SCHOOL FOR THOUGHT

Could your daughter be a very happy car mechanic?

For ten years now, I’ve been fortunate to have been involved in a grade 8 technical skills challenge that involves a number of public schools in West Toronto. Teams of students are given a problem to solve that involves building a mechanism that (typically) moves objects from one location to another.  This has been quite a learning and confirming experience for me and the other business people that get involved every year.

What’s been confirmed: Classroom teachers are no better or no worse than employees in many workplaces.  Sure there are a few slackers, but the majority of the teachers are keen and truly grateful to have their students get hands-on experience applying concepts from the Science and Technology Curriculum. Also no surprise is that the principals that the better teachers work for are often superior.  They show up on competition day to support their teacher and students.  They’re both good leaders and managers.

What’s been learned: The trustees and senior administrators in our public school systems (and, not surprisingly our Faculties of Education) are clueless about the role of technology in our society and what our schools should be doing to prepare students for opportunities in technology careers.  In the 90’s, school boards decided that the only kind of technology that mattered was computer technology.  They shut down shops and sold off machinery at many middle schools. (Some principals saw the folly of this and stored their machinery out of sight knowing that it would be needed again one day.)  Then in the late 90’s experienced machinists and other skilled technology workers began to retire in droves.  Sure manufacturing plants have shut down, but many continue to thrive even in the face of fierce global competition and many are desperate for skilled technology workers.

A big part of the problem is that the people running our education system are clinging to some very outdated stereotypes.  When they think “technology” education they see a student that can’t “cut it” in the academic stream building birdhouses in a carpentry shop.  They should get out more and visit a modern manufacturing plant.  People don’t stand at drill presses all day robotically pulling down levers to drill holes in blocks of metal any more.  They use touch screens to program multiple machining centres.  They use statistical techniques to analyze production processes looking for ways to reduce cycle times and scrap rates.  The other part of the problem is that the education system moves so slowly in response to developments in technology.  While some public education apologists claim that our public schools can accommodate different approaches, the misguided and lethargic actions of the public systems relative to technology education provide yet another strong argument for school choice.

Finally, in a spirit of fairness, I have to point out that the misconceptions about technology are not exclusive to our school systems—the media and parents are just as clued out.  A number of teachers have recounted stories to me of students of theirs who had an obvious aptitude and love for hands-on work but were being blocked by their parents from pursuing a career in that direction.  As one teacher lamented, “I had one girl that wanted to be a car mechanic and she would have made a great mechanic.  But there was no way that her parents would let that happen.” Just what the world needs: another surly physician or unhappy lawyer.

Should report cards “value” students?

In case we needed further proof that Canadian faculties of education seem intent on getting students in Canadian schools ready for life on another (not yet identified) planet, we now have fresh pronouncements from the Ontario Institute of Studies in Education (OISE) on the upcoming discontinuation of graded fall report cards in Ontario. In a Dec 23rd Globe and Mail article, OISE Associate Professor Linda Cameron says that “educators should be exploring a grade-free report card” because “[the] root of evaluation is to value” and (I’m paraphrasing the rest of her words for brevity’s sake) “you can’t honestly value a child using letter grades”.

This is a peculiar interpretation of the word “evaluate” that, to my knowledge, has not been adopted outside of OISE and teacher union offices.  Everywhere else in the world, when the word “evaluate” is used relative to education or training, it means comparing (as objectively as possible - usually using some form of grade) what an individual has learned against what he or she was expected to learn.  I’m sure most teachers would be appalled to think that when they give Omar a C+ in Mathematics that this might be interpreted as saying that his “value” as a person is “average”.

Isn’t this just another case of educators broadening their mandate so that they don’t have to be responsible for the more specific (and measurable) learning outcomes that should be the core (but not sole) focus of our schools?

It’s a Tough Job…...

As School for Thought deems it essential to undertake a thorough investigation of the Barbados education system, we have decided to station a researcher there for the next two weeks. Malkin has kindly volunteered to travel to Barbados and take on the arduous task of scanning the local newspaper for education items - despite the hardships of gentle breezes ruffling the pages and the dangers of being dazzled by the sun. All this research is unlikely to leave time or energy for making blog postings, and so School for Thought’s faithful readers can look forward to a most worthy substitute - John Bachmann, SQE’s vice president. John is a former high school math teacher, a parent and a grandfather, a businessman, and a gifted writer. Happy reading!