even live in this country, let alone this province.”
____________________________________________________________
I actually had to look that one up. It’s so ludicrous that I thought that surely somebody has someting wrong.
Apparently not… unless there’s more to it.
Comment Edited for Length and Clarity
There is nothing inherently “negative” with the policy of reducing post-secondary tuitions — if, and that is a big if, Ontario can afford to pay for it. We already have a deficit of $14 billion and the McGuinty gov’t has doubled the debt. So, how is it progressive to foist this debt on our grandchildren and great-grandchildren? Or, do progressives find that kind of fiscal responsibility boring? Ontario Conservative Leader Tim Hudak said it best: “Dalton McGuinty cannot be trusted to keep his promises. He will say one thing to get re-elected and then break that promise as soon as he is re-elected.”…..
Hudak could also counter with a policy that was not only progressive but conservative in that it rewarded students for their hard work and perseverance by increasing OSAP loans and combining them with a loan forgiveness option. Part or all of the loan would be forgiven (essentially becoming a grant) once the student successfully completed their programs and actually graduated.
….There is no magic. Governments do not create their own money. It all has to come from us, the taxpayers and the fastest way to go bankrupt, as they are finding out in Europe, is to try to be all things to all people.
A really good post on leadership, Paul. But, I stand by my position that the buck (in education) goes all the way up the line and stops with the elected Cabinet.
Re the discussion on leadership. A really good post Paul. But, I stand by my position that the buck goes all the way up the line and stops with the elected Cabinet.
____________________________________________________________
Not much good management there, either.
The “negative” of this, and so many other of McGuinty’s efforts, is that he’s entirely unable/unwilling to explain how the cost will be covered. There’s nothing either compelling or admirable about a politician who wants credit for something and simply dumps responsibility for paying for it onto future generations.
The irony is that the folks getting the tuition cuts will be the one’s paying off McGuinty’s zeal to spend money like a drunken sailor.
How gracious of Dalton McGuinty when it was he who lifted the freeze on tuitions in the first place.
Gov’t is the last place to look for leadership in education….it’s gotten us so far already….NOT! In a perfect world gov’t gets its marching orders from the people/voters/taxpayers not well-paid bureaucrats, some who I bet haven’t seen the inside of a classroom in quite a while.
Nope, I’m one of those who stands firmly on the side of the belief that government can’t fix everything – the less government interference in education the better IMO.
Could it be that Accountability is a Monster that can lead to ineffective education policy? (Sorry to muddy the waters
_______________________________________________________
I’ve avoided using the term “accountability” deliberately.
I find it to be totally meaningless as long as there isn’t a consistant, reliable and objective methodology that can measure whatever it is that’s to be assessed… even that hasn’t been clearly defined.
what would you use in its place Andrew? Asking because I too think that it’s one of those terms that gets people doing more yawning because of its overuse and meaningless results.
Accountability IS the problem. The jurisdictions that place accountability first don’t do very well. If testing actually worked to improve the system USA would be #1 not #17.
Think of accountability vs professionalism like a see saw or teeter tawter. If one end goes up the other goes down. Increasingly, accountability comes at the expense of professionalism and professional judgement.
If so Doug, increasing professional judgement/autonomy by decreasing accountability measures - increases the risk of educators, including the upper levels to produced an increased in the numbers of poor outcomes (the students), as well as increasing decisions being made to protect their best interests over the best interests of the students. Essentially what Fullan has created with teacher collobaration and the leadership program that there is no effective mechanism that ties what is produced, the new practices and if they are truly effective for the students. What I have observed is many of the new practices are aligned with the political, economic, and values of the adults. Or in other words, let me count the number of ways students spend on activities that hinders increase learning.
In another paper, ” A number of studies have recently pointed to the need to align internal and external accountability. These studies suggest that schools with reasonably strong cultures develop their own internal accountability often based on peer professional accountability. Such cultures can provide strong support for improvement because they combine motivational and capacity-building efforts. Where internal and external accountability are mutually reinforcing, it appears that change is powerfully supported. Where the two are not aligned, internal accountability is likely to overwhelm external accountability or external accountability may undermine local capacity.”
“In sum, educators and policy analysts will always be concerned about educational accountability. It is hard to imagine an educational system where educators are not accountable to multiple constituencies through a variety of mechanisms. This means that educators will be accountable to different people for different things. It is becoming more and more important to design accountability mechanisms that encourage schools to provide a more effective education for all children and to orchestrate these mechanisms so that they send as consistent a message to educators as possible.”
Read more: Educational Accountability – Moral and Professional Accountability, Bureaucratic Accountability, Political Accountability, Market Accountability, Legal Accountability, Standards and Assessment http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/1931/Educational-Accountability.html#ixzz1XHIBHun1
People rarely demand “accountability” when things are going well. It is when things start to go off the rails that the howls for “accountability” are heard.
Worth repeating, in the UK massive numbers of new teachers quit the job before 5 years are up. The fact that these were often the most creative new teachers cause the government to ask them why they quit.
Lack of professional autonomy. I want to decide what to teach, how to teach it when to teach it. Outsiders keep butting in telling me what to do and how to do it. I won’t work under these conditions. I can see it in TDSB friends. Very creative teachers furious and frustrated by petty “accountability” limitations.
Accountability drives out creativity.
Every profession that attempts to refute accountability invariablly isolates itself in an ivory tower.
No doubt the “whys” of why so many teachers quit covers all sorts of bases and, I suspect, the one-size-fits-all rationale is pretty simplistic.
As to “professional autonomy’ very few jobs have unlimited freedom to do their own thing. One wonders if a large part of the problem is unreasonable expectations going in; did anyone actually explain the mechanics of the job to the newbies?
As to “accountability” driving out “creativity” the two aren’t mutually exclusive.
There appears to be some resistance to good management.
Why is that?
I think that the “accountability” failure of public education is more about the egos involved in admitting that failure exists on the accountability front.
Parents learn very early on in their experience along side their children that
rules can be broken, standards ignored, exceptions, and the system is NEVER wrong. It’s always someone or something else that’s making it wrong and unaccountable.
Kids are usually the first to notice the inconsistency too and the failure to be accountable.
I’m betting that as school starts this week parents right across this country are the proud owners of school manuals that include all kinds of notices about, the role of the parents, the role of the students at the school. How many of those same “Welcome to the 2011/12 School Year” have sections on what parents and students can expect from teachers, principals, board for the school year?
(crickets chirping)
When the definition of accountability in education is being defined from inside “the blob” and measured by same I do believe we’re closer to solving the mystery of the lost accountability.
“the role of parents…”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/the-hot-button/a-teachers-message-to-parents-trust-us-please/article2157282/
the administrators are hiding in the usual places. Behind a plethora of articles like this which condition the parents to avoid their responsibilities and listen to the spokespeople spin the spin. Hiding behind walls and more so, public scrutiny.
Good article in a way. What it fails to mention are the educrats who are constantly driving a wedge between teachers and parents. It’s their “divide and conquer” survival technique and it’s working wonderfully well.
So who knows more about education teachers or parents?
the role of parents…”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/the-hot-button/a-teachers-message-to-parents-trust-us-please/article2157282/
the administrators are hiding in the usual places. Behind a plethora of articles like this which condition the parents to avoid their responsibilities and listen to the spokespeople spin the spin. Hiding behind walls and more so, public scrutiny.
Wouldn’t that include you Doug? Teacher turned unionist turned school trustee turned owner of a private school, built from the ashes of the fault lines of the public education system. Ron Clark, certainly fits the bill who is also the proud owner of a private school, plus a teacher academy, plus having corporate sponsors to be able to offer the selected students (by the way no students with disabilities need not applied) reduce tuition fees.
http://www.ronclarkacademy.com/partnerships.aspx
Although Ron Clark had a rather curious circular route entering the teacher profession, one could not declared that he was an administrator. In one article, he states something that is dear to my heart, regarding progress. It is dear to my heart, because progress is never measured especially for children who have learning problems. Just the scores……..”
Any class of students you want to give me right now–three years behind grade level, I couldn’t care less. Give me those students. Have them take a test. At the end of the year, have them take that same test or another test, and show the growth. For that, you can hold me accountable all day long–on how much progress those students have made. But holding a school accountable for how high the scores are? That’s not a fair judgment. What you have to look at is the improvement you’ve made with those students.”
Read more: http://www.beliefnet.com/Inspiration/2006/08/The-Inspired-Teacher.aspx#ixzz1XYsk0k8B
I agree it is the progress that is made, and not how high the scores are. As a parent I wanted progress, and my fights with the school and the administration saw progress only through the lens of my child’s grades, and not the progress (and in this case, very little progress) of my child in improvement in the 3Rs. I wanted more progress in the 3Rs, by using different methods and programs dealing with reading and writing, which were effective for my child. But otherwise, Ron Clark still very much like Doug, implying or stating, that the parents must remain the cheerleaders and being asked to do everything that the teacher/school request without questioning.
“Mr. Clark also suggests that parents drop the excuses they use to defend a child’s poor performance, to not question grades and to not believe everything their child says happens in the classroom.
“And please, be a partner instead of a prosecutor,”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/the-hot-button/a-teachers-message-to-parents-trust-us-please/article2157282/
What is sheer irony, is that grades are often used to introduced the SEC factors and other external variables to blame poor performance of students, rather than the instruction and curriculum. I heard enough from the educrats over the years, as to why my child will remain a low achiever, and it had nothing to do with instruction or curriculum according to them. Ron Clark is still doing it in his private school, but Doug may be learning that instruction and curriculum is very important. Rather hard to deal with wealthy Chinese parents, and blame them for their child’s poor academic performance.
So who knows more about education the teachers or the parents?
————————————————————————————–
This is the type of shallow and obtuse statement administrators love to hear and hide behind. It ensures the “woe is me, why do the parents continue to intrude in teachers business” spin, deflects attention from public scrutiny and accountability where it matters – with the educrats and policysmiths.
Given the results, one needs to ask why the educrats, who know or care so little about the education of our youth, are the ones in charge.
However, creating and maintaining the conflict between teachers and parents is what protects the educrats from serious scrutiny.
Typically Doug is continuing to try to wedge the accountability issue.
I’d venture to suggest that neither educators or parents have a handle on public education….not really.
When “the blob” brain-trust clues in to ask parents, post-secondary schools and employers what they can do to be more accountable – “the blob” will get its answer….and they, like Doug are afraid to hear what that is.
That is an interesting observation,I had never thought of it that way!
I haven’t had time to follow this thread, but three thumbs up to Paul for raising the issue of educational administration:not the elephant in the room, but the mastodon. The topic is almost completely absent in discussions on school improvement, accountability, salaries and benefits, effectiveness, etc. etc., yet it is central to all these themes.
A major problem is the virtual invisibility of the administrative level of public education, from the Ministry of Education, to related agencies like EQAO (in Ontario), Literacy&Numeracy Secretariat, and. district school board administration. The only ones the public is generally cognizant of are the lowest level, the school principals and vice principals. Even their responsibilities, compensation, accountability systems, and areas of jurisdiction are rarely disclosed. The entire system is conspicuous by its opacity.
Yet, it is a monetary black hole, and the source for many policies and practices that arouse public interest (or even rage), from discipline issues to curriculum and teaching methods. Typically teachers bear the fusillade for these issues but are almost never the ones who made the decisions or were even party to the decisions. The actual eminences grises behind the scenes are faceless, unidentified, and never held to public accounting. Even those working in the system rarely know where particular initiatives or prohibitions come from. Who, for instance, decided that Jump Math and Jolly Phonics were not to be used? An administrator told me, in secret, that there was an unofficial “do not use” list — compiled by whom? On what basis? With what parameters? Who is accountable for these decisions? Where can people who disagree with them go to influence such policies?
The rest is silence. But questions should be asked. Back in the day of “variance reports,” it was found that the TDSB spent four times what it was allocated for “central administration.” That money had to come out of other services to students, including maintenance, caretaking, repairs, textbooks, supplies, technology, special education. You can find out a great deal of information on any teacher in Ontario online, including the teacher salary grids and compensation packages. Good luck finding ANY of that out about administrators. They should be accountable to the public, as public servants. Are they?
A separate, but related problem is, who are these people, what are their actual qualifications and competencies? We know from U.S. data that education administrators are the lowest ability occupational group (from data of the Educational Testing Service) save only daycare workers. Do you really think school systems should be run by people who lack the academic ability and cognitive skills of an honours secondary student? There are real competence issues and I have yet to hear any serious discussion about this. Again, the opacity of the system militates against any comprehensive look at improvement.
Another issue entirely is in how to attract top people into administrative positions, starting at school levels. Principals and vice principals come from the teaching ranks, yet in the last decade or two I’ve seen a significant decrease in the number of top quality teachers willing to go for principal positions. Many who *do* go that route can best be described has having mixed motivations and less than stellar prerequisite skills. However, the system must work with what they have got, so they have centralized many functions and decisions that used to be part of a principal’s purview. I have to laugh at the idea that principals are “instructional leaders.” Giggle giggle. They have become managers, not “head teachers,” and this is a definite step in the wrong direction for a number of reasons. Schools need instructional leaders, and this gap is not readily addressed by others. Of course, some principals and vice principals DO have these skills, but increasingly are so consumed by meetings and paperwork that they have limited time to spend on curriculum and instruction, which is where the focus should be.
So in sum, we need to address:
(1) the opaque nature of the system, where important decisions that affect students are made, with no accounting or accountability
(2) the need to attract top candidates and steer them into student-focused activities . Money is not the real issue, it is more one of job satisfaction and ability to make a difference
(3) the feedback loop, so that policies around teaching practices, methods, materials and student behaviour are transparent and open to input from employees, families and the community
(4) Public accountability, to include clear public information on what individual position holders do, what they are responsible for, how they are evaluated, and what happens when results are poor.
There’s more, but that’ll do for now.
Makes one wonder if we need school boards at all.
I don’t think we do need school boards Andrew. Not in Ontario where the current gov’t has all but straight-jacketed our elected trustees who used to guarantee local consideration of decision-making but is more and more simply a long arm of the blob’s bureaucracy.
Too much of what goes on in schools is wasted effort and contributes nothing to the education of children. Parents get that very early on when classes are disrupted by useless assemblies at the whim of a principal who likes the sound of his/her own voice as they launch yet another mass fundraiser or introduce this month’s “character” attribute.
Managing and administration needs to start showing leadership by actually moving to get rid of those activities in the school day what add no value to a child’s education.
Replacing things that don’t work rather than tinkering is something else that I believe parents would favour.
I think too many board, school managers are working off of models that no longer meet the needs of students and their communities.
Too many educators, parents and students talk about the culture of fear within the system but it’s also a huge elephant in the room.
We’ve read about it here from educators fearful to come forward to speak openly. Parents fearful that if they do speak up something’s going to happen to their children.
Some administrators and governments create their own fear elements…as do the unions.
“Where there is fear, important information and opinions will be withheld or distorted, communication will be inhibited, rumour and negative attributions will abound, relationships will be adversarial and distrust will be pervasive. Leaders must eliminate fear in order to lead.” (The TEAM Handbook for Educators – Scholtes, Bayless.Massaro, Roche).
Good points all TDSB. The lack of any real, relevant information is astounding.
SQE tried to get as much data as possible, at least data that is readily available, and put it all in one place at http://www.SunshineOnSchools.ca but even it has its limitations for detail. The province of Ontario just does not provide much to the public.
To see what it REALLY should be like, take a look at our North Dakota counterpart at http://www.SunshineOnSchools.org. Yes, you can find exactly what Mr. X Principal makes and what Mrs. Y Administrator makes –and you can track it over the years. Names are named too.
If school boards were required to make more than their basic financial statements available, there would be much more transparency.
I agree with you, they should disclose what texts, programs, etc. they are using as well.
TDSB`s comment-
“The entire system is conspicuous by its opacity.”
And the banned list of things that actually work-corrupt-trace it to the probable corporate relationship between large publishers who peddle and market fabricated effectiveness and the government.
I have come to realize these are the people in charge,it needs to be written about by an investigative journalist…
I also am extremely dubious of the Trillium List in Ontario which is a filter for what is to be used and not used…very suspicious…who are these people who do evaluations,they are by no means subject matter experts!
So what is to be done about the incompetent management for which we are paying?
A taxpayers’ revolt?
Deprive school boards of their share of property taxes?
Lawsuits?
Remove our youth from public schools?
I am firmly convinced THIS is the problem with public education.
Joanne mentioned the textbook publishers, Andrew. Yes improved management is one key, but there is other key areas that need to be improved. One of them is management. The next link is rather a long paper published in 2010, Study of the Canadian K to 12 Educational Book Publishing Sector. http://www.pch.gc.ca/eng/1280508345588/1273780512587
Very good for background information, and the relationships of the publishers to the public education system.
The next link, is the Curriculum Services Canada, located in Ontario, non-profit (supposedly, but they do charge $3500 for each assessment of a textbook), and is the organization that puts the stamp of approval not only on the Trillium List, as well as across Canada. Put it this way, CSC is self-supporting, and I would love to see their ledgers on executive salaries. The study above, the textbook publishers have valid points on how textbooks and other educational material are purchased and distribution of such materials.
http://curriculum.org/content/home
An investigation would really be revealing as to how educational material received approval in the K to 12 system. More importantly, how accountability is removed or the people who work within the education system are shelter and protected from poor educational material. As well as the education ministries who can denied that they are at fault, and offer a 100 reasons why the education resources are not being used in the right way, or blame it on the school boards, to the teachers.
I should think that poor texbook selection (unless those folks are bribed) is possibly based on poor knowledge of the specific topic covered. Decisions based on insufficient information are risky and to be avoided whenever possible. To do otherwise is bad management.
Not correcting poor decisions, but covering them up as is the current practice, is even worse management.
I believe something sordid is at play in the smoke and mirrors strategy,similar to the People for Education group being funded by the Ontario gov….
Please don`t be naive…
I have spoken to AIMS for example,they know teachers are not being trained to teach Reading,they said ,would you believe….
how about giving school communities the option of NOT using a school board? Save the middleman and added bureaucracy. When it’s all controlled by central command anyway – the role of school boards has eroded so much that I’m pretty sure my community wouldn’t miss it if it were gone.
Catherine, what you describe is the basis of a charter school. That would certainly be a workable option.
I have to say great debate over on SQE where Diane Ravitch just mops the floor with Wendy Kropp from TFA.
I may put it on Little Report since Ravitch wins by a mile.
Personally, I thought it revealed the great concern both guests have regarding the crisis in American education.
But sure, put it on the “Little Report” – mops do tend to sanitize.
I saw it the other way around!
Dirty mop? 😉
I am very leery of ethical leadership from the CEA.
This organization has not proven to look out for the well being of children,be they poor,aboriginal or immigrant.
As Steven Covey so aptly stated,’begin with the end in mind”.That means care about your results for your customer.
Steven Covey leadership courses would be better than CEA`s I`m sure.
As Diane Ravitch points out in her debate with Wendy Kopp over at SQE, the world leading Finland has no Finnish word for “accountability” the closest would be “responsibility” and we take that as a collective responsibility. We train the highest level of teacher, only 1/10 that applies gets in [ 2 master’s degrees needed in most cases] and then we trust the professionals.
I agree completely-but there are extremely specific things versus generalist ideals which our universities in Canada extol-when they can give us course outlines using specifics then we can talk!
Otherwise it will be more of the same-like Professors who haven`t taught in 30 years developing new courses.
No thanks!
Developing new courses?
Properly trained, professional teachers don’t need “developed” courses.
They need to know the curriculum guidelines and content thoroughly for their grade level and then teach. If they have a problem, they howl for help… and get it.
And English has no word for “enmerdeur”.
Your point?
Could you translate this word from Finnish please?
vastuullisuus
The issue is mostly that there’s no obligation on those with higher degrees to actually do anything more than those without. Possibly we should oblige those offering up higher degrees, and being paid accordingly, to actually accept more responsibility.
First, though, we should determine what is a reasonable and appropriate level of education for teachers and ensure that it actually gives them a means to be more effective on the job.
It isn’t so much the level of their training as it is a question of the quality of their training.
One would think that the lack of preparedness of those starting university would be a clear wake up call for the education faculties that something is wrong with what they’re teaching.
Unfortunately, that is not the case. Since these are the self-proclaimed educational “experts” I can only conclude that they don’t really give a damn.
Andrew has come to the right conclusion.
One can only hope this ethical leadership survey/initiative is central to the contemporary challenges fermenting as we speak. It would be interesting to see a concurrent initiative engaging parents and communities also.
One also wonders if the NS superintendents, staff and admin. did/will participate in the exercise.
It sheds more light on Andrew’s observations to see the best possible solutions and objectives regarding sound management.
You’re bang-on Steven.
Your assessment of the CEA “Ethical Leadership” initiative looks to be deadly accurate. Carole Bryant’s exploratory piece sends out ominous signals. It looks like a mutation of the American Essential Schools project known as “Critical Friends” That project, dating from the 1990s, was actually designed as a professional support program.
The CEA continues in its efforts to blur public accountability.It’s telling that the goal is to foster an ethic rooted in expanding “opportunities for all” as a way of countering incessant public demands to accept responsibility for student learning.
“Comment:
With the public clamouring for administrative accountability, it’s amazing what the school superintendents are up to when it comes to “professional development” to meet the challenges of the new century.”
Whatever they’re up to it’s clear that taxpayers will not be honing in on any sort of administrative accountability any time soon. Not to mention the education of students.
Clearly leadership for school change isn’t to be found at the CEA – that’s clear.
Paul – I replied to your post but my response ended up under your last post, not this one, which is where I posted it.
Your alternative is “unethical leadership” ?
Doug,
“Your alternative is “unethical leadership”?
a good question to start off any “Ethical Leadership Survey” submitted to administrators and School Boards.
Everything you need to know explained.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2011/09/12/reformmoney
A prerequisite for ethics. Critical thinking.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking
WOW,
At least we now know one thing, bringing in private management and private schools to public funding is disasterous and divisive.
http://educationviews.org/2011/09/13/doubts-grow-over-the-success-of-swedens-free-schools-experiment/
Doug,
Clean your own house first.
Perhaps by confronting the issue of ethical leadership propaganda.
But don’t blindly defend with miss directed “accountability” (vastuullisuus) the alternative – “unethical leadership”.
Doug flails and throws mud at the wall to see what will stick.
Reading more stuff no one wrote?
Is this an illness that’s going around?
Unethical leadership at play!
http://www.torontosun.com/2011/09/13/tdsb-calendar-shocks-6-year-olds-dad
Joanne, unethical leadership at play. Rather sad, to see no significant days such as Mole Day, and other days that have a direct implication on education. Mole Day, is one such beast, where in the local school, and province wide, has its emphasis on, rather than educating students on values that individual students and the general population have diverse views on. Who would be against Mole Day, compared to the number of students who might be absent on days of transgender people, prostitutes, AIDS or female genital mutilation. http://www.moleday.org/
Doug,
Clean your own house first.
Perhaps by confronting the issue of ethical leadership propaganda.
But don’t blindly defend with miss directed “accountability” (vastuullisuus) the alternative – “unethical leadership”.
The Americans are working very hard on making there system “accountable”. Where is it getting them? Nowhere. The rest of the world is working very hard on achievement and critical thinking and quality through ECE, smaller classes etc and making great strides. Korea cut classes in half a few years ago and shot to the top of the OECD ratings. The UK has very big classes, especially in primary and is going nowhere fast.
The Corporate Education Reform Agenda CERA, is going nowhere because the flaw is in the analysis. It is a deeply flawed analysis because it denies the effects of poverty which would mean, to fix the problem would require taxes.
Poverty can be radically reduced as many European nations are proving by higher minimum wages, denticare, vision care, housing, AND education. Most European nations heading to 5% poverty. USA poverty is rising now to 15%.
They can’t (won’t) see the forest for the trees.
Doug, the Europe States are having their own problems regarding the negative outcomes of their poverty policies. And where it shows the most is within their education systems. Inequities abound within European society, in the same way as it shows in United States and Canada. It does not bode well, when the income gap is producing a diminished middle-class that stresses the poverty policies to provide for those who have reduced income. Furthermore, it also stresses the education systems as well as other social institutes to provide, beyond the education and welfare needs of their citizens to replace the lost income of their citizens or reduced ability to pay for their own basics. In Canada, even though health is provided by the state, the social net is being pulled apart by the many needs and the completing interests of the government, public sector and who they service, the public.
Food bank usage have increased by another 21%, and the year is not over in Canada. What is ignored by both the reformers and progressives, is the denial of the realities of their citizens, and how the citizens have become accountable and responsible for bad policies that only serve the best interests of those who are the creators of the bad policies. One policy that the public education claims is to educate the students with the skills and abilities needed after grade 12. If that was true, than there would be no need for the many and various remediation taking place for basic skills that should have been taught in grade school. A 2 billion dollar business in tutoring in Canada alone, and even yourself have benefited from that fault line of the public education system. More of the same policies, will only enhance the bottom line of your pocket book Doug, especially when education policies stresses opportunities, and not the skills and abilities needed to progress with some ease from one year to the next.
Is English your second language, Doug?
” The answer lies in part in MASS’s commitment to public education, its stated sense that “the challenge for educators is to define what we believe about education in a manner that encompasses the values of a democratic society, respects the inherent uniqueness of the individual student, and at the same time provides equity of opportunity for all.” The Association’s Statement of Beliefs in Public Education has codified the values that have grounded its work for the past 15 years (see http://www.mass.mb.ca) and reflect Robert Starratt’s “ethic of justice” and “ethic of care”, as well as the “ethic of critique”, which is crucial for the constant renewal and change required to create and maintain a strong democracy.”
Indeed nothing more than meaningless, politically correct nonsense to cover-up the real problems in public education. as Andrew has stated. But ethical leadership provides another loophole for our esteem educrats to escape the accountability, as well as to maintain the base of excuses for the negative outcomes of students. The weakness of ethical leadership, and its model that has been developed in the education field, is that it is not dependent on the knowledge held by the decision makers, which is the polar opposite in other sectors, where knowledge is crucial to make good decisions for the product, their employees, and goals. In public education, can ethical leadership model be applied where the product that is produced, are the students who all hold differing values, cultures, and morals as individuals, plus hold differing skills, abilities and talents as individuals? I would state no, without hesitation, because the ethical leadership model that is within the public education system, is based on the values and knowledge of the educrats and not on the values, skills and abilities of the students, the parents and the wider community.
It is rather easy to lead and make decisions by the ethical model because it does not require the person to obtain increase knowledge. Knowledge is important when it comes to the individual learning needs of students, especially when students are struggling in learning. It requires specialized knowledge of not only the individual, but as well as the collective group that shares common traits among them. Rather amoral for the public education system to decide that the best interests of the students who are struggling in learning at any point within the system, no intervention until they are failing or almost failing. Rather amoral, when interventions are mere value changing exercises rather than the correct remediation for the individual student, to produced a steady increase in achievement. Rather amoral, to blame SEC factors, and/or become the official nanny regarding the SEC factors, without the specialized knowledge of the values that are held by the students, parents and taxpayers.
In the Globe and Mail today, “Elizabeth Witmer, Ontario’s Tory education critic, said that instead of a ban, schools should educate students about the potential hazards of caffeine and let them decide. “It’s pretty much a part of the daily lives of people and we have the trust the judgment of students in secondary school,” she said.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/primary-to-secondary/resistance-brewing-to-ontario-schools-caffeine-cutbacks/article2165116/
Soon to come, will be more regulations on students and teachers who dare to bring in their coffee, and other caffeine beverages into the school, in the same way as there is regulations if a teacher dares to teach in a way that is not the accepted standards of the educrats, the union brass and other stakeholders of the public education system. After all, teachers are to passed down the values, goals, and aims of the stakeholders to the general populace, and not actually educate students to become accomplished learners, reaching their full potential.
What is never mentioned within the ethical leadership models, are the values and morals that are held by our education leaders regarding the students and how their values and morals are imposed, and the values and morals of the students are restricted and controlled under the rules and regulations that serves the best interests of the education leaders. Where inequities abound, and the education leaders are too busy imposing values and morals, that are in keeping with the values and morals of the education leaders. In another article from the G/M, “ Moral education changes with the times, of course. Today, instead of industry, honesty, piety and thrift, the leading virtues are anti-bullying and recycling. Instead of learning to fear God, little children have learned to fear the Ziploc police.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/margaret-wente/civic-virtue-kisses-and-baggies/article2163233/
As I have discovered, in the last 12 years or so, there is less and less focus on academic skills, and increased focus on ethical standards that allows people to pass the buck to avoid accountability of their own actions. Whether it is zip-locked bags, or caffeine drinks or ineffective remediation/instruction methods, decisions are based on ethical standards of the ones who have the final say, regardless if it is not in the best interest of the student or the collective. Common sense is one value that does not hold sway in any ethical leadership model.
Here are two more questionable policies, where potential outcomes are ignore, in favour of the goals or the best interests of the decision makers.
“Toronto public schools could soon be pooling some — or all — of their fundraising money, says a trustee who plans to push for changes to a system that sees some schools in wealthy areas bring in hundreds of thousands of extra dollars a year.
The money would be put “into a central pot which is then distributed equitably,” said trustee Sheila Cary-Meagher, who sits on the Toronto District School Board’s inner city advisory committee.”
http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/education/schoolsandresources/article/1052747–fundraising-ban-would-hurt-schools-educators-say
I be damn to fundraise or donate monies, where the chances are that the local school will not benefit, but some other school, all in the name of equality. Judging from the comments, most parents disagree with this one.
“Before, a school and police may have carried out simultaneous investigations. Now, a principal must consult with officers before interviewing a student who has previously been interviewed by police to “minimize the possibility of jeopardizing a police investigation.”
Libera said the new requirement will mean more collaboration between police and a school on an investigation.”
http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/education/article/1051324–schools-must-report-relationship-violence-to-police-new-rules-state
A likely outcome, is the hiring of lawyers by parents to protect their children, before they even entered the school’s office for bad behaviour or for being a witness to bad behaviour.As a parent, I would be really upset that a principal is no longer accountable for their actions regarding bad behaviour, unless there get the OK by the police. I can well imagine the giggles from the students, when they hear that the principal has to get approval from the police before action can be taken by the school for a bullying incidence. Yeah, a great way of reducing accountability, by reducing the authority of the principal and spread it over a number of agencies that have their own goals that do not serve the education needs of the students. Ethical leadership at its best, without the authority needed to produce positive outcomes.
Leaders are not the issue, teachers are not the issue, choice is not the issue, testing is not the issue, accountability is not the issue. They are all totally meaningless. POVERTY is the issue no matte how much Corprorate Education Reformers try to deny it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/public-educations-biggest-problem-gets-worse/2011/09/13/gIQAWGz2RK_blog.html?wprss=answer-sheet
Poverty is the excuse for failure.
Doug, the numbers are interesting because it is the manipulation of incomes to infer a picture of 42 % of families are low-income. This picture can be done using Canadian stats, to infer that 63% of Canadian families are low-income. By doubling the low-income, where all basic living needs are cover, The 63 % for Canadians, would be all families with children, having $50,000 income or below. What has stay more or less steady, is the number of children living below the poverty rate, and what is changing rapidly is the number of Canadians or Americans losing income and falling below $50,000.
The case for poverty and the stats is of simple economics. The lower the income, a higher percentage and in some cases most of it, is spent on the basic living expenses, leaving a variety of low percentages for spending on non-basic expenses. Due to the economic situation, spurred on by higher prices and are still climbing in basic needs such as food or shelter, there will be increasing number of Canadian families struggling to maintain their current standard of living. My point is, that the so-called poverty theory that you stressed so much as being the only factor, is the stats in Canada and United States, the percentage of families living below the poverty level has remained the same more or less. Approximately around 23 % and is very dependent on the employment rate, government policies and other economic policies, to keep the number of people living below the poverty level steady. If not, unrest and economic turmoil is the result when a higher percentage of people can no longer meet their basic needs.
That said, it is not the level of income but the increasing wage gap between the top 10 % of income earners taking the greater share of available income, leaving the majority of wage earners will less income, to pay for their basic needs. Toronto is caught up with the increasing wage gap, where middle-income people are becoming a dying breed, and the increasing numbers of low-income people that is currently at the 30 % mark. But what has remain the same, is the percentage of people living below the poverty level, who can no longer meet their basic needs. That has never change, or otherwise Doug, you would be stepping over people in the parks, or be demanding laws to keep them out of your neighbourhood. Programs, and other tax incentives all help to keep people from falling below the poverty level. But is it enough? It should be, but due to the special interests including governments and public sector unions, the poverty theory and the valid points being made, have been hijacked to serve the best interests of those who are not of low-income. It has been thoroughly politicized, where the special interests within the public education system, has taken on the banner by constantly repeating the messages that low-income students are in need of an education that mimics the same type of education that the high-end of the middle-class and high-income groups enjoy. The upper income groups enjoy, because they have excess monies over and above the basic living needs. They can buy the services or provide to the school that are not deem essential education items. As a result, the middle to low-income schools, are constantly struggling with maintaining a balance of resources and other education items, of what the school or school board will provide and what parents and the outer community are willing to provide.
It serves the education arms to promote poverty as the key to an improved education system, because accountability is spread out, allowing the SEC factors to become the blame for the failures, and promotes downloading of the responsibilities and accountability to the parents. Rather easy to blame a high-income student who failed grade 10 English, unto the parents, in the same way as it is very easy to blame the low-income student failing grade 10 English on the SEC factors. The focus of the current public education system is to stay on the SEC factors, where reformers focus is maintain at the structural, curriculum and instruction methods that plays havoc with the SEC factors that the progressives love to promote in every piece of policy that crosses their doorstep. It serves the public education system to promote poverty and low-income as the enemies because no matter what stripe the government is in, what economic system that is in place, there will always be a certain percentage of low-income, middle to high income groups to manipulate the values and cultures of the income groups to take on the responsibility as well as being held accountable at a higher standard for the state of their children’s education. The bonus is, that those who work within the public education system, can enjoy less accountability and responsibilities to the education of students, while spreading the accountability to the parents, taxpayers, the governments, and the wider community in various doses, to complete and fight over values, cultures, and the scarce resources of the education system. Where most often than not, parents end up serving the best interests of someone else, and not the best interests for their children’s education needs.
The latest example, compliments of my youngest who is now calling the grade 11 advance math class, Grade 11 SPED math class. Today, it was going through the multiplication tables much to her chagrin since she learned the multiplication tables to mastery by the age of 11, and than came fractions. But she learned them at home, because it was deemed by our educrats, learning the basics in reading, writing and numeracy to mastery is no longer needed to complete in this world. Progressive education philosophy has ensure that by manipulating the curriculum and instruction methods, the parents, students, and taxpayers are more than likely serving the best interests of those who work within the education system, than the best interests of the students. The best interests of the grade 11 advance math class, would have been served better if the students would be provided an avenue to practice the basics of multiplication by using Khan Academy, and other such free educational internet services, rather than taking up a block of instruction time, that is limited. After all, the grade 11 advance math class are not being tested for multiplication tables, but for advance trig and calculus. However, progressive math curriculum and techniques that is practiced within the education system, is the kind that produces great disparity between different income groups, that mimics the poverty theory and its stats. Mastery is forbidden, since there would be far less disparity between the income groups, and a reduction in the ability to manipulate the SEC factors, to suit the progressives’ self-serving interests. And the bonus is, less accountability within the public education system.
Poverty is the excuse for failure.
Now that we have had charters and vouchers in many areas for over 20 years, people notice that charters and vouchers do no better than public schools with the poor people. When you ask charter people in poor areas why they cannot make better progress they say “you try it, they are poor, they have many problems, they are absent very often, poor nutrition, bad teeth poor eyesight, no role models, etc etc etc.”
I`ll make sure to tell my First Nations clients your thoughts,we are superceding the success of school boards in their area and this year I am telling Peter Cowley at Fraser Institute about their new confidence in writing EQAO tests in some of the schools.
Sitting there and excusing failure due to SEC is an ungenerous way to be part of the human race,better to make sure things change than to justify your failure.I have come to know many many people in this sector,we have to do better for them than turn them into stats.
Fraser Institute (eyes roll) the tip of the Corporate Education Reform agenda in Canada, sigh.
The denial that SES is the overwhelming factor in education success confirmed by every study since Coleman, makes fools of the deniers. Even many “reformers” understand that it is true.
The latest OECD publication tends to negate that claim. You might want to get with the year 2011 instead of 1981.
Doug,the culprit is flawed instruction and teacher training weakness-give them literacy and they have a tool to better their education and reduce or get out of poverty…
Jo-Anne Gross
Doug,the culprit is flawed instruction and teacher training weakness-give them literacy and they have a tool to better their education and reduce or get out of poverty…
Ya that is the Corporate Education Reform Agenda propoganda line but, in case you have not noticed it, nobody is buying it.
This where it`s obvious that educrats need to get out of the way-we need to banish something,you stand in the way of progress for low SEC communities.
Doug, you are so wrong. Flawed instruction, along with poor curriculum, and questionable teacher training, are the main factors that impacts student achievement. Plus the failure of the public education system to keep up with the knowledge and advances being made in the science of learning, and education fields. Does current aspiring teachers in a teaching college, including the present teachers know the reasons why (the actual science) dyslexics need more time to complete tests and exams.
1. Word Skips and Reading Mistakes on Test Questions
2. Visual Fatigue and Visual Crowding Errors – Scantron
3. Reading Speed
4. Difficulty with Multiple choice Questions
5. Writing Problems
http://dyslexicadvantage.com/profiles/blogs/dyslexia-accommodations?utm_source=getresponse&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=dyslexicadvantagenewsletter&utm_content=Dyslexic+Advantage+Newsletter+September+2011
No it is not the science that is taught to aspiring teachers and current teachers on the job, but rather the manipulation of variables that lie outside the control of the school, and the school board. As a parent, I had to informed the teachers since no one is bothering to inform them about dyslexia. In my case, I had to start at the bottom level dealing with the misinformation that is being taught at teachers’ college that dyslexia is rare, and learning disabilities, the students are slow learners, and will always be low achievers. Kind of the same thing that happen to the Fonz, is still happening today in our public schools in various forms. And yet it is the Fonz who was awarded a an honorary OBE for his work on dyslexia in the UK. It really does take outsiders to change the backward thinking of today’s education system. “The honour was presented in recognition of the star’s services to children with dyslexia and special educational needs.
Non-British nationals can receive honorary awards for their contribution to British interests. Honorary awards are conferred by the Queen on the advice of the Foreign Office.” http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/sep/15/henry-winkler-honorary-obe-dyslexia
Most of the reformers have it right what is currently wrong with the public education system, but I do disagree with the focus on narrowly defined goals. Change one part of the system, without making changes to other parts of the system, at the same time, can be a waste of time and money. Pouring money into standardized testing, without changing the lower levels of the education system, and their ability to transfer knowledge and remediate when students fail to transfer knowledge, creates a situation that serves the best interests of the powerful arms of the public education system. The data from the standardized testing is being used on both sides to create polar book ends, where accountability is at one end, and at the other end, no accountability. In between the two polar ends, war is wage on many fronts. One of the fronts is the attitudes and often bias beliefs of the unionists, professors at teachers’ colleges, and the top level educrats with all their extra letters in behind their name, and their stubborn ways of refusing to see that the science of learning, the advance knowledge, the development of improved organization theories is the key to reach the full potential of each and every student. But than again, accountability would enter the picture and it is the last thing that the educrats would want to see happen in their world.
I state poor attitudes and bias beliefs because it is what I have been confronted with as a parent from day one, when my youngest entered into the public education system. The science was always tossed, in favour of dumbed-down education, and self-esteem lessons. When I objected, I was accused of lying, and than told it was understandable since few parents accept the limitations of their children. I no longer have to deal with poor attitudes and closed minds, but what has not change is the dumbed-down education and self-esteem lessons. Progressive methods at its best, always determined to chart the students’ progress at the lowest bench levels, using the handy guide of SEC factors and behavioural indicators to determine the bench level. For my child, at the very best a 60 % average, and will always struggle in numeracy and writing as the educrats deemed. Today, my 16 year old came home, all excited telling me the wonderful world of physics, and how much she loves physics. That little event would not have happen, if I did not fight tooth and nail for my child, re-teach at home, and taught her the essential basics that the public education system no longer sees fit to impart to their students.
Here is an article from Tyee, that is dangerous to the powerful arms of the public education system.
“It isn’t too hard to figure out the conflict here. The Ministry of Education appears to be the most obvious source of funds for opening up the BCLN. Yet it is the ministry itself that is encouraging school boards to get creative with finding alternative sources of revenue when funds run short. They are not yet falling over themselves to hand money to people who are essentially giving away their product.
It comes down to how we define public education. Open source advocates might say that all of the educational materials paid for by the public should be available to the public. Some, such as Stephen Downes, might go as far as to say that all users of public education, including teachers, students and their parents, should be the ones in control of the entire network.
Martin Dougiamas, the young and affable creator of Moodle, would likely agree. With his easy-going Australian twang, he tells the conference-goers how they can use Moodle to give students more power. He mentions that students can contribute to writing online textbooks and course content. He tells us that Moodle has evolved so as to allow students to have a say over how they structure their learning (he even introduces us to the soon-to-come app that will let students hand in assignments and contribute to discussions using their mobile devices). He mentions that high school students are asking him for integration with Facebook and Google Docs.
The stir that Dougiamas gets from the crowd is palpable when he asserts, “What it means to be a school is now up for grabs.”
This thought returns to me later in the day when Stephen Downes is again on stage. “Schools create mechanisms so that students can learn for themselves.”
Yes, this is thin ice. Teaching does not get anymore dangerous than this. ”
http://thetyee.ca/Life/2011/09/15/Open-Source-Teaching/?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=150911
“
Just scrolling though and reading bits and pieces of this. My thought about leadership in schools is that it’s mostly about following. Follow, follow, like sheep. Anyone who is creative or innovative does not go into the field of education, they go into engineering, or research, etc, where they are encouraged to think outside the box. I’ve said for a long time that we need some engineers in the area of education. So, before I could discuss the accountability part of this, I would have to see some leadership first.
What they seem to have missing is the idea that effectiveness and standards are essential to any good job and that the citizens being served are of prime importance,not themselves,their cover up and their excuses.
They need a private school mentality-why are the clients of public education looked down upon rather than served?
That is the genesis of improvement,ATTITUDE.
peggy
Just scrolling though and reading bits and pieces of this. My thought about leadership in schools is that it’s mostly about following. Follow, follow, like sheep. Anyone who is creative or innovative does not go into the field of education, they go into engineering, or research, etc, where they are encouraged to think outside the box. I’ve said for a long time that we need some engineers in the area of education. So, before I could discuss the accountability part of this, I would have to see some leadership first.
Engineers? creative? These words do not belong in the same sentence.
Sure they do.
Andrew Gilmour
The latest OECD publication tends to negate that claim. You might want to get with the year 2011 instead of 1981.
I see them all myself. OECD is one that always says SES is the critical factor. It is relative poverty that matters (poverty within the nation) not poverty between nations.
The “Little” credibility you have left just took another serious hit. Another document you didn’t read and analyze yet feel qualified to comment on.
Hint: The document is 500 pages of solid statistics. No way a human being could actually digest that in such a short time frame.
Basically everybody believes poverty and sometimes race is the big issue but some reform deniers cant accept it.
http://educationviews.org/2011/09/16/department-of-education-kills-controversial-teacher-ratings-program/
First off Doug, relative poverty.
“Relative poverty is a poverty measure based on a poor standard of living or a low income relative to the rest of society. Unlike absolute poverty, it does not necessarily imply that physical human necessities of nutrition, health and shelter cannot be met; instead it suggests that the lack of access to many of the goods and services expected by the rest of the contemporary society leads to social exclusion and damaging results for the individuals and families in relative poverty.
Measurements of relative poverty are similar to measurements of social inequality. However, there are often attempts to exclude the relative position of the richest from poverty measurements, so the OECD and European Union often use a poverty line based on 60% of the median equivalised net household income in individual countries: this has the effect of comparing the poorest in each society with those in the middle.
One of the consequences of using relative poverty to judge societies over time is that the poverty line tends to rise as incomes rise. This may be desirable if it reflects a changing social consensus about minimum acceptable standards of living. However, it may be less desirable if it leads to social and economic policies which give such an emphasis at reducing inequality that the cost includes keeping the incomes of the poorest at a lower level than they might have been had an absolute poverty measure been used to guide policy.”
http://infomutt.com/r/re/relative_poverty.html
So now that the definition of relative poverty is settled, one can see why the OECD is downplaying the role of poverty, and focusing on the policies of government.
Number 2 Doug, creativity or as Peggy has stated ‘thinking outside of the box’, are traits found among the great leaders, scientists, mathematicians, artists, designers and even engineers. Where it is rarely found, is within our public institutions that are ruled-bound, including the public education system. In fact Doug, the emerging information coming from the psychology world, ‘thinking outside of the the box’ is very discouraged by the public education system for students and staff alike.
Finally, I just read a study titled, “Defining educational leadership in Canada’s Yukon Territory:
“Hmmm, that’s a good question…”
http://ojs.vre.upei.ca/index.php/cje-rce/article/view/365/840
I had no idea that there is no firm definition what leadership is within the education field. The conclusion of the report, “The principals in this study appear trapped in a structure that sees them limited as managers, despite being referred to by policy makers, employers, and the extant literature as
educational leaders—whatever the term means……..”
You still haven’t read it, eh, Doug?
I’ll give you another hint: You need to look at other statistics to put the OECD statistics in context.
Iris Rotberg has been, for many years the top educational researcher for the RAND Corporation. I have discussed these matters with her. Nobody knows more about why America does badly or what it means.
http://gfbrandenburg.wordpress.com/2011/09/12/international-test-scores-irrelevant-policies/
I don’t know about Rotberg being a top educational researcher, but she no longer works for RAND. RAND’s mission is: “To help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.”
http://www.rand.org/about/glance.html
TEDx video on performance measures from RAND. Rather interesting, no one could disagree with what has been said, but plenty would disagree at the bottom levels of the education system. I think one of the reason is the intense focus on three to four goals, without looking or completely ignoring some of the perverse outcomes from education policy. The video mentions one example, which I have brought up from time to time, as many other parents have wonder about it. Elimination of recess has increase in children being overweight. Overall good education policies should not bring a whole new set of problems.
http://www.rand.org/multimedia/video/2011/07/16/cultivating-thriving-schools.html
Now back to Rotberg, her focus of late is looking at the micro-data and connecting them to the policies. “Dr. Iris C. Rotberg has a Ph.D. in Experimental Psychology from The Johns Hopkins University. Her areas of expertise include: school reform, the education of low-income children, math and science education policy, federal policy in financing education, and international comparisons of student achievement. Dr. Rotberg is Co-Director of GSEHD’s Center for Curriculum, Standards and Technology (CCST). She currently serves on the Board of Trustees of the Lab School of Washington and the Free the Children Trust, a college scholarship program for inner-city youth. She has published articles in journals such as Science, Phi Delta Kappan, and Harvard Education Review. Here recent book Balancing Change and Tradition in Global Education Reform is in its 2nd edition. She was formerly a Program Director at the National Science Foundation; a Senior Social Scientist at RAND; Principal Investigator for the Technology Policy Task Force of the House of Representatives’ Committee on Science, Space, and Technology; and an Assistant Director at the National Institute of Education. Dr. Rotberg can be reached irotberg@gwu.edu or at (202) 994-2735.”
http://www.gwu.edu/~edpol/faculty/
How her background fits in with her current positions, I cannot comment since I have not read anything that she has written. But boy, the Lab School of Washington is one of the leading schools for LD. Over $38,000 in tuition, and much of what is being practiced in this school, are often the very things that the educrats and unionists will fight tooth and nail from entering a typical school to benefit all students, and not just the LD students.
“For over 40 years, The Lab School of Washington has been providing an exceptional, college-preparatory academic experience for bright students (grades 1-12) with ADHD, dyslexia, and other learning disabilities. Our innovative, arts-infused curriculum is experiential and multi-sensory, helping young people to overcome difficulties with reading, spelling, writing, and math, while preparing them for a rewarding range of college and career choices. Take a look and learn about all that Lab School has to offer.”
http://www.labschool.org/podium/default.aspx?t=136085
However, Doug, Rotberg has shifted her views since leaving Rand and it tells me from the little research that I have, her views often represent the views of the organizations she has worked in, or at presently. “In Balancing Change and Tradition in Global Education Reform, Rotberg brings together examples of current education reforms in sixteen countries, written by “insiders”. This book goes beyond myths and stereotypes and describes the difficult trade-offs countries make as they attempt to implement reforms in the context of societal and global change. In some countries, reforms are a response to major political or economic shifts; in others, they are motivated by large upsurges in immigration and increased student diversity. Irrespective of the reasons for education reform, all countries face decisions about resource allocation, equality of educational opportunity across diverse populations, access to higher education, student testing and tracking, teacher accountability, school choice, and innovation.”
http://ebookstore.sony.com/ebook/iris-c-rotberg/balancing-change-and-tradition-in-global-education-reform/_/R-400000000000000314777
I am sure Doug, there is more researchers out there at the top, exploring questions on education, leadership, and other important measurements that impacts education systems. I am sure her book would be an interesting read, and perhaps a chapter on teachers’ unions and teachers’ colleges work against reforms that are not in their best interests. Lots of chatter at the top levels of the education field discussing unions, teacher quality, accountability and much more.
“The European Edge in Education: What the United States Can Learn”
http://legacy.wilsoncenter.org/ondemand/index.cfm?fuseaction=Media.play&mediaid=BD549E22-E6CE-517F-1B86AE53A109C909
Doug, you are so wrong. Flawed instruction, along with poor curriculum, and questionable teacher training, are the main factors that impacts student achievement. Plus the failure of the public education system to keep up with the knowledge and advances being made in the science of learning, and education fields. Does current aspiring teachers in a teaching college, including the present teachers know the reasons why (the actual science) dyslexics need more time to complete tests and exams.
Totally wrong Nancy, Social science research since Coleman has confirmed 1000X that SES is the critical factor. Reformer who are careful say teachers are the greatest “in school” factor. Funny how those rich and middle class students who get all of that terrible instruction do so well. Only the poor seem to suffer. Same instruction, same teachers, go figure.
So now SES has gone from THE factor to A factor.
Before that, THE factor was not enough money but oddly enough Finland spends less than we do.
What’s next week’s excuse, Doug? Can we get a preview?
The Steven Brill’s of the world are constantly being handed their hat and told they know nothing about education as it is with most reformers.
Many people have simply become just the dupes of some powerful corporate forces that are attempting to privatize education. The rest is fluff and windom dressing.
Of course Doug, you do like to forget the data that has been generated and available in the last 10 years, thanks largely to the Internet/computer revolution. Funny how data shows relationships between the number of private education tutors, and other educational products to the number of low achievers. In a rural area, where there is little to no access to private tutors, 60 % of students are struggling in some aspect in the 3Rs. The stats clearly shows the relationship and of course the data shows the number of low achievers are much higher than in urban areas. More importantly, income does not appear to be a factor, since most rural schools in Canada are composed of a composite of low to middle income. And let us not forget the kids with LD, where the advances being made in the last 15 years, the public education system can only managed to bring approximately 4 % of the LD group, to post secondary.
Paul’s post brings another interesting perspective on teachers. My type of teacher, who is concern about the state of his students’ writing skills, just like the local high school, who are very concern, since they are dealing with 60 % of the student population, who do not have the required skills in writing, to do well in post-secondary education. Grammar lessons is on the slate, as well as other goodies that should have been taught in grade school. As Doyle writes, “We could do much better by asking artists, developmental psychologists, ethicists, environmentalists, and physicists to chime in about what kids need to learn. If the past is any guide, it seems much more likely that those on the margins of power and wealth should have better insights into the future than those who have defined the status quo.”
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2011/09/14/03doyle.h31.html?tkn=XWXFUItaaVnD5Ec%2F8mLakKqrzhXg9Po6wHlY&cmp=ENL-EU-VIEWS1
The status-quo has too much of a vested interest, in being the architects of the public education system. Like this little story in England, where the union is up in arms telling everybody the evils of reading instruction based on phonics and phonemic sounds. “Teaching unions agree phonics is a good way of teaching children to read but say it is one of a range of techniques used by teachers, who should be trusted to vary their methods depending on their pupils. Chris Keates, the general secretary of the NASUWT said: “NASUWT research, among thousands of teachers, has shown that the clear majority disagree with the introduction of a compulsory phonics reading test for six year olds. “Teachers oppose the test because it will not provide robust information about a child’s reading ability. “It is possible to pass a phonics reading test and still not be able to read.” The UK Literacy Agency (UKLA) is campaigning against the check. It says phonics is the most effective way of reading many words, but cannot be used to read all words, for example “come” and “once”, which require other techniques. Greg Brooks, a former president of UKLA and Emeritus Professor at Sheffield University, says the check will inevitably become “high-stakes”, leading to teachers “teaching to the test” and causing anxiety for parents and children. ”
Only a union who has a vested interest in keeping children from learning to read well, and give students the best possible start by spreading misinformation, and to boot, declare a simple assessment that takes all but 7 minutes, teaching to the test. It is not a test, but an assessment to determined phonemic awareness, but one would never know that listening to the unionists. “The new check is based on a method that is internationally proven to get results, and the evidence from the pilot is clear – thousands of six-year-olds, who would otherwise slip through the net, will get the extra reading help they need to become good readers, to flourish at secondary school and to enjoy a lifetime’s love of reading. “This study finds that the check will be of real benefit to pupils but takes just a few minutes to carry out, is backed by most teachers and is liked by most children.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-14930193
High-stakes my foot, and the teachers’ unions in England are on the warpath because it threatens their status-quo. It bears repeating – Doyle states – ““The problem, then ( in the past) and now, is that the architects of futurist school reform are too invested in the status quo to tolerate, let alone foster, much subversion, criticism, or free thinking.” Very true when it comes to unions as well, preventing assessments of primary children to determined reading difficulties. If education was left up to teachers’ unions, the state of education would be in a fine pickle. Their slate of 21st century skills, would be devoid of anything that would help students fine tune the 3Rs, so they would be no need for remediation. It is a good thing that unions are not in charge of the public education system, but if they were in charge, it would probably result in the biggest exit of parents taking their children out of the public education system. Pure speculative thoughts on my part, but the England story sure tells the true colours of a teachers’ union and their vested interest in keeping the status-quo.
Incredible story Nancy-McGuinty looks the other way on purpose because the 75% EQAO scores are fudged-we know this because of their instructional preference-NOT based on the empirical research,it would be IMPOSSIBLE to reach the grade 3 scores he says they reach.
I feel they want to show no drop outs and more students attending post secondary so looking thr other way on these mills helps those stats too.
Another negative outcome, is what the public education system is teaching the public, and what matters for the education of their children. For a parent to spend $500 to buy the high school credit, knowing full well that they are buying a good grade in the private realm, rather than spending the dollars on private tutors to upgrade their skills and basic knowledge because the public education system are producing messages from the get-go that learning is best when there is a certified teacher in the class. Private tutoring is discouraged in the public education system, for a number of reasons by presenting them in a negative light to parents. It also includes organizations that offers free services in reading, writing and numeracy. A particular problem in Canada, where the Scottish Rite Learning Centres or the grandmother without a teacher’s certificate, are side-line because of their instruction practices, more than the tutors having a teacher’s certificate. I was confronted with this attitude regarding the tutoring of my child, by the educrats. It is why I kept silent for a few years, as well as parents who have access and the means to enrolled their children in private tutoring concerns. I once had an interesting chat with a provincial representative, whose sister was paying close to $400 a month for tutoring lessons on the basics in the 3Rs. I contacted him, because of what he stated in a newspaper article that I thought was not presenting the reality.of achievement in the province. It was during the conversation, that he confess to me the tutoring lessons being provided, and kept hidden from the school authorities. However, he still did not change his attitude regarding achievement and the current curriculum and instruction methods. No need to change it as he stated, because it has more to do with the students and other factors than the curriculum and instruction methods.
When I went public within the local community, school and board concerning re-teaching at home, what was surprising was the number of parents who provided tutoring and educational products for their children at home to work on the basics. The type of parents had higher educational levels, as well as parents who had family connections to parents with higher. educational levels. I let the cat out of the bag, in a community where there is no private education concerns, and where the community is dependent on the school, the teachers to provide an education for their children.
The cultural of school and how parents interact with the school’s cultural can also provide insights why the communication, information, and knowledge conduits between parents and the schools, prevents and hinders achievement of children. The SEC factors become very significant when parents and the community are provided with information that works best for the adults, and not the best interests of the students. It was not until I purchased a computer, and the Internet brought to me a whole world of knowledge that should be available and freely given by the school authorities. I am still waiting for that miracle to happen in the public education system, as I am still waiting for the miracle of effective curriculum and instruction to prevent remediation as well as providing a solid foundation for advance school work.
How accountable are the educrats to the parents who place their trust in a public education system, to provide an education? Not very accountable, in my eyes.
I agree,parents last,customer relationships and satisfaction not weaved into planning,are THEY happy doing their jobs,union question.Adult centric when they should be working for the public.
Did you see the “private school Doug response?”
Talk about talking on both sides of his mouth.
….Toronto Star investigative reporter who went undercover to exposed the shenanigans of the Ontario Education system.
Hmmm, private school shenanigans. Isn’t the market supposed to save us all? OTOH, the Ministry is supposed to inspect and regulate these outfits. Looks like they don’t do it well (or maybe at all).
The edweek post from Slavin’s blog made some good points, but in general Slavin is not a reliable source (he however did not write this post; a guest blogger did). Slavin is almost single-handedly responsible for destroying the Reading First program in the U.S. which brought empirically-validated instruction and excellent PD to students and teachers in low-income schools for the very first time. With “friends” like that, research-based instruction doesn’t need enemies.
The reference to Rick Hiss is worth following up on (his book cited in the link is an excellent and thought-provoking analysis), and the Casey study cited is also worth careful reading, bearing in mind however that the general trend in Canada is different from that in the U.S. Our low-income and ELL students tend to show steady improvement over time compared to their demographic peers in the U.S.A. I am not aware of any comprehensive analysis being done to identify the critical factors responsible, but they are likely multiple.
I know ,but the improvement over time is not logical or possible.
I think it`s a ruse,created by a clever test.
Reading does not truly improve, the memory is forced to visualize more words,easier for some kids than others.The “processing part”would be missing so writing becomes impossible.
I have seen it so often.They can`t spell and write from thought because we are working on the wrong side of the brain.
About the Robert Slavin piece,I just wish the leadership could be less corrupt and the legislation endeavour to do what this pice recommends.
I am also suspect as I am a trainer publisher-we`re on one side or the other but at least I am helping First Nations people,they let me in where the BLOB does not.They prefer to pay the Literacy Secretariat in On.,25 million a year to write newsletters and cozy with Fullan and Levin.
Yes the corruption seems to be in PRIVATE schools. Our school was established to be the total opposite. Small classes, certified teachers only,highly qualified admin. boutique school. 100% passed EQAO, TOFEL, IELTS, COPE (U of T). 100% accepted at the university of their choice.
The diploma mills of Toronto use uncertified (cheap) teachers. In many schools the principal is not even a qualified teacher let alone a qualified principal.
Funny how the reform crowd says private good, qualified teachers and principal unnecessary big classes ok but where these actually exist in real life they are unmitigated disasters.
We think the Torstar article is great. It will help drive the bottom feeders out of business.
Fine one to talk Doug. Let us not forget your private school catering to the foreign Chinese students, created by one of the many fault lines of the public education system. You even offer a guarantee of admittance to an university. I would say it is not much different from the high school credit mills, the bottom feeders as you have aptly described. However, Doug, private schools of your type, can be called the top feeders creaming off and selecting students on the basis of their pocketbooks, Of course you are not alone, the BC education system has a fine tradition to providing a pricey high school education for foreign students with large pocketbooks.
However what is not track whether it is the high school credit mills, or private schools such as the one Doug owns, or even the regular high school students, how many students are woefully unprepared in post-secondary education. Would be interesting to know, since the common percentage that has been reported is approximately 40 %, but it will never be known, since post-secondary institutions loath to release the stats. As for your comment on “It will help drive the bottom feeders out of business.” – What makes you think that the current and future policy makers, are going to do anything about the schools including Doug’s school, when they are too busy defending the fault lines, the cracks, because profit is being generated to serve the best interests of those who are making their livelihood in the education field. Or otherwise Doug, your school would not exist.
I know ,but the improvement over time is not logical or possible.
I think it`s a ruse,created by a clever test.
Reading does not truly improve, the memory is forced to visualize more words,easier for some kids than others
Of course it is possible, and has been documented for decades, long before EQAO. It is particularly true for low-income and ELL students because:
(1) their knowledge of English grows steadily over time: more extensive vocabulary, better grasp of syntax and grammar (with concomitant effect on meaning), consistent growth in academic English. Mulltiple studies confirm that it takes speakers of a non-Western language ten years at least to achieve native-like fluency in academic English (conversational, everyday English is achieved much sooner).
(2) Their background knowledge grows omnifariously and can inform their reading and writing skills
(3) They add to their own experiences and narrow some of the gap with their more advantaged peers. Many children from low income homes enter school without having ever visited a park or playground, driven in the countryside, been to a restaurant, seen a zoo, or even played with other children outside their family. Over time, school provides many experiences (some vicarious) that help children make sense of the world and what they read about the world.
Decoding skills, per se, rarely do improve without systematic help — that is true. But many composite reading tests do not measure decoding.
A consistent finding in many schools serving some ELL student populations is that the Grade 3 results are relatively low, the Grade 6 much higher, and Grade 9 and 10 (for the same students, tracked by OEN numbers) off the charts. Several other cultural communities show a consistent pattern of improvement. These are reflected in norm-referenced testing (where administered) as well as EQAO measures.
EQAO tests are closely linked to the Ontario Curriculum, and do NOT (repeat NOT) measure foundation skills. It is quite doable for a student with very weak decoding and spelling skills to score a level 3 by exhibiting good cognitive strengths, while a student with outstanding decoding, grammar, spelling and written organization would score Level 2 because s/he did not show evidence of the higher-level thinking or connections to personal experience required for a Level 3 or 4. Many schools that used to teach decoding and spelling in a systematic, synthetic phonics approach stopped doing so because it actually made their EQAO scores go down. It took too much instructional time away from the higher level thinking. There’s the conundrum for those of us who want to get more effective early teaching in place: it has to be parsimonious (so as to minimize the time required), multilevel (because of the nature of the inclusive classroom) and cost-effective (because budgets are much more limited than in the past.)
However, a potential window of opportunity lies in the LNS’ determination that teaching decoding and spelling skills is urgent to produce good early readers who comprehend text with minimal effort and cognitive load. They have not decided yet how they will translate this into practice however. I have a few ideas but no time to develop them at the moment. On verra.
I hope we can disagree in a friendly way.
I defer to http://www.childrenofthecode.org as well as Steven Pinker`s writing from Harvard.
This is Fullanite and does not concur with the research but it does concur with the Ontario strategies.
I believe there is a large difference between reading to fluency and being cognitively aware of what you read due to background knowledge and new knowledge brought to children through reading and vocabulary encountered in text.
Oral reading comprehension,if that is what is tested in EQAO is a totally different segment than truly being able to read at a speed and proficiency that allows comprehension to occur at the same time,reading does not get better after grade 3 in 75% of children.
Read the Casey Foundation study that is recent as well as the NICHD RESEARCH.
I defer to http://www.childrenofthecode.org as well as Steven Pinker`s writing from Harvard.
This is Fullanite and does not concur with the research but it does concur with the Ontario strategies
The confusion here seems to be about what EQAO measures and how it is evaluated, and secondarily, how to address those issues.. Unfortunately, although I have marked EQAO multiple times, I am not permitted to share any details of how the process works. That, however, is where many people are misunderstanding the issues. I recommend to interested reformers that they volunteer to mark the EQAO tests (you have to have a university degree, but you do not need to be a teacher; you do get paid, but not a princely sum), for your own understanding of how the system works. I guarantee it will be eye-opening and possibly shocking.
I’ve read some 5000+ pages of the NICHD research, very rich in instruction-related material but not at all focused on current issues about standards-based assessment or Item Response Theory. We are dealing with a new genre that is unfamiliar to most. There is no good overview to the topic for the general reader, either. I wonder if that is deliberate.
It’s too bad the Education Reporter blogger is now covering mostly municipal affairs; it would be a public service for someone to do a series (Hugo did one initially on “The ABC’s of EQAO”) about standards-based, also called “holistic,” assessment, IRT, rubrics, validity and reliability, etc. etc. These could be explained in a clear and informative way so that the public would have a better grasp of these important issues. Parents and interested citizens need good information in order to be effective lobbyists for the changes we need to see.
However, it is off-topic for this thread so I will drop the subject except to point out that what we need are tests that *do* measure the skills essential for children’s long-term success. The UK is leading the way here and we would be wise to consider emulating their example. More on some other thread.
I took the time to dig out the article on The ABCs of EQAO. Quite the eye opener from a parent’s perspective. I learned some information that apparently are not wide known among parents.
http://blog.educationreporter.ca/2011/01/keep-those-eqao-envelopes-sealed.html
The link to the article, is found on the right side of the blog, the column with the background colour of green.
What I did learn, has confirmed my little hypothesis and a surprising fact that the Developmental Reading Assessment, is based on the Reading Recovery program. Now I know why the spirited, if not heated discussion with a staff member in the ministry’s education department when my child was in grade 7, was the eureka moment or the light bulb finally got turned on. It was the turning point for them to start to take me seriously, and not to pushed me away based on previous assessments of the DRA, and other observable measures to denied accommodations and SE services. By that time I was steamed, because I realized than at that late stage her reading problems stemmed from reading instruction, and assessments that was not picking up the reading problems of my child. It set up the typical parent dilemma, where I state reading problems, and teacher and board staff will say no reading problems, and put the problem back onto my child, myself and anything else that was handy. It was not until grade 9, it was finally conceded by the board, my child had reading problems, especially in decoding, since her low phonemic awareness was never remediated properly.
My point is, that the firm foundation in reading, writing and numeracy for all students is essential to become successful in high school work. Four of my child’s classmates have to repeat grade 10. What do they have in common, weak foundation skills in some aspect or all aspects of the 3 Rs. None of the 4 students have any learning problems, and were all known to have a typical B average, or higher. The ironic part of it, in the last half of grade 10, two male students asked my child to tutored and help them in biology and math. The boys were almost failing the courses, and did not want to go and do another repeat of summer school, as in grade 9. My youngest, has some pride in her since the boys credited her for giving them the help, the strategies to passed final exams. At one point, she even told them to work on fractions and the multiplication tables, and provided the sites that are fun to practice on. The boys passed, and are located near my girl, for the very same reason in the physics class, to hand out pointers when it comes to the math in physics.
The EQAO testing and other like testing as I see it, has never been used properly to extract the data and other information to make better instruction decisions for their students. One look at the hard copy of the CRT, could have told anyone my child had problems with reading and writing, on the written portion, and parts of the multiple choice. She did not have problems with her higher skills, and yet it was the focus in the early years, and little attention was paid to the core skills in the 3 Rs.
It would appear that a certain self-proclaimed progressive is, in fact, regressive.
More of the same that isn’t working isn’t likely to work any better but then again, the more the PUBLIC system fails the more the private schools can make money.
Most of us would love a “coup d’etat”to improve public schools but the barricade is too high!
Not much is likely to happen until the public/taxpayers/students/parents get on the same page and find a way to deny funding to the school boards. When the educrats’ paychecks are at risk you’ll see plenty of change.
An article in the G/M – Are We Serving The Public or The Providers?
“The young professor, like the doctors, nurses, judges and lawyers, are providers of a “public” service – in this case, imparting knowledge and encouraging critical and creative thinking. But the systems within which they all work have been crafted to suit the interests of the providers, not the public. Of course professors care about their students, as do doctors and nurses about their patients and judges about those seeking justice, but the way this caring is manifested within their large public system is circumscribed by the priorities of the providers.
Governments have largely gone along for the ride, since they’re reluctant to confront strongly entrenched vested interests. Occasionally, a brave minister will try to create different incentives. But ministers come and go, as do governments, and the institutions they try to reform go on largely unchanged. As for those who run the systems – university presidents, health-care administrators, senior judges – they have a good deal less power than their mighty titles would suggest.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/are-we-serving-the-public-or-the-providers/article2169054/
The comments are virtually across the political spectrum, agreeing with the main theme of the article, that the entrenched vested interests of the public sector have been created to suit the needs of the public sector, and not the public they serve. It is rather sad, and actually pathetic when the vested interests of the K to 12 public education system, provides services only if it suits the best interests of those who work within the education system. They have 100 plus 1 reasons why the simple cases of students struggling in the 3 Rs cannot be remediated effectively in timely fashion, and one thousand reasons to preserved the status-quo of the system, maintaining non-accountability to the public purse and as well as to limit services and resources to the public they serve.
“Governments have largely gone along for the ride, since they’re reluctant to confront strongly entrenched vested interests. Occasionally, a brave minister will try to create different incentives. But ministers come and go, as do governments, and the institutions they try to reform go on largely unchanged. As for those who run the systems – university presidents, health-care administrators, senior judges – they have a good deal less power than their mighty titles would suggest.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/are-we-serving-the-public-or-the-providers/article2169054/”
Nancy,although validating for us that a journalist has finally noticed that they run their own empire,also discouraging.
The unions are bad news and they frighten the governments.At this year`s SQE annual seminar John Snobelen said he always thought that they could fix the schools but admitted after his experience as Minister of Ed it couldn`t be done!
Accountability needs to be explored as a strategy,what could be done-I mean really,getting away with math and reading ineffectiveness when you get that kind of money?
That puts people on welfare for life.
Here is the second part of the shenanigans of the Ontario education system.
From a student perspective – “Goldstein walked out with a 95 per cent which was transferred to his high school transcript.
He entered Waterloo in September 2009 with an entrance scholarship based on an overall average in the 90s and has since transferred to Ryerson University after switching programs of study.
Goldstein, 21, says even though he saw a huge disparity in how marks were earned, he was never worried about the validity of his credits because the private school was accredited.
“It was pretty much a sham operation. They’re making a ****load of money off of people who are just trying to get a good grade and that’s not how the school system should be run. I literally knew what I was doing was wrong. There’s a glitch in the system and people are taking advantage of it and I guess I partook in that.”
http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1055391–star-investigation-student-questions-marks-from-a-high-school-credit-mill?bn=1#article
Nor did he see the sham of accepting an entrance scholarship, but what is worse, is the government’s inability to see the shenanigans of a public education system willing to hoodwink the taxpayers over inflated grades, and rewarding students with scholarships, who took courses at the high school credit mills.
It really gets my goat, that the actions and policies of the public education system, no one is held accountable.
http://www.bancroftthisweek.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3306874
Read it,it will floor you-will they be accountable?
No
They will have meetings,edubabble,excuses and be on their merry way.
Love to hear their excuses if they are confronted. Number one reason is the reading and writing instruction, and a combination of resources, access to the Internet, and other resources directly related to the teaching of the children. No doubt the schools are experiencing a shortage on toilet paper and soap in the bathrooms.
Actually Joanne, this does not surprise me. A typical rural-urban school, with few immigrants to speak of usually does have low achievement, especially in Ontario. But what surprises me, and why they would go this route borders on sheer lunacy. The high percentages of SE, that go beyond the norm of anywhere between 15 to 20 %, by 10 percentage points would indicate to all who work at the schools, the board and the ministry, time for an investigation. Lunacy, because it goes far beyond what is statistically found in any population.
Check out what the board is saying.in two areas. Talk about the manipulation of numbers, to show the positive side.
“Key instructional strategies, such as co-teaching and co-learning, have shown promising results. Co-teaching and co-learning are when teachers plan, teach and examine student work together. During the 2010-2011 school year, this strategy resulted in gains of up to 12% in student achievement in Junior math in several schools. Similarly, this strategy contributed to growth of up to 19% in Grade 10 English OSSLT student achievement in several secondary schools over a three-year period.
Closing the gap data shows growth for students with special needs in Applied Math. Closing the gap refers to using strategies that are good for all students, but necessary for some, such as the use of technology or manipulatives. Our students with special needs exceed the provincial results for achievement in Levels 3 and 4 (Level 3 is the provincial standard). In addition, we have fewer students with special needs who are performing at Level 1 as compared to the province.”
http://www.hpedsb.on.ca/newsroom/?p=3365
Certainly not full disclosure. I would certainly like the percentage of students of SE students at levels 3 and 4. In its absent, more than likely it might represent 11 percent or so.
Nancy I felt the same way,the number of SE children was completely disproportionate,where are the people to take notice of these atrocities abd dole out the consequences.Truly disheartening.
Joanne, the high number is typical where the structure of SE funding helps to contribute to add more SE students to the roll, because it means more money. Ontario SE funding model, is a typical model that rewards schools by a mix of identifying and non-identification of students, whereas other funding models, rewards schools by not identifying SE students through the assessment model. Either way, the students who truly do have LD learning problems are lost among the reading instruction causalities, or may never be identified in the primary grades, The very nature of LD, and within the sub-population, approximately 80 % fall with the mild to moderate spectrum, displaying various strengths to get through the primary grades, barely passing in LA and math for some, and doing very well in other subject domains. Throw in the other disabilities, such as ADD or non-verbal, who also limped through the primary grades, and have struggles in certain areas covering the 3 Rs, are lost as well within the reading causalities, and may never be identified.
The present funding model of SE, the assessment model of the primary grades, the current primary instruction model, and the current administration practices, are more of less based on the SEC factors, rather than the development milestones, other such measures and reading assessment models that measures phonemic awareness. As a result, children who fall within the low-income , there is always higher percentages of SE populations found, because low-income, single parent families, and other SEC factors are being used to sort out for early identification. In the typical school that have more or less even levels of low to high income, the SE students are for the most part low-income and single parent homes. In the high-income schools, the population of SE children, are children that have already been identified prior to entry into school, through the health system. The LD children, and other disabilities that affect their reading, writing and numeracy,in the high-income schools, have the best chance of being identified formally or on a informal basis, by a combination of parents willing to remediate through private services, and the school’s bias based on the SEC factors. It results in much lower percentages of identified disabilities, falling below the standard population stats. and non-identified children will received the help through a combination of the school remediation and private services. Note the latter, problems will resurface in high school, due to the reading instruction, and practices that is typical in a public education system. In middle-class schools, what often is found that the bulk of the SE population are of the blue-collar families, and the professional families the students will likely never be identified on a formal basis, but they will have quicker access to SE services, more help within the classroom, than the students who have blue-collar parents.
I have been staring at the numbers for 10 years now, and in Canada, the public education system is set up where the only legal requirement is best efforts. In the United States, the legal standard goes far beyond best efforts, where the disabilities have legal rights under the law. The SE funding model is a very different animal than the one in Canada. In the primary grades, there is systems that are in place to remediate reading and to prevent reading failure. Not very good ones, but as one goes up the income level, reading instruction and practices are of a better quality, creating the same patterns as in Canada. High SE populations in the low-income schools to very low percentages within the high income schools. The whole language instruction and its many different versions have not change, but as one goes up the income ladder, the schools works very hard to prevent and remediate early learning difficulties, to prevent law suits where the parents usually wins hands down. In Canada, at the moment they do not have to worry about law suits, but the day is coming very soon where Canada will have their own set of IDEA laws in place.
The one school in the Hastings board, has just over 200 students, with a 45 % SE population. Approximately 90 students are SE, when it should be 20 SE students. Seventy students are more than likely the instructional causalities, based on the SEC factors. As for the remainder 110 students that are sitting at or above the achievement standards, more than likely the high to middle-income and where the parents are professionals, two-parent families, and parents that have the abilities and means to help their children, and are better able to navigate the education system for the best interests of their children. As I mentioned before, due to the very nature of the funding models, the identification systems, trouble comes to the 110 students at the high school level in the form of difficulties in keeping up and doing advance work at the high school level. Why? A weaker foundation in the 3 Rs, which the origin of the weaknesses are the instruction practices, curriculum, and administration practices in elementary schooling. And where this set of students, are at a higher risk of failing because they do not have a solid foundation in the 3 Rs, and more than likely will repeat one high school grade the weaker the 3 Rs are. The stats reflects this at the high school level, in areas that publishes the numbers, but that is a rare district to do so, and on the whole, the stats are hidden from the public on the individual schools. It is at the individual schools, the stats will reflect what I have stated above, and it is this set of stats that are hidden from the public, including the think tanks who like to rank schools.
The growth in private tutoring, software help, and other remediation purchases spikes to an all time
high at the high school level, compared to the elementary levels, for remediation of the 3 Rs. As well as tutorials at the high school level, and other classroom instruction such as grammar, and other writing skills that should have been taught in the elementary years. The high schools at any income level, have no choice but to addressed the weaknesses in the 3 Rs, and it is here the quality of instruction increases as one climbs up the income level. One of the reasons why low-income high schools, composed of the typical population with low numbers of ESL students, have such high figures of low achievers. In part it is the funding formula, where funding is being redirected to high schools with high numbers of ESL students, and as a result there is no extra funding to addressed the remediation of the 3 Rs, in a typical low-income high school. And in my eyes, as well as others, the SEC factors appears to be the culprit, but in reality it is the weak foundation in the 3 Rs.
Accountable, no way, but the very structure of the public education system is set up and designed to reflect the SEC factors, and not the instructional practices, curriculum, and teaching training which are the main culprits.
Ontario SE funding model, is a typical model that rewards schools by a
mix of identifying and non-identification of students, whereas other
funding models, rewards schools by not identifying SE students through the
assessment model.
You may be thinking of past practice in Ontario. The current funding model
does not reward schools for identifying Special Education students (nor
does it reward them for *not* identifying them). Funding is strictly on a
per-student basis, regardless of need. Special ed kids do not generate
more funding for the school, nor is there any “reward” for NOT having any
special education students. Student numbers determine funding.
The special education industry of old is being phased out in favour of
full inclusion and “differentiated instruction.” Naturally some
self-contained special education programs will remain because they are
required by law, but access to them is quite restricted and parents
wishing such a placement must jump through many hoops. Money allocated by
the government for special education is frequently spent on other budget
lines.
However, there are some secondary schools that specialize in programs for
adolescents with developmental disabilities. Some that I know of include
General Brock in Halton, Frank Oke Secondary in TDSB, and Huron Heights in
York Region. Scores for EQAO tests would be poor or missing for many
students in these schools because the students are on modified programs
and do not reach the level of academic expertise required, but the schools
do an outstanding job of preparing these students for further education,
trades and jobs in the community. Some do eventually complete secondary
school and even community college. Students with developmental
disabilities learn much slower than average but many can blend comfortably
into the “normal” population when given an intensive education and support
into their mid-twenties.
It is a failure of leadership at the upper levels, however, that parents are rarely informed that their chances of getting an appropriate placement for their exceptional child are slim to none. Although Supreme Court Justice John Sopinka wrote, in the case of Eaton vs Brant County Board of Education that full inclusion should not be a “default setting,” because it could deny a child his right to an effective education, it has become exactly that. Parents are often under the impression that rights and regulations that apply in the U.S. are similar here, and this is far from the truth. Our leaders do not do justice to parents’ need for accurate information.
” Our leaders do not do justice to parents’ need for accurate information.”
Very true statement. By time parents finally learned the knowledge, high school is knocking at the door. And some don’t learn until senior high school.
A few months back, there was an article in an Ontario newspaper (I cannot remember the town), of parents sending their boy, to a U.S. LD private school, to remediate the weaknesses, and the parents were none too please, because the school always informed them the boy was doing well. He is now in university, but he would not be in university if he did not go to the private LD school. Another article, again in Ontario, and I believe near London, another family send their girl to a private LD school in Ontario, in the senior year. Same story, the parents were not receiving the right type of information. One of the biggest beefs on the LD forums, is not being given the correct information, and leading parents down the garden path.
As far as I am concern, there is an incentive. Keep the kids in the inclusive classroom, and the school is rewarded through extra funding for the classroom. Have no evidence, besides chatter on the web and my own observations, but an audit of the public education system, would shed a light on monies being redirected for other purposes.
And there is the Moore case, that is being heard by the Supreme Court of Canada, and the decision is expected to come in the Spring of next year. If it rules in favour with the Moores, it would shake the education systems across Canada to the bones. It would also help all students with disabilities, and not just those who have dyslexia. In other words, best efforts will no longer be the minimum legal requirement, in addressing the educational needs of students with disabilities.
A discussion about the excuse of low SES…and failure.
http://www.linkedin.com/news?aag=&actionBar=&articleID=798567717&ids=3sNdPsSdjwVdOMNc30NejkOejsIczsSczgNc30U&freq=1&trk=sgnl-0-trend-title-2
Our American fried Tom Whitby has returned to the theme, once again, with a new post “Absence of Leadership?”
Tom sees New York University historian Diane Ravitch as a valiant defender of American public education and wonders why she is now fighting a rather lonely crusade:
http://tomwhitby.wordpress.com/2011/10/09/absence-of-leadership/#comment-2225
I beg to differ with Tom Whitby on the whole matter of what has happened to Diane Ravitch. She is a fine educational historian whom I respect greatly for her work in that field. That is why it pains me to see the price she is paying for becoming a shill for the American teachers unions.
Her 2010 book The Death and Life of the Great American School System is a classic, but then she decided to become a partisan..and lost tremendous credibility. Andrew Rotherham was one of the first to openly express the opinion that she was burning bridges in the education world by shifting from pithy analysis to pure polemics. Her Twitter feed merely confirms that suspicion. She is sounding more and more like Alfie Kohn…
In the Schools Wars, switching sides can have dire consequences…and ultimately leave you marooned in “no man’s land.” If and when Dr. Ravitch awakens to the realization that she is becoming a caricature, it could well come to pass.