Horsefeathers. Teacher-directed instruction is alive and well and mandated (and closely monitored) by school boards and the Ministry of Education. It is not, however, the teacher-directed instruction that you wish to see. Are we to blame ETFO for that?  I pay dues to ETFO to negotiate collective agreements on my behalf (as a member of a large group with interests that are not all the same, thus compromise is always needed), to liaise with negotiated benefits providers (life insurance, medical plan), to work to ensure the collective agreement is honoured (by all parties), and to provide other services members request, such as professional development on specific topics, career planning and leadership workshops, and so on.

I do not elect or pay dues to ETFO to take positions on curricula per se. That is the role of the MOE and the Boards, and the place to influence them is through elected representatives, delegations and proposals to the board and the Minister, etc (I have actively been involved in all of those things).  Of course, unions, ETFO included, are large bureaucracies with all the faults of other bureaucracies, including having agendas of their own that may not represent their members. ETFO demonstrated last year that it was out of synch with the membership. Exit last year’s leadership.

I find it very interesting that the “union” is some horribly bad guy, when the people who make many of the decisions that result in the practices and procedures you deplore are apparently saints.  Why is the top-heavy administration at many boards not taken to task for “holding children hostage” and like sins? What about the mushrooming MOE which is now in a position of undisputed control (thank you, Bill 160).  That’s where the policies and procedures you deplore are coming from. Teachers are charged to implement them, like it or not. We are employees.

Most people don’t pay a lot of attention to what ETFO says except during negotiations.  Bureaucracies are bureacracies.  As Richard Elmore, the Harvard expert on school improvement recently said, all sides should be banned from using the phrase, “It’s about the children!”  It clouds the debate and is simply posturing.

Many people work hard for the best interests of children but they do not agree on what those best interests are. Parents don’t agree, teachers don’t agree, voters don’t agree, NGO’s and research organizations don’t agree, yadda yadda.

This is a straw man and not worth my time.

TDSB, of course the teachers’ unions formulate their positions on the basis of the best interests of their members. I have no quarrel with that. My argument is simply that the teachers’ unions should stop justifying their positions on the grounds that they are in the students’ best interests.

I know that you find it very difficult that the teacher’s working conditions are in fact the student’s learning conditions but it happens to be true.

Teachers & Parents both want:

Smaller classes
The best possible teachers in the classroom
beautiful, clean safe schools
up to date labs, gyms, cultural facilities,
high quality support staff for kids who need it
small schools to stay open as much as possible
up tp date, high quality text and other resources
excellent local support of consultants and coordinators
money for field trips
larger budgets overall

I am sure you find it frustrating that parents and teachers have such an incredible overlapping agenda that they find themselves to be natural allies but that is the way it is and we are not sorry about that.

Teachers federations do have curriculum departments and broad positions on pedagogy which we make sure that the ministry and the boards are aware of because is is the fedrations that speak for the profession on matters of education as well as collective bargaining. We do not negotiate this but you would of course, be horrified to find them on an endless # of ministry taskforces, committees, workgroups etc.

Teachers unions will continue to justify their positions on the basis that what is good for kids happens to be good for teachers as well. Did I ever mention that the USA is an excellent lab for the role of unions. Where unions are compulsory and strong your precious test scores are also strong. Where unions are weak in non-compulsory sttes, test scores are very bad. I guess we can say, strong teachers’ unions are good for kids.

Aren`t we barking up the wrong tree here?Isn`t the problem in the Teacher Training which is shallow and superficial-after all,if we are going to teach in these above stated pedagogies don`t we have to teach the teachers “how to teach"them?
Professors teach whatever they want in the 8 month licensing with no regard for the research and the above stated methods of teaching.Publishers are allowed to print and peddle things like Discovery Math even after the decade of documented innumeracy they still peddle it-the Trillium List in Ontario has all kinds of materials on the list that are against the work that research shows to be conclusively superior to the well being of children`s learning.In my view,the unions have absolutely nothing to do with that.Who tells us what to put on approved lists and why?

What we need to do is train people with the right backgrounds in alternative certifications how to teach specifically in the early grades where we can prevent so much damage.If the children learn properly by Grade 3 the percentage of failure drops by 80% and if we can`t trust the Universities to train teachers to teach properly then we need to do otherwise-after all the children are our interest here.Then we will be using non unionized teachers because alternative certifications will be dramatically superior.

I would agree with Malkin that the unions interests shouldn’t be confused with what’s beneficial for students.

It’s a crutch that the unions count on to get support and sympathy for their causes from the public and parents in particular.

It’s worked for the most part as a diversion, but if you’ve been on the side of a child who has fallen through the cracks or asked one too many intelligent questions about why not more DI and systemic phonics for all kids you’ll learn quickly that the unions, particularly ETFO have learned how to milk the public well.

It was once the ETFO what was seen as the more rational of the teacher unions - no longer. The once hysterical OSSTF is fast becoming the more clued-in union to deal with, or so I’ve been told.

You can fool the public for a while but not forever.

Joanne - I like the idea of “alternative certifications” could you tell us more.

Seems to me you’re hitting on something that’s necessary and more beneficial to student learning than is the illusion the unions attempt to portray as caring for children.

I don’t recall being asked upon enrolling my children in public education if I or they supported the unions?

The right to a closed shop for Ontario teachers was granted in the 1940s by Tory Premier George Drew because he was panicked that the teachers were shifting heavily to the CCF (the NDP forebearer). Mr Sheep it is actually none of your business.

You can see the list above. Is low class size good for kids or good for teachers or good for unions, oh look it is a threefer.

Don`t eve try try to reason with a Union-they twist your thoughts and your words.We know teachers on the whole are terribly underprepared so as a result,their salaries are bloated and their benefits envious.I know we need alternative certifications-it would be the beginning of an important trend.If we taught teachers how to apply research teaching in Reading and Math-my,what a radical thought!
By the way,what is a teacher-a person with a B.A. and an 8 month course from a University with professors who have not taught in classroom for 30 years,nor have they worried that their curriculum is modern,cutting edge and gives teachers what they need to succeed for the well being of children.I think they need competition…don`t you?Closed shop?That`s hopefully not going to be for long.Every one needs competition to do their best!

Mr. Little. It is every bit my business and that of every other taxpayer in this province. If you can hang your “what’s good for the union is in the best interest of the students”
spin out for all to see, use and abuse to suit your agenda by all means keep it up. It’s the fastest and surest way to speed up that exodus to private and alternative schools you say doesn’t concern you.

Jo-Ann - One thing Ontarians have become used to is the spin of unions, although some teacher unions have made huge PR efforts to work more with folks then always up side their heads.

Mr. Little represents a dying breed. Good representation for the real needs of educators shouldn’t be confused with his spin either.

Nobody has to even work on the relationship between parents and teachers. It is a natural alliance.

The list is quite clear in post #3 in this thread. Parents and teachers came together to defeat Harris and have stayed together ever since.

No Mr Sheep, nobody wants the items in post #3, Ya right. It is the privatizers that genuine parents hate.

Parents and teachers - a natural alliance without the union’s interference.

Parents are aware that the unions use them. Those who don’t mind benefit don’t they? Those who don’t know it need to be educated to it.

The both sides of your mouth are at it again Little.

It’s none of parent’s business one side. Natural alliance the other.

Hmmm….. wasn’t Harris put into power with the help of the OSSTF?

Darn teachers, you can’t trust them and the math teachers they are the worst. They can count.
They stripped local boards of there taxation powers, brought in standardized testing…really doubt you would have much sympathy here on that.
Harris was elected by the people to do a job. What was the deficit at the end of his run?
Shifty bunch those math teachers.

Walkerton and Ipperwash brought him down, if our country was just a hair futher south private school tax credits would have been welcomed.

TDSBNW, I have found your past posts very interesting and to the point.

Thank you for the link to the article about what makes a good teacher and Lemov’s rules. I have thoroughly enjoyed it and I will try to read the book.
I was also impressed that you felt responsible for the student in grade 6, I think, that did not yet know how to read even though he had passed from grade to grade for all these years.

Anybody familiar with DI, di and who has read Engelmann is somebody who understands what most of us on this blog are talking about.
You are the first teacher I have met that is familiar with Engelmann work.

I can definitely relate to what you are saying about bureaucreacies and having to follow rules because you are an employee. We all have kids to raise and mortgages to pay so I don’t think it is fair to ask people to commit financial suicide if the system forces idiotic things on them.

I was puzzled by your “It is not, however, the teacher-directed instruction that you wish to see”.
What do you mean by that?

Maybe we are sometimes barking up the wrong tree. What do you suggest would be some realistic things that could be changed right away if somebody had the will to do it?

No OSSTF did not support Harris ever. He was the worst disaster that ever hit education in this province. Actually the deficit was qite bad under harris/Eves, about $6 Billion that they tried hard to hide.
You will never get private school tax credits and I think you know it. Even on John Tories proposal, we polled on the question: If it came to the point that if Roman Catholic schools got funding all schools got funding or conversly no religious schools got funding which would you prefer.

Answer 70% no funding for any religious schools, 20% favour all 10% no opinion. In polling we know that “no opinion in fact usually breaks in the same % as those with opinion in the end. This probably means that about 77% oppose this. Keep dreaming. (a little Math for you Mark)