Malkin - in your opinion, if the we’ve had vehicles like the Canadian Achievement Tests and the Canadian Tests of Basic Skills at our disposal what stopped the province from implementing them as the EQAO testing program was being developed. Seems like a no-brainer to me that if measurements like that are seen as a good way to measure what skills students learn that the nay-sayers would be few.

I suspect the teachers’ unions again.  They probably got rid of the CAT & CTBS in the first place, and wouldn’t allow the Harris government to re-introduce them.

Well, here’s MY recollection of how it all unfolded, but Educhatter may want to correct my memory since he was closer to the action than I. It was Bob Rae’s government that created the EQAO, and so they were in charge when the superstructure was being developed. It is my impression that they just left it to the educators. In the beginning, the NDP were asking for yearly testing, but soon the new EQAO people were saying that this was impractical and that they intended to test only a few grades. So the EQAO was pretty much in charge right from the get-go.

Then the NDP government fell and John Snobelen became the new minister of education. His heart was in the right place, but he too trusted his staff - at first. From the “create a crisis fiasco” that totally crippled him, Snobelen learned the hard way that ministry officials were the enemy. But by then it was too late. Earlier in his mandate, he had to appoint the first CEO and he innocently agreed to the appointment of Joan Greene, a staunch supporter of the status quo. We tried to warn him at the time, but he went ahead with the appointment and the rest is history.

We are told that we must have testing to improve the system. The weak schools will receive help to improve. The USA had many years of NCLB. No improvement. Ontario had many years of EQAO, no real improvement. The weak schools don’t get any help. Simply listing them every year accomplishes nothing it seems.

That Dean believes there has been no real improvement isn’t the fault of the test, it’s because I believe that the “experts” and educators have no idea how to improve achievement on a grand scale, so no real improvement will continue to be the case.

Also, the unions like the status quo—no accountability.  Even their members who cheated on the last test will get, at the very most, a slap on the wrist.  If teachers’ pay were based on the achievements of their students, tests would show a dramatic improvement.  We need the tests, but we need real follow-up afterwards (merit pay, etc.); otherwise test scores will remain stagnant

I always thought it spoke volumes that just about nobody ever went beyond quoting the infamous “create a crisis” soundbite to explore what was said before or after.

My understanding is that the point he was making was that big bureaucracies won’t change unless a crisis forces it to.  Certainly there’s enormous pressure in education, from various corners, to carry on the status quo; in that sense Snobelen was spot on.

you’re right John L. re: Snobelen’s remarks. I remember that speech and it sure has been tweeked to suit the likes of the teacher unions, yet few clarify the meaning.