This is an interesting post. You should know that many, many teachers begin the year with the same type of figures in front of them. I’ve sat with my colleagues on many a September afternoon trying to figure out how much time is really available to us.

There are a couple of interesting subtleties in your post, Malkin. One is that instructional time is the same as learning time (and vice versa). Just because things are “being taught” doesn’t mean that they are being learned. In the same way, not all things learned are the result of instruction.

The real question for me is how to make time spent in school more efficient and valuable. Interruptions throughout the day were one of the major differences between the North American school system and the Japanese system. Japanese visitors could not believe that classes were disturbed so much by announcements, students coming to the door, etc.

I am looking forward to hearing other comments on Ms. Dare’s post. I for one, think that we can streamline things in our schools much more than they are. I don’t want to give up gardens, recess, the Arts, Physical Education in order to keep noses to the grindstone.

That said, I do agree that we have learned much about what makes for effective learning environments since the days when it was a requirement in Ontario that a schoolteacher keep a school garden.

Flow and momentum are important. But so is the ability to make use of those experiences that we sometimes sideline in the name of teaching the basics.

After all, how many classes these days are learning about the characteristics of living things without ever seeing or touching anything that is alive? How many students are learning about measurement of area and perimeter without ever having to build or construct anything. Yet aren’t these are skills and aptitudes that any gardener uses in the work that she does?

Show me a garden and I will show you a living and breathing learning (and teaching) opportunity!

Dare I say that the proof of the pudding is in the eating?   

The question to ask is does it all translate into actual, measurable learning?

many issues in education
are NOT
either- or
but both

This is oin of them

A good question, Doretta, but it begs another one around what we mean by actual and measurable. Not to dance around semantics, but many would agree that we’ve narrowed our vision of learning so much that we’re missing much along the way!

There is so much learning is valuable, actual, but not easily measured. But it is still desirable and important.

(I wish there were more people around my house that actually cared about tending the garden!)

Mr. Hurley, my take on what you’re saying is that you are dancing.  Teachers and all educators need to be focused.  Your first role is to teach children numeracy, and literacy skills, along with cursive writing and spelling and grammar (in case these aren’t under the umbrella of literacy skills).  Then if you have time, go on your field trips and explore ‘immearsurable learning’.  I can’t figure out why you’re talking about all of these other abstract ideas when children are not learning properly?  Surely you know very well that this is the most important task.  If children in some classrooms were up to their grade standards, it would be delightful to see them gardening as well, but not at the expense of core curricula…  This is so easy, that I’m baffled by your remarks.

Hey I’m not against music, drama, enjoying nature etc. in school.  I know that studying these can help other learning.  I strongly believe in a well-rounded education—but not at the expense of fundamental literacy and numeracy, which is the point of Malkin’s post.  At SQE we see too many kids who can’t read or do simple mathematics and the data supports our position. 

I realize that to enjoy music, or any of the arts, you don’t have to pass a test, although additional knowledge of same allows one to enhance that appreciation.  But even musicians have to pass assessments of their skills before they can move on in their studies. 

And for the record, I like gardening (especially roses) too.   It’s about finding the right balance.

Of course, Doretta.  I think that educators just throw out these statements, i.e.:  we can’t stop teaching phys ed, music, art, because they want to muddy the debate.  Of course these are wonderful to have in school, however the primary focus should be numeracy and literacy.  Others are enhancements.  To state the obvious:  what benefit does a child have who can play the clarinet, but can’t read—which one will serve him best?  The answer’s as plain as the nose on our faces; yet we are always drawn into these tangled webs cast by educrats (no offence Mr. Hurley).  If we simply stuck to the bottom line and focus…

No offence taken Bev. I’m the furthest thing from an educrat that you’ll find!!!

Good conversation though!

Jan Wong, getting attacked on all sides, because is questioning the eco-ideology that lies behind the gardens of schools today. Even personal attacks when she informs readers, “That’s what Chairman Mao said when he shipped millions of Chinese youth to the countryside - and abandoned them there.”  Much like the abandonment of our youth, with various levels of the 3 Rs, without the skills needed to navigate in their life. Instead, they are well schooled on eco-ideology, and all of the other mushy dogma, that leave one generation after another without the skills to behave independently, and to make good choices in their life. Very difficult to do, when their heads are filled with propaganda and dogma of some Utopian society, and the world pressing in with all their messages, it is difficult to sort out the messages.

Why I laugh, the Waldorf school, has the goats and chickens, in the middle of the city, and big fat fines for residences who dare to have a few chickens, rabbits, or goats in their backyards. They get the message as well as the rest of residents under a certain income level, that the keeping of animals is a health threat as well as to the sensitive noses who believe in eco-ideology and dogma, only the well-heeled should have access to this kind of learning.

Of course, it is ensure that most real learning cannot take place, since the removal of all wood shops, home economics, mechanics, and tech shops, and in its place, pseudo-learning with lots of ideology and dogma, After all, you can’t have students like the ones from Bendale Business and Technical Institute leaving for jobs after high school, or what would happen to all the mickey-mouse certificates at the college level, that more or less, are addressing the weaker skills in the 3 Rs, with a little bit of knowledge.

Stephen - ” After all, how many classes these days are learning about the characteristics of living things without ever seeing or touching anything that is alive? How many students are learning about measurement of area and perimeter without ever having to build or construct anything. Yet aren’t these are skills and aptitudes that any gardener uses in the work that she does?”

After the eco-nuts and the rest who believe whole heartily their own dogma and ideology, the answer to your question lies within the rules and regulations. Can’t even have a tadpole or tadpoles in the classroom, or a bunch of worms sitting in a pot of soil. Oh my, that brings disease, or too messy, too much work for both teachers and janitors, and while they come up with their excuses based on regulations, the kids sit on the floor to eat their lunch, because they are not allow to eat at their desks. Apparently for health reasons, and how twisted the folks are who are in charge of programming, twisting what might make good learning for one and all, into something that might be dangerous to one’s health. Each and every rural school, could have its own outdoor eco lab, studying the natural habitat found in ponds. Science, math all rolled into one, where students understand what is clean water, and why some water can be drank without ill-effects,.

I agree with Wong, let’s stopped mucking around for those who do not intend to be farmers, and other careers, and start teaching skills that would be useful in the students’ daily lives, and a nice fit to elicit math and science skills, that are far more useful that the eco-ideology and the rest of the dogma, that does nothing for the skills.

Perhaps Jan Wong is being
“attacked on al sides” is because her arguments are found wanting.
Test score have value but they are limited.
We have more than a century of data world wide to show this.

What is always forgotten, in the late 50s, throughout the 60s and almost to the end of the 1970s, students had testing for the 3 Rs, had public exams, gym 3 times a week in a high school, including one period for health, shop and home economics, and somehow, they walk out with a solid foundation and skills that were actually useful in their lives.

The off-loading of the 3 Rs, to be taught elsewhere or when the schools saw fit to teach them, the gym, art and music classes are seen as minor subjects, and much more important to learn more about who painted a art piece, rather than doing an art piece. By the 1990s, welcome to the world, where ideology and dogma is far more important than the explanation and why some animals and insects are bad for the garden and others are good for the garden. Of course the dogma is, the kids things that when they grow up, they hire someone or learned it on the net. After all, they have this funny idea, that basics and the day to day skills can be learned at any time in their lives. If not, society will always pick up for them, and their follow co-workers after all, have their best interests for them. I guess, you have never run into the cashier that cannot figure out discounts, and wants to ripped you off by a few dollars. Real treat today if you ever do,  but perhaps standards are lower for you.

“We observe cosmic cycles, the moon cycles,” explains Eva Cabaca, the school’s gardening teacher. “We are healing land with special preparations. We are sensitive to the seasons so that everything works in a harmonious way.” When I ask if the students also learn to butcher the chickens and goats, she recoils. “No! No!”, she says, shaking her head. Waldorf students brown bag lunch, so they rarely eat the produce except at a single “harvest” dinner to which families are invited each fall.”

Cosmic cycles and moon cycles?  ”  Esoteric cosmology is cosmology that is an intrinsic part of an esoteric or occult system of thought. It almost always deals with at least some of the following themes: emanation, involution, spiritual evolution, epigenesis, planes of existence or higher worlds (and their emanation and the connections between them), hierarchies of spiritual beings, cosmic cycles (e.g., cosmic year, Yuga), yogic or spiritual disciplines and techniques of self-transformation, and references to mystical and altered states of consciousness.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esoteric_cosmology

Skills of learning to plant a garden, questionable. Cosmic cycles?  Really, the focus should be on the number of sunny days, rainy days, and temperatures. Can’t be too worry about sunspots and the amount of UVA rays beaming unto the garden. Although, no doubt pollution particles inside Toronto , may be of a concern, especially if one is trying to grow organically.

In the comment section - “But, my son is in grade 1 in a TDSB school. I was at curriculum night last night, and the teacher let us know that there is no way she keep track of the various reading levels of her 19 students.” She went on, worrying about the basics, but she accept that the teacher of 19 grade 1 students could not keep track of the reading levels.  Sounds more like conditioning the parents to picked up all things that the school is no longer willing to teach. As she noted, it is the parents’ duty to pick up and note reading levels at home. Let us hope, her children never run into learning difficulties, they get a double whammy of ideology and dogma, without a solid foundation to stand on.

Perhaps, Wong was wrong to equate achievement to gardens, and she should have focus on the fact of the questionable curriculum associated with gardens, that speaks more about ideology, and other soft skills, than the math and science, to which there is very little of.

A century of data, plus another set of data, that each generation starting around the 1980s do not have the basic skills needed to navigate in this world. After all, sewing, swinging a hammer, installing an electric plug, fixing a leaking toilet, or even a leaky tap, or even learning to cook from scratch according to the education field are no longer necessary for the 21st century. But apparently learning about the cosmos cycle is, and moon cycles is vital, rather than learning why dish soap and water can keep the bugs off, without harming the plants. An old solution, that still works even in the 21st century. But than again according to a parent, the grade one teacher of 19 students, can no longer keep track of reading levels of her students. What are the priorities, if not reading levels?  Ideology and dogma?

Stephen,

Since you began this blog with the example of you and your colleagues discussing how much you spend on academics, I’d be interested in hearing from an elementary teacher how comfortable you feel with Ms. Dare’s assertion that half the classrooms in Ontario spend 38% or less time on academics.  I’m assuming that she means elementary because in secondary the percentage is nowhere near that low. 

Oddly enough, 100% of my time in math class is devoted to teaching the kids math.  Ms. Dare also knows that 18 out of the 30 required courses for graduation are compulsory and weighted heavily to math, science and English.  Of the other 12, students do have leeway, but most use those credits for courses necessary for university entrance (more math, science, English).  Others take courses that may lead to possible job paths.  I don’t believe even Ms. Dare would assume that auto shop is a fluff course for a student contemplating becoming a mechanic.

Wayne, yes I’ve been thinking about this today, and I would like to take time to provide the feedback that you’re requesting.

I’m going to have to wait until tomorrow though as I’m in the middle of some stuff. I hope that my final figuring is higher than 38%...

More tomorrow!

stephen

I’ll go over the numbers in more detail, but my initial calculations, based on my discussions with colleagues is closer to 25% of lost instructional time each year.

We actually have 188 instructional days this year, once you deduct the 6 professional activity days.

More “life on the ground” numbers tomorrow!

I arrived at 178 mandated instructional days by also deducting the up to 10 examination days allowed by the province (http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/general/list/calendar/holidaye.html), proceeding on the assumption that the maximum number of examination days would be taken in most cases. Please correct me if I am wrong in this assumption?

Thanks for that Stephen, I’ll wait for the final results tomorrow.

Ms. Dare,

Examination days are for secondary students.  Elementary students receive normal instruction on those days.  So, which students are you talking about - elementary or secondary?

Best e-mail of 2011 and fits quite nicely with the above instruction discussion. Stephen, I thought of you when I was reading it, on the political pages, and how teachers and their responsibilities have evolved into being social worker, chief bottle washer, and security person, and part-time instructor?

“Subject: Fwd: Fwd: BEST E-MAIL OF YEAR 2011 ***THINK ABOUT IT CANADA***

Begin forwarded message:

Nominated For “Best Email Of The Year 2011”
After being interviewed by the school administration, the prospective teacher said:
‘Let me see if I’ve got this right.

‘You want me to go into that room with all those kids, correct their disruptive behavior, observe them for signs of abuse, monitor their dress habits, censor their T-shirt messages, and instill in them a love for learning.

‘You want me to check their backpacks for weapons, wage war on drugs and sexually transmitted diseases, and raise their sense of self esteem and personal pride.

‘You want me to teach them patriotism and good citizenship, sportsmanship and fair play, and how to register to vote, balance a checkbook, and apply for a job.

‘You want me to check their heads for lice, recognize signs of antisocial behavior, and make sure that they all pass the final exams.

‘You also want me to provide them with an equal education regardless of their handicaps, and communicate regularly with their parents in English, Spanish or any other language, by letter, telephone, newsletter, and report card.

‘You want me to do all this with a piece of chalk, a blackboard, a bulletin board, a few books, a big smile, and a starting salary that qualifies me for food stamps.

‘You want me to do all this and then you tell me . . . I Can’t Pray!”

I was more thinking of the elementary panel - so obviously my 338 hours estimate needs to be raised. I’m looking forward to Stephen’s calculation. It would also be interesting to get Mr. Wainscotting’s estimate for high school - given that the clock starts ticking at 178 days and of course most students get spares…

Another responsibility for teachers, soon to come compliments of the Toronto Board. Serious, but just watch it being used as the excuse for students who are failing, and to add more rules, to protect children, compliments of the nanny police. Does a class have the time to fit in another topic, in between teaching the core subjects? 

“This means shifting the onus onto educators to lead the way in brain injury prevention, treatment and management.

“There’s an obligation for school boards to weigh in heavily on concussion education and prevention because there’s a huge impact on student learning,” said Catherine Fife, president of the Ontario Public School Boards Association.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/public-schools-consider-larger-role-in-head-injury-management/article2191343/

Mr. Ng, you’ve painted a rosey picture of what children require in order to graduate from secondary school, so why do so many come out of highschool so woefully lacking in literacy and numeracy skills?  Regardless of how rosey a picture is painted, many of the ‘required courses’ are very easy and no where near international standards. 
Mr. Hurley, perhaps you don’t waste time, and being self-motivated is commendable, but there are many teachers who waste a tremendous amount of time, and I’ve been told by children who can’t read that their teachers oftentimes begin a year gung-ho, but this enthusiasm wains during the year, so that by winter, the kids say they’re doing nothing. 
There’s no accountability, which seriously impacts our educational system, and the above are direct/indirect results.

Good morning,

I’ve done some reflection and number crunching around my experience as an elementary teacher.

This is actually a good exercise to go through, and I would look forward to hearing from any other elementary educators who may have a different way of approaching this.

FIrst, on paper, Malkin is right in that there are 300 available minutes per day for formal instruction/learning activities. That’s what I got when I took school hours and subtracted recess (30 min) and lunch (60 min).

But that doesn’t take into consideration that many, many students receive additional help, tutoring, and assistance during both recess and lunch hours. As an example, I had “open” time in my classroom last year every recess that I wasn’t assigned a yard duty, and most lunch hours. This was for students to do work, check with me on instructional items and receive individual help. This has been my practice for many years, and I know that I’m not alone in this.

But, let’s work with the official 300 minutes that Malkin correctly identifies. That’s 5 hours per day

So, over the course of the 188 instructional days (after 6 P.A. days are deducted), that gives us 940 hours per school year where “instruction” can take place.

Malkin lists off a number of things to be deducted from that number, but the list doesn’t provide any solid numbers from which to work. So, I thought about some of the items on the list.

These days, field trips are difficult to organize given increased focus on literacy and numeracy blocks, planning time arrangements and the high cost of transportation. (This will change even more as limits to what we can ask students to contribute become district policy)

But I put 2 field trip days in my calculations, which would translate into 10 hours of instructional time.

One of the realities in elementary is what Malkin identifies as “transition time”. This is signicant. If you consider that, in the morning, by the time kids get in, get their stuff off, get settled, and then listen to announcements, you’re already 15 minutes into the day. There are ways that I’ve learned to deal with this, including having activities for students to do as soon as they come into the classroom. But, my own recollection of the last few years is that, with a 9:15 start, I was able to really get going by 9:30.

In addition, before and after recess time requires about 10 minutes, especially with the younger children. We’re not permitted to take snacks outside, so a 5 minute snack time on either end of recess is necessary. Then another 5 minutes to get settled after recess. So 10 minutes is the consideration here.

Then there are the other things that happen throughout the week: assemblies, the collection of money for fund-raising, etc. I’ve averaged this time out to an average of 20 minutes per day, understanding that there are some days with none of this happening and other days when there is an increase in these events.

So, when tally up announcements, transitions, and other events, you’re looking at an average of just over an hour per day. Significant, but a reality of the current structure of school.

Now, I don’t agree that the total month of June is a write-off. When I first began teaching, things slowed down in June, but that is not true anymore. Last year, for example, we were in full flight until the last full week of school. But I will give you that there are days that are more intensely “instructional” than others. So, I’ve built in 7 days or 25 hours of lost time per year for things that are listed: class celebrations, etc., to be generous.

So, I think that I’ve accounted for everything that Malkin addresses in her original post.

Even if we were to assume that nothing of educational value happened during these “deductibles”, the amount of instructional time available to teachers is actually twice as much as what Malkin identifies:

In hours:

940-188 hours (“interruptions/transitions)

= 752 hours

752-35 hours (7 days of non-instructional activites: celebrations, etc)

= 717 available hours per year

717/940*100 gives us 76% of the allotted time during a school year available for instruction.

Two final things: I’m quite open to the fact that I may be a little off in some of my calculations, but I’m going from my experience as a classroom teacher at a number of elementary grade levels.

Finally, there is another conversation to be had about the value of some of the things that look like fluff or mere program enhancements.

This is just a response to the numbers, and my best response to the original 38%.

Please let me know if you feel I’ve left something out.

My work day beckons!

Stephen

Nancy,

I’ve printed a copy of that email. It’s wonderful and responds nicely to earlier comments that our first role as teachers is to teach literacy and numeracy.

There is so much that surrounds that role.

My first role, I believe, is to teach children, and to help them become active members of this world.

Literacy and numeracy are incredibly important to this project, which is why the majority of timetable minutes at elementary are dedicated to these. But, as Nancy’s email has pointed out, there is a whole set of complexities that challenge the notion that, “if we only do this, then this will happen.”

But that is what I love about this work.

Any teacher worth the title “professional” struggles every day to make their classrooms an engaging, meaningful and responsive learning environment for all students. And every teacher worth the title “professional” struggles every day with the realization that they fall short on most days.

And there are many reasons for that.

Here is another, that is in direct opposition of your last words somewhat, “Any teacher worth the title “professional” struggles every day to make their classrooms an engaging, meaningful and responsive learning environment for all students. And every teacher worth the title “professional” struggles every day with the realization that they fall short on most days.”

“Every kind of award you would receive as a teacher just validates the types of things you did in a classroom every day to make learning enjoyable for your students,” he was quoted as saying in an article. “You never know what you do and what you say that is going to impact a young person.”

Lederer received the Baillie Awards for Excellence in Secondary School Teaching from Queen’s University this spring. Chancellor Emeritus A. Charles Baillie established the awards to honour Canadian educators who made a positive influence on high school students as a role model and mentor, instilled a love of learning and inspired academic excellence and the pursuit of higher education.

On World Teachers’ Day, Lederer shares with Dialogue Online the top three things he does to help students succeed:

1. Mastery Learning: You don’t get 80 per cent? You rewrite until you do! Not optional, either. Students know that they need to succeed to a high degree, and that I will provide all the means of support to get them the mark they really want and need. (Students’ first mark on anything does count, and then it’s averaged with the maximum you can get on a rewrite, which is 80 per cent. First efforts always count but don’t constitute everything in the assessment of student learning.)

2. No Zero Policy: You can’t exhibit mastery if you don’t do the work. In doing this for 21 of my 29 years of teaching, I’ve never had one student NOT hand in an assignment, a quiz, a test or a lab report.

3. Be there for your students. Care.”

http://dialogueonline.ca/three-things-that-make-a-great-teacher/4630/

Sounds to me, this teacher is closing the door on activities plus the rest of the self-serving pseudo-learning, for active learning with high goals attached. If anything this teacher doesn’t accept 50 % as acceptable for any student, My kind of teacher, who will not use excuses, and instead finds a way to overcome.

Hi Nancy,

Thanks for sharing this. I’m curious as to why you feel that these sentiments contradict my last statement.

Yep, my kind of teacher too.  Thanks for sharing Nancy.

Each of the three statements made here resonate with me as well. I have found the same reaction from students when I announce my no-zero policy. Work gets done, comes in and, in this way, provides a starting point for further learning.

Number One and Number Two, in fact, can work quite nicely in conjunction with each other.

Words like this, although it can be found throughout the education systems, in their mission statements, and coming out of the mouths of politicians celebrating the snail increases after great expense - ” to make their classrooms an engaging, meaningful and responsive learning environment for all students.”

The teacher who won this impressive award, states mastery. No fancy words attached to it.And as he stated, ” In doing this for 21 of my 29 years of teaching, I’ve never had one student NOT hand in an assignment, a quiz, a test or a lab report.”

And he probably had a very engage class, meaningful and a responsive class, in the last 21 years. The first 8 years was the slow realization what was taught to him in teachers’ college, must be discarded, because it provides the base for excuses, as well as badly behaved students, to low achievement. A teacher who thinks mastery is the most important factor, are teachers who refuse to dance upside down, spinning around just to gain the attention of a student or students. Having a song fest, will not help a struggling student to master material, because it is a short term feeling. Mastery is the key to motivate students internally, rather than relying on outside external factors to motivate students.

Give the students the tools needed for mastery, and high standards, there is no need for outside motivation measures to be imposed upon the students. Unfortunately, the school boards and the upper levels of the public education system think otherwise. It is this prevailing attitude of people at these levels, that simply do not believe mastery is important, or even needed for today’s students. But if you had by youngest child, you would be faced with examining the beliefs and values that there must be something to mastery and high achievement. Mastery is the last thing on the minds of those, above the school level, and rather blame low achievement on SEC factors and in the end the students. Mastery does not serve the best interests of those who work and profit by the public education system. It is why, approximately 4 % of the LD population will make it to post-secondary, or otherwise, if mastery was a key concerning policies, 96 % of the LD group would enter post-secondary directly after grade 12. I only cited one set of stats, and there is many more instances regarding stats and sub-groups of students.

A clarification from above. I do agree with the willingness of students and teachers to work until they reach the goal. It’s not always practical, depending on how many other expectations are required over the course of the year.

We’ve been having discussions around here related to how marks are calculated. Averaging in a first attempt “failure”, while seemingly fair on the surface, may not be a true reflection of the learning that has taken place over time.

For example, if I get a 32% on an early term math test, but work really hard and score an 80% on both the final test and the final assignment, my score is going to be less than an 80%. In fact, it is going to be a 64%, an unacceptable grade.

The opening 32%, in my mind (and practice) should count as an indication of the work that is still to be done. If I then “get it”, why should my final mark not reflect that?

It’s an interesting conversation and one that always stirs up some strong feelings.

Ah, that’s what I thought Nancy. I also believe that mastery is the goal. I’ve learned though that the conditions for learning (engagement, relevance, meaningful connections) ground and support that mastery.

For me, the conditions are never the goal of the learning, but just that: the conditions that can have a profound effect on the outcomes.

If we have an engaging environment and students aren’t learning, then that is unacceptable.

But the real, deep and lasting learning I’m after comes only when the conditions are right.

I understand that the jargon is out there, and is sometimes detached from the real goals and outcomes of our work.

So much has gone on here, I’ll try to answer all questions raised.  But first of all, much thanks to Stephen - that was a lot of work.  I admit that I was curious from a parent’s point of view as well.  It would appear that an adequate amount of time is spent on academics in elementary schools.  Could it be more?  That would be for those expert in the field to answer.

Now to answer Ms. Dare.  (Sorry Stephen) My job is dead simple.  I don’t need to worry about spares, travel time, and so on.  Since the 1970’s (probably earlier) there has been one ‘gold standard’ if you will for high school credits.  A credit has long been defined as ‘110 hours of instructional time’.  One change from the 1970’s to now is the movement from year-long classes to semesters.  Ms Dare, you said you have the school calendar.  To find the fall semester, count the number of instructional days from September (after Labour Day) to the beginning of exams in January - do not count PD/PA Days, exam days, holidays or weekends.  You will find that there are 89 instructional days in that semester.  In fact, do the same for the spring semester and you will also count exactly 89 instructional days (ie:  89 x 2 = 178 days as you counted).  In semestered schools, classes are usually 75 minutes long (some schools are 80).  My school has 75 minute periods.  Multiply 75 x 89 = 6675 instructional minutes divide by 60 and you get 111.25 instructional hours - in fact exactly one more class than required for the 110 instructional hours (ie:  88 75 minute classes = 110 hours).

Now, let’s take a look at interruptions.  There may be one or two missed classes for assemblies.  Up here in the boonies, we generally miss one or two classes per semester for extreme weather. Let’s make that four missed classes in total so far.  For those who haven’t been in high school since the 1950’s, you need to understand that students choose their own timetables, they don’t move in blocks anymore.  In other words, if the English teacher, Mrs. Shaw, takes her class to Niagara on the Lake to see Pygmalion, I might be missing 2 or 3 students in my math class - NOT the entire class.  So, I’m not going to have 22 students ‘sit tight’ for a period waiting for the Shaw trippers to come back - we move on.  It is up to those who were away to seek extra help to get caught up.

Therefore, Ms. Dare, there may be dozens of interruptions per month in our school for trips, activities and sports - that is meaningless for my math class.  I get 85 (89 - 4) out of the 88 classes I need - or 96.6% of my time is spent on academic pursuits.  I did try to warn you that secondary is much higher. 

As for students with spares, I don’t see how that impacts my math class.  Lest you think that the taxpayers are being ripped off, the Ministry gives funding based on FTE (Full Time Equivalent).  In other words, if a student is taking 6 out of 8 classes (ie: 2 spares), the the board gets 66% of the funding of a full time student.  So students taking spare don’t cost you a cent, you can sleep easy at night.

Finally, Bev - I wasn’t painting any kind of ‘rosy picture’.  It was a simple statement of the kinds of credits students opt for.  Why do we see such poor results?  That is a discussion outside the bounds of this thread, and one we’ve covered before.  However, relevant to this thread:  I have taken pains to show you that a semester is 89 days long.  We have students who are absent from class 40, 50, 60, 75, even 80 periods.  Rather difficult to be competent and successful in class if you are only present one or two out of every ten days, wouldn’t you say?

Wayne, I had no idea that funding at the high school level was tied to the number of courses that a student has. There is the rule at the local high school level, that all full time students must take a full slate, with absolutely no spare periods. For the few part timers, are students who need to picked up a course or two to meet the requirements of a post-secondary institute. After the class is over with, they must leave the school grounds, unless it is directly connected to their course of studies. Only full time students enjoyed the after school activities and other benefits that the high school has. Minimum courses is 7, where 8 is often the norm for senior grades.

”  Could it be more?  That would be for those expert in the field to answer”  Do you mean the experts at the board level or higher? Just wondering, because often they are underlying cause for teachers and students difficulties. As well as the absent record of students which is often overused as a regular excuse from the board level and up. But as I have pointed out over the years, to the those at the board level, who have no listening skills when others point out, being present everyday, is no guarantee for students to be successful in school, especially when students are having difficulties. Often the only choice is to dumb down the student’s work, to meet the demands being imposed from the top, as well as the demands laterally at the bottom levels.

Many times throughout the elementary level, my child was not progressing, and in the process learning bad habits and thinking either negative thoughts or playing the game of doing the least amount of work, because nothing was expected from her. As a parent, I beamed in on instruction and curriculum quite early on, and the quality of instruction time. Of course my focus was on my child, and from this end, it certainly looks like a waste of instruction time, when it could be put to better use addressing the weaknesses in the 3 Rs. to improve her performance and participation in class.

The elementary and high school years are two different beasts. As you have stated, at the high school level there may not be a loss of instruction time due to interruptions, but as high school teachers, you are dealing with the big elephant in the room, the many different levels in the foundation of students, and the reality that many do not have the skills for post-secondary education. Skills that should have been taught at the elementary level, and the same skills that the upper levels of the education system, no longer seem to think that they are no longer as important. Skills such as mastery, before moving to the next level. No point in talking about a ‘big idea’ in math, if the grade 1 students barely know how to count to 20, without tripping up. But as the eggheads at the board or higher, will defend their practices and curriculum, and will not listen to parents or even heed the words of teachers at the front line.

Below is a hour presentation, where the board/ministry staff have no time or even the intent to look at the practices and curriculum exploring the weaknesses and how to improve it, making better effective instruction time for one and all.

“Featuring Dr. Steven Graham, Dr. Louisa Moats, and Dr. Susan Neuman in a discussion about teaching writing. These three renowned reading and writing experts address why writing is important, what the latest research tells us, and what educators and parents can do to support our children’s development as writers.”
http://www.readingrockets.org/webcasts/3001/

Mr. Ng, even though this topic, according to you, doesn’t belong here, you commented anyhow by saying that students are very often absent from class, so you imply, ‘how can they be taught?.  So, my question, why are they graduating?

Interesting story on the chair of the Ontario College of Teachers’ discipline committee.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2011/10/05/ontario-teachers-discipline-chair-resigns.html

Sorry wrong thread.

Hi,

Before I respond, I need to clear up a major typo.  I do try hard to get these posts right, but sometimes errors do creep in.  I don’t know what I was thinking, but 6 of 8 is 75%, not 66%.  Sorry.

Nancy, by experts in the field, I meant people involved in elementary education, like Stephen.  Between you and me, I’ve never met too many people at the board level that were expert at anything.    However, I’ve become an expert over the years at being able to tune them out!

Bev, in my experience, students who are absent that often do not graduate.  But, I do take your point that too many students who are graduating do not possess an adequate level of the skills they ought to have.  There are many reasons.  Many have been discussed on other threads, some recently.  Others may be able to chime in with situations they have run across, but here are some:

a)  I’ll be blunt and up front, there are some teachers who feel that ANY work they get from students is wonderful and credit-worthy and bend over backwards (mentally) to justify giving them a credit.

b)  Someone mentioned that principals have always been the only one with the authority to grant credits.  I’ve spoken to quite a few colleagues who have had their final marks changed by principals - some by much more than just a passing mark (eg:  turning a 45 into a 75).

c)  Summer school.  I’ve had a number of students who failed grade 9 math show up in grade 10 lists.  When the teacher checked, the student got 80% in summer school.  Odd, student gets 40% in my class, 80% in summer school, 40% in grade 10 regular school - what do you think they did next summer?

d)  Alternate programs - way too open ended and unsupervised.  Students asked to complete courses on their own through an advisor, but not necessarily a math teacher, or science teacher, etc.  Interesting how they couldn’t put two credits together in regular school, but get enough work done in two months to justify 6 credits?  Hmmm?

e)  Credit mills - ‘nuff said.

I’m sure that others can lengthen the list for us.  By whatever method these students get through, you can bet for every one that does it increases pressure on those dinosaurs like me to give up silly principles like standards and just ‘go with the flow’.

However, the silver lining in all this fiasco may be the students themselves.  So many are beginning to push the boundaries so far that no principal would ever be able to stick up for them.  For example, if the principal comes to me and asks why Student A should not get a credit in my class, and I answer, “80 absences”, what are they going to say?

Wow.  What we’re missing here of course is that in a perfect world where parents/students/teachers were given choices, supported for those choices and respected we’d have schools for those who wished “gardening” method of educating youngsters and schools which cater to those wishing a traditional skills based education.

What would happen Wayne, if a typical high school did an analysis of the incoming students of grade 9, using the school records of the students, going back to grade 1. What would happen, if it was determine that 60 % of the incoming students, need drastic upgrading on their foundation skills? What would happen if the other 40 % of students needed fine tuning and specific targeting of strengthening the skills, of the individual as well as the whole class?

There is few students in the local high school pushing the boundaries. because a system has been put in place where the school knows where each student stands academically on any day of the school year. The only boundaries that are being pushed, are the students who is looking for a few extra marks to make it a 60 or closer to a 70. As for not doing homework, the penalty is detention after school, until homework is completed. A zero for all assignments delivery late after three chances.
And instead of the students pushing boundaries, the school has turned the tables, and are pushing the boundaries. Parents even gets a phone call for failing a pop quiz, and expects parents to do their part in assuring it will not be a repeat performance for the student.

What is the aim of the local high school? To ensure that each and every student has the skills and ability to enter post secondary. So students who are making constant errors in multiplication, are told to bone up on the multiplication tables. Practice make perfect as well as automatic recall of basic math facts. My child no longer feels funny, when every once in a while, I tell her to practice on her Wii, her math facts. Where grammar lessons are taught, along side the curriculum and outcomes in English. She has plenty of company, where parents are telling their kids to practice the basic facts. And progress is noted for the kids who for the most part have been the low achievers, by the teachers and principal out in the hallways, good job, and not in some assembly. Higher status if a student is signal out by a teacher in a hallway, than any assembly. Sure there is problems, but a lot the problems stems from the board level and structure of the system, that hinders student achievement as well as reaching the full potential of each student. But the school found a way around it, without upsetting the tender sensibilities of those who dwell at the board level.

And the students are motivated because they are getting the tools and skills to do the work that is required of them at the high school level. Better behaved teenagers, who are more focus and actually like attending school.

And you are right, teachers and the principal know what the problems are, but have little recourse because the restrictions that have been placed upon the school, and the many completing self-serving agendas, that are not in the best interests of the students, or the staff that work in the classrooms. I only know too well that a solid foundation is no longer a requirement in the eyes of those who are at the board level and the levels above the board. The only saving grace is the individual teachers and sometimes a principal. In elementary, it was always the principal who was the first line of defense to denied services. But I soon learn, to bypass the lower levels, and go to the ministry. Even than, the principal and board move like snails, while complaining I did not have to go up high. I would have loved to be a fly on the wall, on the phone calls from the staff of the ministry when talking to board staff.

I am just as cynical as you are on the antics of the students, but my cynicism is, high schools and will they still be dealing with all the fall out of elementary schools,  not teaching the skills and providing a solid foundation, to do high school work even after 20 years from now?

Some good questions here Nancy. Implicit in all of your musing, I suspect, is the question, “What happens when test scores and graduation rates become indicators of student success instead of real learning?”

The “data” around both of these is seductive and, unfortunately, have been pressed into double duty. Test scores and graduation rates have become the indicators used to judge school quality; they have also been the indicators used to judge political effectiveness.

Holding test scores and graduation rates up as the sole indicators of success and quality will almost always lead to the type of activity described by Wayne. At best, they are symptoms of success.

Never thought it that way, but I never put much stock in the scores, but than it has been an indicator for parents, on how well a school does, compared to another school. Especially, if one is thinking of moving, and one does not have insider’s information.

Too bad, if they had cracked open all the hard copies on test results, more than likely they would have discovered the real reason why kids were failing. The inability to expressed themselves and the various reading problems. Also the problem can be found in the students that passed, but indicates weaknesses in some aspect of writing, and not so much in reading. The third factor is the number of students reaching high levels in the 4s and 5s. I believe knowledge is not the problem, unless there has been a severe absentee problem. Very easy, to focus on teachers, by focusing on the scores, rather than the hard copies.

But than again, if hard copies were used, the evidence within would be further support that there is a huge problem with the curriculum, and the same curriculum as well as other practices are not in the control of the schools, but the upper levels. The second part is the background knowledge of students, and the questions that are asked, making the assumption that all students have been exposed to. Like the grade 6 test, describing two characters in Peter Pan. A book that was never on the menu, and my child dislike Peter Pan. The only character she could remember was Tinkerbell, and she thought Captain Hook, was Captain Cook. More than likely she earned a failing grade, judging from the scores on the categories. I would have loved to see the hard copy of the grade 6 one, if only to see how much emphasis is put on having the correct opinion of the marker, as well as being very wordy, even though the grammar is horrible as well as the spelling. I suspect biases plays a role with the markers, since in part subjective criteria is used.

Third concern, is the handicapping of students to where the standard norms is the best achievers, who normally do not require a dictionary, and have good to excellent skills in reading and writing. The rules fits perfect for these students, but trouble comes for the rest of the students with their various levels of reading and writing.

There is other concerns, but as my youngest would state, what is the point of pictures, words and numbers. She probably had the correct answer, but more than likely she was being tested for her creativity, and not the actual math. In grade 6, another year failing the math portion, and she managed to do worse than in grade 3, even though her math average was in the low 80s by grade 6.

Criterion Reference Tests has its drawbacks, but the wide use of them in Canada gives the advantage to the upper levels to be used as political fodder, and keep the focus on rising achievement rather than the reasons why students are failing in parts and/all of the testing, academically speaking. Or otherwise, they might just be grammar, spelling, and remediation of basic numeracy skills, along side the regular curriculum.

I believe standard testing brings data to the table, that has great value, but many parents would disagree with me. that it brings no value, and therefore the testing should be eliminated. I believed it is not the knowledge that students are lacking, but the skills that they are lacking to expressed themselves in writing and reading. The only way to verify it, is to examine the hard copies of the tests, after the markers are finished with them. Rather comical, if the marker was incorrectly grading the test, and the school pointed it out. . .

Some clarification.

Standardized test are so named because their design, administration, and scoring are exactly the same regardless of who writes them or scores them or supervises the test taking.
They can only test some basic knowledge and skill but they are high in reliability; i.e., you can’t fudge the scores.
They have a place like taking your temperature does in checking for signs of illness.
But they do not tell you for certain, if something is wrong, why it is wrong, or what to do about it.

They do NOT set standards; people do.
Once standards are set standardized testing serve as one indicator of success or its lack.

Now, however useful the EQAO tests may be, do they meet the strict criteria for being standardized or are they merely examples, maybe good ones,
of large scale assessment?

Here is some information, although American, but are directed at the teachers. Everything from A to Z on standard testing. Even I learn that CRTs are not the kind of testing, that lends itself, to the remediation of the individual students, or sub-groups of students, but is ideal for large scale measures of the whole student population. Perhaps this is the reason why they do not look at the bottom end, where too many have specific weaknesses, and as a group cannot provide general remediation, since the individuals vary greatly in their levels of reading and writing.
http://echo.edres.org:8080/nea/teachers.pdf

The EQAO tests are not norm-referenced tests (like SAT, CTBS), but are criterion-referenced tests.  They are “standardized” to the outcomes of the Ontario curriculum and, unlike norm-referenced tests, not to the average performance of the whole population. 

They are (mostly) “authentic”-style, i.e., students are expected to actually write a short paragraph to explain whether they can understand what they read. The marker decides (based on those curriculum performance criteria) on whether the student has demonstrated acquistion of the particular skill being measured. 

There has been a move over the years to include more multiple choice style questions (for ease of marking and to shorten the reporting turn-around time), but they are still geared to standards of performance outlined in the Ontario curriculum.

For more information there is a great book by Dr. Mark Holmes “What every teacher and parent should know about student evaluation”