I was a young teacher once...

I was a young teacher once. I was excited with what I thought were new and innovative ideas. Like what...like open area schools where kids got to move freely, like the school where I observed with the library as the hub in the center of a circular shaped school, like the move to child-centred philosophy, like the recognition of the need for critical and creative thinking. All of these progressive movements seemed new to me at the time. But were they?

I was excited when my own children’s primary school embraced all of this and more. They were led by Selma Wasserman of SFU and others that followed in the same vein. Selma’s “Teaching for Thinking” changed the lives of children and teachers. I knew teachers that literally changed how they taught and never looked back. And those teachers continue to learn to this day. I was sad when my children’s primary school was closed years later. It was an incredible loss and a short-sighted decision.

I was excited by the recommendations coming out of the Sullivan Commission in the late 1980’s and hopeful that they would be embraced by educators. The recommendations were progressive and the Primary Program came out of those recommendations. There was money provided for in-service. I was sad that all ended at the intermediate level due to such things as poor implementation plans, parental concerns about reporting, political competition and no money for in-service. I am glad that young teachers are, perhaps unknowingly, embracing much of the wisdom from the Sullivan Commission that was never allowed to be implemented.

I was excited that the Ministry of Education of the day (NDP) put in writing much of what teachers had always known, namely that students learned at different rates and styles and that learning is dependent upon the participation of the student. I was disappointed when that knowledge was ignored by subsequent Ministers with the emphasis placed on standardized testing and condoning the ranking of schools according to those tests. I am further disappointed due to the threat of de-categorization of special needs students who require special services to accommodate their different styles and rates of learning.

Upon reflection, I wonder how many times before me had teachers advocated for progressive change and I wonder if teachers with long experience were thinking how nothing we were excited about was new.  I think of authors like John Dewey who came long before my career started. I find myself sometimes thinking “is this really new.”

I’m happy that young teachers are enthusiastic about progressive change. However, what I am not happy about is the thinking that those of us who are older and more experienced were somehow living in the dark ages and that we allowed education to go unchanged since the industrial revolution.  I don’t blame young teachers for this. Our government constantly harps on the idea that schools haven’t changed in over a century. Of course that is pure nonsense. Teachers have always been progressive. Obviously there have been individual teachers who didn’t embrace positive change, but for the most part teachers are a progressive lot. No matter what age we are, we want our children to get the best education possible. It is a good thing that young teachers are taking up the torch. And because I know teachers are the most likely to know what is best for kids in regard to education, we will be carrying those torches together whether we be “old” or “young.”

But I must warn you.  Although I hope that progressive change can happen, there will be roadblocks and some of what we as educators know to be best for kids will never happen. There are a myriad of reasons: What’s best for kids may cost more, i.e. smaller class sizes, supports for special needs. What’s best for kids may not be what can be controlled by a controlling government. What’s best for kids may not be what is best for the corporate interests that are making inroads into our education system.  

If there have been roadblocks to progress in education most have been put there by governments and their corporate agendas.

Kids Matter! Teachers Care!

21st Century and Reality in the Classroom

I just watched the video on the C21 Canada site called  “Designing Schools for the 21^st Century” presented by the Pearson Foundation and The Mobile Learning Institute. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ur7gp6cB-Zo&feature=player_embedded It all seems very visionary which some would characterize as progressive and therefore good.  It makes one feel all fuzzy and warm about educating teenagers.  Everyone is interested in their learning. Everyone is happy. Who could argue with that?  But...what don’t we see in that video?  We don’t see the billions of dollars required to build such a facility in every neighbourhood.  So who would get such an amazing facility? We don’t see the children who struggle with basic subjects. We don’t see the special needs children and the supports they require. 

This is a pie-in-the-sky vision designed to do what the community Christmas Tree was meant to accomplish in the sale of overpriced homes in a recently proposed housing development.  Just think of the community Christmas tree and one can imagine that if he/she moved into the neighbourhood all the neighbours would get along like family and gather around the tree on Christmas Eve and sing carols. What a wonderful vision! No matter that the development was being built on a landfill and no Christmas tree would ever be able to grow in that environment.  As long as the prospective buyers don’t know what’s under the surface and they continue to envision the community Christmas tree.

I have no doubt that many of those who share the 21^st C vision have the best of intentions and question why anyone would be skeptical of this wonderful “new” and enlightened vision.  Why indeed?

Here are some thoughts about that:

Those of us who have been teaching for a long time have seen the cycles.  In the late 60s and in the 70s we saw what I, as a young teacher thought were wonderful innovative changes to education.  My children went to an open area primary school, one that worked very well. The kids were not sitting in rows in most classes. Schools were designed for free movement of students, we had multi-age classes, etc. 

So, many of us are resentful of the Ministry and other management laying claim to what teachers already have been practicing and to further innovations which teachers believed to be progressive but were often held back due to funding shortages, philosophical differences and sometimes parental concerns about changes. That was evident in the Sullivan Commission recommendations in the late 80s. Now, all of a sudden, we see the Ministry laying claim to educational enlightenment with the inference that teachers, especially the older ones, are stale and not capable of recognizing progress or of adapting to the times.  For example, continually telling teachers that having students sit in rows with their eyes forward is from a different era, when teachers have been configuring their classes in many different ways since the 60s, does nothing but breed resentment.

This attitude does not recognize that many experienced teachers are true experts who have been working with and observing children and how they learn for many years. They have seen firsthand through that work, how the child’s brain works.   

And now another important concern:  the question of what is behind the world wide push towards “21^st century learning. We see big corporations making serious inroads into the education “business.” And these actions by multinational corporations are not philanthropic in nature.  They are shrewd business decisions.  We see organizations like GELP pushing agendas that would benefit big businesses like Pearson, Cisco, Dell, Microsoft and big banks.  In the U.S. we see big business, through ALEC, actually crafting legislation with politicians. We see meetings of big business and world political leaders, where discussions take place about education policy around the world. We see the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund with education and other policies that would profit banks, but are not necessarily in the best interests of the citizens.

 

Even those corporations that may appear to be philanthropic are often looking for something in return. Once the system gives in to large charitable funding it is often beholden to the donor’s intent in giving the gift. 

 

We also see teachers being left out of the discussion.  It’s obvious to me why.  Teachers are aware of the realities. They want guaranteed working and learning conditions. They don’t want to be overworked. They don’t want to be expected to perform miracles without adequate resources and supports.  They would actually want the system to work and work well, and that would require coming down from Cloud 9 at the 50,000 foot level to ground level where the action takes place and where realities have to be faced.  For example, how many schools in BC would be replaced with anything close to the school toured in the video?  I would venture none. In short, teachers would get in the way of the dream because they are the ones in the trenches. Don’t get me wrong. Teachers dream of the perfect system too, but they are the ones who have to face the reality of lack of supports and resources and inadequate facilities while at the same time being pressured with the dream of those at the 50,000 ft. level.

 

Going back to the prospective buyers in the proposed housing development, they need to consider the likelihood of the Christmas tree growing at all, the likelihood of 300 happy neighbours gathering around the tree, the reality that it is probably just a shrewd marketing gimmick, etc. So like the prospective buyers in the proposed neighbourhood, where they need to look at the reality of the Christmas tree vision and consider all factors, so do we in the education system have to consider all of the factors involved in 21stC learning and those delivering the most fundamental of the services (teachers) need to play a major role.  Teachers will inject the much needed perspective of reality.  We need that perspective for success.

 

Advice to MOE, School Boards, Administration, etc.

All of those involved in developing Education policy need to take a look at the Charter for Public Education. Determine if whatever you are advocating will get you closer to the Charter.  If it does then you are heading in the right direction. If not, stop what you are doing and head in a direction that will.

For a full size copy of the Charter for Public Education go to http://publiced.ca/index.php?page=english

PRIVATIZATION: Paranoid or Perceptive?

“You can’t get people to drop something that works, unless you make it stop working.” – Corky Evans (2009)

When teachers express concern about privatization of education services, we hear: “Come on now...you teachers are just paranoid.  Where’s the proof?”

We all know that the Liberal government believes in a free market ideology.  That ideology drives their privatization agenda.  We have seen this agenda in the various attempts at P3s, the privatization of important hospital services and in the undermining of BC Hydro while at the same time promoting private Run of the River projects.

Public Education is not immune to that ideology.  The biggest difference is that because public education is so important to so many people, the government must be very careful about not just privatizing openly.  They have to do so by stealth.

How do they do that? The privatization of public education is being facilitated by underfunding and the accountability agenda.  Both are by design and are intended specifically to undermine public confidence in the public education system, over time.

“You can’t get people to drop something that works, unless you make it stop working.” – Corky Evans (2009)

The Liberal government believes that private is better and here is how they have gone about trying to “convince” the public.

1.       First, underfund.  If you withhold funding, important services are lost and if important services are lost, parents become dissatisfied with the public system.  It is easy, for the government, once this happens, to implement “accountability measures. Those with enough money might bail on the public system at this point.

2.       Implement the Accountability agenda

a.       Keep the accountability demands as far away from the government as possible.  Focus all accountability on the teachers

b.      Bring in “Accountability Contracts” (which were quickly changed to “achievement contracts" in B.C.) Insist on standardization of goals and demand loads and loads of data.  Design goals so that success is near impossible.  That way more standardized tests can be justified.

c.       Standardized tests – out of the demand for data comes standardized tests (FSAs, Grade 10 and 11 exams, a myriad of district wide tests).

d.      Ranking of Schools – standardized testing then gives rise to the ranking of schools. These rankings undermine public confidence and seriously undermine teacher and student morale.  The public calls for more standardization in the classroom so that the kids can do better on the standardized tests.

e.      Standardization of education, results in a loss of autonomy for teachers and with the loss of autonomy, the education experience of students is diminished. Once the educational experience is diminished (i.e. narrowing curriculum, scripted lessons), private options look more attractive.  Throw in public funding for private schools and the ability for full funding for private distributed learning and soon the public system is a shell of its former self.

When you consider the pattern established by past practice and you look at what is happening in the U.S.  with private charter schools, I think you can dismiss paranoia and say ...”you teachers are so perceptive.”

Education before incarceration

On Feb. 6, 2012 the Liberal government bragged that the new prison near Oliver BC would produce 240 full time jobs.  Hold on...is this something to brag about?  Wouldn't it be more appropriate, in a time when the crime rate has decreased,  to brag that there will be 240 more teaching jobs, or 1000 more?  That would be something to brag about.  But when do we ever hear that?  When it comes to education, it is more likely that we hear about cuts to teachers and resources.

Christy Clark has the gall to say that this prison will help families and will help schools thrive. Families will be attracted to the region. She goes on to say that she hopes that a prison in the community will change the statistics of Aboriginal incarceration in the country. 

Whaaaat? 

These statements are just mind-boggling coming from a government that has cut the education budget by nearly $3 billion in the last 10 years. Classes are overcrowded and services to special needs are lacking. Yet Ms. Clark thinks building a prison is what it will take to make schools thrive.  She thinks building a prison on aboriginal property near Oliver will keep aboriginal people out of prison in this country. 

Whaaaat?

Mark Twain once said, "Every time you stop a school, you will have to build a jail. What you gain at one end you lose at the other. It's like feeding a dog on his own tail. It won't fatten the dog."

It is time to get our priorities straight.  We need to support schools, rather than build more prisons.  Education needs to be a priority over incarceration.

In Praise of Cowichan Valley Board of Trustees (Updated)

In Praise of Cowichan Valley Board of Trustees (Updated)

On May 17 in Janet Steffenhagen's blog George Abbott, in response to the approved restoration budget of Cowichan Valley School Board, predicted there will be “a miraculous turn around” by the board before the June 30 deadline for school districts to submit their budgets and went on to threaten the board with relief from their duties.   Too bad George Abbott, you were wrong, the Cowichan Valley Board has submitted their restoration budget and I applaud them for doing so. http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Education/2012/05/31/BCTF-supports-Cowichan-Valley-restoration-budget/
Support is rolling in, from around the province, on the facebook page "The Budget begins with you."
https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Budget-Begins-With-You/367788029917203

The Cowichan Valley board is doing what any board should be doing.  They have been elected to be stewards of the education system in their constituency and that is exactly what they are doing.  They have the support of their constituents including  the Cowichan Tribes, the largest First Nations band in British Columbia, whose council has passed a motion of support for the budget. They were elected on a platform that they would submit a restoration budget and to do anything different would be a breach of that promise to the community.

For ten years, boards across BC have been complying with the order to submit a balanced budget, without acknowledgement, through any effective action, of the damage that is being done to their schools and the children who attend those schools.  To ignore that damage makes boards complicit in the destruction of the education system that our provincial government seems so intent on creating. 

Eden Haythornthwaite, in her statement to the "Tyee" online news source said, " If we just continue to do it, what good are we to the community? We're no good. We're just a beard for the ministry." I couldn't agree more.  The time has come.  Enough is enough.  Thank you Cowichan Valley School trustees.

I would encourage every citizen who is concerned about the state of funding for education in BC to write a letter of support to the Cowichan Valley board to their chair, Eden Haythornthwaite. Her e-mail address is 

ehaythor@sd79.bc.ca

Send copies to your own trustees letting them know that you agree with the actions of the Cowichan Valley school board.

Or if you are within travelling distance attend the Stand up for the Made-in-Cowichan Budget rally. It will be held outside the board office at 2557 Beverly Street in Duncan,  on Wednesday June 20.

Update:
Listen to Eden Haythornthwaite on CBC at http://www.cbc.ca/ontheisland/2012/06/13/cowichan-school-board-standoff/#

A Teacher's Perspective on the Principal's perspective

A Response to BCPVPA:
Following, in red, are my responses to the recent “Perspectives from the Principal’s Office,” by Jameel Aziz, President of the BC Principals’ and Vice-principals’ Association (BCPVPA). Upon reading this article, one might wonder how they think they will ever be able to mend the rift that has occurred between administration and teachers, let alone improve the relationship, by writing such an article. This type of article will only widen to a gaping chasm what could have been a mendable crack.

The 2011-2012 school year has been anything but normal and as we head into its last few months, I have been asked to share the perspectives of members of the BC Principals’ & Vice-Principals’ Association. These illustrations, while not representative of all schools, are examples of the real challenges that many schools, students and parents have faced this year.

  

Schools are typically vibrant communities, with a lot of positive interactions both in classrooms and out of them. School culture has been significantly eroded this year by the continuing dispute between the BC Public School Employers’ Association (the body which negotiates on behalf of school boards with teachers in British Columbia) and the BC Teachers’ Federation (BCTF). The routine and critically important communications between teachers and principals and vice-principals about student progress have not occurred in the normal fashion. As a consequence many students have not had their important academic issues addressed in a timely fashion or at all. Although teachers may not have been communicating with administration in the same way, they have continued to communicate with parents and with those colleagues responsible for developing programs and services to students.  However, some academic issues may not have been addressed in a timely fashion, but one can hardly blame the job action on that. Many issues for students have not been addressed for years due to lack of funding and over 700 special education teacher positions being lost over the past 10 years.  As well, school counsellor positions have decreased by 11.2% over the last 9 years.  English as a Second Language positions have decreased by over 330.  Library positions are nearly 300 fewer than in 2001.  None of these can be attributed to declining needs.  In fact needs have actually increased.  Teachers are advocating for the return of these necessary services.


  
This year has seen the cancellation of some Christmas and winter holiday performances and routine student recognition assemblies. Some meetings about students who are having difficulties have not taken place. Meetings with teachers to discuss the direction of school initiatives and goals have not taken place. Parents did not receive first term report cards about their child’s progress. While some parents were able to get information about their child, many did not receive this information. Indeed, some parents reported that they made electronic contact with teachers but received no helpful response. Students have informed us that they have missed out on numerous scholarship opportunities as many of these applications require leadership activities to be considered. Mr Aziz, the wording of your accusation that some parents were “able to get information” would infer that getting information from teachers was difficult.  The fact is that just the opposite was true.  The vast majority of parents were getting far more useful information than they would ever get from a report card.


  
Surprisingly all of this disruption has not generated as much public response as those of us in the system would have expected. Still, principals and vice-principals often hear from parents that they are concerned about vocalizing these issues. It is not surprising at all that this has not generated much public response.  When people are actually getting better and more relevant service, they don’t usually complain.  Teachers have worked very hard this year to ensure that parents get useful and relevant information about their children’s progress.

  

We have now moved into a new phase of this dispute. In many districts, the school day consists of student instruction from bell to bell but little else. If we, as adults, reflect on our student experiences, we know that instruction and formal learning opportunities are only part of the value of school. The interactions
with teachers and others, through clubs, sports, fine arts activities,
drama performances, field trips and special school activities
make our schools special and create unique, memorable and
invaluable experiences for students. These enriching and positive
opportunities will not be a part of the public education experience
for many of our students. Teachers are not stopping these activities from occurring.  Principals, vice principals and other excluded staff along with parents and community members are welcome to step up to the plate and do their share.  If principals and others believe these activities to be “invaluable, unique, memorable, enriching and positive, then surely they will step up.  Mr. Aziz, your descriptive words mean nothing if you continue to write other words that indicate a complete lack of respect for the teachers and the work they do.  For as long as I can remember, teachers have been freely giving of their own volunteer time to support other people’s children. Perhaps it is time for people to realize just how much teachers actually do to support their students beyond what is required.  

  
Principals and vice-principals have had many conversations about a
new normal that is being established in our schools and they have
consistently expressed a belief that this is not a positive direction.
If schools lose the energy, character and culture that have been
their hallmark, our students will leave their public education years
less well-rounded, less prepared for their working lives and less
likely to champion public education when they are adults. What a short time it took principals and vice principals to declare that a new normal is being established! I suppose if it goes on long enough some teachers may decide to curtail some of their volunteer activities.  I don’t know. However, if you are concerned, it might be wise to step up to the plate and start supporting teachers’ efforts to achieve an education system that is in keeping with “Better Schools for BC” than supporting the constant underfunding of our education system through silence and complicity. 

Better Schools for BC http://bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/Publications/BetterSchoolsForBC.pdf

  

Principals and vice-principals do not have the answers to resolve
the issues facing our schools, but we believe it is important to
share the reality as we see it on a daily basis. Our concern, as this
school year moves to a close, is that nothing will be different in
September and students will be forced to endure another year of
disengagement from the system.  It won’t do any good to just stand by and be concerned.  You need to be vocal and work alongside teachers in their efforts to maintain a Class A education system.  You cannot do that by cheering as this government attempts to make the lives of teachers more difficult by stripping long standing rights to job security.  You cannot do that by supporting threats to teachers through Bill 22.  The actions of Principals and vice principals through articles like this one can only further erode the already strained relationship between these two groups.

  
There is no sign that a resolution is at hand. If this dispute
continues for another year, the negative effects will be long-term
and profound. You are right. There currently is no sign of resolution.  How can there be with legislation being drawn up like Bill 22 and Bill 36?  How can there be when there have been 21 education bills since the current government has been in office, not one of which has been seen by teachers as offering an improvement?  10 of these pieces of legislation have been deemed in contravention of International Labour Law, of which Canada is a signatory.

Bill 22 hurts students and attacks teachers’ rights. http://www.bctf.ca/BargainingAndContracts.aspx?id=25978



 Principals and vice-principals have worked hard this year to ensure
that as many as possible of the normal school processes occur,
and they will continue to do so. However, the system works much
more effectively to serve the needs of students and families when
all partners are able to work together to provide that support. Wouldn’t that be great!  Unfortunately, it has been mostly teachers who have been volunteering to do extra-curricular activities.  This latest job action is to protest the cuts of the last 10 years and to advocate for re-instatement and improvement of services to students. Perhaps if principals and vice-principals joined with teachers and “worked together” in this important struggle “to provide that support” we wouldn’t be in this situation.



This latest phase in our schools will not allow principals and vice principals
to pick up the many pieces of school life that will be lost
and in the end it will be the students and families of the public
system who will miss out.
Statement from BCTF in response to this statement:  For the past 10 years, it’s been teachers picking up the pieces – because of the loss of so many special education positions, because of the loss of ESL teaching positions, because of larger class sizes and fewer supports to go around to all students. Teachers in schools have been shouldering the burden. Their union dues have gone toward expensive challenges in the courts to try to get those working and learning conditions back, and teachers’ hard work has gone into trying to get the message out to parents and the public about the devastating changes flowing from Bill 27/28. From our perspective, the BCPVPA has, at best, sat idly by – and, at worst, cheered the provincial government for implementing legislation like Bills 27/28.  


  
A respectful and workable solution must be found soon to protect
the long-term viability of public education and to continue to give
students the opportunities they need to thrive now and achieve
in the future. Yes indeed! A respectful and workable solution is what is needed. What is not needed is Bill after Bill that erodes the rights of teachers and promotes the deterioration of our children's learning conditions and our education system.