Like many people, the ones writing into the Toronto Star in response to ‘Waiting for Superman’, assume that they know more than they do, by asserting that, unlide the States, we have a wonderful educational system.  They don’t seem to understand that our curricula is poor, which results in low literacy and numeracy skills.  The people with higher profiles (teachers, etc.) understand perfectly well how bad our system is, but it would not be good for their cushy existance to see higher standards to come to Ontario.

nne Kidder’s letter, is a good example of keeping the status-quo, for the stock reason why kids are failing,by blaming it on societal problems and the solutions are to provide support and resources to fixed the societal problems. But to used John R. Saul takes the cake, by twisting his words, to blame the individual by not being strong citizens in a democratic country.

“In his book, the Unconscious Civilization, John Ralston Saul says we must beware of emotion bereft of content. He says that emotion can obscure reality. Let’s make sure that our ideas about education are not driven by things like films that play to our emotions.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/letters/article/862335—a-harbinger-for-our-schools

I spent a few hours reviewing what Saul has stated, and discovered that Kidder omitted the bigger message, that she and her kind, would rather be buried under a mountain of reforms and supports that does little in improving education.

The general message of Saul is this. “Voltaire’s Bastards, The Doubter’s Companion and The Unconscious Civilization….........These books deal with themes such as the dictatorship of reason unbalanced by other human qualities, how it can be used for any ends especially in a directionless state that rewards the pursuit of power for power’s sake. He argues that this leads to deformations of thought such as ideology promoted as truth; the rational but anti-democratic structures of corporatism, by which he means the worship of small groups; and the use of language and expertise to mask a practical understanding of the harm this causes, and what else our society might do. He argues that the rise of individualism with no regard for the role of society has not created greater individual autonomy and self-determination, as was once hoped, but isolation and alienation. He calls for a pursuit of a more humanist ideal in which reason is balanced with other human mental capacities such as common sense, ethics, intuition, creativity, and memory, for the sake of the common good, and he discusses the importance of unfettered language and practical democracy.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ralston_Saul

Taken from a blog, called Idiots in Power, the writer expressed the above further as stated by Saul.

“Increasingly, power and legitimacy in Western nations lie with special interest groups and big decisions are made by/between these groups. Note, for example, the remarkable growth in the lobbying industry, which has as its sole purpose the conversion of elected representatives and senior civil servants to the particular interest of the lobbyist. IOW, lobbyists are in the business of corrupting the people’s representatives and servants away from the public good, says Saul.”
http://idiotsinpower.blogspot.com/2010/02/john-ralston-saul-unconscious.html

Sounds very much like the Canadian Public Education system, where powerful interest groups are usurping the individual’s right to choose, by presenting choice by controlling access and knowledge nodes, with heavy doses of ideology that is presented as the truth.

What is ignored by Kidder and her ilk, are the end results of policies. In their world end results do not matter, especially the end results that are the failures. Kidder states as she cites Saul, that the film plays with our emotions. ” We must beware of emotion bereft of content. He says that emotion can obscure reality. Let’s make sure that our ideas about education are not driven by things like films that play to our emotions..”

Failures of our education system, are not the reality in her eyes. Yet when she cites Saul, to defend her stance, is she not defending the status-quo that Saul rails about in his essays?  Protecting her position, where there is only opportunities, but the right to be fully educated, where the basic skills of reading, writing, and numeracy are for some but not all?

Parents who are sick and tired, are parents who are sick and tired of the special interest groups within the public education system, preventing them from accessing better education opportunities for their children. The real sad part is that our government run education systems, refuses to look at all end results, but chooses to see parents as having no content, as Kidder has pointed out. Lots of emotions but no content. And keep on repeating how wonderful the public education system is, and the failures are blamed on external factors.

Saul calls them technocrats, the ones that will at all costs to prevent the rise of individualism and rediscovering what a true democracy is. Sad, but our public education systems is the last place one finds democracy, especially for parents who are reasserting and discovering their own power, because schools are no longing meeting the education needs of their children.

Interesting, Nancy.  I also think that Ms. Kidder is wrong about the film only playing on one’s emotions.  The reason this film causes the audience to get worked up is because the film is true, so it therefore strikes a chord within us.  Comedy is the same way—one can’t react emotionally with laughter at a joke unless the joke has a strong element of truth (albeit exaggerated) in it.
What I can’t figure out about Ms. Kidder is what is she doing this for?  Surely she doesn’t believe any of this stuff any more than we do!

Kidder does believe in this stuff, because she truly believes that public education should be in the hands of government.  Parents of Kidder’s ilk, are parents who appreciate the inequities of the education system, that enables them to work the system to benefit their children. If changes were made, there would be other parents of various backgrounds and income, that would be able to avail of the same things, that Kidder and her kind likes to keep to themselves.

If one goes on P4E site, they do have plenty of information that fits in with their goals or aims of P4E. However, information coming from the chat boards, are mainly information coming from professionals who are working in the education field. When a parents writes in, showing the other side, for the most part their posts are ignored. The professionals are less likely to respond, if it does not fit in their position of whatever the topic is. For example in one post, the topic is inclusive technology.

The third post from the bottom, from a parent who calls herself, “curious mind” is an example, that really should have a respond from the professionals. “This is really a sad joke…....., every where talking about funding this and that and special education etc…....Being a LD/ADHD myself, I am having a hard time teaching my kids to do their homework .....I think our educational system in need of reform…..not just for SE but for all kids and in my case my kids are special needs “learning disability” , yes they have wonderful teachers and yes they have great principals but my kids are not learning anything cause they’re teaching them in a same way they’re teaching everyone else except slower. Every child learn in a different way we have 6 senses , why do they only use one(paper/pencil/abc/123) to teach.”

http://schools-at-the-centre.ning.com/group/specialeducation

There is more to the post, but to me, Kidder and others like her, do not want to hear from parents who are perceived as being non-supporters of their own goals, or showing that their reality, is not the real reality for many parents. In the case of curious mind, she more or less stated, that school is in need of total reform, including the teaching methods and resources.

Now curious mind is an example of what one calls practical democracy. Often practical democracy and people who practice it, are a rare beast insides the walls of the public education system and other public institutions.

Did Doug Little write Annie Kidder’s response? Sounds exactly like what I read Little post hear and elsewhere more than a few times.

Shows me just how out of touch some are to the reality of what’s really going down in our classrooms.

Ms. Kidder doesn’t represent the feelings or thinking of this parent or many of the others who responded to her usual mantra.

Kidder is not an elected official has no provincial mandate but is very much the darling of the Toronto Star and the unions…..I wonder why?

Chuck, no matter where one is in this country, the responses like Kidder’s is typical of those who hold the power, and have the greatest influnence toward education policy. They truly believe public education is the only type of choice that should be provided. The stance I do not mind, but it is when others who point the inequities, the unfairness are swept under the rug, or as was described in one of the news article, describing the movie, Waiting for Superman, as having no content, except emotion.

Parents are faced with this kind of thinking. One would just have to look at IEP meetings, and how easily parents’ concerns are overlooked or dismissed as being too emotional. If anything, the only effective method for parents is to either become and act like a professional consultant/advocate, or hire one to do the job. My one and only sucessful IEP meeting was the last one, that occurred in the later part of 2008. I took to heart of the advice of a lawyer that had a LD child, who had written on an American parent site, to become professional, the how-tos’, the tips, and what to watch out for. Two days of preparation, armed with charts, examples of my child’s work going back to grade 1, report cards, the two assessment reports, and other ancedotal evidence turned the meeting around within 5 minutes, where the members of the board staff, was asking me how can we help regarding her weaknesses. At the eginning of the meeting, most of the professionals in the room, thought it was amusing that I was handing out a 5 page report, and at the end of 5 minutes no one was amuse at that thought of my actions, but were alarm at their own inaction or non-effective action at remediating my child’s learning differences.

Not every parent have the skills or the ability to do this. Even now, I still surprise at my success of that one meeting, because it was hard work to put it together, even for a person who has the required subset of skills and abilities. Does a parent have to go this far out of their own comfort zone, to speak their professional language, to be heard and to be taken seriously? 

What makes me angry is how easily parents values and beliefs are dismissed by the naysayers of Waiting for Superman. What is being missed by all of them, is the messages of the parents and the children, that they want something better for their children, and the public education system is unwilling to provide it. Much like the IEP meetings, where parents’ concerns are easily dismiss, especially if the concerns are filled with emotions.

Nancy - please demonstrate to us how Ms. Kidder has any power whatsoever and/or has any great influence over education policy? I believe they are a pacified and perhaps over-blown but by no measure does her organization hold power over anyone or anything thing.

That’s an illusion that’s played itself out nicely in Ontario.

She has the ear of the government where the Ontario government and other well-known charitable agencies donate to P4E on a regular basis.

“Atkinson Charitable Foundation
Canadian Auto Workers
Canadian Council on Learning
Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario
Laidlaw Foundation
Ministry of Education
Ontario Trillium Foundation (2006-2008)
RBC Foundation
TD Financial
the Toronto Community Foundation”

An impressive list, that may indicate how they can retain some pay staff. Total amount in grants in 2009, $315,947, and the Ministry of Education, was the largest, paying out $85,021. In year 2008, the Ministry of Education, paying out $31,021. Between 2008 to 2009, the Ministry of Education grant to P4E, increase the grant over 200%..

How many other non-profit education groups benefit from the generosity of the Ministry of Education?  I have no idea, but it does indicate that P4E is rather important to the government, to create the illusion of P4E acting on the behalf of all parents. Even though there is the illusion, P4E still has the ear of the government. At the very least, in terms of grant money, and at the most, influencing education policy at the top.
http://www.peopleforeducation.com/funding

In 2007, the Ontario government give away 32 million dollars in grant money. 15 million went to the United Jewish Appeal Federation, and 1 million to the cricket club.
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/241399#article

I suppose the Ontario voters can look forward to another give away of grant money, Perhaps the increase for P4E, is just one of the first to received an increase, before the next election.

Just because they’re on the MOE payroll means nothing at all Nancy. Donations by other organizations? There are other organizations that get donations and grants from foundations too - SQE for example.

It’s not always about the money. It’s about the connects made for People for Education because of their supposed affiliation with the unions. If that affiliation wasn’t in place those donation dollars wouldn’t be either.

It’s an illusion to suggest that Kidder has any influence over the government at all. She’s not that bright and parroting the union line takes no skill.

Don’t let her fool you Nancy. It’s the connections and bolstering by teacher unions that get Kidder and her org. the attention People for Education get.

On the SQE site:
“Thank you from the bottom of our hearts. As we receive no government funding, we depend on the support of hundreds of people like you. Every donation, no matter how small, is greatly appreciated.”

It assure me that SQE goals/mission is not influenced by government grants/funding.

On another foundation, that has goals that probably go against the grain of the MOE, and other education ministries.

“Children First grants are made possible by the generosity of people like you.  We do not accept government support, but rely solely on donations from individuals, foundations and organizations to help every child.  We currently have a waitlist of over 7000 children.”

I believed there is a difference between taxpayers money being used to support various non-profit agencies and organizations who do not accept government support. As for private foundations, such as BMO…..“BMO Financial Group’s support focuses on social responsibility in the communities it serves. As an active participant in Canadian communities, it believes in the possibilities of personal growth and achievement through continuous learning and access to education. Traditionally, it focuses on specific projects or programmes that add value to the scope of services offered by an organization in the following areas:

Education
Hospitals, Health and Research
Civic and Community Services
Arts and Culture

But BMO, like many other foundations, have their exclusions. For BMO,27 exclusions that BMO will not support. One of them is, “Organizations or lobby/advocacy/partisan groups that promote a particular social, political or economic ideology “
http://www2.bmo.com/content/0,1089,divId-7_langId-1_navCode-4905,00.html

I picked BMO, because in my life time, BMO has always been one of the major sponsors in national sports activities that my children have attended, in Ontario.

At least private foundations are clear on what they will support or not support. Government on the other hand, are not all that clear. But it has been my observations, that government will support programs that agree with their own goals and mandates.

I agree that without the union support, P4E would be nothing, but P4E plays a very valuable role both for the unions and the MOE. P4E has become a valuable clearinghouse, to promote government and union policy and stances in education that are in line with the government mandates.

Now, what would happen if P4E decided charter schools or vouchers should be part of the solution to solve the many systematic problems within the public school system?  Perhaps, P4E would no longer received government grant money….......or the support of the teachers’ unions.

People for Education has no effect on student achievement in this province because they’re not about boosting achievement. They’re about towing the line of the status-quo and where the NDP line up so too shall Kidder.

While People for Education do not probably have influence over the government are MOE decisions they are unfortunately very visible.

Almost every time there is and incident or an education related event we are treated to Ms.Kidder and her opinions on the prime time news and on the televised discussions.

The People for Education’s influence stems from the fact that one way or the other the media always disseminates their voice at the expense of others. That’s the big problem, that their media influence makes them look as if they are a representative, grass-roots organization.

Think about it .. you are the parent of student in grade 2. You have the feeling that something is not quite right about his school. You go to school, the teacher tells you that everything is fine, don’t worry, don’t push since each child develops at its own pace. Not quite convinced you decide to wait and to pay more attention to the debates about education. You see that some other parents worry, they even formed organizations - People for Education.
And then you see Ms.Kidder on TV saying how most things are ok except for the funding and how all the teachers are knowledgeable professionals that just don’t have the right conditions.

You are going to keep waiting, and 2 years later when all the gaps in the basics make your child unable to keep up even with the low requirements of the Ontario so-called curriculum, you just give up on your child thinking that well - all these professionals have done everything they could - your child is just one of the unlucky ones that has learning disabilities and you have to get used to the ideea. 

Because of her media exposure I think Ms.Kidder has a lot of nefast influence by helping with the brainwashing and PR regarding the state of education today.

Europe - that visibility began with the help they rec’d from unions. That most media in Ontario is left-leaning it’s not hard to figure out why they go to Kidder - she says exactly what the left likes to hear. People for Education’s connections get them access to schools, school councils,
foundations etc.

I can tell you that outside of the GTA and a few larger pockets in Ontario Kidder and co. never did have many followers. I distinctly remember many school councils asking P4E to stop sending their material to them because it was forced upon them in the beginning whether they wanted it or not.

She’s had the way paved for her - don’t kid yourself.

What would have happened had SQE (OQE before) been given the same access and exposure to schools and parents?

Kidder’s no different and has no particular skills that I could tell that would make her the “expert” the media makes her out to be.

Any one of us could challenge her any time.

What I can’t grasp is why the media in Canada is left-leaning.  And talk about propaganda!  Why does the media choose to perpetuate the same lies that the teachers’ unions and MOE want spread around.  Why don’t our media inform the parents and taxpayers of what’s really going on?

It’d be interesting to see how much of P4E’s funding actually comes from individual parents, the one’s they claim to be representing and how much comes from the unions, trusts, foundations, etc

Keep in mind that Kidder, et al, are very much supporters/prisoners of the status quo; there’s no way in the world she’d ever do a critique of, say, the overwhelming power of the unions in trying to run the system or how well the money there is being spent

Yes, well said, John L.  The above disclosures would indeed be interesting, and AK would never go against the grain.  I personally suspect that she’s the unions’ stooge and nothing more.