One wonders why there wouldn`t be an adherence to the research.
It seems strange that if we`re in the business of helping children,we wouldn`t be concerned with what works and actually want to test ourselves to see if what we are doing is working?We continue to believe in the developmental model.
It`s also strange that we would just blatantly ignore discoveries and we would simply paste things from the MOE,as Stephen has said,they spent millions at the Secretariat on their own curriculums.
We know except for the Early Learning Strategy,2003,there has been no mention from this Ministry about the findings of the empirical research.

The lovely word balance-who says we are disputing it.I need a map to drive to New York from Toronto so I can then enjoy the city when I get there.
As if those of us who advocate for explicit systematic synthetic instruction with the 5 pillars of reading research wouldn`t believe in teaching stories and vocabulary.
Stephen in my view is an example of a closed mind,many teachers are far more open and they are because they see how many kids are struggling and they want to see how to help.
Sorry to be so blunt.Doug,well he`s a generalist that advocates for the status quo because we`re doing so well.

The experts have evaluated the research all around. They find the evidence from you wanting. I expect that constructivists hire other constructivists and they all teach constructivism to more academics so after a couple of decades Constructivism has a hedgemonic place in the academic world.

Everybody knows that phonics is a tool in the tool kit but most relegate it to the world of SE because most kids learn to read quite well from BL.

Your group is seen as a small tribe of reactionary heretics on the outside of the education world.

You are strongly associated with right wing politics Fraser Institute, Frontier Centre, AIMS, and the American Heritage Cato Fordham type groups.

The OISE/UT type establishments and the various teachers’ colleges are run by liberal/social democratic people who reject that school of thought as behaviourism, BF Skinner types. A Bahaviourist is the worst name you can call somebody in university-education situations.

What’s wrong with being right winged?  Without the business world, where would the money for services come from?  What bothers we right wingers is that the money handed over to you is not being spent properly, and so many publically-funded agencies have grown too big, totally unresponsive, greedy and self-serving.  In education, many of us believe that children are not getting a proper education—in fact it’s poor.  This makes us unhappy.  Too much left-winged positions can cause an imbalance—look at Greece, a prime example of failed socialism.  For that matter, Ontario’s in the worst financial mess ever in its history.  Who put the Liberals into power?  The puc’s—just like they did, Bob Rae.  The first thing he did (NDP policy then) was borrow and spend his way into a financial disaster…
Without the private sector, you’ve got nothing.

Damn, I wrote puc rather than psu’s, but I think it’s obvious what I was referring to…

Instruction or as I prefer, “teaching” is a professional concern. It results from a dialogue between the profession (AKA the teachers’ unions)  the academic and research community and the Ministries of Education. The teaching methods are mostly under the actual control of the MOE through thier system of curriculum documents, suggested and approved teaching ‘strategies’ and enforced by their inspectors. The inspectors usually visit private schools. The heavy lifting within public schools is done by SOs and principals. The Director of Ed is a cross appointment of the school board and the ministry since he is expected to enforce the rules of both. In any area of conflict the MOE is sovereign.

The opinions of parents are always interesting “input” but they cannot drive the bus.

“the author says that no one in the education world has an incentive to improve teaching methods.”

The author is correct.

I tend to agree with Joanne. Minds are closed unless of course there’s a brain wave or flavour-of-the-month.

Do new teachers actually understand what a “teaching method” is?  I raise this only because I’m betting my bottom dollar that it’s not something they dwell on at the teaching faculties.

Doug as usual can be counted on to offer, well, what Joanne said.

Could be nothing much needs to change. The system is doing as well as it possibly can given the resources, human and material, that it has.

Bev - Doug’s pushing, or trying to push political buttons. It hasn’t worked anywhere that he’s landed, and it’s not working here either by what I’ve read today.

The future of education is not with the Doug’s. Stephen? Maybe, at least he’s more open to discussion and diverse opinion than it the guy who has his own website but doesn’t allow for comments yet spends his days on reform forums doing something….just not sure what he’s accomplishing. Maybe just busy work but he’s sure not moving mountains. Great that this is one place where parents can enter into discussion on par with the “experts” and stand their ground.

I find this forum very professional in that respect and not afraid to tackle the choice issues.

The last comment in the article - “No, I don’t buy it. Measured against objective curriculum standards of what a top achieving student should be able to do, what top achieving students can do is pathetic - really just enough to allow schools to say they are successful. And don’t forget, the schools, state education departments and test makers all work hand in hand to determine what it is advanced students will succeed at - usually doing well on tests crafted not to assess but to advertise “success”.

The above comment speaks about controlling the education strings, the education processes, and in the end to control the behaviour and actions of the students, parents and the general public. Why I had to laugh out loud, on Doug’s remarks that the education establishment rejects behaviorism. Yet the public education system is built and designed on behaviorism theorem as well as the other pedagogical theories, to control all aspects of education and learning. The educator controls all learning in the same way, as the the upper levels of the education system strives to control the inputs, to governed behaviour of the players. Easier done, when the public education system is a monopoly, that holds all the strings of what is and what is not an education.

Instruction is a black box, that provides no incentives for the stakeholders within the education to improve instruction, and at the end the quality of an education. On the other side of the coin, the parents, taxpayers and general society have the incentives but do not have the power to change instruction that benefits the students, rather than the interests of the public education system.

When a parent talks about the quality of instruction, the stakeholders circle their wagons, ready to do battle with parents who dare to suggest that instruction is not up to par. After all, the public education system design, is all about separating students. “Students can be divided into the easily educable and the difficult to educate.”

Seen it in action for the last 40 odd years, and more so in the last 15 years, where the public education system is very quick off the mark, to label students in the easily educable and the difficult to education. Behaviorism figures largely into it, to control the actions of the users, so they too will march to the drums of the best interests and agendas of the public education system.

But what Doug states using the word behaviorism, is not what is being employed across the public sectors providing services and the private sectors. Today it is called behaviour analysis, and is a subtopic in the disciplines across the fields, and especially so in the education of children.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavior_analysis_of_child_development

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_change_theories

More importantly, Doug’s post is a tactic developed and fine tune from the behaviorism theorem, to change behaviour who are questioning the powers to be. In this case the public education system, in keeping the status-quo.

Or the question at the end of the article, ” How do you propose steering the educational ship to not only unlock the secrets of the instructional black box, but also to assure that schools follow the revealed secrets instead of, you know, sticking with the status quo? “
http://d-edreckoning.blogspot.com/2010/11/im-in-process-of-wading-through-100-or.html

The stakeholders within will fight to the bitter end, to protect their agendas and best interests by imposing narrowly define parameters unto learning, and full control of teaching practices and policies that favours the stakeholder within the education system, at the expense of the students’ education.
In part, behavioural analysis plays a major role to control the agendas and interests of all within and outside of the education system.

Nothing wrong with right wingers who admit who they are.

If you ask parents what was the worst goverment since WW2 for education Mike harris comes up first.

Did you ever in fact notice that people come from all over the world to look at the Alberta and Ontario systems because Canada is seen as the best system in the English speaking world?

Interesting conversation. I’m not going to try to defend the accusation that I’m close-minded. But I read pretty well everything that is recommended here. I have had numerous discussions with our own board personnel on the issues raised here, and I do my best to understand different perspectives.

On Friday I had a lengthy conversation with our district level literacy consultants on the research behind the appproaches that they are promoting with their teachers. That request came as the result of a conversation here.

I’m not an expert in lteracy and Jo-Anne, it is your life.

But being accused publicy of being close-minded is a little inappropriate, if you ask me. Especially when you don’t know about my own work, the work that I am doing with my own district and what actually goes on in my mind.

Jo-Anne and a couple of others here signed up to come to our EdCamp, but didn’t come. I was disappointed because I desperately wanted your voices to be heard by others.

I’m not saying I agree with everything that is written here, and I’m not saying I necessarily agree with all of the research links that are cited. (The balanced literacy folks didn’t just dream their stuff up; it is grounded in research as well)

So I love the conversation here, as I’ve said a number of times, but I have tons of other things to be doing if that conversation is going to get as personal as that.

Hmmm

My sense from working within the system is that there is a great focus on instructional quality. In fact, that is really all that we’ve heard about for the last decade. The focus of the MOE is deinfitely on classroom practice.

YOu won’t find a generation of teachers more immersed in questions of practice, communities of practice, reflective practice. 90% of PD targets practice, teaching strategies and methodology.

Districts have hired special assignment teachers to be in classrooms with the expressed purpose of imiproving practice.

John Myers teaches a very popular course at OISE/UT in models of teaching. Practice is at the heart of his teaching.

So the question I have is why is there a public perception that classrooms are still black boxes. Is there a communication problem? How do we draw the “public” into the conversations that are happening in every school as we speak? How do we install more “windows” and “doors” into our classroom so that these efforts become part of the public dialogue.

Stephen,
Thanks for your comments.

The teacher training arm at OISE does not converse with the research arm.It trains teachers,I have conversed with many over the years,in their belief systems versus research that should influence teacher preparation.
The teacher preparation,even for special education level 1 and 2 doesn`t worry about arming teachers with testing and testing analysis understanding and practice in remediation technique religions such as Orton Gillingham or testing to see if a child in grade 4 has phonemic awareness.
I`ve seen many high school kids tested for phonemic awareness and seen that it was their core problem,this stuff should be happening in grade 1.
I assure you,trying to get through school without the skill of reading and spelling fluency is a sham and your work opportunities afterwards are so limited.

I am sincere here in telling you I am not picking on you,if you`re closed,you were prosthyletized during your early teacher training,very difficult for you to stay open.

I always refer to the NICHD research because it was gold standard,longitudinal,had no corporate smells attached to it and it was orchestrated in 11 of the world`s most prestigious University research centres.

Jo Anne,

There is an ongoing element to your critique that if we don’t follow your way, nobody will learn how to read.

At no time in our history have as many people been able to read, not as a raw number but as a percentage as well.

At no time in our history have as high a % of students graduated HS or gone to post secondary. In fact our post secondary rate is the worls’s highest (StatsCan).

It is pretty hard to make the case that nobody can read in these situations.

My sense from experiencing the system along side my children for 13 years is that SOME teachers care about instruction quality. Not all and by no means “a generation of teachers”. 

Simply put Stephen as to why the public perception of a “black box” is that not all teachers are learning those instructional quality lessons well.

Not all teachers are created equal, so changing the language from the inside to reflect that would be a start in debunking the illusion with the public that all educators are experts in quality instruction. 

Parents know it, good teachers know it and the system wonks know it.

There are a whole host of challenges when you try to mix research. practice, and policy (RPP).
Here is a short list, each of which could be a issue for discussion in itself.
- alignments among RPP are harder than you think
- policy questions often connect to beliefs and values rather than facts borne out by research or classroom practice
- while there is now a rough synthesis as to what works in schools, research in education is more like research in medicine rather than research in physics
- not only do researchers need to talk to practitioners more, but also need to talk to each other more
- teachers are distrustful of advice given by those who either demonstrate a lack of what happens in classrooms, present advice in the form of “magic bullets”, or sound arrogant (this last stance is thankfully rare these days)
- How do we include parents and even students in this; e.g., student-led teacher parent conferences, even if more parent were available? Too many parents, like mine, were too busy working to take more than a passive interest in school through reading the report card.
- a tendency of thinking that because “x” works with my kids it works with all kids
- another tendency to dismiss an idea because of faulty implementation: I tried “x” once and it didn’t work
- a lack of quality, sustained professional development
- it takes years if not decades to get good at something; if my Models of Teaching course is useful and gets great reviews it is because I had decades to learn this stuff in many classrooms and many grades and give my students many opportunities to practice, both in my class and in their classes during practicum
- my interest in research began early in my teaching career and it is as rare now as it was then, but when I tried things out as a “researcher” it helped me grow; my goal is for more teachers to do this

Lots more to say but this will do. Have to go back to marking, get over a cold, etc.

“So the question I have is why is there a public perception that classrooms are still black boxes. Is there a communication problem? How do we draw the ?public? into the conversations that are happening in every school as we speak? How do we install more ?windows? and ?doors? into our classroom so that these efforts become part of the public dialogue”

Spent an interesting morning, on the black boxes of classrooms. Vast and numerous literature, studies and research being conducted over the years, and in particular the classroom black box.

Joanne addressed it in part, “The teacher preparation,even for special education level 1 and 2 doesn`t worry about arming teachers with testing and testing analysis understanding and practice in remediation technique religions such as Orton Gillingham or testing to see if a child in grade 4 has phonemic awareness.”

From what I can gather, the classroom black box is not transparent, and the answer generated from within, it is up to the teachers.

“In terms of systems engineering, present policy seems to treat the classroom as a black
box. Certain inputs from the outside are fed in or make demands?pupils, teachers, other
resources, management rules and requirements, parental anxieties, tests with pressures to
score highly, and so on. Some outputs follow, hopefully pupils who are more knowledgeable and competent, better test results, teachers who are more or less satisfied, and more or less exhausted. But what is happening inside? How can anyone be sure that a particular set of new inputs will produce better outputs if we don?t at least study what happens inside?”
http://weaeducation.typepad.co.uk/files/blackbox-1.pdf

The 2011 book called The Blackbox of Schooling is a must read. Below is a summary, that attempts to cover the connections of the classroom, and the external outputs. “This book is about the classroom, the most important meeting place for teachers and pupils in an education building. Our knowledge, however, about what happens inside this space is limited. In many respects the classroom is still the black box of the educational system.”
http://www.peterlang.com/index.cfm?event=cmp.ccc.seitenstruktur.detailseiten&seitentyp=produkt&pk=62995&cid=722

Another paper that is often mentioned in the search engine, is titled, Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards Through Classroom Assessment.
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/Inside_the_Black_Box_184495_7.pdf

Further literature, papers have all stated in one form or another, that the classroom has remained a black box from within the education system, for many different reasons on an ideological basis, and the classroom has always been a black box to parents and the outsiders that lie outside of the education system. The main reason, is that the classroom processes and what goes on in there, is not transparent, open, and as a whole the public education system, including the classroom are not willing to disclosed their insider knowledge, and as well information that empowers parents with knowledge. It is why I sometimes wonder, why teacher faculties continued to trained teachers that actually disempowers teachers in the classroom.

What Joanne speaks of, my child became a victim of black box optics, engineered by the stakeholders within the public education system. There is many black boxes in the public education system, and as a parent who was force to wear many different hats - teacher - psychologist - lawyer - mathematician - and many other fields. In between the wearing of the different hats, I sometimes had the luxury of wearing the parent hat, when the classroom blackbox was willing to share their expertise and work co-operatively to support the steady progress of my child.

The public education system, and its many different parts, have never made parents a priority and the design of the education system, the training, education policies have turned parents into black boxes, much like the black boxes of the classroom and instruction.

“

Regarding the comments about families from other countries being attracted to Ontario and Alberta because of our outstanding educational system, my hubby works for an international company—always has—and some of the Europeans do not want to locate here if they have school-aged children.  Word got out to families because of those who located here for a few years were unhappy with our system.  I know that this isn’t much more than gossip; however as the saying goes, where there’s smoke there’s fire.
As far as the teachers working so diligently on their pd days to improve literacy—what the heck is wrong then??  We have a 42% literacy rate (some say higher).  Are all of you in the education field beating a dead horse?  Why aren’t you teachers speaking up and saying that the methods aren’t working.  Surely you see the lack of results from balanced literacy and fuzzy math, don’t you?

I deal with agents from China who send people around the world for education. Since English is the preferred language, Korea and Finland are out.

They use the PISA scores to say to clients, “Canada has the best education system in the English speaking world.”

Our system scores far higher than UK, USA, Australia and still ahead of the not too bad system in NZ.

The 42% illiteracy rate is a total fraud. 2% top of Canadians “cannot read”.

Huge #s of the so called 42% read very well. 15% have a literacy level below grade 9 level.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_illiteracy

Notice the 15% rate in Canada, Even almost all of these 15% can read.

The illiterate in Canada are primarily people not educated in Canada or not educated by a provincial education system Aboriginals. The possible 6% of those who “cannot read” or level one literacy are overwhelmingly from this group.

Functional illiteracy in Canada is usually equated to those with less than grade 9 literacy. Take a look at a grade 7 class in Canada. Do they seem like “illiterates” to you? They are by the FI definition.

Here is a good example of getting a high school certificate,Doug says we`ve never graduated more students.
There is a visual here of what we currently see,this kind of writing and printing is a direct result of right brain instruction.Rather,what we need is explicitness and left to right brain instruction.

EDUCATION | February 06, 2012
On Education: Despite Focus on Data, Standards for Diploma May Still Lack Rigor
By MICHAEL WINERIP
Grading instructions with sample answers suggest that the bar to pass the New York
State English Regents exam is surprisingly low.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/06/education/despite-focus-on-data-standards-for-diploma-may-still-lack-rigor.html?emc=eta1

Low literacy skills has never been a priority with industrialized countries, and until until now, a rate of 40 to 50 percent of adults with low literacy skills was acceptable. As a result, public education models never needed to to have all students reach proficiency in reading and writing skills. The core root problems of reading and by extension the writing skills varied among the low-literacy adult population. including the adults at level 3, who are thought as having the necessary skills in literacy to get by in life.

Very few discussions are taking place in NA, that goes to the heart of the rising low literacy rates in industrialized countries. More so for English speaking countries. No one speaks of the silos of adult education and public K to 12 system. No speaks of the instruction practices for adults, in remediation and upgrading literacy skills. No one speaks of the billions of dollars of taxpayers monies being pumped into literacy programs , literacy remediation, and upgrading skills in writing and reading. No one speaks of the public K to 12, where no one school, class teacher and school board, have the data on fluency, number of words per minute, comprehension, of each and everyone of their students. Grade level reading scores do not show how proficient a person is in reading, or how well a person reads. In other words, reading assessments are not an activity inside our schools for most students, and when it does happen, reading assessments are reserved for students who have already been diagnosed with reading disorders.

As a result, in NA myths on literacy and writing skills become the truth. Programs are designed around the myths, producing lack-lustered results in adult education concerning literacy. Myths such as adults with low-literacy skills, mainly are immigrants. In Canada, it is the native born Canadians, and the highest risk of having low literacy.

In Europe, the educators, and top government officials are having frank open discussions on the low literacy rates. In particular England, where there is 5 million adults sitting at level 1. Difficult conversations, that most in NA do not want to speak of, uncovering the myths to exposed the truth. The public education system figures largely because it is the native born speakers of English, who become the next generation of low-literacy adults. Is it instruction practice? Is it a combination of instruction and pedagogy practice? Lots of reasons to point to, but isn’t about time to put the finger of blame down, and start having the frank discussion on literacy in NA?

A British teacher, famous in England, and very frank.

“; I hope that some policy-makers are not so assured of their moral superiority in all things educational to miss the chance of learning from their colleagues in the primary school sector. The mechanics of learning to read are the same if you are six or 60. It does not infantilise adults by teaching them to read using kids’ methods: it infantilises them playing the silly guessing games they call whole word recognition without any previous grounding in phonics. Foolish indeed is the individual, organisation or sector that begins to think they have special skills no one else could understand.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/aug/05/teaching.education

Two video links:

http://www.veoh.com/watch/v15337868mrahmpnp?h1=Can’t+Read,+Can’t+Write+[Part+1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU6uvKixSro&feature=related

“‘The country’s most inspirational teacher’ (The Times). “
http://www.philbeadle.com/

Well worth the time, and this extraordinary teacher who is willing to finally cross the line that few dare to tread in NA. 

“Over 16 million people, 48% of the population in Canada are operating with a reading level below what is internationally deemed necessary for functioning in a modern society.

As a journalist, the thought of not being able to read or write is terrifying and almost incomprehensible. And if you are reading this blog, the same likely goes for you.”
http://www.shannonbusta.com/2011/03/illiteracy-isolates.html

Nobody wants to talk about the truth - 48 percent which is the latest percentage, but rather the myth that it is an immigrant problem. Phil Beadle has quite a bit to say on literacy and the general state of the education system. He also believes in grammar, spelling and more importantly that all children are capable of having high proficiency in reading and writing. The videos, the first are composed of 6 parts and the second is composed of 3 parts.

Much of what Nancy says, is indeed quite true. There is almost an iron law in international education that states educate their general population only to the level req’d to allow their economy to function properly.

Western industrial nations felt some but only a little pressure to educate beyond the needs of a manufacturing, resource and construction economy.

Slowly service industries like banking, insurance government first needed higher results, later manufacturing itself needed higher results in sophisticated industries, finally even resource industries became less brawn and more brain oriented as well.

The gutting of Canadian mfg by free trade deals means we need to become a high education high value added economy.

Amazing how we agree on major intersections in education, Doug?

What is even more important, and the European education papers/essays have stated, that all students must have higher literacy and numeracy skills, and can no longer rests with low literacy rates of 40 percent or higher. Most of the initiatives in literacy, is to reduce the low literacy numbers via through instruction starting from the K to 12 system to adult education.

But Canada and United States, the powers to be within the education system, are too busy debating if phonemic awareness is crucial, or creating strategies to work around the students with poorer reading skills.

The gutting of the manufacturing sector signal for the powers to be in Canada is already a signal to upgrade literacy skills that are sitting from level 1 to level 3. The latest chatter on the web, is the connections being made on level of literacy and the ability of the global corporations in reducing wages.
Caterpillar comes to mind, as well as the latest company in NL to shut out their unionized workers.

Adults with low literacy skills, are least likely to participate in society, more than likely not to insert their rights and freedoms, and least likely put pen to paper in filing complaints on low quality services and goods. And now, is there a connection between jobs requiring lower literacy skills and reducing wages?  The gutting of the blue-collar jobs, only to be replaced by workers with a college education, who cannot find work in his field?

And yet, nothing is being done besides the expenditure of tax dollars for lack-lustered performance. But the positive light, are the educators within, few in numbers standing up like the British Phil Beadle, charting new territory into changing reading instruction from K to adulthood.

“Western industrial nations felt some but only a little pressure to educate beyond the needs of a manufacturing, resource and construction economy. “

Another way of looking at it, is the legal definition of a basic education. It does not state anywhere in the schools acts and the laws, that reading, writing and numeracy all students must reach a level of proficiency.  Hopefully, the Moore case at the Supreme Court of Canada, will be the earthquake needed for the provincial education systems to change their literacy and numeracy instruction.

We need to first agree that Canada has the highest post secondary rate in the world so we are doing better in this area than anyone else.
http://www.ccsd.ca/factsheets/education/
After that we can all agree that much more needs to be done.

We probably don’t agree on what that is LOL.

Never been a problem with me on that particular stat of having a high post secondary rate. However, I just wish their open up their stats to the public on the sort of things that potential students would like to know ahead of time. As well as the trend, where PHD programs are being filled up by international students, up to percentages of 75 % in NA. 

Post-secondary became necessary for most students, because jobs that only required a grade 12, must have a two year certificate. Jobs such as entry positions in accounting, when the job requirements for the job has not change much since the 1960s. The requirement of basic arithmetic skills, is still there as it was in the 1960s, and the only extra requirement is knowledge of accounting programs. Accounting software are relatively easy to understand, compared to the accounting software that give birth in the late 1980s. It was faster to do it manually, as I once thought being exposed to the accounting software. Does it require a two year certificate?  Or as students are reporting more and more, the expense of an post-secondary education, does not always give rewards in a decent living wage.

At the university level, few of the 2012 articles are worried that not enough students will enroll in university. I am sure as 2012 goes by, whether their worries are justified, or students are making decisions based on future debt consideration. Apparently, the well has run dry for tuition, grants, and other interest reduction consideration,

I will tell you two true stories from my own community.

A student, not known to be a stellar student, but he worked hard to pull off a 80 something average, is now a medical researcher, professor working at Harvard.

Another student, only known for his poor achievement and always getting in trouble with law, over minor incidents, that eventually landed himself in prison for a spell. Rescue came in the form of the programs to address remediation in the 3 Rs, committed educators to address the needs of a group of young adults, who never had a chance in the education system. He is now going to college, taking accounting, and the best news, he is staying out of trouble, and staying on a straight path.

The common responses when people hear about either student. For the first student, all kinds of good things about him, but for the second student. The responses run along, that he does not have the smarts to add up numbers, let alone stay out of trouble.

Both were raise in the community, and both have come up to my child over the pass summer, to encourage her to continue her pursuit , and each give her solid advice on studying habits, and other advice relating to schooling. My 16 year old, came home in the two separate events, relating to me the comments that came from her friends, and at the same time dealing with some adults who think she should not in charge of money, because she has LD. My point is, the two true stories of two males on different tracks, both told her to work hard on things that are important such as study habits, because the payoff is realizing your dreams. Best part, both were well aware of her LD problems, and made no mentioned of it.

Another big problem is the labels put on students, rather than the repairing of academic deficiencies, including the foundation in the 3 Rs. Perhaps the second male, would not had to spend some time in prison, if he had not be labeled as a behavioural problem, and many other labels after that. The best of education programs are not successful, when labels are put on the students, and decisions are made through the labels.