SCHOOL FOR THOUGHT

More brickbats for faculties of education

Guest Blog by Mark DeWolf - letter to the editor in response to Margaret Wente’s column on faculties of education

Bravo on this morning’s column regarding the lack of math knowledge and skills among elementary teachers of math.  And you may very well be right in suggesting that there is too much emphasis on other “learnings” (to use the current jargon) in university Education departments.  I suspect that part of the problem stems from an underlying problem that afflicts all sorts of organizations, namely, the need of administrators, managers, and consultants to continually come up with new and apparently promising approaches in order to justify their positions and quite possibly enhance them.  In math teaching, we’ve seen all kinds of new approaches being recommended to teachers (and student teachers) in the past 20 years, the use of “manipulatives” being one I can think of.  While working as a Literacy Coach in the Halifax school system, I kept coming across boxes of these blocks and other interesting shapes gathering dust in book storage rooms.  I was also shocked to hear that the use of the terms “numerator” and “denominator” was being discouraged by the Math Coach (preferring the terms “upper number” and “lower number”) on the grounds that the previously-used terms sounded too intimidating for junior high students.  This, despite the fact that the kids had no trouble with words like “terminator” and “refrigerator”.  That’s just one little detail that illustrates how silly and wrong-headed some of the new approaches can be.  But they keep coming.

Perhaps a column on the paucity of knowledge and skills among English teachers is in order as well.  In my three years as a Literacy Coach at the junior high level (and in my 25 years as an English teacher in Halifax before that),  I was continually surprised (even shocked) by the inability of younger English teachers to write a sentence that was free of errors, and their complete lack of knowledge about some of the most basic “rules” of English expression.  Communications from school board officials (many of whom had risen through the teaching ranks) were littered with errors of all kinds, and one of my Literacy Coach supervisors actually had to ask me to tell her if any of her messages to the coaching cohort contained errors, as she admitted she wasn’t very confident in “areas of correctness.”

In Nova Scotia, teacher training is conducted by three universities: Acadia, St. Francis Xavier, and Mount St. Vincent (this last in Halifax).  The MSVU education program lasts two years, and includes a good deal of in-school practice teaching (a welcome improvement over earlier one-year programs with limited classroom practice) and I have been led to believe that administrators of the MSVU program are not afraid to ‘wash out” B.Ed. candidates who prove unfit for teaching.  I believe that receiving repeated negative evaluations from supervising professors and teachers may be enough to remove a student from the program, but I wish I could be assured that their actual knowledge and skills in the subject they propose to teach is also looked at carefully.  Ideally, competence in their proposed subject area would be evaluated at the time of acceptance into the program. Years ago, when I was temporarily B.Ed. Coordinator at Dalhousie University (back when Dal had an Education department), it was my job to approve any applicants for the program, and remember clearly having to reject applications from would-be teachers of English (who had already earned B.A.s) on the grounds that their application letters were full of obvious errors.  But at a time when universities are fighting to keep their numbers up, pursuing a strict policy of weeding out unsuitable candidates is very much against the interests of Education departments.  Sadly, not pursuing such a policy is very much against the interests of good public education.

Again, Margaret, thank you for this morning’s column.

Having no choice is no fun

This Youtube video and all of the information it contains are provided “as is” without warranty of any kind, whether express or implied, of Wendy’s (registered trademark). All implied warranties, including, without limitation, implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement, are hereby expressly disclaimed. The Society for Quality Education is not responsible for the good taste or nutritional value of Wendy’s (registered trademark) products and does not hereby endorse the hamburgers, fries, milkshakes or any other products provided by Wendy’s (registered trademark).

Big Brother Is watching over your kids - Or is it Big Sister?

Here’s an update for those who have been following the Ontario government’s attempts to introduce a comprehensive and very explicit sex education curriculum (background here and here). According to the Institute for Canadian Values, the curriculum is being reworked as we speak and will be released some time after the October 6 election. In the meantime, however, some school boards, such as the Toronto and Hamilton public boards, have gone ahead and integrated mandatory sexual diversity instruction. Here are a few quotes from the Toronto board’s JK-Grade 3 curriculum, according to the Institute’s full-page ad in the National Post a few days ago. 

• “Read some traditional folk tales and fairy tales with the class. Have students write/illustrate their own ‘gender-bending’ versions.” (p. 44)
• “Read Gloria Goes to Gay Pride. If this storybook is not available, cut out a photo from a newspaper or magazine of the Pride Parade.” (p. 56)
• “Encourage girls and boys to role-play opposite roles ... At times boys may play girls and rely on sexist stereotypical behaviour with which they are familiar.” (p. 37)

Call me a “right-wing reactionary homophobe” (the term applied to opponents of this sort of sex ed by homosexual Liberal minister Glen Murray), but I still cling to the notion of letting kids be kids - sparing them this kind of brainwashing at their tender age. I really don’t think it’s a good idea to confuse kindergarten students about their gender identity or encourage them to start thinking that they might be gay.

Lesbian Liberal minister Kathleen Wynne recently confirmed the government’s commitment to sexual diversity instruction. The Institute’s web-site has a petition you can sign if you disagree.

A conversation about education

Guest Blog by Steven Hurley

I’ve attended my fair share of professional development conferences over the course of my teaching career and, with few exceptions they have all been pretty similar in both design and effect. 

Most have been built around a theme chosen by an organizing committee. Most have featured at least one known and validated keynote voice. A pre-determined slate of workshop offerings, a substantial lunch and a robust publisher’s display are also very familiar features of traditional conferences. Oh, and coffee…lots of coffee! 

It’s a structure that has been in place for years and it’s a structure that most educators have come to expect when we choose to attend a conference. Until recently, that is…

There’s a new kid on the block, one that’s determined to change our perspective on what professional development looks like, sounds like, and, yes, even what it tastes like!

The EdCamp movement began in the spring of 2010 in Philadelphia, and over the past year other EdCamps have been organized around the U.S. This past spring, I flew to B.C. to be part of the excitement at EdCamp Vancouver, the first of these events to be held in Canada. I knew right away that this was something that I needed to help develop in the Toronto area.

The EdCamp model forces us to engage in some pretty fundamental questions about both the form and function of professional learning. One of the first questions that threatens to stare down anyone considering planning an EdCamp is “What’s left?” Once you take away the expensive keynote, the fancy venue, the workshop leaders, the promise of lunch and coffee breaks, what do you have remaining? 

It’s a powerful question, but the answer, I’ve discovered, is even more powerful. In a sense, when you strip away all the “trappings” of the traditional professional development conference, you’re really just left with one thing: the voices of the participants. And when you set out to create an environment where those voices are valued and given space, what you hear emerging the sound of creativity, passion, commitment and hope. You also realize that these are voices that are anxious to be heard and even more anxious to actively participate in the work of transforming education. 

EdCamp Toronto is scheduled to take place on October 15th at York University and, whether you’re a parent, a teacher, an administrator or a community member, you’re invited. All you need to bring is a heart for public education, a question or topic that is on your mind, and a willingness to participate in the conversation.

EdCamp Toronto is participant-driven and the agenda for the day is set once people arrive and begin to talk about and listen to the questions that are brought.

You’re invited to take a closer look at the EdCamp Toronto website (http://www.edcampto.org) and if what you see there piques your interest, register for one of the 300 available spaces.

You probably have some questions; don’t hesitate to get in touch with me through this post, or at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

We look forward to meeting you on October 15th!

A Chance to Express Your Opinion

Here’s a bonus posting - just to let you know that MSN’s Poll of the Day asks how confident you are that your local school system can delivery quality education programs. At press time, 16% were very confident, 39% were somewhat confident, 42% were not very confident, and 3% were undecided. On the right-hand side, two-thirds of the way down. H/T to LDA.

Giving apples to the right teachers

Let’s say you own a real estate company. Some of your employees have great people skills plus they work really hard, with the result that they sell dozens of properties every year, while other employees barely manage to scrape by with five or six properties a year. Regardless, you decide to pay them all the same basic salary, although you do give very large bonuses to the employees with blue eyes or first names that start with the letter “J”. 

It doesn’t make a lot of sense, does it? Nevertheless, this is more or less the way most North American teacher compensation systems work.

A new study (which in fact confirms an existing body of research) finds that there is little or no relationship between teachers’ experience or qualifications and how much their students learn - even though teachers’ pay is based on these factors. Click here for a newspaper article about the study and here for a podcast interview with the principal researcher.

Teacher effectiveness is the most important school-based factor when it comes to student achievement. Teachers should be compensated according to their effectiveness and not on the basis of irrelevant characteristics like experience or qualifications. H/T to A

Sunday at the Movies (Miss USA on Math)

Picking up on the math theme from a few posts ago on lack of good instruction and curriculum, here’s another one of those satirical Miss USA videos that somehow eerily ring true.

HT Hypatia

Ontario election ads

While education has been on the back-burner in the Ontario election, at least by the three main political parties, the issue is front and centre for the teachers’ federations who are spending members’ big bucks on third party advertising. (See here as well.)  Many Ontario residents will have seen the Working Families Coalition television ads or those silly Elementary Teachers Federation “Vote Against Kids” ads.   The latest to great me over my Saturday morning coffee was this huge ad in the Toronto Star placed by the Ontario English Catholic Teachers.  Their Speak for Children campaign print ad states: “Zero days lost to strikes and lockouts since 2003. Ontario’s education system is on the right track.” 

If “no strikes” is their indicator of a successful education system, then there is nothing more to say.  Who speaks for children?  I think you know the answer. 

All of these campaigns are meant to imply that the unions are working for your children’s best interests, but what are they really hoping to accomplish?  Keep in mind that their collective agreements expire next August and that these unions have been handed salary increases of up to 25% since 2003 when the current Ontario government took power.  They got huge raises and increases in benefits  while many parents of their students lost jobs or took pay reductions during a serious recession that threatens to return.  It’s pretty clear that it isn’t the kids that are first in line when the gravy train rolls into the station.

SQE does not endorse any party, leader, or candidate, but we do encourage readers who will be voting in Ontario to take a look at each party’s education platforms and policies.  Our latest September Newsletter contains links to all the parties here.  It’s not too late to vote in our Ontario election poll as well.

One plus one equals two

Three different people have sent me a tip about this math report (H/T to LDA, DH, and ME), so I guess I should blog on it. Really, I don’t have much, if anything, to add. Traditional methods are superior to discovery-based methods when it comes to teaching math. The sky is blue. The sun rises in the east. 1+1=2…

Furthermore, reader reaction (see the 565 comments at press time) and the voting question at the bottom show that the vast majority of people already know this - in sharp contrast to the Saskatchewan educator quoted near the bottom of the article who trots out the old canard about deep understanding being more important than rote learning. This short article from our archives explains that fluency is an indispensable pre-condition to comprehension. 

You’ll wonder where the money went

(Guest blog by Nancy Wagner)

After 12 days of school my grandson has come home with the following requests for money:

• An agenda $7.00 - optional, but he had already written in it.
• Money for pizza day. We sent in $60 for him and his brother. Good for 2 months.
• Book order forms for recreational reading.
• Money for sub sandwich lunches. We opted for every other week. Cost per child $31.50 for 9 lunches.
• School “meet the teacher” night is this week. It is combined with a fun fair fund-raiser. Minimum cost if you take 2 kids and don’t eat anything yourself is $20.00.
• Terry Fox Walk Day is this month. Children are asked to bring their toonies.
• Finally, class and individual pictures will be taken next week.

These are optional costs, but many parents feel pressure to give/buy. I know this has to be a difficult situation for families where money is tight. In my opinion, this has really gotten out of hand. The really sad part of all this is that parents/ grandparents like me avoid complaining about these money grabs because we don’t want any blow-back on our kids.