When they put it in the most positive light in the poll nobody is surprised. I was OSSTF’s polling guy. The opponents, however will campaign against “your public money going to private schools” at which point support crumbles.

When voucher systems are put in place, parents will be gaining control over their children’s education again.  I’m so happy, especially for the children—many will be getting opportunities they would otherwise never get.

More and more people are favouring choice, for a number of reasons, that rests with the quality of education being received.

The achievement gap is one of the reasons.

“Educators are expressing alarm that the performance gap between minority and white high school students continues to expand across the United States, with minority teenagers performing at academic levels equal to or lower than those of 30 years ago.”

http://americaswire.org/drupal7/?q=content/educators-alarmed-black-latino-high-school-students-perform-levels-30-years-ago

Two underlying reasons of the achievement gap is low expectations and unconscious bias” by teachers and administrators.

Choice is driven by a public education system and its model, that has institutionalized low expectations and unconscious bias within the framework and the education policies.

““We take kids that start [high school] a little behind and by the time they finish high school, they’re way behind,” says Amy Wilkins, vice president for government affairs and communications at the Education Trust, a Washington-based educational advocacy group. “That’s the opposite of what American values say education is about. Education is supposed to level the playing field. And it does the opposite. . . .While many people are celebrating our postracial society . . . there is still a significant hangover in our schools.”

Uneven playing fields is the reason why choice is here in Canada, and people are becoming more aware of a public education system that is not working for the best interests of the students.

If the pubic education system cannot provide a reasonable quality education system, than public funding should go to private concerns that are able to provide a quality education without the bias and low expectations.

That is a Friedmanite theory. Reality is much different. If not for religious motivation there would be zero gas in the privatization tank.

Some people panic because the world is secularizing at a very rapid pace.

The majority finds this motivation unsufficient.

The achievement gap is caused by poverty full stop.

Reaching for straws Doug?

Must be desperate to throw in economic theories and a pinch of religion to avoid the topic of institutionalized unconscious bias and low expectations found throughout the public education systems in Canada and United States.

Choice does not happen in a vacuum, nor does it happen in the free market of goods and services. A thriving company can quickly go out of business, producing shoddy goods, poor rendering of services, and planning policy without due consideration of unconscious bias, that may paved the way to law suits. The public education system is a monopoly, and like most monopolies do not have to worry about quality of services being delivered. Monopolies can be selective as to whom they serve, what type of people based on quality.

Choice, provides the impetus for public education to improve on quality of education and the delivery of education. Is it fair, for middle-income and above to picked up tutoring services due to the poor math curriculum?  Is it fair for lower-income parents not to have the available option of tutoring for their children? It has nothing to do with fairness Doug, but has more to do with the public education system setting up the conditions, where private tutoring blossoms. The quality of education being received by the students in the public education system is the key where choice blossoms.

The lower the quality, the more parents will seek out alternatives for their children in its various forms and what best suits the families. The Moore case being heard by the Supreme Court of Canada is essentially a case of unconscious bias and low expectations for dyslexic students. Dyslexic students received a lower quality of education, and the stats support it. As the stats support the achievement gaps of other groups of students.

What you don’t seem to get, a person can stopped shopping at a store, with little impact in their lives, because there is alternatives. But the public education system monopoly, a person only have alternatives according to income .The majority is trapped between low expectations and unconscious bias within the education system, thus creating the conditions for choice to blossom.

Low expectations and unconscious bias cannot be stopped effectively within the public education system, when the very structure and design of the education system uses the SEC factors to explain away low achievement, and failure of education policy.Nor can it be stopped in a classroom, unless the individual teacher is aware of her own beliefs concerning low expectations and her unconscious bias towards her students. It is embedded in the structure, and the education policies.

Choice becomes the only option for parents across the social/economic line, because the public education systems refuses to provide a basic education above the minimum legal requirement. Anything above the minimum legal requirement, is provided by the parents, outside agencies and private concerns.

Doug, your statement is an unfair swipe at the poor.  IQ has nothing to do with income:  the difference is that the poor can’t afford tutors, so a good education for their children in today’s union-run monopolies—where they refuse to teach phonics, and use fuzzy math—is next to impossible.

A swipe at the poor and continued excuse.

Choice avails those parents who want something besides the excuses a chance to show that they’ll move to a system that aspires to teach children rather than continue to make excuses for why it can’t.

The future of education is not based on excuses but on choice. The more the better.

Below is the Supreme Court of Canada, a growing list of organizations to intervene, for the Moore case.
http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/case-dossier/cms-sgd/dock-regi-eng.aspx?cas=34041

Take note, the organizations that have applied to intervene, to speak for the side of the Moores. All organizations that know very well the experiences of low expectations and unconscious bias within the education system, that only provides the minimum legal basic education for students with disabilities.

For the other side, including the big guns from Ontario, and the BC teachers union. Doug, I would love to be a fly on the wall, seeing the lawyers try to explain why it is okay to discriminate on services, because nobody is receiving services.  I can well imagine the unconscious biases toward intelligence and the unsaid words of ‘hard to teach’ with the attached SEC excuses.

Good thing, the other side have plenty of data and final outcomes to prove without a doubt that students with learning disabilities received a lower quality of education below the basic education legally required. Plus two mountains of research and science going back 60 years, that has been ignored by the public education system.

Doug, choice is going to be shove down the collective throats of the public education system. The Moore case may very well be the tipping point, where the new goal and the only goal for the provincial education system to to improve quality of education, and cease the discriminatory practice of using excuses to protect self-serving interests within and the right to discriminate. The Moore case may very well open up the doors for authentic choice in all things educational.

Poverty is the problem not “the poor” poverty is the fault of the rich, not the poor.

Read David Berliner research on why the poor do badly. It is very well known.

American reformers now acknowledge their constant denial that poverty is the main reason for low results has seriously undermined their credibility.

Finland has almost no private education and almost no choice until after grade 10. It leads the world. There is zero connection between choice and excellent results.

http://greatlakescenter.org/docs/Policy_Briefs/Berliner_NonSchool.pdf

The future is not choice, the future is Finland, excellence through equity.

Doug, choice is going to be shove down the collective throats of the public education system

I hope you are their communications advisor.

Choice has been totally rejected by the voters of Ontario for all time.

Either that Doug, and when the Supreme Court rules in favour of the Moores, and not if, the public education system can pay handsomely to the parents who are paying for tutors and other such private options for the expressed purpose of upgrading their education and skills that are no longer taught in the public education system.

It be much cheaper for the public education system, to increase the quality of education so each student reaches their full potential, than paying parents strip-ends to education their children on the things that are no longer taught.

In Finland, unlike Canada or United States - the entire education system is focus on the individual student’s educational needs, timely intervention and well-trained teachers, that know a thing or two about learning struggles. Remediation is paramount in the early grades for the 3 Rs, without the use of the excuses. In Canada or United States, the education system is all about serving the interests of those within,  with little concern about students’ education needs.

Unconscious bias and low expectations is what the current public education systems is all about, and the identical factors that are at play with the education theories built around poverty, with a touch of science. It results in rampant bias from those within the education system, allowing the SEC factors to be used as the excuse for failures of whole subgroups of population. Whether it is gender, race, culture, or intelligence and or a combination of all 4, it is used to justified the education decisions being made on a daily basis or in the collective student group. 

Excuses, because the public education only needs to deliver an education that meets the minimum basic education. As for the extras, the parents picks up the costs, which apparently includes reading and writing remediation for the dyslexics. The Moore case is more about the excuses and the failure of the school board for not providing a quality education for the Moore boy, as well as telling the parent to go take a hike to the private school down the road. $100,000 dollars later + private school =  a Supreme Court hearing

Choice has NEVER been a question at the polls in Ontario.

Doug believes that rewriting history makes it true. It does not.

You are on the wrong side of education improvement for students Doug.

Choice has NEVER been a question at the polls in Ontario.

Doug believes that rewriting history makes it true. It does not.

You are on the wrong side of education improvement for students Doug.

Posted by Dan Sing on 01/26 at 08:10 PM

Dan in 2007 PC leader John Tory proposed to fund all religious schools the same as RC schools. It became the only issue in the election, the PCs lost badly on this one issue. John Tory lost the seat he was going for himself, some PC members opted out.

The issue was choice and it cost JT the election. Since then the PC have dropped support for choice because it is political poison.

I was at the federation and we polled his proposition exactly as he framed it. It drew 15%. We showed the other parties and they said “this matches their polling” he is walking straight intto the propeller blades.

We asked the people polled why they did not support choice. Rural small town folks said, “no way my tax money is going to religions I dont support.” City folk said “our public schools need every nickel of public education money.”

You can deny we had the existential eletion on choice but you are dreaming.

I would LOVE to have a referrendum on both John Torie’s plan and on RC funding. Both would lose very badly.

Don’t confuse your opinion with public majority opinion. They are not even close.

Dan I am 100% for improving education but I am 100% opposed to privatization, public funding for private education, public funding for religion, testing etc. This new issue will explain why Finland is #1 with almost no choice, or testing.

http://thelittleeducationreport.com/

Doug, with your history of being heavily involved with the teachers’ union, you can’t possibly be in favour of seeing improvement in education—it would mean that teachers would have to work harder, be more accountable, etc.  The union works in the opposite direction.

There is no relationship between teachers working harder and educational improvement. Finland leads the world. Their teachers work 600 hours of class time per year. Ours work 900, USA 1200 even worse results. The secret is smaller classes, teacher education and earlier start with ELP ECE.

The operating slogan in Finland is Teach less-Learn more.

The “accountability movement” is a dismal failure in the USA. Also no relationship to improvement.

You re confusing the policy of the Corporate reform movement with well researcher proven fact. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The union is also the professional arm of teaching. They have researchers constantly working to improve education.

You have a naive antiquated idea of teachers’ unions.

We should always be sceptical of “polls” commissioned by folks with a stake in the outcomes.  Poll questions can easily be tailored to get whatever result the sponsors want.  Is a poll done by the OSSTF on an issue they have a preordained stance on really reflective of anything?

Unions drive up raises attracting better quality teachers.

Unions create smaller classes increasing quality.

Unions demand more PD improving quality.

Unions demanded ELP increasing quality again.

Unions demanded more SE making groups smaller, 1/8

Unions demanded subject specialization increasing quality.

I could go on and on but where unions are weak, quality is far lower.

The polls are for internal consumption so organizations can tailor their message, not public consumption. BTW the collapse of the PCs due to support for religious choice confirmed the polls.

The “reform movement” really needs to understand that just because some of you support a position, that does not make it popular.

Public support for private education is VERY unpopular.

Doug, once again comparing apples to oranges, on top of ignoring other variables of Finland, such as working more effectively. Finland can do this, based on its language, and more or less students are ready to read to learn in one year. Hard to do in Canada or United States, where English, is one of the most complicated languages to learn, compared to Finnish language and even harder when the educrats insist on using whole language methodology to instruct children to read. The alphabet has 5 vowels, and the english language has 16 vowels, and the history of the english language, the spelling of words incorporates several different languages. Just two of the differences of Finland’s and English languages and there is many more differences that makes comparisons to Finland’s education system moot.

Which is it Doug? Time and time again, you have insisted that the union plays no role in curriculum and instruction methods. If the union was ever the the professional arm of teaching, the union would have been included in the civil education suits launched by parents in the United States, as well as the civil suits in Canada. The union so-called professional arm is to protect their image of professionalism, as well as to ensure that all research follows the goals of working for the best interests of the union. Currently, best interests is to ensure that at least 50 percent of the student population do not have the skills and abilities, and will need remediation well into their adulthood.

Research, if not all that occurs in teachers’ unions is to protect the status-quo, the structure and to prevent serious reforms that will increase the skills and abilities of students.

When there is choice, teachers’ unions will be more incline to reform within the education system, that increases students skills and abilities, to protect their contracts and maintain their position within the education system.

Below. a current example of SE teachers striving to introduced neuro-science into the classroom instruction practices. Don’t see much of it in the Canadian teachers’ unions research, nor in the teachers’ faculties. The Canadian unions have effectively block the new advances and knowledge in learning, that makes learning more efficient. Becoming more efficient, is not a goal of the unions,
nor ensuring that all students reach their potential.

As for your six points, unions actively work towards the six points, for good reason. It will increase the number of members, and therefore increase the coffers of the unions. However, it does nothing for quality of education that is being received by the students.

The Moore case is one such example, and all so typical of the LD student population, as well as the whole student population. The quality of education being received is dependent on the agendas and interests of those within the education system. Unions actually work against the best interests of the students when reforms are attempting to increase the quality of education being received. 

Internal polls?  “The polls are for internal consumption so organizations can tailor their message, not public consumption.”

Tailor their message?  Anyone for doing some reading on propaganda theory, and polls?  Doug, and the masses are suppose to believe it. No wonder the public trust is going down the tubes in Western nations. Another piece of evidence, that those within the public education system, think the outsiders cannot put 2 and 2 together, and come up with 4.

Anyone for choice?  It has to be better, than to put your child’s education in the hands of a public education system, that strives to undermined the quality of education, at every turn?

Nancy,

Organizations like OECD who know much more about education than you do, have factored all of these things in. Small? not a factor states and provinces the size of Finland are compared all the time. Language? not a factor multilingual Finland Finnish Swedish and Sami compares very well, in fact immigrants to Finland do better than immigrants to USA or Canada.

Unions do not SET curriculum and pedagogical issues but do lobby on them.

You have far too much faith in choice. Where it is available, little changes, I won’t bore you with the massive amount of research that choice canges nothing.

If it was not for religious reasons, there would be almost zero support for choice. people want the state to support their religion. Mainly people don’t support that. They believe in separation of church and state.

http://www.thelittleeducationreport.com/index.html

As has been pointed out repeatedly there are all sorts of factors to take into account when comparing education in Finland to other jurisdictions.  Doug operates on the premise that simply repeating dubious claims will, somehow or other, make them true.  That strategy may work in a classroom of bored teenagers however among adults it doesn’t.

As for your six points, unions actively work towards the six points, for good reason. It will increase the number of members, and therefore increase the coffers of the unions. However, it does nothing for quality of education that is being received by the students.

Don’t be ridiculous. All of those items increase the quality of education. The USA has Right-to-Work states where unions are weak or nonexistent. They are among the worst in education. The states with strong unions lead the nation.

BTW Canada has the 3rd best education system on Earth. Finland is better and Korea is only better due to massive tutoring. Finland beats Korea without the tutoring.

The great nations in education built their greatness with great public school systems, not with choice, privatization, religion or testing.

Tell that to the parents who are paying for the private tutoring lessons to addressed the foundation of the 3 Rs. Tell that to the other set of parents providing home tutoring to their children on the basics. Tell that to the parents who spend a great of their disposable income on items that the education system no longer provide, but are required.

Than go tell the so called experts such as the OECD, and other high-level educators why they send their children to private schools. Could it be, they know the public education cannot delivery a quality education?

Especially the OECD, and other global organizations located in Europe, that actively seek out high quality schools for their children, and to make a living, espouses the common public school for the masses, because they don’t need a quality education. The masses just needs opportunities to access education. Quality does not matter.

Hypocrites, including yourself Doug. What do you provide for your private school students Doug? A quality education, tending to the learning needs of your students.  And than you have the gall to espouse the opposite for the rest of the public school students, a basic education based on the needs and wants of those who work within the system. Quality does not matter, just the opportunity.

The Moore case is in the Supreme Court of Canada for good reasons based on only providing opportunities , and not bothering with the quality factors. Sure would be nice to see the public education system working on quality issues, such as ensuring that every student will have a solid foundation on the 3 Rs, instead of having parents to pick up the costs.

Another example, civil suits launch by parents, for bullying. The very idea of parents expecting schools to be safe environments, gives choice the fuel. Public schools are not safe environments for students, when the agendas and interests within are too busy safeguarding their needs and ensuring that the legal requirement of a basic education is fulfilled. Safe environment from bullying, is above the basic education, and just like a solid foundation in the 3 Rs is above the basic education.

“On September 3, 2010, the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench awarded the girl $40,000 in damages for mental distress associated with the school’s unfair conduct, which the court characterized as a miscarriage of justice, in deciding she needed to be expelled for having sex in public at a Christmas school event.  This case demonstrates that Canadian parents, like their American counterparts, are turning to the courts to seek redress in cases where they do not believe school jurisdictions are treating their children properly at school.  While this case dealt mainly with whether due process had been followed in the student’s expulsion, the court examined whether gossip at school could serve as the sole basis to expel at student.  The court held it could not.”
https://www.asba.ab.ca/natlegalnews/sept10/files/main.html

Either choice Doug, or continued to pay large sums of monies awarded to parents and their children, when the public education systems continues to ignore the quality education being delivered, and as well as the final outcomes of policies that works for the best interests of those within the education system.

The teachers’ unions will have a hard time negotiating their contracts, when the school boards are faced with multiple law suits, that requires a great deal of money upfront to pay the legal fees. to defend the many practices of the public education system that are the underlying reasons for the law suits.

“Is a poll done by the OSSTF on an issue they have a preordained stance on really reflective of anything? “

No John it’s not for the reasons you state.

Right on time too as the fellow who champions union continues to dazzle with the same spun talking points.

It’s getting old with voters, taxpayers and pretty much anyone outside the bubble.

In Ontario we’re waiting for the axe to fall as reality hits the wall. Talk of cuts and de-listing health care services when the focus should be on cutting waste and yes, maybe even school boards, because there are more requiring healthcare than there are people with kids in school in this province. Soon the demand for more healthcare will mean, despite his provinces McGuinty is going to find that healthcare in the bowels of our education system. It’s not a matter of IF any long it’s when.

You fellows don’t seem to grasp that polls done by federations or parties for internal consumption are just that, they are not propoganda polls. It does not serve the polling company or sponser any good to bias the question or push-poll for the answer they want. They are only well served when polls are accurate.

Of course the poll WAS congruent with the results of the election where the PCs got hammered for supporting choice.

Ever wonder why no party today in Ontario will support vouchers or tax support for private schools? Believe me if the Tories actually thought the idea was popular they would be on it like white on rice. No political party will touch vouchers or education privatization with a barge poll because they know it is political suicide. They have all thought this through and decided that it is a big political loser.

McGuinty knows that the jusrisdiction that does not invest massively in education cannot compete in the modern world. It costs far less to fund it well than to cut it.

As has been pointed out repeatedly there are all sorts of factors to take into account when comparing education in Finland to other jurisdictions.  Doug operates on the premise that simply repeating dubious claims will, somehow or other, make them true.  That strategy may work in a classroom of bored teenagers however among adults it doesn’t.

Posted by John L on 01/28 at 02:06 PM

John L. You man not relize that every time one of your bubbles gets burst by reality you fall back on “there are many factors involved”.

The fact is that organizations like the OECD have taken all facors into account and discounted the bogus ones before they point out that Finland is the model to emulate, not the reform favourite #17 USA.

The idea that it is a dubious clam well “it is to laugh” at the sad attempts to clutch at straws and defend corporate reform when it is repeatedly proven to offer nothing to the improvement agenda.

I get a kick out of the logic of the reform movement on standardized testing.

1) When the NAEP test proves that unionized states do far better than non-unionized states “it is more complicated than that.”

2) When PISA tests prove that states that build up their PS systems with high quality unionized teachers and pay little or no attention to choice, “it is more complicated, there are many factors.”

3) When testing proves that that social class is the primary and overwhelming component in underachievement, reformers say “it is more complicated than that, and go searching for outliers.

4) But when testing shows that this year, (maybe not last year or next year) teacher A had better results than techer B, teacher B should be fired or have their pay cut or teacher A should get a bonus.

All of a sudden, it is NOT more complicated than that, we can pay teachers based on test scores alone. There are no other factors.

It is to laugh.

Doug,you protest so much,you must be frightened now that Ontario may lose it`s triple A credit rating because McGuinty caved and got blackmailed by the Unions.
He also spent money that was not there on a new venture called the Early Years,a billion dollars we didn`t have.
Research shows that school boards are unaccountable-testing in the Grade 3 area MUST continue otherwise we are in the dark.This isn`t corporate reform,it`s accountability.
Poverty,your incessant excuse for failure-I sat on a plane with OECD conference planners,shallow.They are fed policies,they don`t make them.
Education is the way out of poverty,your political unaccountability slant dooms them forever.I want hope,planning and accountability,I want education to honour research and not allow each Professor to do their own thing and completely ignore gold standard studies.

My belief is that very stupid people attempt to save money on education. It is like a corporation slashing its R&D arm to save money. The education systen and its improved downward extension is the reason Ontario will move forward. I am not a Liberal but I am pro public education and whem McGuinty does the right thing I clap. When he does the wrong thing I complain.

Conservatives don’t seem to get the fact that the modern economy is so heavily reliant on a strong education system that cutting education is the best way to destroy the futures of our children.

Education is, in effect free because it creates more wealth than it costs. The more you spend, the wealthier you are.

Families seem to understand for their OWN children, an investment in education is the best thing you can do but can’t seem to upscale that to understand that what is good for their child is good for everybody. We really should have free tuition like Finland.

ALBERTA, you heard me ALBERTA is about to abandon not just grade 3 but grade 6 testing as well. TORY ALBERTA.

The vast majority of education research supports the opposite of what you want.

We have a lab of 5.5 million people in Finland that shows us exactly what to do. The OECD says follw my direction not yours.

The billion dollar early years venture won`t enhance education results,it will simply shuffle children into different programs and create more jobs and more card carrying teachers.
It`s not our fault that that unlike Finland there is weak curriculum integrity and weak teacher preparation.
Perhaps Finland isn`t in bed with the Union and the publishers.
If we were like Finland we wouldn`t be having this discussion.
Apples and watermelon.

http://www.educationnews.org/international-uk/telegraph-private-school-teaching-methods-uninspiring/

Time for a timeout, Doug.

Your bombardment of comments is getting a little irksome, particularly when you simply repeat the same dubious claims over and over.

Report back when you have something new and compelling to contribute.

“My belief is that very stupid people attempt to save money on education. “

Must be a lot of stupid people within the public education system, Doug?  The stakeholders within are always willing to look after their best interests at the expense of the students. Let’s us dumb it down, keep out the gold-standard research, and water down all approaches and policies concerning the skills and abilities of students that rise above a basic education. After all, it is the parents that pick up the costs, when the stakeholders within are too busy looking out and protecting their best interests.
As well as society, in the final outcomes of students.

Again Doug, testing is not going the way of do-do bird in Alberta, There will be changes, but the elimination of the testing is not on the table.
The teachers’ union, is the one that is pushing for elimination, but than again it is not in their best interests to have their members being held accountable for achievement of students. It is one stakeholder, that does not give a toss about quality of education being received for the students, and the final outcomes of students. Apparently in their eyes, it is all about the SEC factors and intelligence levels of students.

Here`s a link re Finland that is very interesting,they don`t begin school on a compulsory basis till age 7 and there is tremendous focus on foundational skills.

I think teachers choosing what works versus the dictatorial school board curriculum choices makes sense,ever met a teacher who likes using what doesn`t work?
No one wants to listen to them,do they ask them for 20 years now if the children are learning math?
I have a question-how do you handle teacher training that brain washes,“phonics is bad”,phonics is boring and rote learning,only 15%of the class would feel that but interestingly they love it because they learn to spell so well.
I guess Dalton wasted the first billion.

John,

I have never seen you cotribute one single new piece of information, no news, no study nothing, just conservative talking points and nostrums.

They are slogans but none of them are true.

The billion dollar early years venture won`t enhance education results,it will simply shuffle children into different programs and create more jobs and more card carrying teachers.
It`s not our fault that that unlike Finland there is weak curriculum integrity and weak teacher preparation.
Perhaps Finland isn`t in bed with the Union and the publishers.
If we were like Finland we wouldn`t be having this discussion.
Apples and watermelon.

I’m glad you saved us all of that money Jo Anne with all of the internaional experts and our own homegrowm Fraser Mustard and Margrette McCain saying ECE and ELP was the way to go.

In Finland the union is FAR more involved in school reform than here. A very strong union indeed and one of the reasons Finland does so well.

Nancy, If there was any relationship between testing and improvement the USA NCLB would be #1 and Finland would be #17. As it so happens, the reverse is true.

There is zero relationship between testing and improvement as Alberta has discovered.

Testing is a placebo, nothing more.

Testing is a measure of accountability. That stated, testing represented a measure in my eyes, the effectiveness of the curriculum and instruction inside the schools. As well as a barometer on the methods of improving achievement inside the walls of the school.

That said, it does not take a genius to figure out, that unions are preventing reforms and new measures, after the results of testing,  to address the school population that are the low achievers.

As Joanne has stated, between curriculum, instruction and training of teachers, a parent who is doing their part at home, should expect steady improvement in their children’s public education. But alas, steady improvement within the education system is a small increases in percentage points for the individual students, to ensure that most students will never reach their full potential.

No Doug, Finland’s teachers’ unions are not heavily involved with the day to day curriculum, instruction or school reform. The education ministry is very involved to ensure that the teachers are upgrading their skills, nor are the unions controlling the operations of the schools by their contracts. The teachers are there to do a job, to ensure each and every child reaches their potential, and a solid foundation to stand on, living within the contracts.

Finland are known for their effective unions, as well as not known for labour unrest at a drop of a hat counterparts are known for. Very clear lines dividing the responsibilities of union members and the services.

Wikipedia -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederation_of_Unions_for_Academic_Professionals_in_Finland

The actual site - http://www.oaj.fi/portal/page?_pageid=515,452376&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

Rather refreshing compared to the NA teachers’ unions sites, and the many different SEC reasons why children are not succeeding in schools.

http://bertmaes.wordpress.com/2010/02/24/why-is-education-in-finland-that-good-10-reform-principles-behind-the-success/

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

Although it is Wikipedia, it is quite comprehensive. COMPULSORY education starts at age 7 but most kids are in very high quality ECE provided by the city long before age 7.

One can only imagine the howls from the teacher unions if someone actually claimed our teachers suffer from “weak teacher preparation”.

That flies entirely in the face of the party line, folks!

Time for a timeout, sir

In Finland they seem to believe that teaching children to read before age 7 is a big waste of time because they are not ready in a cognitive sense. They start at age 7 with a “mixed system” and everybody can read within one year. By age 15 they are the world’s best readers.

Because they use the the word reform does not imply support for the corporate reform movement. It is the exact opposite.

I agree with every one of those points which is why Finland is #1.

One can only imagine the howls from the teacher unions if someone actually claimed our teachers suffer from “weak teacher preparation”.

That flies entirely in the face of the party line, folks!

Time for a timeout, sir

I would say it and unions across the spectrum would say the same. it is the reform movement that is trying to de-professionalize education with this TFA and anybody can teach mentality.

Are you the moderator here John? Didn’t think so. NEA buggest teacher union on the continent position paper, it must be made much harder to become a teachers, higher marks more degrees.

The Finnish language lends itself very well, to delay the reading instruction when students are more mature developmentally wise. Unlike the English language, which needs an early start. Starting at 7, will only extend the amount of time of learning to read well into grade 5 Doug. As it stands now, approximately 60 percent of grade three students are meeting grade level or above in reading in NA. The stats displays it consistently, and the stakeholders within the system keeps blaming the SEC factors, rather than the reading instruction and education policies that does a number on education quality of students. Too bad the English language is difficult to learn, and more so when the students are left to figure out the code on their own.

The high quality of Finland’s ECE has more to do with many neighbourhood storefront operations, and the training of the ECE, who staffed the storefronts. For a community my size, 2 to 3 storefront operations, and where the ECE as well as daycare adapts to the community and parental needs, and not the other way around, as in Ontario where the parents and communities are force to adapt to the one-sized-fits-all ECE.

As the Finland’s government has stated time and time again, it would not be fair to the parents and children if ECE had no choice. and one-sized-fits-all. Parents and their children have their own values.

You really should read the papers and articles from Finland, instead of using secondary sources. One debate within Finland, is the number of Swedish homeschoolers moving to Finland, to get away from the restrictions being place on them. In Finland every parent has the final say in how they children will be educated, without interference from the state.

Doug, it is about the education quality. And Finland knows all about doing it right when it comes to education quality.

Hmmm…

  Even with our “weak teacher preparation” we still have what we’re told is one of the finest systems in the world…?

As to “more gegrees” the issue is whether or not that obliges the teacher to actually take on more responsibilty.  As has been noted here a teacher can attain a graduate degree in Ontario and do absolutely nothing more than a teacher who doesn’t have a graduate degree, albeit it at a higher salary.  As others have noted years of experience and more education only have a limited value in creating a capable teacher.  Creeping credentialism, as opposed to actually having the competencies required,  means nothing.  A mediocre or unmotivated teacher will remain so no matter how much paper hangs on the wall.

Anyway this is getting repetitive and boring.

Take a timeout and report back later, sir.

Below is further evidence, that income has little to do with achievement levels.

“Links Between Young Children’s Behavior and Achievement: The Role of Social Class and Classroom Composition” was published by the journal American Behavioral Scientist last month. Its authors, Annie Georges and Jeanne Brooks-Gunn of Columbia University and Lizabeth Malone of Mathematica, found that students’ attention problems had a bigger impact on their academic performance than their family income level, and that the classmates of students with attention problems experience a negative impact on their own test scores.”

http://earlyed.newamerica.net/blogposts/2012/new_research_on_behavior_and_academic_achievement_in_kindergarten-62862

Perhaps another reason why choice becomes the only option, is the continued focus within the progressive public education, on the SEC factors. Yet very little focus if any, is done in areas of attentive behaviour of children. A problem that crosses across all social/economic spheres.

Here is the part you don’t understand Nancy. Income does not have “little to do with” results it just that attention has “even more” to do with it, but like behavious, attention is also class based. Dr Dan Offerd at McMaster an expert in child mental health demonstrated that a poor child is 90% more likely to be diagnosed with a behaviour problem.

Across TDSB and all big cities behavioural classes are housed in poor schools because the middle class schools hardly produce any ADD or ADHD kids. Ask any teacher with any experience in a big or not so big city and they will tell you the poorer they are the less attention they pay. Try getting attention on an Native Reserve. It take special teachers to do that.

John try to familiarize yourself with the literature. In Finland you need a masters degree to teach grade 2. There is no extra duty required. The point is to get all teachers to that level some day. The salary difference for an MA in most boards is now zero. It used to be $1000 per year. That was cut thanks to Mike Harris.

Finland leads the world due to the strength of its teacher “credentialism” but it guess “it is more complicated than that.”

I love the way you try to make a last point and then cut off debate. Ya right.

Doug,your statements about ADD and ADHD, Behaviour and lack of attention due to poverty belong in the garbage bin.
Absolutely pathetic,I`m incensed.
ADD is a neurobiological disorder of the frontal lobe and has zero to do with SES.
I`m appalled at your know it all,ignorant insistence that we bow to your knowledge.
I have worked to date with 150 First Nations teachers,I can tell you none of them believe this crap.
Instruction that is based on research,engaging ,multisensory and does prevention work leads children to early success .That`s what matters not your free wheeling opinions.

I`m sure Peter Chaban would be delighted to sit and enlighten you about ADD Doug.
Nancy has more knowledge than you because she reads and researches,you go into your ego for knowledge.

http://www.ldrc.ca/contents/view_article/215/

This fellow says attention and behaviour problems overwhelmingly from the poor.

http://www.offordcentre.com/about/offordpapers.html

I happen to have already read the research and written extensively on the topic.

I know many of you don’t want SES to be the determining factor in education because it undermines your thesis (bad public school, bad union, bad blab, good choice, good testing…) but the denial of it simply makes you look uninformed. Even American reformers are starting to realize that those who deny it just have no credibility thereafter.

Funny how 90% of the diagnosed are poor. No wonder you are working on a reserve. Have you noticed “they are poor.”

Attentiveness and problems associated with it, concerns all human beings. It has nothing to do with income, and any other SEC factors,and what you have just posted, is like stating that all low income people walk differently from the other income group levels. See and hear differently from other income groups. Income level does not change the physiology and biological make-up of human beings. Income and other SEC factors will aggravate the physiology and biological weaknesses of human beings. The higher the income, the individual has more ability to tend to the weaknesses of his or her physiology and biological makeup.

Other than that, income levels does not predict behaviour, attentive problems, intelligence, creativeness and every other aspect of physiology and the biological aspects of human beings.

The science research,two mountains full of research has shown that SEC factors, especially the focus on income, has generated billions of dollars wasted on programs, that does nothing for the cognitive root problems underlying behaviour of students. The high income students have just as many behavioural problems as any other group, but within the education system, the higher the income, the students behaviour is more tolerated, than within the low-income schools. The higher the income levels, gives the ability to tend to the behaviour problems, as well as increasing the likelihood of effecting permanent change in the neuro-cognitive pathways of the brain.

In one word, unconscious bias is at work within the public education system. Low tolerance for behaviour in low-income students, and higher tolerance for behaviour in the higher income groups. It results in widespread discrimination and inequities across the education system. It shows in the data streams, how income and other SEC factors are the deciding factor, and sometimes the only factor that allows access to education services, as well as the creation of large concentration of the acquired disabilities and increase behavioural/aggressive problems at the bottom of the income ladder.

Within the public education system, the training, and throughout the system there is no focus on the root cognitive problems affecting attention, memory work and other aspects especially in the primary grades. Instead behaviour becomes the focus, and are blame for the bulk of the reading, writing and numeracy low achievement. The underlying root problems are ignored, and income comes into play at this point. Income gives the ability to improve behaviour as well as the underlying root problems that came first before the behaviour.

Attentiveness affects all student achievement. As the article has stated, “The researchers conclude that “it makes sense to align teacher training and school intervention to foster children’s attentive behavior.” Helping teachers – or school psychologists and social workers, as the study recommends – diagnose and correct attention problems in the early grades could give those children a better chance for high academic achievement and, ultimately, help them succeed later in life.”

It is so sad to see the repeated swipes at low income students, implying that their physiology and biological make-up are seen as being less capable than the higher income student. Worse yet, using it as an excuse for low achievement, instead of working at the cognitive root problems of all students no matter the income, to increase over all achievement and to navigate in the adult world. Worse still, to use it as the reason to limit and/or redirect scarce education resources.

Choice becomes the only option.

Nancy`s quote
“It is so sad to see the repeated swipes at low income students, implying that their physiology and biological make-up are seen as being less capable than the higher income student. Worse yet, using it as an excuse for low achievement, instead of working at the cognitive root problems of all students no matter the income, to increase over all achievement and to navigate in the adult world. Worse still, to use it as the reason to limit and/or redirect scarce education resources.”

Agreed,truly deplorable.I think Doug`s idea is to show hopelessness so we don`t waste revenue on those children and teachers but rather give another raise through the public sector union.
After all,the Ministry tells us salaries take up over 80% of budgets as it stands.

Doug`s link on ADHD and ADD-

Not one mention of poverty.

I put it there for his credibility. He says behaviour disorders 90% from poor students.

How dare you deceive us with a link that you imply
corroborates your angle.

You`ve got an agenda and you`ll do anything to support it,including manipulate the truth.

The links between income and children’s mental health are overwhelming. Dr Dan Offord (1934-2004) was a powerful voice linking poverty to mental health. Do a bit of research Jo Anne before you sound off.

http://www.ccsd.ca/pubs/inckids/index.htm

Do some reading.

“I happen to have already read the research and written extensively on the topic.”

If you really did Doug, you would not be writing and spouting the lines from Big Pharma, who would love to see all human beings drugged, medicated and everyone identified with a mental disorder. But to use and twist the work of the Peter Chaban and mental health, declaring that 90 percent of the poor have attention and behavioural problems are from the poor is grasping at straws. Is that the reason, why laws are put in place, to criminalize the poor, for being poor? No doubt, when it comes to the so-called experts who thinks all behaviour is a result of the SEC factors.

Again Doug, and the other Dougs of the world are always eager and willing to discriminate, to advance their own interests. Even to the point of taking research and twisting it to suit their agendas and visions of what should be.

“Tannock and Martinussen put forward the proposal the ADHD should be viewed as a cognitive disorder. This has implications for the classroom. Current practices target the overt behavioral systems of ADHD. The authors suggest that an alternative approach might be to try to moderate behavioral symptoms by using instructional practices that reflect an understanding of the cognitive weaknesses associated with ADHD. “

“http://www.ldrc.ca/contents/view_article/215/

The above quote is from Canadian researchers Doug, that know a thing or two of applying the research to the education environment. Unlike Dr. Chaban and his work was strictly within mental health with no emphasis on applications within the school environment. As well as no mention of mental illness according to income.

That said, mental health is becoming the new focus that will replace the feel good stuff of self-esteem. I am afraid, that reading struggles and other learning struggles will be seen as a mental health issue, as it was when self-esteem became a major focus within the education policies and practices. No amount of self-esteem lessons, will improve underlying cognitive weaknesses the root problems of learning struggles.

The focus is our schools should be the underlying cognitive root problems, and the not the surface behavioural problems that results from the cognitive root problems. Having policies centered around mental health, does nothing for achievement of students in itself, without having the underlying cognitive root problems that needs attending first.

Read the Children of the Code Doug, and a major part of society problems rests in the reading instruction and other practices of the public education system, that instills shame unto the individual students, that ultimately hinders achievement in all students.

Choice becomes the only option.

Jo Anne,

Poverty causes ADHD.

http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/52/6/464

There are many many sources for this but I won’t bury you.

I have an agenda? Don’t you work for a private outfit that pushes your POV.

I don’t.

Back to Nancy,

The reason attention and behaviour problems are greater predictors of success than SES is because they are a subset of SES in its most extreme form.

If any parents are watching,this is called"school board cover up”.

If any parents are watching,this is called"school board cover up”.

So I guess people are now ready to admit that SES causes childhood disorders of the attention and behavioural type. Since it has been proven, and I could go on and on, we are back to name calling.

So Doug, things have not change much since the 1950s. Why doesn’t the public education system and the so-called experts revert back to the old label of mental defects, for children who are struggling in school, and abnormal behaviour. Used often in the 1960s, and I seen it with my own eyes on my school file that had to 8 inches thick. First words that greeted me was mental deflect, compliments from an expert at the Ontario ministry of education. Good thing the school ignored it all, and got down to the business of teaching me how to speak, as well as the lessons in grammar, and other things that help me become a straight A student by grade 5.

Your link concludes - 
“A positive association appears to exist between adversity indicators and the risk for ADHD as well as for its associated psychiatric, cognitive, and psychosocial impairments. These findings support the work of Rutter and stress the importance of adverse family-environment variables as risk factors for children with ADHD. “

Yes, environment factors plays a role Doug, because they will aggravate or improve children who have developmental disabilities. As in your link, the conclusion simply states the family-environment variables, the adverse kind are risk factors that will increase the severity of the ADHD, as well as in other studies in other developmental disorders.

My point is if children received the correct help early on in the public education system, adverse environmental factors would not hinder progress of students, and leads to higher achievement in all children.

The poverty angles, and the heavy use of SEC factors ends up with a lot of students with labels, when most of the students are causalities of poor instruction and ineffective school policies/practices that actively promotes the mimicking of developmental disorders of ADHD or dyslexia.

Poor parenting, and the rest of the excuses are used to limit remediation for the 3 Rs, as well as placing severe restrictions on the use of effective practices within the schools, that follows the brain, cognitive and learning research to which has implications in all aspects of educating children.

As to Doug’s link - “In carrying out the research for this report, it became clear to the authors that what we need in Canada is a new and realistic approach that will allow us to determine an appropriate poverty line. With this in mind, the authors have framed their research around the following question: What if producing healthy children was the main objective of anti-poverty efforts in Canada?”

It does not state that poverty causes ADHD. Read the report Doug Poverty does not cause. ADHD or dyslexia or autism or the other developmental disorders. But poverty will aggravate the developmental disorders. But than again hanging around a bad crowd, will also set the conditions for students to behave badly in schools.  that kicks off the labeling process with scant attention being paid on remediation or the cognitive processes of students.

Developing a poverty line is a good thing, but using the poverty line to design education policy around it is a bad thing when the physiology and biological make-up of students are ignored for the most part in the education policies that are crafted by the advocates of the SEC factors.

http://www.aacap.org/cs/root/publication_store/your_adolescent_attention_deficit/hyperactivity_disorder_adhd

Of course you will see POVERTY, listed as a cause of ADHD here but many of the “other” causes listed are also heavily weighted amongst the poor, FAS, lead paint, nutrition and so on.

Poor attention in class is a function of SES. It is at its most profound in very oppressed communities such as our poorest First Nations reserves.

Of course it does not CAUSE disorders any more than reading problems. If it did we would never see a successful poor kid.

Poverty does exacerbate and magnifies all school related problems but the endless denial of this on these and other pages as if we could solve the problems of poverty and education with phonics and DI are to say the least, dangerously naive, at worst counterproductive.

Doug’s wrong about a lot of things it seems. 

Like this item that was discussed a few days ago about on-line learning.  This not only proves the SQE paper timely but Doug’s spin about the success of on-line learning is just that more spin.  No one’s fooled here.
http://www.thestar.com/news/education/article/1123294—long-promised-ontario-online-institute-still-far-from-launch#.Tyaih4GlvUM.facebook

Working memory capacity is a very good predictor for academic success.

Below the Pearson site - and Cogmed - a company that Pearson purchased in 2010..

Why?

Besides the gold-standard research, 80 percent success rate, of not only improving working memory capacity, but all of sudden acquiring skills become easier to acquired.

http://www.cogmed.com/how-it-works

Far superior than the subjective bias of income and other SEC factors, Working memory capacity is another thing that all human beings share, and poor working memory capacity is not confined to low income groups.

In school, the high achievers have good working memory capacity compared to their counterparts. Good working memory capacity is an important strength for all students, as well as having the public education system to have increase focus on the cognitive needs of their students, as well as the foundational basics in the 3 Rs. 

Now Doug, are you going to tell me that working memory capacity is a subset of the SEC factors? No doubt, and if you still insist, than you truly believe that folks of low income, are not as intelligent as those folks who were born in the higher income groups.

A real shame that Cogmed is not used within the public education system, for the kids who do have disabilities. More shame, when all students are denied cognitive training of this nature, because it benefits all students no matter the income.

Where do you see poverty listed as one of the causes in the link that your provided!

“A child’s environment may contribute to the development of the disorder or worsen the symptoms. “

Otherwise nothing.

Your last post stated, “Of course you will see POVERTY, listed as a cause of ADHD here but many of the “other” causes listed are also heavily weighted amongst the poor, FAS, lead paint, nutrition and so on. “

Forget all the other stuff, concerning the school environment, and the cause of many of a doctor phoning up a school, reading them the riot act. My own family doctor read the school the riot act to my delight and surprise.  How school environments and their practices and the absent of key practices that benefits students directly are much of the cause of the learning struggles in schools, as well as aggravating developmental disorders in their severity. Too add insult to injury, by having the educrats developed and put in place, practices that further aggravates the developmental disorders, as well as hindering achievement for all children by denying key practices according to the income of students, is discrimination, that allows subjective bias of SEC factors,  to become the deciding factor for all education policy throughout the system.

And the link that you provided, is just further proof of the lack of and the absent of cognitive, behavioural and social skills training in the public schools that all students benefit, as well as to help all students to achieve to their best efforts.

http://www.aacap.org/cs/root/publication_store/your_adolescent_attention_deficit/hyperactivity_disorder_adhd

This may be due to such related factors as poverty; malnutrition; lead poisoning: poor prenatal and neonatal health care (which can lead to prematurity or low birth weight); drug or alcohol abuse during pregnancy; and family disturbances, including violence and drug and alcohol

2nd paragraph under “Causes and Consequences” of ADHD. Also all of the other causes are associated with poverty -malnutrition, low birth weight, etc etc.

Read a bit more carefully.

I know you don’t want poverty to be at the root of ALL education problems but it is.