Educators gathered at the Canadian Teachers’ Federation (CTF) President’s Forum on July 9-10 in Halifax sounded and looked dazed and confused by the notion of “quality education.” Trying to define “quality education” is perplexing when you eschew higher academic standards, still resist testing and accountability, and espouse what CEA Director Ron Canuel calls “soulful education” Even Dr. Charles Underleider, former BC Deputy Minister and CEA consultant, seemed baffled by the stubborn persistence of a Canadian public longing for more than a periodic taste of excellence. http://www.ctf-fce.ca/Events/?index_id=121317&lang=EN&id=91095
The “Quality Education” Forum did not really raise our expectations. The Opening Speaker was Dr. Joel Westheimer, a New Yorker in happy exile from the Land of “No Child Left Behind” and a sworn enemy of standardized testing. http://www.cea-ace.ca/video/joel-westheimer-mary-lou-donnelly-will-canada-follow-americas-no-child-left-behind-policy Once again, People for Education’s Annie Kidder bore the heavy responsibility of representing all parents and”outsiders” clamouring for better schools. How could this be a Forum on “Quality Education” without the Canadian Society for Quality Education? And where was Nova Scotia’s Education Minister, Ramona Jennex, Chair of CMEC, during an event held in her backyard?
The terrifying “bad guys” were, as usual, not on the invitation list of the Teachers’ Union Forum purporting to gather opinion from a “diversity of perspectives” on the state of Canadian K-12 education. P4E’s Annie Kidder was there as a “pet reformer” to provide intelligence on “how to win the battle for the hearts and minds of the public.” The elephant in the room was the Fraser Institute, a devil-like, monolithic colossus threatening the entire system. In this imagined world, all legitimate education reformers from AIMS to SQE are bereft of “independent thought” and take their direction from Vancouver or Alberta, the deviant “school choice” province.
The CTF’s President’s Forum was a sad spectacle for those seriously interested in reforming public education and restoring “quality standards” for today’s students. Worried educators took to the microphone to rail against standardized testing and to further demonize the Fraser Institute. One tortured soul assured the invited group of of 100 teachers that it was possible to be “a good Leftie” and still be in favour of improving numeracy and literacy skills.
The CTF Forum attendees are worried sick about a new, insidious influence: the Weston Awards for Educational Excellence. Recognizing the 30 to 60 most outstanding schools in BC, Ontario, and Alberta, was doing incalculable damage. Identifying the “most improved” schools was an even more diabolical move. The Garfield Weston Foundation, working together with the Fraser Institute, might actually “seed” a dangerous spirit of competition into a system promoting an “equality of outcomes.” http://www.forexcellenceineducation.org/News_Releases/News/2011/AwardsON2011.aspx
The latest answer to “riding out” the wave of accountability came in the form of a new CTF-CEA initiative, “Teaching the Way we Aspire to Teach.” With provincial testing entrenched, “teacher quality reform” is beginning to show its ugly face, possibly threatening iron clad tenure and even contract entitlements. What’s the antidote? Smarten up — and become the “reflective practitioner” you once aspired to be. http://www.cea-ace.ca/publication/teaching-way-we-aspire-teach-now-and-future Simply put, get your teaching act together before “teacher quality” reform spreads into Canada.
Thoughtful, astute educators like Stephen Hurley give this initiative some instant credibility. Just as education reformers come in different stripes, so do career educators. He’s also smart enough to introduce the initiative with a core question: “Are We Teaching the Way We Aspire To Teach?” The answer, for most teachers, is “no.” But is it the right question to begin with? Whatever happened to the more challenging one- “Are we Teaching the Way Children Learn?” http://www.cea-ace.ca/blog/stephen-hurley/2012/07/1/are-we-teaching-way-we-aspire-teach
Why in the world are Canadian teacher federations so allergic to educational excellence? Why all the confusion about assessing students for what they know, can do, and actually accomplish? Will “Teaching the Way We Aspire to Teach” actually promote “quality education”? Is the whole CTF-CEA initiative just another gambit to stave-off the advance of “teacher quality” reforms?
Educhatter 
I do not get invited to these things and am not sure I would ever want to go. Too much wishful thinking or ideology masking as thought. That is also certainly true of those noted above who did not attend (SQE etc.).
I see no real contradiction between Stephen’s question and the question considered to be “the more challenging one”.
Most young teachers want to do well. So what gets in the way?
Among other things
– the assumption that education faculties can do it all and a failure to co-ordinate between what happens at teachers’ college and school in the early stages of a career
– professional development that lacks quality (see Doug Reeves’ work); instead, it too often consists of drive by workshops and an unending array of powerpoint(less) slides
– a lack of understanding of both the power and limits of research in education
(see Robert Marzano, John Hattie, and Dan Willingham); instead, I witness a rather child-like fascination either with “traditional” methods or “new” methods among their acolytes
– the emotional attachment the acolytes have to their favourite educational success stories: Finland, vouchers, testing, home schooling, unschooling withgout recognizing the contextual factors that may or may not account for their “success”.
– an inability by the acolytes to see “quality” as the complex thing it is; for decades, since the studies of John Goodlad, schools have been asked (by parents as well as by their representatives in government) to “do it all”; i.e.,
• basic skills and knowledge in a increasing array of fields
• sound character development
• critical and creative thinking
• collaboration
• understanding of and working through complex issues
• vocational training and the learning skills to succeed in the world of work
• the ability to work with and understand the demographic diversity that is Canada
add to these
• technological literacy
and you have your 21st century skill set: most of which was true in the last century
I seldom contribute to anyone’s blog these days because I would rather DO in my classrooms and with my colleagues than TALK or RANT about it.
The CTF President’s Forum is a sad spectacle because “crossovers” are rarely, if ever, invited into the lion’s den. Neither are more open-minded, experience-based educators like you, John. Stephen Hurley of Teaching Out Loud stands out because he at least acknowledges (and talks with) those holding differing views.
You do a far better job of explaining the layers of complexity than Dr. Charles Underleider did at the CTF Presidents Forum.
Why was Dr, Underleider hired to produce the CTF report? Anyone reading his 2003 book Failing Our Kids can see that he is allergic to educational excellence and a leader in the Canadian band of “school reform deniers.”
Why don’t you join us, Paul, for this afternoon session. No charge. We would love to listen to your comments, in person, instead of hearing them in short spurts via social media. #CTFPrezForum2012
It’s a little late to extend an invitation. I’ve seen enough for this year.
Why not consider me for next year’s CTF President’s Forum? You might also consider inviting Malkin Dare, Doretta Wilson, and Charles Cirtwill, all thoughtful, knowledgeable people far too often left off your invitation lists.
Let’s see what Dr. Charles Underleider comes up with in his proposed report.
Thanks for the kind words, Paul.
One additional issue from conferences, colloguia, institutes, workshops, symposia, etc. is the lack of systematic follow-up.
I would want to know afterwards (and should be asked)
– What did I get out of the session(s)?
– What can I do with this in my classroom?
– How will I know it is successful in quality learning and teaching?
– It is work / fail because of implementation or did I happen to happen the right fit with my learners?
and if I get +ve answers to these, I ask
– Can I generalize and take this “thing” that worked in this class, work in other classes and for other teachers?
– How does this reshape my view/stance/ philosophy about teaching and learning?
If these questions are not asked or answered, where is the quality?
Feedback is the engine of learning!
The respected American education think-tank, Education Sector has just released (July 10, 2012) a cutting edge report on the challenges facing Teachers as Professionals in the United States.
Sarah Rosenberg and Elena Silva address the critical issue of Teacher Quality Reform, providing a voice to allow American teachers to speak on Unions and the Future of the Profession.
Here is the Executive Summary:
“Over the past decade, teachers have seen changes in both their conditions of employment—from pay to retirement benefits—and their practice. Far too often, these policies have been made by people who talk about teachers, rather than talking to them.
Last fall, Education Sector surveyed a nationally representative random sample of more than 1,100 K-12 public school teachers. The results of that survey published in Trending Toward Reform: Teachers Speak on Unions and the Future of the Profession. Co-authors Sarah Rosenberg and Elena Silva look at teacher attitudes on a variety of teacher-centered reforms, including new approaches to evaluation, pay, and tenure, and the role of unions in pushing for or against these reforms.
Trending Toward Reform shows how teachers’ thinking has evolved on some reform issues. It repeats questions from Education Sector’s 2007 survey Waiting to Be Won Over and a 2003 Public Agenda survey on these same issues. Our findings show continued strong support for teachers unions. But teachers also want more from their unions.
Other key findings from the survey reveal:
Teachers think evaluations are improving. In 2011, 78 percent said their most recent evaluation was done carefully and taken seriously by their school administration.
Three out of four teachers—76 percent—say that the criteria used in their evaluation were fair.
Teachers are warming to the idea that assessing student knowledge growth may be a good way to measure teacher effectiveness, with 54 percent of 2011 teachers agreeing. This compares with 49 percent in 2007.
Teachers are still opposed to including student test scores as one component of differentiated pay, with just 35 percent supporting that idea.
Teachers do support differentiated pay for teachers who work in tough neighborhoods with low-performing schools (83 percent support). Teachers also support differentiated pay for teachers who have earned National Board of Professional Teaching Standards certification or for those who teach hard-to-fill subjects.” (Education Sector)
Comment:
American teachers seem to be gradually awakening to the demand for “teacher quality” in public schools. The American Teachers Federation (ATF) is definitely nudging its membership in that direction, and now the rival NEA (National Education Association) is beginning to countenance the need for improvement, including “weeding-out” weak teachers doing harm to the profession.
It took a serious crisis to “unfreeze” the AFL and NEA positions on teacher assessment, teacher tenuure, and LIFO (Last in, first out) staffing formulas.
Surveying teachers on their “aspirations” is at least a small indication that it is now on the teacher union radar here in Canada.
I guess one issue in teacher evaluation occurs when you compare it to medicine.
The body is almost as complicated as the mind but it is easier and faster to see the effects of poor treatment on the body than to see minds fail.
This is why if there is ONE thing I consider, it is getting feedback on how students are doing as they do it, providing direction and support and seeing them try again and succeed.
I see this in athletics and music and drama. It seems to explain much of the success of Jump Math and some forms of Direct Instruction.
If we can get into this habit as teachers in a consistent way, learning will improve.
This is why tests are at best only a thermometer. It is what happens BETWEEN TESTS that counts.
I agree with your observations Paul and John.
Why the fear? As well, they don’t like the transparency of the Fraser or AIMS report cards because it might mean that doing the same thing over and over is just not getting the results. Transparency calls attention to both the ‘tall poppies’ and the short growth. In the past the ‘tall poppies’ were either dismissed as anomalies or their innovators were ‘sent to Siberia’ at some undesirable teaching outpost as punishment for success.
Powers in public education fundamentally fear losing control over the money in public education although they would never admit this. The public might just ask questions about how their money is being spent–on everything from fad ineffectual teaching practices to sick leave pension payouts.
The concept that education can be delivered in other ways outside of the status quo (vouchers, charter schools, virtual schooling) just doesn’t register. One attendee’s question in yesterday’s session talked about thinking outside of the box–a hackneyed term that I cringe at. Problem is they can’t see any other kind of box.
http://www.societyforqualityeducation.org/index.php/blog/read/cue-the-black-hats/
“The concept that education can be delivered in other ways outside of the status quo (vouchers, charter schools, virtual schooling) just doesn’t register. One attendee’s question in yesterday’s session talked about thinking outside of the box–a hackneyed term that I cringe at. Problem is they can’t see any other kind of box.” I respectfully disagree with this statement only because I believe that these usual suspects know this only too well, but far prefer keeping those who fall for it in their state of fear. Think about it if you will. There’s more fodder in the CTF and their pet parent Ms. Kidder keeping up the fear element than in actually moving to reforming a sick system. Was it not Julien Falconer who, in his report spoke about a culture of silence and fear within TDSB schools? Same exact thing goes for the entire public school system. What the folks at CTF seem to depend on is that keeping the culture of fear momentum building, because otherwise if they really listened to individual classroom teachers, parents, students and communities they’d HAVE to change.
Why the fear? Because in the past it’s worked. The tide is changing and very quickly.
Nice response to the feeble CTF kneejerk invitation. Coming a bit late to the party is a bit transparent in and of itself.
The Education Sector Media release (July 10, 2010) softens the initial message:
“The findings (among American teachers) show continued strong support for teachers unions. Compared with earlier years, teachers say their union plays an important role in protecting jobs and addressing working conditions.
But teachers want more from their unions. In 2007, 52 percent of teachers said their union should “stick to bread and butter issues” rather than focusing on reform; today, just 42 percent of teachers feel that way. At the same time, the number of teachers who want their union to put more focus on reform has risen from 32 percent to 43 percent. As one example, 75 percent of teachers surveyed said that unions should play a role in simplifying the process to remove ineffective teachers—up from 63 percent in 2007” (Education Sector)
Comment:
Support for teacher unions remains strong among American teachers, but members are beginning to demand some action to assure higher professional standards and meet the public demand for improved student performance..
One wonders what Canadian teachers might say if asked to respond to a survey containing those same questions. Would our teachers feel free to complete such a survey?
If one asked a teacher privately I’m pretty sure they’d tell you the truth and you’d be pleasantly surprised Paul, however, if you asked them publicly or among their peers those union ties seem to bind and gag them which supports the culture of fear very nicely. I would bet also that, in Ontario at least you’d get a VERY different answer from the newly minted (and unemployed) teachers than you would the older more entrenched educators. I find younger and newer teachers less likely to put up with what hasn’t worked and more flexible to move to what will…..phonics and Saxon math come to mind. Get to them while they’re new and they’re require more of their unions too I’m betting.
The U.S. survey results are problematic considering when Wisconsin and other states passed right to work laws, about one-third of Wisconsin teachers left their unions.
http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2011/12/12/wi-school-teachers-vote-to-disband-union-we-never-had-to-use-their-services/