Raising test scores? Easy Peasy!!! Educating students into successful lives…a little more difficult. As long as we’re focused on improved test scores as the real value that good teachers can bring to the life of a student, then we’re destined to maintaining the status quo. And that’s unacceptable.

“A great teacher” can do that and Michael Jordan can lead a team to the NBA championship and it flounders after he retires.

Here is the problem. It only works for “great teachers”. There are very few “great teachers” just as there are few great lawyers, doctors athletes, or any other profession.

Americans love the Jamie Escalante solution to school problems. Problem is, there is only one and even he could not duplicate his success later in life.

You cannot run a school system on a “star system” because thee are not enough “great teachers” to give each school even one. They are very quickly spotted and made into consultants.

You CAN run a school system on a majority of good and very good teachers however and all teachers (most anyway) can be improved.

You also cannot just duplicate the process of great teachers any more than the coach of an NHL team can say to his players “OK guys here is what I want you to do - Watch Sydney Crosby tonight and tomorrow, DO THAT.”

Great teachers are special, rare, inspiring but they cannot be duplicated.

The VA system attempts to reduce to numbers that which cannot be reduced to numbers.

When applied to average teachers, the data was wild, all over the map and produced different results for the same teacher in different years.

Look at Daniel Willingham’s youtube on why it doesn’t work again.

‘student test scores are not a valid measure of teacher effectiveness’.  Hello!  If a child can’t pass a test, what’s the purpose of that child being in school?  What good is a teacher who doesn’t successfully teach the children in their classroom the syllabus?  That’s their primary job, and the one they should be focused on every single day.  If a student has not grasped the basics, the rest of the teachers’ goals are simply worthless, because a child lacking basics will most likely have a bleak future…

Test scores can be a valid measure of how students are doing. They miss a great deal if they are used exclusively.

Many jurisdictions, including ONtario, are so focused on improving scores on must one test that, “results” are skewed, as is our sense of what constitutes a well-rounded education.

Hello, once again non-teachers telling us how to do our job. I have not heard the word syllabus for 30 years.

The danger is that you think you know what it is all about. You don’t.

I talk to province wide inspectors. They strongly de-emphasize tests and the quizes they encourage should not coun’t towards the final grade.The call it “Assessment for Learning” a teacher check on how they are doing.What counts “assessment of learning” they strongly push essays, oral presentations, observations, conversations, debates, seminars, etc etc.

Except for math, the MOE discourages “tests and exams” in language based subjects.

There is a strong belief that ests and exams, again except in math, possibly science, are a very poor way to base assessment.

Hi Doug,

Curious about the inspectors? Are they from the ministry? LNS? Gosh, I haven’t heard the term “inspector” used for years.

Assessment policy and practice are huge in our schools these days. Tough to move both parents and teachers into thinking about things other than tests and exams as forms of both assessment and evaluation.

Even in the arts, there is a sense that we need a written assessment in order for it to “count”.

But, if we want to know what students really know and can do, beyond knowledge of basic facts, then “alternative” assessments are key.

Stephen and Bev has valid points, but Doug simply is against any measures dealing with teacher quality.

Has anyone wonder why achievement testing began in the first place in Canada?  Why the powers to be pushed for it in the first place. I have, and I do agree that standardize testing is essential, but the testing should never be used as the sole indicator for judging teachers’ value, because the testing at that level, the standards are too high, because of the absence of crucial foundation skills in the 3 Rs, the lack of the resources at the schools, as well as the lower standards at the school level, what passes for an A to a D.

The standardized testing came in play, due to the drop in the standards on the basic skills, such as spelling, grammar, as well as limited remediation services for only the students who were severe enough. As I observed, it started in the late 70s, where my oldest child had inventive spelling, no grammar lessons, or even the requirement of memorizing the multiplication tables. As the years have rolled by, the standards have dropped, resources of the schools are even more scarce, and the agendas within the education system have managed to placed their interests above the interests of the children’s education. Than standardized testing enters the picture, and strong reactions from within and from outside. Opinions all over the place, taking their sides. As a parent, I was very interested on the test itself, as other parents were. We all shook our heads, knowing full well seeing the examples of a 2 or 3 or a 4, that most of our kids would struggled just to get a 3, because they had weaker skills in the 3 Rs, and the knowledge base was not the problem. Weak skills in any aspect of the 3 Rs, impacts the ability to expressed knowledge and critical thinking. The only relief for parents, was the testing was supposed to be used to improve the schools, and no outward penalties for the students. Of course, in my opinion it did not materialized, and any improvements made were according the agendas and interests of the stakeholders within the education system. The 3 Rs, took another hit, and what was not acceptable writing, reading and numeracy soon became the norm. The standards dropped once more, and it was easier to received a C average than ever before.

As Bev has stated, standard testing is a valid measure and has become a valid measure, because of the evolution since the late 1970s of dropping standards, so more students can pass from one grade to the next. Reports cards are no longer a dependable measure, since the focus remains on all students receiving a 50 percent and call it a day. Plus grade inflation plays a role, but more so at the high school level, produces concerns throughout society, questioning the quality of education being received for the students, after 12 years of schooling.

Throughout the 12 years of standard testing or so, from one year to the next, there has been no upward movement of improving the 3 Rs, the foundation, within the public education system. What will it take, to move the agendas and self-serving interests to focus on what is needed for students, the skills and abilities needed to do high school work, let alone after high school?  I have no idea, but until than, the standardized testing will be the measure, for most of the public to judge the schools, their neighbourhood schools, because the other measures are not reported, except for a report card, that probably will go gradeless sooner rather than later, if certain agendas within the public education system have their way.

A research report, on low-income schools and how middle school is vital for achievement.
“It is a time when they can close achievement gaps and enter high school ready or at least close to ready for standards-based instruction that leads to college readiness. Alternatively, it is a time when students’ achievement gaps widen, forcing them to enter high school still in need of a good middle grades education.”
http://www.amle.org/portals/0/pdf/research/Research_from_the_Field/Policy_Brief_Balfanz.pdf

The focus within the public education has placed too much stress on standard testing, due to completing agendas and interests, and not enough stress on the actual grades of students, where 50 percent grade average is good enough, and the school calls it a day.

So what if syllabus isn’t the ‘in’ word…  My goodness!!
Please don’t tell me that there is anything more valuable than teaching a child to read, or understanding math.  Frankly, if test scores are poor, the school has failed.  What could constitute a good teacher who fails to teach the above?

Unless your students are participants here Doug, we have no idea whatsoever what kind of teacher you were, do we? For that matter same goes for all other educators posting here. The kneejerk reaction, usually from you tells me that the folks here and at SQE are closer to the truth than you’ll admit here.

Perhaps the public, parents, employers and post-secondary institutions would have more confidence in what teachers do IF they actually did what their unions and the system claim.  Too many have experienced something other than effective educators.

From a private enterprise perspective when the customer makes suggestions on how to improve a product or service delivery that’s usually a clue to the managers and workers to take notice and shape up because we know that if we don’t the customer will not use our product or service.

You need to pay much more attention to the customers Doug because they need to be heard. Although, unlike the private sector the students and families not in a position to opt out of a bad school or school system are pretty much just SOL right?

Nancy, not to argue with you, but I went to school in Ontario, and we wrote city-wide exams.  This was in the 50’s and 60’s.  If you failed, you repeated your year—simple. 
I missed the grade 13 departmentals by a year, and even back in the 60’s I noticed things got just a little more relaxed when the departmentals were no longer written. 
Standardized testing is the only way to know whether or not the syllabus has been properly covered by the teacher; hence testing has been fought over now for many years.  It didn’t exist at all in the 70’s & 80’s here in Ontario, but appeared again when Mike Harris became premier.  Correct me if I’m wrong, but the Ontario teachers’ unions want the province-wide testing scrapped.

Stephen, they are from the MOE. They are heavily serious about assessment. Rubric or similar oral is fine they like “conversations” like oral test with each kid,

No nancy I don’t oppose teacher assessment. I believe principals possibly VPs and SOs are best and based on classroom visits. There is no place for standardized testing to evaluate teachers, even the ETS commissioned to create tests in the USA says their own tests are totally inappropriate to evaluate teachers.We have know-nothings in politics making decisions on this based on profound ignorance.

There is zero place for testing in teacher evaluation.

BTW standards have never dropped. All the kids having difficulty with upper HS today were long gone into the factories and pumping gas in previous generations. We now believe in giving every kid more of a chance.

Chuck,

The system pays incredible attention to what the public wants. Annie Kidder tells us all the time. The system finds her credible, you not so much.

Bev listen carefully, EVERYBODY believes in basic skills however very very few serious educators believe in a phonics driven system. It has a place. A small place.

I’m glad you all believe in standardized testing for students. It shows us that we need to direct many more resources to the poor schools, give them smaller classes, ELP, etc.

There is almost no such thing as a bad school Chuck. Find me a rich school with poor results or a board anywhere in Canada or on the face of the Earth where the poor do better than the affluent.

You can’t do it because education results are SES driven.

I wrote “Departmentals” in HS. They were very difficult. Huge numbers of kids failed. They lost a whole year and then went to university and sailed through. Eventually everybody understood they were a giant waste of time and destroyed many lives.

Alberta is moving away from testing, California’s Jerry Brown is telling everyone they are useless and ought to be phased out.

Unions would be happy if testing were samples like a PISA for Ontario. Abolished would be better but random would be an improvement.

Read the Vanderbilt study. Teachers are not motivated by merit pay. You pay it if you want but it makes no difference.

“BTW standards have never dropped. All the kids having difficulty with upper HS today were long gone into the factories and pumping gas in previous generations. We now believe in giving every kid more of a chance. “

Standards certainly have dropped, because most of the students have not a pray to enter the high school science and math course above the applied level. Less of a chance of obtaining a solid B average, due to the weak foundation skills. Moving up to academic or advance courses, students still need a good foundation to stand on, just to maintain a solid B average, and spit out the knowledge in the sciences, that were consider post-secondary knowledge, and now are considered high school knowledge.

Toss in the absence of studying skills, note taking, and decent english prose, and all things that should have been taught in grade school, it makes it that much tougher for students. And their dreams are being burst one by one, because of the shaky foundation in basic skills. And Doug, the jobs you talk about are the jobs that still need a solid foundation, but one can tell they can’t do discount, and the simple addition of column of numbers, Or even a good speaking voice for telephone work, or how to be pleasant to customers. Taught them well, to ignore the customers, as the public education has taught them, if a student does not show promise in grade 1, the student is tossed into the discarded pile, for work that still needs basic solid skills, but not a high degree of knowledge.

From the chatter in Canada, the remedial percentages for college, is now climbing to the 50 percent mark. It will be no surprise that it is higher than 50 percent, but than again it is profitable for colleges to have the prep courses, for students for a year or two, before entering their choice of studies.

Show me a high-income school, and I show you Doug, over 80 percent of students have taken remediation tutoring for foundation skills at two junctions in their school lives. As for the the remainder 20 percent, the students are in it for the duration, that is the tutoring.

I never had to take the public Ontario exams, they did not exist when I went to high school. But failed one subject, including gym, you failed the whole year. But than again there was summer school, night school, and all kinds of other options to avoid repeating the whole year. Lots of students took extra courses via through night school, but back than it was rather inexpensive, and the cost of the gas to travel in the city to the schools. But the one thing I do know, students graduated and there was plenty of jobs. Today, the same jobs requires a two-year certificate to add up a column of numbers. Essentially what a low-level accounting position is. Or a secretary answering the phone, and filing, a two-year certificate.

As for Anne Kidder, she do anything to make it easier for students, and the teachers’ unions. After all she is a creature of the unions, and unions are always pushing for dumbing it down, because it is less work, than bringing the kids up to standard.

I remember the syllabus. It was pulled out when a teacher was reading the riot act to me, because they knew I could do a lot better than the 75 percent average I was pulling in his or her class. I was not a very engaged student, but at least it give me a signal that the teachers cared about me. Now they settle for a 50 percent and called it a day, in most of the schools.

So much potential is lost to a public education system that takes cares of the adults’ agendas and interests. When I went to school, our janitors were pretty learned, Quoting Shakespeare, and if not having discussions with students on the local politics of the day. Even though, the calculator had not been invented, nor the desktop computer, nor social media - it did not take more than two days for parents to hear about bad behaviour or bad grades. The telephone took care of that, and the community who saw kids as kids and knew that kids needed guidance and being called out when they knew they could do better than the lowly 70 percent. And this is back in the days when grammar and spelling was graded on tests. and not a mark for showing up to class to take the test.

That era is gone, and no one is calling any student to the mat for receiving a grade below their potential. Hell, the students are not even tested to find out what is their potential. The parents are kept in the dark, including never seeing the hard copies of standard testing. Just a piece of paper with meaningless numbers, and the same numbers that are ignore at the end of the day by the education establishment, unless the numbers happen to fit into the agendas and interests of the stakeholders within.

Standards have dropped, and in its replacement is the soft bigotry of low expectations.
.

There was never a time in the past when we did better in education than we do today.

The dropout crisis was dramatic in the 1950s

Graduation rates up

University graduations way up

No country on Earth graduates a higher % of students 18-25 from post secondary.

Nostalgia ain’t what it used to be. There was no “golden era” in the past when we did better.

>>Raising test scores? Easy Peasy!!! <<

Really? How come it is not being done?
How come the test scores in elementary years - grade 3 and grade 6 - are not increasing even though the class sizes have decreased?

How does a reading comprehension test or a writing test or math test at elementary level not reflect whether or not the student does has these skills or not?

It has been done, and the scores aren’t going to get any higher…unless we begin to rethink the way that we envision schools.

My point is that we using a false set of indicators to measure success. If not false, at least inadequate!

There are tons of ways that we can “raise the scores”...strip away even more of the “frills”, force students to stay in school for longer hours,etc. These are easy fixes, and rather unimaginative.

What we really need is some major refocusing and some substantial redesign.

I’m not suggesting that we lose sight of the basics, but we may want to begin with a serious conversation about what the basics are. Test scores don’t help much with that conversation, do they?

Stephen, I would not call them false, but the indicators are disconnected from the reasons behind the indicators. As well as the misuse and interpreting wrongly on the data, imposing false beliefs.

What about the students who score low, but the other evaluations done over time in the classroom, states otherwise? What about the student who is known for his poor behaviour, low grades but performs at a much higher level on the standard test?  What about the underlying reasons of curriculum and education policies that promotes low achievement, regardless of the teachers working hard, their training?

How often are the SEC factors used as the reasons, rather than looking within the education system, to ponder on the final outcomes of students. Throw in the unconscious bias, beliefs and training practices, that will confound the individual students’ final outcomes.

The knowledge, advances being made in all things learning, there is no reason why 95 % of a grade 3 class could not perform at level 3 or higher.We are talking about grade 3, not advance trig. Sure there is tons of ways to improve students’ outcomes, but more importantly in order to determine why students are performing at low achievement, the underlying reasons must be determined for the individual students. The current public education model is structured in a way for quick fixes, and passing the problems up the line, to become someone else’s problems.

On the CEA site, Stephen is brave to suggest in his last few blog posts, in a round about way, that the problems lie with the designed of the education system. “In essence, if we want to encourage our teachers and students to become more deeply involved with what we are asking them to do, then we need to place our conversations about assessment and evaluation in their proper place. And believe me, that place is not in front of engaging, flexible and responsive teaching.”
http://www.cea-ace.ca/blog/stephen-hurley/2012/01/1/our-focus-assessment-taking-away-our-childrens-education

Very few within the education system, would like to have serious conversations on this matter, on the education policies and practices that has a negative impact on the individual student’s education.

In the United States, states are introducing creativity indexes. “. Building capacity to create and innovate in our students is central to guaranteeing the nation’s competitiveness,” declared the President’s Council of Advisers on the Arts and Humanities in a report last year.”  Probably soon to come to Canada in one form or another, and more money will be redirected away from the students, to measure something that the science has not figure it out. But to use it to rank schools, is rather silly, when 70 percent of the work force do not have to be creative, but they do need to have the ability to think on their feet, chewing and walking at the same time. Can’t have that, when the majority of today’s students never taught to mastery level, in an overcrowded curriculum, and not enough hours to work on the crucial foundation skills needed for mastery.
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/02/02/19creativity_ep.h31.html?tkn=QMVFH7OZ9EaVa9ml3hHRo02ibbUybUlb79c4&cmp=ENL-EU-NEWS1

Testing adds nothing to education. Finland just does not do it and kick everybodies backside.

All of the test critics predicted exactly what would happen when the EQAO arrived. Teachers and the ed system would shift time away from arts, phys ed, science etc and shift the time to reading and math. Teachers would drill questions congruent to those on the test. Scores would rise a little like blowing hot air on the thermometer. The low hanging fruit would “improve their test scores” not to be confused with improving their education, up to a small plateau. It would be very difficult to raise scores beyond that.

Stephen is correct. We can add more hours all for drill and teaching to the test if test score increases are all we want but initial test supporters like P4E are moving away because the casualty is the arts. Allison Redford in Alberta is moving away because “they do not give us useful information” Jerry Brown is moving away because “I don’t see tests improving anything.”

We have all sen this movie before if we live long enough.

When we have testing nothing improves and we gradually learn to hate testing.

When we don’t have testing we kinda miss it. The poor still don’t do well and politicians realize they either have to mitigate poverty or find scape goats using testing. It is much cheaper but guess what.

You get what you pay for. Cheap answers never work.

We argue about nutritious meals and kids don’t want to eat them in TDSB and across Ontario because they are not cheaper than McDonald’s junk across the street. Finland fixed the problem, nutritious meals in school are free. Everybody eats in the caf. The cost just goes on the tax bill but overall it is cheaper.

High cost of university is a big issue here? Finland no tuition. Problem solved. Cost amortized on the tax bill. Finland has a more unfavourable GDP per capita than Canada or the USA, priorities. They care about their children and they care about their future.

Everywhere on this entire planet, USA, Canada, UK, Europe, China, Japan, Australia, that you go, the list of achievement however measured, tests, graduation, university graduation, kindergarten word recognition, is 99% congruent to SES factors.

To argue against SES being the overwhelming determinent of educational achievement makes critics look like the tobacco industry saying “smoking does not cause cancer because look at Joe here, he is 90, smoked his whole life and does not have cancer.”

This is what the vain search for educational outliers is akin to. Exceptions PROVE THE RULE.

If you hope to make a great fool of yourself in educational debate, argue against SES as the major factor.

Nice they are finally finding “creativity” after they destroyed it with standardized tests.

Testing and creativity
black and white
night and day
up and down

They pull the system in totally opposite directions.

They didn’t destroy anything.  Testing is a way of finding out if knowledge has been given to students.  Students need basic knowledge in order to be creative—in other words, it’s the ground work.
What we have now is a 42% illiteracy rate, and children who can’t make change when working a cash register, with almost 0 understanding of math.  How is this creative?

The SEC factors are the handy excuses of those within the public education, no matter what part of the world, because if the truth was reveal, is the maintain the class structure, to where only the professionals and wealthy have all the brains, and therefore all resources are directed at them, and whatever is left over, is handed out equally to the rest of the income groups. Of course, unions used the SEC factors, as well as approving education policies that mimics the SEC factors, when it is really poor teaching training or poor instruction or poor curriculum, combine with poor resources.

A 42% illiteracy rate is a joke. Canada has the 3rd best readers on Earth.

To call SES an “excuse” is absurd. Anybody who lets this slip from their mouth has just lost all cred.

Once again you post is riddled with errors of grammar and syntax.

Odds bodkins down Quebec way the MEQ has been running standardized tests for all potential high school students for 50 some years.No one child seems to have died from test-itis yet.

PS ‘quizes’ Doug is spelled quizzes… a typo we’re sure.

I heard the $42% number at a recent conference:

http://www.ccl-cca.ca/ccl/Newsroom/Releases/11May05-Literacy.html

One of the questions that I have (and I would like to connect with the survey more deeply) has to do with the age categories. This is an adult learning survey, and likely includes a broad spectrum of Canadians: broad in terms of age, cultural background, SES, etc.

I know that the tendency is to point to a failure in the public education system, but which one, in which era, and in which country?

I shall assume all the public monies, the changing of government regulations, as well as the adult remediation funding plus the fundraising/charities to address low literacy that are on the upward climb, and no evidence of flat-lining, has nothing to do with the 42 percent low literacy or the new figure of 48 percent low literacy. Funny thing, follow the money, and most of is handed off to the provincial public education system, to spend it as they see fit, without being held accountable for the state of low literacy in Canada.

Toss in the 2 billion plus industry in tutoring of remediation for the 3 Rs,  one will be scratching their heads, why there should be such emphasis on the 3 Rs,  in the face of statement from within the public education system saying Canada is the third best in reading.  Yet no statements coming from within the education systems of the world, on the upward climb of adults with low literacy skills.

Here’s a link to the International Adult Literacy and Life Skills Survey from which the 42% illiteracy rate is derived. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/050511/dq050511b-eng.htm

Quoting: “The average literacy score for Canadians had not changed significantly during the nine-year period since the last major survey was conducted in 1994….In general, young people perform better than older Canadians. However, after their parents’ education was taken into account, the survey seemed to show an apparent decline in literacy scores among young people aged 16 to 25 between 1994 and 2003.”

About 2% of Canadians “cannot read”.

They are recent immigrants, Aboriginals, old people, or very intellectually limited people.

Those is the survey can read. They are part of a spectrum from non-readers to the university educated. It would be better if their reading was stronger.

Canada has the best readers in the English speaking world and #3 in the entire world.

You will notice in the link 15% at level one. These are the people who have difficulty reading insurance policies, their income tax, etc. Even they can read. Non readers in Canada tiny % many not educated in Canada or having fairly severe learning problems.

The Adult Literacy community has a financial interest in redefining literacy to maintain their grants.

The IALLS separated Canada’s population into four levels. The lowest level, Level 1, which included 15% of Canadians, was defined as “persons with very poor skills, where the individual, for example, may be unable to determine the correct amount of medicine to give a child from information printed on the package”. The second-lowest level, Level 2, which included 27% of Canadians, was defined as “people (who) can only deal with material that is simple, clearly laid out, and in which the tasks involved are not too complex. It denotes a weak level of skill, but more hidden than Level 1. It identifies people who can read but test poorly. They may have developed coping skills to manage everyday literacy demands, but their low level of proficiency makes it difficult for them to face novel demands, such as learning new job skills”. Taken together, the two levels include 42% of Canadians, a figure that is essentially unchanged from 1994, and these citizens are considered illiterate by Statistics Canada. StatsCan makes the point that the adults in the lowest two levels have only a 50% chance of finding a job even after 52 weeks of unemployment.

“However, after their parents’ education was taken into account, the survey seemed to show an apparent decline in literacy scores among young people aged 16 to 25 between 1994 and 2003.”

So, is it valid to take parental education into account, but not parental income level?

I would say that if we’re saying that literacy is on the decrease—and it may be—that we need to look at other aspects of modern life that might provide some clues. Have we become more passive consumers of text? Are we engaging folks with text in a way that is going to help them negotiate meaning in the 21st century?

If we’re looking for school-based links, I would argue that the obsession with literacy scores and the scientific approach to reading instruction has sidelined the things that could really enhance deeper connections and the ability to bring meaning to text. In the end, that is what literacy is all about.

But if we keep stripping down what counts as important in school and focus on doing well on the tests, then prepare to see even greater declines in literacy. I know that it sounds counter-intuitive but…

Even level one “can read” usually at about the grade 9 level.

I did my masters degree in adult literacy, the rule of thunb for equivalency was that the level one tested at or below the grade 9 reading level. The call them illiterate by any stretch of the imagination is absurd.

The difficult part for the reformers comes when they are asked “which countries are better than Canada?” hmmmm they are stuck.

Not a school, not a board, not a city state like Hong Kong or Singapore, a real country.

1994-2003 were the Harris years in Ontario. Reading went up again after that experience.

Any teacher knows that students stretch themselves and struggle to do their very best when reading material that engages them and interests them.

The more we “break it down” to “reading skills” instead of “chilrdrens’ literature’ the more they turn off and turn away.

My 5 year old is enduring poorly written “levelled” books that are zapping both of our love of story. He sees them as “schoolwork”. I see them as…boring!

Phonics helps too, Doug.  I’d love to see the balanced literacy advocates try to learn the Japanese hilangana & katakana.  Just tell the educrats to look at the pictures—they’ll figure it out

If Level One is Grade 9 (“Level 1, which included 15% of Canadians, was defined as “persons with very poor skills, where the individual, for example, may be unable to determine the correct amount of medicine to give a child from information printed on the package”.) God Help Us.

Stephen—-“My 5 year old is enduring poorly written “levelled” books that are zapping both of our love of story. He sees them as “schoolwork”. I see them as…boring!”—-You’re not 5 years old, he is.

Doug—“1994-2003 were the Harris years in Ontario. Reading went up again after that experience.”—-Exactly! Hmm better curriculum, clearer standards, assessments, transparency, a little more accountability…And the problem was…??

My wife wrote the Cantonese and mandarin programs for the ILC, She was in charge of Chinese language for the TBE.

There is an ongoing struggle in Asian language teaching between the “copy out characters” crowd and the “teach oral first and teach characters in context” crowd.

Ask your grade 8 kid to read the medical instructions on the prescription to give medicine to your 4 year old.

1994-2003 the Harris years of war and destruction had to be put behind us before progress could be made. We are still trying to recover educationally from that period.

While I was doing my masters work and serving as the chair of the TBE study on Literacy and on the boards of lieracy groups, 15% of Canadians (many of whom were educated outside Canada and outside Ontario) were considered “functionally illiterate” in that their lower reading skills could hinder progress with their daily lives. Everybody understood very well that these people “could read”.

Could they read an insurance policy or a tax form without verbal or comprehension errors, no of course not. that was the problem.

The functional literacy rate was equated to a grade 9 or less education. Take a look at a grade 6 class. Can they read? Of course they can. Can they read Nuclear Physics? No of course not, neither can most of us.

Adult Literacy data is totally unreliable and it is essentially irresponsible to measure our schools by it,

Many in the difficult to read crowd were not educated in Ontario or Canada, many came to Canada very late, 15% of high school students are SE. This is highly congruent to the 15% FI group.

15 yer olds, educated in Ontario schools are the 3rd best readers in the entire world.

Yes, I know that he’s 5 and I’m not, but I have endured the books longer than he has…he wrote them off a couple of months ago. There’s no story, no draw…just words!