Toronto Star has a different story - or outlining the story at a different harsher angle.

“The Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation has instructed its 50,000 members — in capital letters and a bold font — that they “WILL NOT” return to voluntary extracurriculars, leaving some teachers frustrated at the bid to take the decision out of their hands.

The union posted the directive on its website late Monday, with wording that goes beyond merely suggesting that teachers think twice before running after-school programs again, now that the Ontario government has imposed unpopular contracts on them using Bill 115.”
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1312323—school-unrest-high-school-teachers-union-forbids-return-to-extracurriculars

Further down - “The high school teacher said that while about half of his colleagues do not plan to return to extracurriculars because they are angry at the government, others, like him, have decided “the battle’s over, we have contracts and let’s move on.”

Playing down what the Globe article emphasizes - “Since students have a clear choice of schools in all our communities, without activities outside the classrooms we will, no doubt, lose students. And the number of teachers we have is based on the number of students we have. It’s a simple formula,” said Scott Scantlebury.”

To emphasized the legal options - “However, in an article to be published in his firm’s education law newsletter, Roher cites landmark rulings by former Supreme Court of Canada Chief Justice Bora Laskin in 1975 and an arbitrator with the Durham Catholic District School Board in 1999 that if teachers have performed a key volunteer service for long enough, it can be deemed a required duty.

Meanwhile, some Toronto parents say they want the Toronto District School Board to help parents and community volunteers prepare to run some after-school programs themselves, as the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board has done with a new system developed last fall for such “exceptional circumstances” as the current labor turmoil.”

Between both articles, why don’t the school boards and the ministry of education take the teachers’ unions to court. I bet the unions won’t like it one bit, especially when one potential legal outcome is to restrict teachers’ job related duties to instructional time of 3 to 4 hours a day, and all other things, like bullying programs, programs to teach organizational skills, sports, and all other extra-curricular activities be under private-public partnerships. The unions will never be able to hold the public hostage…..

Seriously though, as Ms. Meeks points out in the Globe and Mail article - ” Ms. Meek, managing director of corporate recruiting company, WorkHarmony, followed the lead of other parent-led community teams, which also include the Wanless Community Team, the Brown Community Team, and the Bedford Community team. “We’re very fortunate to live in the community we live in, and to have parents who are willing to go the distance and bring in paid programs,” she said. “But what about the parents and children who don’t have those means? It’s not right.”

It is what the teachers’ unions will NOT do, underneath their brand of myopic vision of professionalism. If as the union brass insists, its not part of their duties, than take it to the courts. I have a funny feeling, the unions will lose big time, pushing their brand that creates the overriding of learning rights of the students they serve. On top of the many inequities imposed by teachers’ contract agreements for the parents and communities. What about the rights of the parents and communities?

It is not a significant factor in school choice.

From Chuck:
http://www.recorder.ca/2013/01/08/so-are-extra-curriculars-voluntary-or-not

Do you think it is not considered? The ones who will panic are PS admin. Unions are run by sr. teachers with lots of job security. It is not wven a secondary consideration.

There is a word that unionists understand and non-trade unionists have difficulty understanding. That word is solidarity.
As they say in unions, it is all they really have but also it is all they need. The collectivist will of the organization supercedes the individualistic needs or wants of a small number of individuals.

They are well aware that even if they want to coach a team there will be no league, nobody will support them, in many cases nobody will speak to them. They will be shunned.

Doug,

I believe many parents have corporate clout-all they have to do is incorporate a non profit and get Nike or Sporting Life to assist and they`ll enjoy the fact that they aren`t being manipulated.

People will figure this out.

It`ll be like the hockey leagues.

Ms. Dare,

Catholic and French language schools in Ontario are public schools as you well know.  Whether OECTA or OSSTF, there will still be a unionized teacher leading the classroom.  Doesn’t matter to me which union.  Nor does it matter much to my younger colleagues - they fear losing their jobs much more through declining enrollment rather than school shopping.

Furthermore, in most jurisdictions, people can move their children to Catholic schools at any age.  Ironically, when we first enrolled our eldest, we looked at the local Catholic school rather than public since his cousin went there.  My wife decided to go there talk to them.  She was asked only one question, “What is your primary duty as a parent?”  Correct answer:  “To raise our children in the Catholic faith.”  We were in.  However, we decided to enroll him in the public system anyway - the local public school had the better academic reputation.  We have never regretted our decision both our children are doing very well.

Overall, your thesis is an extremely weak argument for choice, wouldn’t you agree?  Public, Catholic, Charter, Private - the purpose in choosing a school for your child would be for the education it can provide, not the extra-curricular activities.  In fact, parent demands for their children’s RIGHT to extra curricular activities sound much like the immature, selfish, self-righteous sense of entitlement that you often criticize our younger generation of having.  Maybe the next time you decide to post an article about teenagers’ sense of entitlement, the simple answer should be that the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.

Catholic schools co operated and negotiated and are giving extra curriculars and clubs and there`s no walkouts-they made a deal.

Parents have peace.
Wayne,your comment doesn`t address the issue,where`s the Main Idea?

If parents want to take over let them go for it. Teachers will be happy to unload the responsibility.

I have never been asked the question Wayne - “What is your primary duty as a parent?”

The question that is asked - have you directed the education property tax portion to the Catholic system?

Much more on the minds of Catholic schools’ administration. Know far too many Protestant friends have their kids enrolled in the Catholic schools.

On the contrary, the teachers’ union position are the ones in the weaker position. No matter how one looks at it, there is danger to bowing down to the demands of the union brass. Such danger, giving the principal a hard time on extra-curricular activities, and the principal decides to let go of some teachers at the end of the year, and replace the teachers with teachers who are willing to do the extra activities.

What Joanne suggested, could seriously happen in some districts. Like a big mining corporation, looking to put their corporate social responsibility funding into extra-curricular activities, that would keep their labour happy and contented. Oh yes, save a few bucks of no longer having to pay for a daily allowance for the workers, because they be moving their families into the communities.

What I noted, it is Southern Ontario where the union is having its way with extra-curricular activities, compared to Northern Ontario where most if all activities are still being conducted and teachers are operating them.

That said, in the Star, ” Coran said Zafari has “been very sincere how important it is for students to have those extracurriculars, and he’s also very sincere with regards to how students greatly respect teachers for fighting for democracy, and is there a way to marry those two components.”

If extracurricular activities don’t return, Zafari would like boards to look at instituting a policy like that of the Ottawa public board, which allows parents and community members to step in to run clubs if teachers won’t.

That sentiment was echoed by Education Minister Laurel Broten, who told the Star that “we don’t want students to lose another term of sports,” so her ministry is looking at various jurisdictions where parent involvement in the schools has been successful.”
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1311837—ontario-teacher-protest-could-extracurriculars-return-one-student-leader-thinks-so

Not at all very democratic Wayne telling students that they have to sacrifice their extra-curricular activities to serve the self-serving interests of a union, on the pretense of saving democracy without being awarded. Or will they, every student gets an extra 10 % on their grade average? It be awful boring in the classroom, not looking forward to the bells and whistles, that the teachers are denying to the students.

It be some fun time, trying to tell parents that they need to buckled down with their kids, on the basis of helping the union to save democracy. If the extra-curricular activities are lost, parents will walk with their feet, to a school that will provide. And more so, when they are spending reams of money to provide it to their children. It be easier to change schools, and pay for the transportation costs, than to provide all the extras.

Joe with respect to your comments about unions and “solidarity’..............

I cringe as to whether you truly understand the meaning of the word. Solidarity, is about uniting for a cause that you believe in. It is NOT about being forced to stand up for the collective good when you NO LONGER believe in its cause.

With a Polish husband and friends who lived through martial law and the Solidarity movement, let me enlighten you that the movement was created in a country where it (the movement) was not permitted to exist. It was created because people were tired of being oppressed, told what to do, have nothing to show for it, no ownership, plenty of free ‘benefits’ in a country with the know-how and ability, but without the materials needed to thrive. Solidarity was a movement to help stop the oppression, and was handled peacefully against a government that wasn’t democratic.

Is that why we have unions in the country of Canada Joe? Are we an oppressive non-democratic nation? Are we oppressing our albeit hard-working teachers with deplorable working conditions and lack of benefits, lack of time off, lack of motivation?

Keep in mind that there are plenty of hard-working educated teachers working in private schools for just above minimum wage, without any benefits, and while they would love to be hired by a school board, wouldn’t dare say their conditions are oppressive or deplorable.

The teachers unions are holding an entire province of taxpayers hostage because they are opposing a bill that takes away their collective bargaining powers for more perks. And we, the taxpayers who technically fund the unions (we pay teachers’ salaries and teachers are FORCED, yes FORCED to pay union dues in order to keep their jobs) are to sit back and keep quite because our “oppressed providers of education to our masses of children” are being deprived of the opportunity to negotiate for more sick days?

With friends, family, and a husband who endured hunger, heating rations, food rations, and inability to meet in large groups, line-ups for necessities, censured mail and telephone conversations, and beatings, yes, beatings, for attending Solidarity rallies, don’t you dare tell those people that you understand the unionist term of “Solidarity”.

With a people who needed it and found it in their Churches, faith, and in their Solidarity Union leader, who were persecuted for attending meetings that inevitably led to the fall of the Leftist Communist Rule and have now won the right to a political system with democracy, capitalism, the right to choose whether to belong to a political party, to own, to meet, and to essentially have a better life (at least in terms of basic needs), please don’t use words like “Solidarity” about which you have very little understanding.

Bear in mind that with one of the few thriving economies in the European Union, Poles have managed to understand that unions served their purpose well, and are not needed in every realm of Capitalistic Democracies. And yes, in comparison to the past under Communist (Socialist) rule they are, as a nation, thriving.

And to add to this, most Poles are surprised at how Canada’s education is lacking in terms of mathematics, geography, history, science, and knowledge of foreign languages. I sometimes wonder about how adequately international tests reflect overall knowledge and ability. Most school children in Poland can explain Communism, Capitalism, Democracy, Marxist-Leninist theories, and define the word propaganda as well as complete algebraic equations with 4 unknowns by grade 6. How many of our kids in grade six taught by Canadian FORCED Unionist teachers can do that?

Solidairnosc was adapted from the North American labour movement by Lech Walensa in Poland. We all supported him strongly. Solidarity Forever has been the Labour Anthem in North America for many decades. It is what gves unions their strength. All for one, one for all.

BTW, the Canadian education system is vastly superior to the Polish system.in fact the business community recognizes it as the best in the world in terms of % of people with post secondary education.

Education,systems often make the huge error of introducing difficult material too early so that only a small number of highly streamed students can get it. The point however is to introduce difficult material at the point where the maximum number can get it.

Monika, thanks for your blog.  It’s very good to hear from someone who knows well what it was like during those times in Poland, where we could only watch the news.
Poland has an excellent educational system; here children are robbed of proper learning. 
When I hear that teachers are wearing black this coming Monday, it sickens me that they would behave in such a way.  I wish they’d settle down and get to work and do a proper job…

The Canadian system is vastly superior to the Polish system thanks to teachers and their unions constantly upgrading the system. Too bad the premier has decided to sick the life out of the system. We can now expect to go backwards until the system bashing is arrested.

Joe leaves the impression, that the term solidarity was taken from the American unions. Goes on to provide the song Solidarity Forever as his supporting evidence.

“Ralph Chaplin began writing “Solidarity Forever” in 1914, while he was covering the Kanawa coal miners’ strike in Huntington, West Virginia. He completed the song on January 15, 1915, in Chicago, on the date of a hunger demonstration. Chaplin was a dedicated Wobbly, a writer at the time for Solidarity, the official IWW publication in the eastern United States, and a cartoonist for the organization”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarity_Forever

Further down - “Chaplin was not pleased with the widespread popularity of “Solidarity Forever” in the labor movement. Late in his life, after he had become a voice opposing (State) Communists in the labor movement, Chaplin wrote an article, “Why I wrote Solidarity Forever,” in which he denounced the “not-so-needy, not-so-worthy, so-called ‘industrial unions’ spawned by an era of compulsory unionism.” He wrote that among Wobblies “there is no one who does not look with a rather jaundiced eye upon the ‘success’ of ‘Solidarity Forever.’” “I didn’t write ‘Solidarity Forever’ for ambitious politicians or for job-hungry labor fakirs seeking a ride on the gravy train. . . .”

As one can see, the term solidarity is a curious term that it leaves the impression the very word and its meaning are derive from the political Marxist literature. As Monika has described - ” Solidarity, is about uniting for a cause that you believe in. It is NOT about being forced to stand up for the collective good when you NO LONGER believe in its cause.”

The term solidarity goes back much further, and Monika is right on about the meaning of solidarity within the labour parameters and unions. Historically, and I would love to see Joe’s expression when he reads it, because of his atheist background…..“n Solicitudo Rei Socialis, a major document of Catholic Social Teaching, Pope John Paul II identifies the concept of solidarity with the poor and marginalized as a constitutive element of the Gospel and human participation in the common good. The Roman Catholic Church, under the leadership of Pope John Paul II, was a very powerful supporter of the union and was greatly responsible for its success. Lech Wałęsa, who himself publicly displayed Catholic piety, confirmed the Pope’s influence, saying: The Holy Father, through his meetings, demonstrated how numerous we were. He told us not to be afraid.[12]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarity_(Polish_trade_union)

Solidarity is part of the social teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. If one goes further, the term solidarity and its meaning has not stray much from the original root meanings. Monika is correct in her interpretation of solidarity.

I LOL and could not stopped laughing when Joe raves about the Canadian education system, and in the next breathe, he asking to dumb it down for the students,. Joe writes, “Education,systems often make the huge error of introducing difficult material too early so that only a small number of highly streamed students can get it. The point however is to introduce difficult material at the point where the maximum number can get it.”

The difficult material of primary multiplication and division tables?  Or the difficult material of verbs, nouns and adjectives?  Or the material discussing roots of words? Or the onerous task of learning spelling rules? Or the material containing the various government systems,the political models, of which students will learn that the unions and even governments in the 21st century does not have the best interests of their citizens they served?

Monika is corect when she states, “Most school children in Poland can explain Communism, Capitalism, Democracy, Marxist-Leninist theories, and define the word propaganda as well as complete algebraic equations with 4 unknowns by grade 6. ” She is correct because the public education system doesn’t really teach the terms to full understanding, and when they do, the terms are tied into the flavours of the Marxist literature and ideologies and not the factual content and knowledge to understand the ideologies and the flavours in the political spectrum.

It is not difficult material, but the material becomes really difficult to understand, when the ideologies are only taught. Somehow under the constructivist pedagogy, the student is supposed to figure out what lies behind the ideologies on their own. The ideologies are taught at the expense of the factual content and knowledge needed to understand the ideologies and/or big ideas.

Nobody is dumbing it down Nancy. The Canadian system teaches more concepts to a higher % of the students by keeping streaming to a minimium and choosing the appropriate level for new concepts.

You seem to have trouble understanding that very concept has an apropriate age. Too soon you must stream, too late time is wasted. You really dont seem to know how it works. Would you teach calculus in grade 3? Why not? Because every concept has the correct age. To early is damaging.

Poland in improving but is only up to #9 in PISA behind Canada. It is improving due to additional hours and the delay of streaming. The OECD relates the postponing of streaming to one of the real reasons nations can improve.

Others call that “dumbing down”.

Too early can be damaging, I’ll agree, but not at all, which happens most often here in Ontario is even worse.

How Strange!

With respect to teaching more concepts to more students,I had one excellent teacher (they do exist) many eons ago keep telling us that it’s all about QUALITY and not quantity.

With respect to teaching age appropriate concepts, you’re right, I really don’t know how this works: Why is it that most schools refuse to teach phonics in grades 1 and 2, and grammar in 3, 4, and 5, and that multiplications tables are not taught and ingrained in students by the end of grade 2 or 3 until mastery in these domains is achieved? Would this not serve as a foundational (pre-requisite) to all future reading, writing, mathematics, and most other subjects in future grades? Would mastery not help reduce streaming? Would it not allow for easier understanding of other and future subjects as kids would simply know that semi-colons precede conjuctive adverbs, and that 8x8=64?

Oh here’s an idea: Why not implement something like School Choice, and allow for Charter Schools that would teach using direct instruction and develop strong foundations in phonics, grammar, and multiplication and division in early grades, and then we could compare how this method stacks up against the unionist constructivist approach? We could compare which system is better? What a concept!

Canada still does far better than Poland. There is no quality research to support charter schools.  It is not going to happen, especially the charters that are privately managed.

Google - private school scandals if you want a real shock. Most are a big scam.

Oh really Doug? One just has to look at the curriculum in K to 8, to figure it out. One part, the unions are pushing for having no grades, another part is pushing to eliminate long division (which they have succeeded) to the other part that is pushing to eliminate fractions in favour of decimals. By grade 12, the high school administration never have to worried about the number of calculus, because fewer than 10 percent of the students actually have the background and foundation basics to be able to qualify to take grade 12 calculus. No worries, through, the larger percentage of students land up in applied math, taking 50 percent slice which is the dumb-down version of the academic math that takes up 40 percent of the pie.

If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck - it is just a form of the dumb-down program versions, that has been propagated by the education stakeholders. But rest assured, few students would be able to described the communist model of governance, nor the Canadian model of governance, much less know the names of the finance ministry of Ontario or Canada.

If every concept has the correct age, is that why the public education stakeholders are fighting tooth and nail on reforms where ability is the defining criteria?  Where some kids would finished a subject of a year’s worth in one week, and others might do in six months and the majority would probably do in a year. Or the kids, taking online courses at their own pace - fast or slow to avoid the school classroom. and where some kids speed through to graduate at the age of 16? Or the kid who wants to practice hockey and more hockey,  and needs a school schedule that is in keeping with his hockey training?

All depends on who is interpreting higher concepts? The first time I bumped into it, was when my oldest child was in grade 4 in 1984 or so. The teacher went on in great length that the old way of doing long division was a higher concept that most children were not ready to do developmentally speaking. Putting on all those zeroes made much sense for their minds. Now it is far more complicated where long division is not even taught and if it is, is not taught until grade 6. A long and complicated procedure, to avoid the efficient and fast algorithms taught the old way. I walk out of the grade 4 teacher meeting, that my oldest child had excellent math abilities for her age. My response, to the teacher - would it not be easier to have all children memorized the multiplication tables, so long division would be easy as pie? He agreed, but he had to follow the directives of the new math curriculum outlines. Back in the 1980s, the schools still taught fractions, which was the saving grace. Not true anymore, and is the reason why so few students enters the dreaded calculus classroom. So few students have mastered fractions and long division.

Ergo, in math and other complicated concepts such as governance models, it is all dumb-down so only a small percentage have the knowledge and ability to understand the big picture over the smaller pictures of understanding. Student gaps in knowledge have economic benefits for the public education stakeholders, but not for society who has to picked up the costs on both sides of the equation.

Somehow in all of that confusion we have stumbled into the position of being the most educated nation on Earth.

Sounds like the people in charge know what they are doing.

Joe,
Couldn’t resist! Here’s a little web page that features a few facts about Poles following tertiary education:

http://en.poland.gov.pl/The,greatest,number,of,students,7474.html

I’m sure you’ll delight in finding some fault with this too. Keep in mind when reading statistics that Poland’s population is slightly larger than that of Canada’s, thought the country could fit into Ontario about three times.

Do keep in mind that if any Canadian industries will be recruiting future job seekers, they will not have “Canadian” born as a listed requirement, and they will choose the one with most experience and education.

I’m not saying the person will or should be Polish, just that in the future the person may NOT be Canadian. Keep in mind that most consultants to many of our Canadian companies are actually hired from India.

You’ll argue they are cheaper. True, true, true! But not less intelligent or less educated than our Canadian counterparts. Just less whiny and able to adapt.

The Canadian workforce is known internationally as highly educated. The worlds best. It is the main reason for our economic success compared to others.

The reform thesis is based on the idea that the Canadian education system is terrible. All of the objective evidencepoints in the opposite direction. This makes selling reform in Canada, privatization and so on a tough row to hoe.

But what of the Chinese foreign workers and other foreign workers Doug? One would suspect that other countries would be clamoring for Canadian workers, but they are not.

In fact, the Canadian education system uses this much overuse of a stat, to increase the number and attract foreign students into all aspects of post-secondary. Big money for the post-secondary institutes, pushing out Canadian students, creating intense competition and fighting for available seats at the post-secondary level in a job market that is shrinking in some areas, and expanding in other fields, Creating illusions of competency while raking in increasing revenues to pay for the hired help.

On a side note, one example is applying for post-secondary. What a money racket that is, before a student is accepted, $300 on average for three courses of studies or 3 universities, is taken off the top. All non-refundable, and before the student even enters the door of the university - another $600 or so , is demanded of various fees and non-refundable. Than comes the tuition costs and book fees….. What I stated is Ontario averages, after hitting the roof yesterday, of what I would call forcing all students through a clearing house, centralized to add another layer of bureaucracy of over paid help to have the privilege of applying at a post-secondary institute in Ontario.

So far, no way out of it for students. But I bet the international students have an easier time, than the Canadian students of having the post-secondary institutes of catering to their needs.

I would say all of your examples prove my point. BC mines want Chinese workers because they work cheaper, no other reason. Industries locate in Canada due to the high quality work force. Our education system has become a huge money maker for Canada because of its high quality.

If we lined up every skilled working person in Canada, I wonder how many people we would have in each of the following groups a), b), and c)......?

a) foreign workers on contracts
b) Canadians born and bred; educated entirely in this country
c) immigrants who had some (elementary) or all of their schooling back in their homeland

It’s not going to be 100% truly Canadian eh?

One more thing - of group b), I wonder how many would come from private schools, how many were home-schooled, and how many had extra tutoring after school in Kumon’s, Oxfords, Learnas, etc. or parental instruction to re-explain (read: re-teach) what wasn’t done properly at school.

Just wondering…................

Not according to the government sources. Apparently, there is not the numbers of skilled workers in the coal mining industry. Sound bites that gives way to using Chinese workers and a willing public education system and a teachers’ union all too willing and eager to begin the new training programs that adds more teachers’ jobs, the collection of union dues, and the political talking points, to repeat the cycles of how the public sector and its unions are good for democracy.

A money racket within the public education system, the monopoly of never having to be held accountable to the final education outcomes of the Canadian students, but will gladly be accountable to the foreign parents and governments, and even rolled out the red carpet and push Canadian students out in the cold, when it comes to residence, room and board at the over-crowded dorms not much bigger than a jail cell in some institutions. Then moan about not having enough money for the actual education of the students, and naval gazing at the leaking roof, to which a brand new roof not 5 years old, daring not to complained because it would mean someone within the education system was partially or all responsible for the decision of cheap roofing materials to pay for the high price union help. Instead, the education powerhouse, undertake a number of studies and pow-wow meetings of the wine and cheese, or the fancy boardroom meetings, with beer as the chaser in the local pub, to figure out how to line the pockets of the education stakeholders, and maintain their boss status on all things in education.

Then they all collectively come up with the idea, that the public - the taxpayers - are to blame and demand more money to keep up the money racket and poor quality education being delivered, in disguised as excellent quality and service.

As for industries that locate in Canada…....the public education system are there with their hands out looking for new revenue sources and the government is only too willing to provide by demanding new fees and training courses to maintain certificates. One will soon need a 2 year certificate to mopped a floor in the correct way, using the most expensive chemicals and a K to 12 education system only too willing to create another set of curriculum of the best practices in cleaning, cooking and other household duties of maintenance. That said, it morphs into another industry of deep philosophic literature on the how-tos from infant to death that needs a large army of consultants to provide and enforce. I am still scratching my head, why 50 books is the minimum number of books, a family should have at its disposal when there is children in the house. If not, the parents are crucified and blamed for their children’s state of reading.

Yes, Monika is correct when she states - “But not less intelligent or less educated than our Canadian counterparts. Just less whiny and able to adapt.”

So true for the public education stakeholders. A whiny bunch that wants to hold the public hostage at the expense of the taxpayers purse.

I assume you all saw the lead letter in todays Globe from the facts in education panel? All of the leading nation in education in the world have strong teachers unions.Nations with weak unions and poor working conditiins lag behind.There is no evidence that strong teachers unions are inconsisent with high quality educatiin.

Zero, zilch, nada.

Here is the letter to the editor I sent in to the Mop and Pail this morning. Keep your fingers crossed!

Some “distinguished” Canadian educators would like us to believe that teacher unions cause high achievement, based on the fact that “virtually all of the high performing countries” have unions. Of course there is no logical basis for inferring that the single factor of strong teacher unions causes high student achievement, as there are many other factors that affect achievement. In fact, it is quite possible that jurisdictions without teacher unions might do even better. It is very disappointing that the distinguished Canadian educators who wrote this letter would use such a specious argument.

We have all the evidence we need from the USA where the strong union states seriously outperform the weak union Right to Work states in the NAEP and other tests.

Why are you people so allergic to doing basic research?  Much easier to have a reasoned debate when you work with actual facts.  This took me less than 30 seconds to find:

“While only 17 prominent studies have looked at the teacher union-achievement link, the
evidence suggests that unionism raises achievement modestly for most students in public
schools. These favorable patterns on unionism include higher math and verbal standardized test
scores, and very possibly, an increased likelihood of high school graduation. Although most
studies were conducted on high-school students, favorable union effects were also found at the
elementary level. At the same time, a union presence was harmful for the very lowest- and
highest-achieving students. Research to date is only suggestive as to why unions may improve
achievement for most students. Two promising explanations include the possibility that unions
standardize programs, instruction, and curricula in a way that benefits middle-range (most)
students, and that unions “shock” schools into restructuring for greater effectiveness by
improving connections and communication among district administrators, principals and
teachers.”

this quote from:  http://nepc.colorado.edu/files/Chapter10-Carini-Final.pdf

So, Ms. Dare, apparently it is not a ‘specious’ argument at all.

Twenty years ago when I lived in Singapore, there was a shortage of teachers.  A few years ago, a friend of ours said that a science teacher in her early 30’s who was teaching in Singapore had 600 students.  Needless to say she complained of exhaustion and was considering another field.  Singapore still scores very high internationally though.

I haven’t looked up any of these ‘distinguished’ Canadian educators, but I already know they have an agenda.  They really came out in force against taking anything away from powerful teachers’ unions.  Sigh—people in the education field must be an enviable life, since so many of them will say and do anything to maintain the status quo (smiley).

Today on 640 AM, Bill Carroll brought up an interesting litmus test, quite ingenious actually.

He did state (and I’m paraphrasing) that Bill 115 is autocratic and dictatorial - for the record.

Now he was wondering, if within the parameters of Bill 115, if the government were to increase the number of sick days, and significantly hike up salaries, and include other benefits for teachers, i.e. if the government went above and beyond to make the job more rewarding monetarily and with cushy perks, but within the parameters of non-negotiation of contracts, would teachers and their unions still call for protests, strike actions, and take away extra-curriculars?

After all, it’s not about sick days, or salaries, remember? Teachers and their unions do not want bargaining and negotiation rights taken away from them. It’s barbaric and dictatorial to do so.

So technically even if everything moved in their favour, they should continue with the same mindset and still “throw our children under the bus” shouldn’t they?

Would they?

The most obvious reason union improve education is by demanding high wages benefits and pension. When the standard of living and working conditions of teachers such as smaller classes and ADK are introduced, students and the entire population benefits since higher and higher quality people are attracted to become teachers with smaller and smaller classes educated for more years.

This benefit is so obvious few even mention it.

Do you want your student taught grade 12 history by someone with an MA in history or someone who is a high school graduate only as in some poor nations?

I guess the thing Monika, that you and possibly others do not understand or appreciate is that the content of the contract is not nearly so important as the fact that it is freely negotiated in a free collective bargaining atmosphere. This is what we do in democracies. Imposed contracts are what happens in Fascist and Communist regimes.

What is the price of your right to vote?

I read the other day, the head honcho of the secondary teachers’ union, pointing out there is other ways to have savings, other than taking away the sick days. He went on to said, the union did offer to take over the benefits portion, thus the government would realized instant savings, since they would be no longer responsible for the sick days. The union would be paying for it.

How does that one work without demanding more money from the members, to pay the costs to maintain the 20 bankable sick days,  and increasing salary demands from the union to the government? 

In today’s Star, ” “It’s very difficult to accomplish anything if you don’t have public support, and I’m concerned that they’re losing it because of the withdrawal of extracurricular activities,” said Buzz Hargrove, former president of the Canadian Auto Workers Union.”
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1314978—ontario-teacher-protest-buzz-hargrove-calls-on-teachers-to-resume-extracurriculars

Joe, uses a common reason be purported by the teachers’ union by backing up his assertion to the qualification and education levels, duly certified. “Do you want your student taught grade 12 history by someone with an MA in history or someone who is a high school graduate only as in some poor nations?”

Plenty of high school teachers running around with masters, but unfortunately the high school teachers obtained their masters sometime during their teaching career, to move up the salary scale. Joe, like others leaves the impression of false-pseudo images to move away from the fact, the only requirement to become a teacher, is to received a teacher’s certificate from an approved teachers’ faculty. One only needs a BA of any stripe, to be admitted into a teachers’ faculty.

In reality, teachers obtain their masters, for the increase in their pay. Otherwise, few newly minted teachers arrived complete with a masters in history or mathematics and a BEd.

Further to Monika, the teachers believe in their soul that imposed contracts are illegitimate.If tey do not make Bill 115 a long painful trip to the dentist for the government, future governments are more likely to impose agreements. The mrssage is to all parties. Negotiate free contracts or pay a very painful political price.

The price of my right to vote is to make sure that those in power (like unions) get what they want, or they’ll take it anyways in one way or another.

The price of my right to vote in this democracy is that if I choose to pay for my tuition at a government accredited university, to become a teacher, I must then, without any ability to refuse, join a union if hired by the board of education.

I must understand that a portion of my earned money as a teacher must go towards my union dues, and that my union may use this money to fund a political party of their choice even if I would choose not to vote for that party.

I understand that as a teacher, I lose all power of my vocation and must often act against my better judgement, because it is not inline with union policies. Eg. staying to teach extra-curriculars or participating in protests.

I understand that in my democracy I must pay my dues, do as told, be quiet (unless they tell me to yell) and realise that in my democracy I do not have choice within my profession other than to leave and work in the private sector.

Cool democracy!

I think that you might finally understand that these are group decisions not individual decisions. This is the essence of democracy.

The teachers unions in Ontario have been statutory closed shops since WW2 when legislated by Conservative premier George Drew. The idea that unions can spend their money on anything they please has been to the Supreme Court and they found the unions can spend their money on anything they please, political or otherwise.