Remind us Doretta when the individual board results become public? I understand there is a lag time for those.

Also in response to a previous thread wondering about Dalton’s dumbing down of standards and Malkin’s musings about “if taught properly”, Malkin writes

“Ontario’s premier is now saying that Ontario set the bar too high and that it is unreasonable to expect 75% of the province’s students to be able to master the curriculum for their grade.”

More proof that McGuinty still hasn’t connected with the fact that those students who absorbed and were the products of a steady diet of whole language and feel good methodologies are the teachers in front of the classroom today carrying on a losing legacy.

Dalton McGuinty is doing his part for the environment I guess and RECYCLING bad teaching methods designed to keep students struggling in math and reading so he can CONSERVE well-paid bureaucrats at levels and REUSE the same excuses.

I know Dalton’s Minister of Education spend megabucks “greening” the curriculum but…...........

Gap Between Have’s and Have-not’s Will Increase

Unless people admit that our present system is dysfunctional AND COUNTERPRODUCTIVE we will continue to fulfill the prophesies of doom being projected.

Counterproductive?  Producing more harm than good?

Yes, I do believe Richard Wurzel http://www.canada.com/business/More+chronically+unemployable+people+likely+product+Canada+education+system+observers/3441459/story.html
is on the right track when he predicts a three class system for Canada – without, and this is important, a real middle class where most social progress usually evolves from.

Our present system, he says, leads to:
-  Gold collar workers, who are the creators and innovators in society;
-  Menial laborers, who work for low wages, are paid hourly and are often on contract;
-  Chronically unemployable, who have no marketable skills and cannot find work.

Unless we want a huge welfare system to provide a safety net for these “chronically unemployable” much has to be done to improve their chances to be self-sufficient citizens.

We must harness the parents, the advocates for the children they love.  Yes, parents and love will do it.  Choice, competition, compassion and comparisons through proper reporting will allow appropriate decisions to be made for individual educational needs.

The government’s main role should be to ensure a multiplicity of choices, good reporting, and disproportionate funding as necessary for those needing special services and dedicated teaching.

The Society for Quality Education is be congratulated for always being there when issues of this sort emerge.  Their denunciation of government monopoly of education is worth repeating over and over again.

Down with government monopoly schooling!  Release parental choice and the love they have for their children and let appropriate educational decisions be made.

Go to http://www.eqao.com

Thanks Doretta - I know where to look but when I look up my board and individual schools I’m not getting the 2009-2010 scores up yet - only 2008-2009

Stupid me - I see now where within the new look website that Sept. 15th is the publication data for schools.

I did browse the site and called up a few schools and have to ask what’s with the bundling of the results into groups of school years. Didn’t we move away from a lumping together once before?

Does it make it easier to fool the general public?

I don’t think that EQAO is trying to fool the public.  The data comes out annually so it has always been reported by year.  SQE has put it together by board on the Sunshine site.

The Sept 15th date is probably the earliest they have ever released this information.

When EQAO started the date to release school and board information was in December or later.

“The data comes out annually so it has always been reported by year.”

I know this but you’re not understanding.

When I select a school board and then an individual school on the new-look and configured website the results are now being reported as “Combined Achievement Results For 2005-2007, 2006-2008 and 2007-2009”

Not by individual years. It was that bundling of results that I suggested could fool the public.

http://eqaoweb.eqao.com/eqaoweborgprofile/profile.aspx?_Mident=6049&Lang=E

as an example take this school and scroll down to the bar graphed results so far and check the heading.

Where on there will we find the individual school results by year?

You have to go to each YEAR first then look up the school, although I do see that they put the last few years up to show trends.  After that, you have to ask EQAO why they do what they do.

I guess that is why our Sunshine site is so useful on the board level.

While there is much in this piece with which to agree, competition in education, as in every other field, tends to satisfy people’s desires without necessarily meeting their needs. My 35+ years in higher education, where some real competition exists, tells me that universities often compete in a race to the bottom, inflating marks, accepting students upon their cheques clearing, and making as few professional or academic demands as possible. Some students want a genuinely challenging and high quality university education; many others just want a degree. Perhaps, in the long run, the market might sort this out, but generally, it doesn’t seem to matter that much.

There is, for example, a niche market for quality in teacher education, and a few institutions have striven to capture it. I have had in my courses a large number of hard working, well-read, intelligent, creative, and inspiring prospective teachers, but I have seen too little evidence that these are the kind of teachers that school boards want to hire or retain. A well connected graduate of a cross-border pay-to-play certification mill is often just as likely to be selected to teach as someone who has a far better grasp of current educational theory and practice and appreciation of the contexts in which schooling takes place.

Competition in education is, on balance, a goal worthy of pursuing, but it will not necessarily produce the degree of educational improvement that its advocates often assume.