Ontario elementary school teachers are now being totally immersed in the new pedagogy of Social Justice Education. The Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario’s newish resource, Social Justice Begins with Me, is being rolled out as a teaching resource for the Early Years to Grade 8. It’s a prime example of the deep inroads being made by “social justice educators” in transforming “character education” into a vehicle for addressing social injustices through the schools.
The EFTO promotes Social Justice Begins with Me as an “anti-bias, literature-based curriculum resource kit” that is designed for year-round use and is aligned with the Ontario Ministry of Education’s Equity and Inclusive Education Strategy. The ten monthly themes are explicitly aimed at inculcating nine core “social justice principles”: acceptance, respect, hope, empathy, inclusion, diversity, human rights, and equity. It also targets some identifiable 21st century ‘evils’: anti-Semitism, ageism, heternormality, sexism, racism, classism, ableism, prejudice and faith.
The EFTO teaching resource, like the SJE movement, thrives in a culture dominated by ‘political correctness’ and has found a comfortable home in Canada’s largest education graduate school, the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, in Toronto. That movement now has its own exclusive research unit, replacing what was left of the Department of History and Philosophy of Education. Full disclosure – I’m an unrepentant graduate of that now defunct research department.
Social Justice Education has now taken on a life of its own in many Canadian urban elementary school divisions. Serious concerns raised by the infamous June 2012 Maclean’s Magazine cover story, “Why are schools brainwashing our Children?” have done little to derail the movement. Nor has North American education research lending support to an alternative version of “character education,” founded on a different set of core principles aimed at developing student resilience. Curriculum-informed parents will also spot the complete absence of critical success attributes, labelled ‘old school,’ such as grit, perseverance, resilience, and accountability for actions.
True believers in social justice education see elementary teaching through an engaged sociopolitical lens. Working for social justice in the schools requires “a deliberate intervention” that challenges society’s “fundamental inequalities” and seeks to advance the cause of “better educational and economic outcomes” for “marginalized children.” Social justice pedagogy aims to develop in teachers and students an understanding of “critical literacy” and its key dimensions: 1) disrupting the commonplace; 2)interrogating multiple viewpoints; 3) focusing on sociopolitical issues; and 4) taking action and promoting social justice.
Pursuing social justice in the early grades stirs up considerable controversy, especially among parents more focused on raising standards and improving student performance. Maclean’s writer Cynthia Reynolds certainly unearthed some outlandish, and undoubtedly extreme examples, of actual “social justice education ” activities:
During the 2011-12 school year, first graders in Toronto brought home student planners marked with the international days of zero tolerance on female genital mutilation and ending violence against sex workers, a means to spark conversation on the issues. In Laval, Que., a six-year-old boy was disqualified from a teddy-bear contest because a Ziploc was found in his lunch instead of a reusable container. The Durham Board of Education in Ontario came under fire for discouraging the terms “wife” and “husband” in class in favour of the gender-neutral “spouse,” and the words “boyfriend” and “girlfriend” in favour of “partner.” And in the name of inclusiveness, some school boards include Wiccan holidays in their school calendars.
Such examples of how Social Justice Education can go awry cut little ice with surprising numbers of Education School faculty entrusted with training elementary school teachers. Deeply committed to social justice reform, they believe that the classroom is the front line in the battle to address social ills and establish “safe spaces” for the children of marginalized families. It’s really just the latest battle over the age-old question: who gets to decide on the best way to educate the very young?
Middle-school teacher David Stocker, author of the textbook Math That Matters: A Teacher Resource for Linking Math and Social Justice, for Grades 6 to 9,is in the vanguard of the movement. His math problems include items focusing on issues like workers’ rights, racial profiling and homophobia. “All material carries bias of some sort,” he writes in the introduction. “Really the question is whether or not we want to spend time educating for peace and social justice. If we do, let’s admit that bias and get to work.”
Psychologist Robin Grille, the author of Parenting for a Peaceful World,takes a far more balanced approach, recognizing the inherent risks in imposing a social justice perspective in the early grades. Getting too political in elementary school, where the power differential between teacher and student is vast, verges on manipulation. “You can’t use children as fodder for your cause,” says Grille.
Nor is Grille afraid to pose the right questions: “How do you know these young kids aren’t just parroting what their teacher is telling them? How easy would it be to get them to protest, say, abortion? How much are the young truly able to make up their own minds?”It’s particularly true in classrooms where kids are being graded. So what does she recommend? Children, she points out, need to develop emotionally before they can develop politically.
The controversial 2012 Maclean’s feature story provided a few of what be termed teacher survival tips. Elementary school teacher and Simon Fraser University education professor Rhonda Philpott identified one of the biggest risks: You can’t walk into a classroom and just start a social-justice activity. It takes trust.” Not all parents appreciate the politically-driven pedagogy either. Professor Ng-A-Fook of the University of Ottawa urges practitioners to “know your students” and “prepare your parents” so you do not “offend families or traumatize kids.”
Social justice education is fraught with difficulties and tends to narrow the focus of classroom activities around issues drawn solely from a rather narrow, albeit well-intended sociopolitical perspective. More recent education research tends to focus on addressing student underperformance and ways of instilling resilience in children.
Character is now seen as the “X-factor” in explaining why some children succeed and others get left behind in and out of schools. Toronto-born writer Paul Tough,author of How Children Succeed, influenced by Angela Duckworth’s research, called the character-based X-factor “grit,” but parenting expert Dr. Michele Borba favours the term moral intelligence.
Character education also tends to be broader and more inclusive in its reach than social justice education, particularly as exemplified in the EFTO Social Justice curriculum. The Peel District School Board, west of Toronto, embraces a “character education” model that embraces six different character attributes and seeks to educate children who are caring, cooperative, honest,inclusive, respectful and responsible. That approach is not only broader, but includes two factors related to “grit” – respect and responsibility. It’s no accident that the PDSB credo ends on this note: “Demonstrate initiative and perseverance in overcoming difficulties.”
What is driving the movement to introduce Social Justice Education into elementary schools in Ontario and elsewhere? What are the risks of implementing a Primary School curriculum with such an overt sociopolitical agenda? Are the fears that kids are being “brainwashed” all that exaggerated? What’s wrong with pursuing a more balanced approach in the pursuit of character education?
The whole country is awash with this stuff. Latest out of BC yesterday, where this letter made the news https://www.cheknews.ca/school-district-investigating-teacher-hands-controversial-letter-students-esquimalt-high-287380/
And let’s not forget the earlier incident which created a huge uproar over a BCTF social justice campaign http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bctf-pulls-controversial-online-counter-military-recruitment-posters-1.3850942
And it is reminiscent of a darker, seedier underbelly which has existed for quite some time http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2010/04/cultural_marxism_in_education_1.html.
I fail to see how many of these discussions, and topics have any place, or justification to be taught in the public school classroom. Once upon a time, teachers just taught. Now there is incredible pressure, and indoctrination it seems, for them to wade into the political debate and bring that into the classroom, intended to influence young minds. There is nothing wrong with teachers, or anyone else, who may have political leanings to the right, center, left or otherwise. But when the professional aspect of the job demands that knowledge is to be imparted in an informative, objective manner, there is no place for any type of political leanings, or teachings of this fashion, in the classroom, as well as in the workplace.
I have not read deeply enough about the Ontario initiative to come to any conclusions. However, it strikes me that the curriculum would have to be pretty radical to show more bias or be more intrusive on a developing mind than having a whole system called the “Catholic School Boatd”.
There are three contradictory “goals” of education, roughly: 1) Socializing the child into the rules of the tribe such as showing up on time and sitting quietly, 2) Teaching abstract knowledge such as algebra, history, geography, and music, and 3) Helping the child become the unique best they can be, building curiosity, perseverance and grit.
Public schools (both District and Catholic) are focused on the first goal, they merely define the tribal rules slightly differently.
The other two goals have fallen by the wayside. Educators no longer even care that classrooms are full of kids who count on their fingers and can’t read. They give lip service to individualized education as they process batches of students, grouped by age, lockstep through the standard curriculum in exactly the same schedule.
The ‘tiger moms’ have the second goal right, raising high achievers to be tomorrows doctors, bankers, lawyers, and scientists. We revile them for that. The unschoolers have the third goal right, raising independent, curious kids that will question authority and challenge the status quo. We revile them for that too.
Parents should not expect a refresh of leadership in the next Ontario election to shift educational goals in the slightest. The only idea the opposition has is to modify the tribal rules that are being taught (eg: no sex education).
Ontario is a world leader. No need to change much. More money helps.
I like the ETFO approach and one supported similar approaches kn OSSTF.
Just go through the catagory escorts slowly. Do we oppose racism? Sexism? Classism. ..
Most people find as they consider each one it is really not a problem.
Their are racist, sexist, classiest, homophobic parents who would like to pass their bias on go their children but they need to be told their views are no longer tolerated.
Even the Catholic Church is changing. I’m sure this Pope would endorse SJE. Probably Jesus as well.
Bigots are acting out in various places mainly because they see the jig is up.
My objection to this enterprise begins much earlier in the discussion than when someone has the bright idea to inject the whole idea of social justice into a curriculum and arrogate the authority structure of the public school as a recruitment field for footsoldiers their own political cause.
The very term “social justice” — as used in today’s political discourse, at any rate, is problematic.
I’ve no problem advocating for justice and — it we MUST bring back “values education” to our schools, including justice under that banner.
But the panoply of issues, perspectives and political positions that attach to the SJ rubric are not “justice” per se — some may fall within that realm and some may not, but none of them comprise “justice”. The conception of SJ is developed to provide an umbrella for a complex network of political ideas, mantling them with lauditory language intended to give those ideas a “let up” in political discourse. The idea of SJ EDUCATION is to pre-condition children to accept the desired political conclusions as de facto truth before their prefrontal cortexes are fully developed, leaving them helpless in matters of resolving conflicts over morality and philosophy.
The whole point of adding the adjective “social” to the word “justice” is NOT, as one might suppose, to hive off a particular category of what are unassailably “justice” issues.
It is evident, from any enumeration of “SJ issues” that the point is to associate the word “justice” with a category of opinions and views that ordinarily would not fall under the rubric of “justice”.
In other words, much of what is called “social justice” is not justice at all. It is a verbal trick to turn favourite political ideas into motherhood and apple pie. WHO could question JUSTICE?? Shame on you for disagreeing with “received wisdom”!
The ancient notion of justice is an important one: The term means, and implies, fair and appropriate consequences for behaviour. If you do good, justice dictates that you receive good in return. If evil, justice dictates punishment. And in both cases, commensurate with that which you have done. A critical aspect of justice is the equal treatment of all. Nobody gets special privileges, special protection, special scrutiny or is singled out for especially harsh treatment.
“SOCIAL justice” does not function in this fashion at all, for the most part. In almost every case, a “social justice” issue revolves around the separation of people into “identity classes”. The question of what treatment a person receives hinges not on their identity as a human being, but on their identification as a member of some group. Black? White? Homosexual? Straight? Male? Female? That is the starting point. And the conclusions drawn are precisely as one might suspect. With heavy application of the language of fairness, prescriptions are laid out that are intrinsically unfair and prejudicial, even bigoted; what social justice prescribes for you is dependent on what groups you belong to and how they rank in the implied hierarchy.
Justice is rightly portrayed as a blindfolded arbiter whose only information comes from some scales unaffected by her outward perceptions.
Social Justice might be prepared as an unblinded arbiter with, instead of a set of scales, an array of boxes into which people are sorted. Social Justice is the new bigotry.
There actually IS NO debate on these issues. Racism vs tolerance , Sexism vs patriarchy, classism vs equally. …
The school system is being used exactly as intended – to squeeze evil out of society.
Unfortunately the consequences of misguided SJ instruction are almost always difficult to trace — and in my view these are not only likely to be negative, but probably most often do harm in the formation of children’s understanding and evaluation of the world.
So I think it is important that we pay attention to those experiments in this area which DO have observable consequences so that we can understand the nature of its effects on children.
I can think of no better illustration of the harmful unintended consequences of well-intentioned injection of “issues education” into purely academic subjects like math than this remarkable experiment carried out in Winnipeg a few years ago. You can find the writeup starting on page 24 here:
Click to access Journal-V07.pdf
I do hope the poor experimental subjects in this classroom experiment gone awry received appropriate counselling. And kudos to the experimenters for their honesty in reporting. But I cannot help but come away with a pessimistic take on the likelihood of them actually acting upon the obvious lesson learned here: How long before they try again, or try something else just as bad, but whose effects are not as obvious on the surface?
What are the consequences a better world? Perish the thought.
So much of the current debate over Social Justice Education is presentist and superficial — if you take a deeper historical and sociological look at current curriculum issues. Few today seem to acknowledge that Ontario’s school system is the “House that (Egerton) Ryerson Built.” It was, at its origins, not only Protestant but designed to implant a work ethic in children. Educators spouting Social Justice Education would be well advised to do a little homework, stating with David B. Marshall’s primer on “secularization” and its impact on schools and society. Here’s a link to a summary of his research:
Click to access Marshall.pdf
Exactly Paul but I see SJ education as the modern progressive replacement for Ryersons Protestant work ethic, patriotism …. it is the grist for the curriculum mill.
As Paul notes, this ain’t new though the form taken today may differ.
It also may be that “SJE” appears in some subjects more so than other. History for example,
As one whose background is mostly Irish working class immigrant I puzzled as a kid taking “British history” in Ontario when it was really “English” history.
As noted by Tom B the “tribal” thing seems to be a virtually permanent part of who we are . Bur education has to go beyond this.
As for the “pedagogy” of SJE my grade 10s gave me the best advice possible when I taught immigration and indigenous history in the 70s (back into those themes today). They advice when they knew I was going to be doing workshops throughout my school district “Don’t preach”.
Fine advice then
and now.
The whole country is awash with this stuff. Latest out of BC yesterday, where this letter made the news https://www.cheknews.ca/school-district-investigating-teacher-hands-controversial-letter-students-esquimalt-high-287380/
Or how about teaching social justice in math class? http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5951/jresematheduc.44.1.0037?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
And let’s not forget the earlier incident which created a huge uproar over a BCTF social justice campaign http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bctf-pulls-controversial-online-counter-military-recruitment-posters-1.3850942
And it is reminiscent of a darker, seedier underbelly which has existed for quite some time http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2010/04/cultural_marxism_in_education_1.html.
I fail to see how many of these discussions, and topics have any place, or justification to be taught in the public school classroom. Once upon a time, teachers just taught. Now there is incredible pressure, and indoctrination it seems, for them to wade into the political debate and bring that into the classroom, intended to influence young minds. There is nothing wrong with teachers, or anyone else, who may have political leanings to the right, center, left or otherwise. But when the professional aspect of the job demands that knowledge is to be imparted in an informative, objective manner, there is no place for any type of political leanings, or teachings of this fashion, in the classroom, as well as in the workplace
The problem Tara is that you are in the minority. The world is moving relentlessly towards a moderate socialist direction. Anything in the way are just speed bumps.
Reactionaries and conservatives put themselves in an awkward position. They need to argue against teaching an anti racist, antisexist anti classist antihomophobic curriculum? I would not want to be trying to make that case.
By coincidence, the CBC had a story about ‘Social Justice’ today. Except that they didn’t identify it that way.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/millennial-jobs-education-1.4009295
It starts with a Millennial who could be the poster boy for Social Justice in education. He sat in class obediently, showed up every day, walked across the stage to accept his ‘participation award’ for Engineering . And no one wants to hire him. Or even interview him.
That doesn’t seem fair, and by golly he knows about fairness. He knows the unwritten tribal rule that if you get a degree then you will find a job. I’ll bet he has been taught a lot of tribal rules, including the Engineering rules (wear the Iron Ring on the pinkie of your working hand). But that’s seems to be about all he has been taught.
He exhibits no spark of curiosity, no hint of grit. Others might continue learning new skills, building a portfolio of demonstration project, spending weekends at hack-a-thons, whatever. Heck, I’m retired and I still do that. This graduate laments that he was never given a co-op placement.
And no signs of excellence either. He seems to have passed a sufficient number of credits without any particular distinction or focus. “He studied Mechanical Engineering because he thought it would get him a job.” Encouraging. If I was hiring, he wouldn’t get an interview either.
Doug – if you want to sing the virtues of educators teaching social correctness instead of encouraging students to develop personal excellence and intellectual excellence, then why don’t you give this guy a call and cheer him up.
Students can develop themselves to a high level by studying a SJE oriented program. There is no contradiction between excellence and equity. In fact equity is a precondition for excellence.
The more education is oriented to SJ the more students will graduate K12 and go on to post secondary.
I have taught hundreds of inner city kids in Toronto. I have never ever seen them as involved and participating as when I taught them about Malcolm X. Get the point?
This is very hard to get into some people’s heads but there is a surplus of engineers not a shortage. Business wants us to overproduction STEM graduates so they can pay them all less.
He should have majored in history 🙂
There is a direct and obvious contradiction between docile students taught tribal rules and skeptical, questioning students armed with intellectual tools (history, genetics, statistics, philosophy, economics, etc) and making up their own minds.
This is a debate between John Dewey and Socrates Doug’s taunts to Tara reduce the debate to “My tribe is better”, easy to see where that fits on the spectrum. Tara has previously pointed out that Doug’s educational stance is directed by the wealthy and powerful, as it has been since Socrates was killed for corroding the morals of his tribe.
I can only snigger at Doug’s invocation of Malcolm X, who had total disdain for the police, social workers, and educators enforcing the status quo. He would recognize our current educational model for exactly what it is. We have police checks and other means to keep people like him from corrupting our docile little snowflakes.
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/284359/
“The school system is being used exactly as intended – to squeeze evil out of society.”
I’m sure that’s what teachers under Mao’s and Stalin’s regime were told too.
Don’t mistake evil for truth, higher thought, and discourse. Living in a socialist, utopian existence only ends in utter chaos and destruction. No society has ever been successful under this type of regime, and fooling oneself into thinking lives will be better, will end in abject failure, every single time.
I think you will have a hard time making the case that SJE = Communism. Looks like Joe McCarthy not dead yet.
Try to tell us what is wrong with teaching that all people are equal by race gender ethnicity religion sex or sexual orientation, disability and so on. It is in all the Human Rights Codes for heavens sake.
Teachers are teaching the long struggle for equality. Opposition seems foolish and/or profoundly reactionary.
As far as socialism goes I would say Scandinavian societies are doing g well. I also put Germany, France, Benelux, and many other democracies in the socialist/social democratic camp.
When many lists come out of the best countries in the world to live in, most of the list are advanced social democratic states.
Freedom Squelched
When education becomes a state utility, compulsory and a monopoly, then we need take notice. Do we cherish freedom or not?
Of the benevolent, benign socialist or socialist-like countries mentioned by Doug as some of the “best countries in the world to live in” two do not allow home education of children by their parents — Sweden and Germany. Who owns the children?
Nobody owns the children but the state represents the majority in these democracies.
the Alberta Teacher’s Association latest “Manifesto” on Social Justice recently had to change their wording when they recommended students should be called “comrades”. Parental uproar is the only reason they relented.
As for our Scandinavian and European friends, no, they’re really not doing very well..at all. The Socialist experiment in Sweden has demoralized society to the extent that kids don’t even give a crap anymore when they go to school, and suicide rates amongst the youth are going through the roof. No future options exist for kids in most European countries, especially France, where, unless you are from a privileged family, your only option for a decent job is with the bloated civil service. No career aspirations for the normal student, and depression rates are, as in many countries, much higher amongst the youth than before. Germany? Most families have both parents working 2 jobs to pay the rent, or the mortgage, and job options again are extremely limited to the youth in comparison to North American kids.
Our European cousins have long remarked my Grandfather was wise when he embarked upon our Canadian shores over 50 years ago. Opportunity there amongst the Socialist backdrop is narrowing, and with their social issues, they’re becoming even dimmer.
But instead of learning from that, some in Canada would choose instead to embrace this narrow view of how we should think, and how we should live our lives…all based on the Thought Police guiding us along.
A democratic society does NOT mean we are all equal…it merely refers to the fact that we were BORN equal. What, and how we choose to live our lives, determines what path we take. It’s a dogfight every step of the way. The minute it gets easy, it means we have lost our own freedom to choose, and how to think. And those in charge of shaping our futures is not, up to teacher unions. Teachers are meant to teach and provide knowledge to help us make those decisions. The rest, is up to us.
Democratic society means exactly that we are all equal. Sweden elected a conservative government t which brought in a voucher program. At that point Sweden began a dramatic plunge in PISA scores while Finland stayed almost all public and held up.
Actually Socialism and Communism dictates that people are equal, and that the upper classes are bourgeois, the ones oppressing society. Democracy requires that we must fight every step of the way in order for our voice to be heard, and it rewards those who are willing to fight, and work hard along the way – the exact opposite of Socialism and Communism. 2 completely different systems, as there always has been.
As I said, “we have entered the rabbit hole” and we are falling very fast. Now, it seems, we’re also getting a taste of alternative-facts.
Every year the Ontario catholic schools use school budget money to bus thousands of RC school kids to Ottawa to put on a huge anti abortion demonstration. This is not church money, this is public tax money granted for catholic board education.
I guess if the public schools did the same thing with public money on massive pro choice demonstrations that would be seen as SJE run amok?
Odd double standard don’t you think? This is why Americans oppose public money going to religious education.
While the evidence that public education is in general a “good” thing
– literacy
– tolerance and social skills
– vocational skills
exists
with variations among systems
the same cannot be said of “social justice education” which I believe is the topic under discussion in any of the above categories.
Perhaps some day there will be evidence
but it does not exist today.
There are approaches that promote tolerance and better connections among people and groups that have identifiable differences,
but they are not addressed under SJE.
https://www.thetoptens.com/best-countries-live-in/
As you can see most countries in the top 10 nations have strong elements of democratic socialism such as medicare public education pensions strong labour rights and advanced social programs.
Curious…if unions are so interested in freeing the masses from oppression through social justice programs in schools, how many are supporting THIS guy…the newly minted king of free speech?
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/how-controversial-u-of-t-prof-jordan-peterson-became-a-lightning-rod
I see this one as snowflakes vs reactionaries.
Don’t have a dog in this fight.
It seems we have entered the rabbit hole and the discussion is not really going to get any better (or back on point) from here on in. I am baffled at how, regardless of the web site, blog or issue, the conversation eventually comes down to this level. How did we get from discussing social justice education to bashing unions for not defending everyone who wants to say something outrageous? That’s probably a topic for a blog appealing to psychologists.
So following YOUR logic, Doug, if a white, heterosexual male student, coming from a privileged family, was being falsely accused of sexual harassment by his jilted indigenous girlfriend, are you suggesting the school, and his teachers, would be as justifiably outraged and defend him as if these accusations came from a female?
Or how about this?
Where does my kid go, when the young female teacher starts preaching about how it’s a man’s world…in front of the entire class of boys and girls and how it’s just not fair? Or how racist Canada is because it’s run by a group of old white men? What support is my kid allowed if she wants to question this logic? Because she sure didn’t get any when she tried.
Social Justice initiatives, mainly being run by teacher unions, are misinformed, and misaligned to how issues need to be addressed. Mostly they are only addressing the needs and causes of special interest groups; all others need not apply. The banner of Social Justice is only applicable to those whom are deemed to be unfairly treated. It is NOT about democracy and it is definitely NOT about inclusion or about treating all students equally. There is absolutely NO room for these types of prejudices in the classroom…especially at the elementary level.
Sorry Doug: My response was meant to be in the general reply category not a reply to your last comment.
Ron the only interests unions have are increasing their membership fees. If it doesn’t fit their narrative, they find ways to get rid of the dissenting voice or at the very least silence them. I hear from teachers all the time. It’s absolutely shocking how little their union rep do to support them in their professional endeavour. And as for the Pro D courses…spare me. You’ll really have a hard time explaining why there needs to be a Social Justice in Math Class course over learning times tables at the elementary level. Especially when 1 in 3 kids attend tutoring centres BECAUSE they’re not learning their times tables in school.
Students learn better when education is relevant. Showing them that 8 men have ghe same wealth as the bottom half of Canadian society and then doing some work on percentages is a lot more relevant than the % of farmer Brown’s crop ghat is corn and the % that is beans.
How about 1st Nations are 4% of the population but 50% of the incarcerated?
Why do women only make 80% of what men make.
How about math based on minimum wages and CEO salaries?
The list of problems and possibilities is endless.
Teach math and solve Canada’s problems at the same time.
Tara,
The union was established to protect and advance the economic and professional and human rights of its members. It is largely a self defence organization. It does a little professional work largely in conjunction with the ministry of education.
The bulk of the professional development work is a board and ministry function.
In short the union exists to defend and extend salary benefits and pensions and to defend individual members against arbitrary discipline or termination.
Note that your entire diatribe left out a very important word describing the teacher’s union: professionalism. Shows where the priorities lie, and why they fail to protect their members when it comes to teaching children effectively. And why it should never, ever, be in charge of social justice issues, because unions are incapable of having a balanced conversation, or supporting conflicting views. It’s “their” way, or the highway. So why would we entrust “that”, with our children, and their impressionable minds? We shouldn’t. And we shall NOT.
Teachers have no responsibility to be balanced. They are a private organization and they have a generally center to left POV.
I have been in teacher union conventions for decades. There is lots of debates some along political or ideological lines but there are no small c conservatives.
It is like a debate between Liberals NDP and Greens.
Here is the problem with your logic Tara. The political spectrum from Liberals like Trudeau to socialists like Jack Layton or Bernie Saunders to Communists like Castro to equity seekers Ike M LK Jr to feminists ALL believe in human equality. You cannot pull the old cold ear nonsense of equaity seekers are Communists. It is just not that linear.
Great speech Doug. From your perspective, anyone not supporting unionist views is the enemy. Doesn’t change the facts, or the truth behind what democracy means. It’s about free will, and utilizing our critical thinking to achieve a better society through our own efforts, and fighting to make it right. Socialist societies don’t TRY…they don’t HAVE to. Gov’t picks up the tab, and then it goes down the crapper as the gov’t runs out of money, and cancels social programs for the masses, leading to chaos. Finland’s golden age of education is over. Ditto for Sweden…NOT because of vouchers, but due to the absolute abysmal way their society has responded to equality for all and latest fads being mandated in the classroom
http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/what-the-failure-of-swedens-schools-can-teach-canadians/
https://www.thelocal.se/20160825/sweden-teachers-apologize-professor-jonas-linderoth
You want better lives for people? Let them fight their battles by educating them in the classroom first. THAT sacred area is left to learn the 3Rs, not be subjected to the latest trendy social justice topic of the day.
Finland is a great system. Sweden was a great system until they introduced vouchers at which point they began a sharp decline in PISA especially compared to Finland which remained 95% public.
Stay tuned Tara there is a new war in the USA. Charter vs vouchers. Betsy Devos prefers vouchers. Almost ghe entire charter sector opposes vouchers.
Tara check these reading results. Does Finland look “finished” to you. Just because Canada has the world’s best readers in real nations ( not artificial city-states) Finland is a tight second.
You should be telling everybody to imitate the Finnish and Canadian public education systems. Best in the world.
http://www.businessinsider.com/pisa-worldwide-ranking-of-math-science-reading-skills-2016-12
Well Tara I assume you are now well aware that BCTF took Christy Clark to ghe supreme Cort and son. As a result millions more need to be spent on BC classrooms. Your BCTF at work.
At the end of the day, those arguing against Social Justice Education are not arguing against the Communist Manifesto. They are arguing against the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
They want it to be words not action.
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-15.html
Give Section 15 a read. Then say there is something wrong with SJE.
The problem Doug stems from the interpretation teacher unions give to this particular aspect of Canadian Law. When we have teacher unions sponsoring conferences on White Privilege, and abandoning its principles of professionalism in pursuit of groupthink mentality, that in itself smacks itself of prejudice, and bias.
John Myers said it best:
“While the evidence that public education is in general a “good” thing
– literacy
– tolerance and social skills
– vocational skills
exists with variations among systems,
the same cannot be said of “social justice education” which I believe is the topic under discussion in any of the above categories.
Perhaps some day there will be evidence
but it does not exist today.
There are approaches that promote tolerance and better connections among people and groups that have identifiable differences,
but they are not addressed under SJE.”
Thank you for your insight John.
What is wrong with a conference on white privilege? Nothing.
A final thought. What the union does is the union’s business. It is not subject to oversight from outside it’s membership. Only from its members.
Yes, we are fully aware of the union’s antics, which is why more parents are fighting for school choice. Their tax dollars, their children, their business. Not the unions. Which is a subject for another day.
There will be no more choice in Canada.. That dog just won’t hunt. BTW charters south of the border are jnionizing at a rapid rate.
Just because it is a charter school does not mean no union.
school choice is just that…choice. Parents to choose what they want for their kids, including WHO they want to teach their kids. Can’t come soon enough. Already in AB, w/o unions, and parents are happy with that. Many other options are there, just waiting for us. That’s what a free society is all about Doug: informed choice, not indoctrination. The Thought police is not an option for this family, nor is it for many others. Union would have tons more support if they just did their professional duty and taught. Dictating to impressionable young children about how they should feel, and think about social justice issues is unacceptable, and should not be tolerated in the classroom.
Almost all charters in Chicago are now unionized. There are no laws that bar unions from charters. It just takes time to get to them all. Charter operates efforts to pay charter teachers less just makes it easier.
OECD and basically all other evidence shows that test results are higher in unionized areas than non union areas.
Teachers are doing their jobs. Weak results ALWAYS come from poor areas in every national .
This Is About SEL & Union Influence In Curriculum
Doug says: “The bulk of the professional development work is a board and ministry function.”
With a statement like that it might seem that the teacher unions don’t have much to do with curriculum. But, they do! They have a LOT to do with curriculum and the “agendas” and “hidden curriculum” of public schooling, and the professional development of teachers.
Teacher unions are predominantly on the left of the political spectrum (more socialist than traditional) and are in favor of government monopoly of schooling, compulsory attendance and against parent choice in education.
Teacher unions are against teachers being held accountable for what most people (especially parents) expect from schools — the 3 Rs — which are indisputably measurable. But, teacher unions have wholly embraced SEL — Social Emotional Learning — as one of the 21st Century Learning shifts being engineered by agencies collaborating to produce the “new global citizen”. These 6 Cs (collaboration, communication, content, critical thinking, creative innovation, and confidence) and the SJE themes (respect, empathy, diversity, equity, etc. ) are all part of the SEL program — UNmeasurable. They also take time away from the 3Rs and contribute to the growth of private tutoring groups that desperate parents rely on for academics for their kids
Just see what one of these agencies, Fullan’s latest constructivist obsession, is hatching — deep learning for global citizenship in 7 countries, including 13 school divisions in Ont. http://npdl.global/
What is certainly adding to the conspiratorial aspect of all these imposed initiatives is this link itself, what it says — “a stealthy education revolution worldwide is giving the skills to . . . 21st century citizens”:
https://qz.com/845834/a-stealthy-education-revolution-worldwide-is-giving-kids-the-skills-to-be-21st-century-citizens/
In case you didn’t know, ETFO is selling these SJE kits for $45-65. The methods used to implement these questionable programs — stealth, wholesale imposition, no public consultation — are as problematic as is the content and instructional value — and that’s not counting the time stolen from the academics!
None of these things “takes time away from” so called 3Rs. This displays a fundamental misunderstanding of how schools work.
Students read stories novels plays depending on their grade level. SJE simply makes sure more of the stories novels plays have SJ themes appropriate to the level.
Students study history geography or social studies depending on grade level. SJE just assures much of this time is spent on the struggle for equality and less on dead great white men.
SJ Science is reorient ed to climate change, the dangers of fossil fuels, the glory of wind turbines.
There is no trade off.
Tunya: What’s the problem with the educational models you linked? (By the way, the actual title of the article is “a quiet education revolution …”, not “a stealthy …”.) Are you opposed to children having some say in what they learn? Are you opposed to children learning in the way they learn best? Are you in favour of the factory model that has been imposed since the beginning of the industrial revolution? Are you opposed to children learning to take control of their own lives, to accept responsibility for themselves and for their fellow students and citizens while learning the basics. School has never been just about learning the basics; there has always been a training portion that served the ruling class. Children being freed to learn and teachers being freed to guide them is a joyful experience.
6 reasons teachers’ unions are better for kids.
Higher achievement best one.
http://www.alternet.org/6-reasons-teachers-unions-are-good-kids
Poor students do badly. That is just a fact. Nations that do far better than USA for example Canada and Finland accomplish it mainly by having dramatically lower child poverty rates.
The drunk who lost his keys in the dark looks under the lamp post because their is more light.
Jurisdictions with low results bash the schools because curing poverty seems too difficult and expensive yet if Finland can have 5% poverty so can America. Priorities.
If you choose to give tax breaks to billionaires you will have bad schools guaranteed.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2011/12/12/opinion/the-unaddressed-link-between-poverty-and-education.html
Wrong on all accounts Doug, as per usual. But of course, you are free to entertain any opinion you’d like. That’s the value of living in a democratic society. Your comments are indicative of how some here view valued parents, fighting like hell to ensure their kids get an education they’re entitled to. And it’s also why so many parents stay away; they just don’t have the stomach, or the inclination for it. Best to take care of it themselves, rather than face this madness every day.
You don’t have to ask me. Ask the experts.
The charters in poor areas are hardly even .making a dent in achievement.. When you ask them why they have not caught up to rich areas they are the first to tell you the kids are poor. This is very difficult. Check out the charter disaster in Ohio.
Tara:
“The Thought police is not an option for this family, nor is it for many others. Union would have tons more support if they just did their professional duty and taught. Dictating to impressionable young children about how they should feel, and think about social justice issues is unacceptable, and should not be tolerated in the classroom.”
No doubt the private religious schools would disagree very vehemently with your assertion that schools should not tell children how to feel and think about social justice issues. No doubt many schools that teach the joys of capitalism (as opposed to “democracy”) would also oppose your views.
Bingo! 🙂
true
“public” means public with the messy diversity that is inevitable
Thank you Ron for making my point. Nice to have choice and if parents choose this is what they’d like for their children, so be it. After having attended both a very religious school and a public school myself, I am fully aware of the indoctrination that occurs in both systems. What I did receive in the private system, which the public system did not do for me, was learn how to study, and also give me a firm grounding of the basics: reading, writing, mathematics, and preparation for higher education. It’s something I valued and appreciated as I got older.
The silent majority absolutely just wants teachers to teach, which has been my point all along. Do we want teachers to be judge and jury about how the law operates, or the economic policies behind capitalism, or why a Socialist society is superior to any other?
No.
What parents want, is for teachers to leave politics out of the classroom. You seem to have an issue with religious schools; that’s YOUR opinion. However many differ from that view, just as many differ from wanting other groupthink mentalities pervading over public classrooms.
Just teach. And if the union persists on pushing their own brand of social justice in the classroom, be prepared to have a fight on their hands.
Tara:
I think you missed my point because I did not make your point. You speak as if parents “own” their children whereas I think of children as citizens, albeit not yet voting citizens. I’m interested in students being permitted to learn and if I have a criticism of the public system it is that the bureaucrats (not the teachers) work against students learning to think critically and analytically. However, the same can be said of those private schools that are more interested in what they call the “outcomes”, as if students were no more than a product on some huge assembly line, being better designed to be more “competitive”.
There is no logical reason why the public system can not let students be free to learn and teachers be free to guide them. On the other hand, bureaucrats and politicians whose careers depend on scapegoating teachers and who only think of turning out the “product” as cheaply as possible mostly get in the way.
It is interesting, I think, that you think of social justice as being political. While politics certainly can include social justice, I think seeking social justice is simply a human thing (except, perhaps, for those who think life is a dog fight).
You obviously have a very low opinion of teachers as expressed by your view that “… the union persists on pushing their own brand of social justice in the classroom.” Unions are as diverse as their memberships. They are all colours, all sexes, all sexual orientations, all races, all ethnic origins, all political stripes. Unions are only “in the classroom” to the extent they can democratically convince each and every member of the value of the union’s position on an issue. On the matter of social justice, I’d guess most teachers don’t need much convincing to choose kindness over a dog fight.
Finally, not bring social justice into the classroom is a powerful political statement on its own. I don’t know if the SJE in Ontario is perfect or even the best program, but I do know trying to exclude imbuing students with a sense of social justice arrived at through critical thought is imposing a dark future on them and society.
Tara seems ok with indoctrination so long as it is religious or capitalist.
She is opposed to teachers raising constant questions about why we fail to live up to the equality provisions of the Canadian Charter of Human Rights Section 15.
She seems to think that democratic socialism is not a legitimate part of Canadian political discourse although it is the root of medicare, pensions and other advanced social policy.
Teachers are my greatest supporters AND I theirs…it’s the union leadership and militant activism they pursue with their members that I am against. I also heap tremendous criticism on the Ed Ministries, and also the ed schools, which allow this to occur, but today’s topic involves SJE initiatives, of which union execs and committees are creating.
In terms of parents “owning” their children – your point, not mine, no I do not believe that, and never have I suggested that. What I believe, is that parents are the guardians of their children and as such, they are responsible for their wellbeing and social development until such time children reach the age of consent. The reason we send our children to school, is so they can learn, and develop critical thought. The best way to do this, is through a very vast knowledge of reading, writing and arithmetic. Questions and independent thought are encouraged, however this is a very fine area that teachers must use with discretion, rather than barrel in on the latest and greatest trend and fad disguised as “Social Justice”.
Teachers today are discouraged to pursue independent professional judgement and teach their students factual knowledge. Using their longstanding professional experience, and their expertise is no longer valued. What we now see in the public system, is a groupthink mentality that pervades common sense and is a strict adherence to social policy, rather than an academic one. Pro D sessions are suspect to the latest fads, rather than on educational merit, and there are more classroom distractions then ever before, further limiting teacher’s abilities, and time, to do their actual teaching. There is more time spent on recycling programs to save the environment, rallies and propaganda against oil pipelines, and campaigns aimed at smearing the military which has replaced time spent on arithmetic and learning how to read/write in the classroom. Critical thought can only come through learning knowledgeable FACTS, but when our unions fight against any type of accountability via testing, provincial exams or letter grades, there’s a very large grey area opening up to replace actual facts with propaganda and groupthink rhetoric.
If unions pursued excellence, and professionalism above salaries and benefits, I might believe there is some truth that they are somewhat different from one another. But their leadership actions have proven otherwise. Given their all out attack against any level of accountability involving student performance, vilifying their own members for not conforming to the latest learning fad, and labelling parents all sorts of names does not leave the impression that, “It’s all about the kids”. And when our hard earned tax dollars support the very system that teachers work in, you better believe I’ve earned the right to have an interest AND an opinion about what I want my child to learn in school.
How do you know what the Silent Majority wants? They are silent.
The way it works is that democratically elected school boards and provincial governments represent the interests of taxpayers and citizens.. Nobody gets to say they represent the views of parents because parents represent the full political spectrum.
Nobody gets to say “parents want this or parents wants that”. Annie Kidder represents more parents than anybody I know but hardly all parents.
People make comments about opposition to character education and social justice education in our schools, but these things have always been in our schools. The difference is that today schools need to teach these concepts rather than simply reinforce these concepts.
One also only needs to visit a classroom to see that teachers face the challenge of managing a class of students whose parents have views that spread out the political and ideological spectrum. A simple class discussion could inevitably turn political or ideological as students bring their upbringing and personal beliefs into the debate. How should teachers and schools manage these debates?
In Ontario, John Tory lost a winnable provincial education because he wanted to give parents more choice in faith based education and voters said no. Ernie Eves lost because he wanted tax credits for private school funding. Voters and parents are two different things.
Your concerns Matt regarding how different it is in today’s classrooms regarding political ideology aren’t necessarily accurate. Immigrant children have always made up Canadian classrooms who’s parents always had a multitude of different opinions from the status quo. Back then however teachers were left to their own to teach whereas today’s classrooms include influences from a multitude of different organizations and bureaucracies impinging various mandates and responsibilities on teachers which was not around even a generation ago.
Debate and discussions are a natural part of learning, but today’s discussions carries with it the inevitable political correctness tone usually by SJE issues and encouraging students to question the status quo. Questioning anything is fine, but the first priority is providing enough factual evidence and knowledge so kids can think for themselves and debate issues responsibly. We already know by a multitude of studies and evidence that kids are lacking in the basic facts, so until this issue is addressed responsibly, there is no possible way to expect children to grasp the higher order critical thinking skills of assessing SJE issues that have been thrust upon them in math class.
Is it the teacher’s fault? Hardly. But under this latest regime their responsiblity to “teach” social conscience to students is misguided. It’s their job to provide accurate, historical facts first, and ensure that there is a very good working knowledge before even getting into headier issues.
We have these debates as adults and many times get befuddled and are unclear on many issues. So how can we expect a child to develop the same kind of consciousness and expertise on so many of these topics when cognitively their minds are still developing?
What needs to be discussed isn’t if SJE is a good or bad thing in schools…what first needs to be determined, is if the child’s mind is fully cognitively developed for this type of discourse in the classroom, and what the true role should be of the teacher vs. the parent when it comes to this type of development.
And i would also disagree with your assertion regarding choice, and losing votes. It seems AB is doing just fine, and here in BC we have no problem allowing publicly funded independent schools to exist. It seems perhaps that many voters are, in fact, many parents.
Alberta is by far the most conservative political culture in Canada and even Alberta has begun to shift. It is easy to be conservative on vast oil wealth. Without it class based politics arrives.
I would love every province to have a vote on the question ” do you support giving public money to private schools?”
Those provinces who vote yes would gain it. Those provinces who vote no would lose it even if they have it now. Sound fair?
People who are not teachers with recent experience have no clue how schools actually work.
One of the funny aspects of school choice is that main promoters picture middle class kids in uniforms getting a subsidy to attend private religious schools.
Reality is that poor schools under minority control with few restrictions will preach radical social change and democratic revolution. Be careful what you wish for. 🙂
Schools are easily the central institutions for teaching character education and social justice topics. Schools are also the easiest places to direct opposition to these teachings. But, one only needs to look at other places, like arenas and dance studios to see that character education topics, such as fair play and empathy, are taught outside the school building.
Doug is right in that parent choice is parent choice. If society wants to pursue parent choice than it needs realize that parents have a wide range of beliefs. Who should judge what parent choice should be accepted?
In Ontario, each school board decided which character traits would be the focus of character education in its schools. If I recall, teachers, parents and students all had the opportunity to participate in the selection of the most relevant traits for their school board.
I was wondering what do people feel should be the responsibility of schools to address and perhaps change the attitudes of some students towards social justice issues? There are students in our schools who have been raised with very questionable views towards social justice issues, such as racism. Should schools attempt to change these views or allow the students to continue to maintain their views?
Let the Canadian Charter of Human Rights Section 15 be your guide.
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms section 15. This is what schools should teach. There can be no debate about racism or Sexism. Family rights are OB if they teach against charter
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_15_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms
That sums it up nicely Doug. Thanks.
Perhaps debate about social justice and character education in our schools would be different if the topics were taught as a unit on Canadian Charter Section 15.
It’s Finally Come To Pass – Part I
Paul W Bennett scopes the education field regularly and carefully, and then provides an analysis with questions added. His question, after a careful layout of the issues relating to social justice education, is perceptive — What is driving the movement to introduce Social Justice Education into elementary schools in Ontario and elsewhere?
Well, it seems it is not gradual evolution or a groundswell of public opinion that is pushing the agenda “in Ontario and elsewhere”. Rather, according to Jordan B Peterson “a small, noisy, domineering, victimhood-claiming, coterie of radically left-wing thinkers have commandeered the controls and are steering the ship where they want it to go, screaming bloody murder if anyone dares to question, or worse, oppose …” He refers to the yet another twist to the noxious concept of “producer capture” of the education industry — this time by the elementary teacher union for ideological reasons versus the usual self interest of the education establishment.
Please see Peterson’s call to arms published on video for the new year’s school season — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0EuQe6BOWo&feature=youtu.be
It’s Finally Come To Pass – Part II
From the blurb accompanying the video, we glean the intent of Peterson: Students should speak out — “This sounds like indoctrination to me, rather than education, so I’m leaving” and walk out of the classroom if any of these topics are intruded into the regular classwork: diversity, inclusivity, equity, white privilege, systemic racism, gender. Yes, Peterson admits that mistakes will be made, some discussions may be reasonable, but on the whole he sees the scale of the effort as “essentially ideological and propagandistic”. He calls for “active resistance” saying “if effective action is not taken now to counteract the politicization of the public school curriculum, the need for such action will merely increase, and it will take much more to forestall the process later. Pick your poison.” His video is keyed to parents and students in elementary to high school.
The video argument is LONG, so have coffee or tea at hand, but it is sequentially built by Peterson in such a way that it becomes self-evident that the drive for these moves is guided and organized and not a spontaneous natural development of social change. That something needs to be done. What it does mean is that parents, in particular, must try and become aware of this creeping politicization danger and support their children if this issue comes up in their schools. The kids are sitting ducks in this element and what seems to be happening is very undemocratic!