It is a great day for parents and kids in Ontario. This program will be as popular as medicare. Now e can work on extending it downwards to 3 year olds.

Why should they have choice? Very very few even want a choice. They can keep the kids out till grade one if they want.

I would not have bothered with the adjustment money.

Sure low SES should get a leg up but they will still benefit more in a universal program.

Yes the cost-recovery costs should be interesting. The costs for parents who can afford daycare, depends on how many parents are receiving subsidized daycare.Add the children who are already been identified as special needs early on in their life, and parents, no matter their income, are subsidized to obtain quality day care, nursery schools that include private concerns. I paid a grand total of $45 per month for nursery school, half days, so my child could be in an environment that would promote active oral communication, among other things.

Speaking about nursery schools, and kindergarten, will the teachers actually have the time to communicate to parents on a regular basis, on effective methods that they might be using at home. Somehow I do not think so, not when they have 26 students to look after. Will the teachers, identify problems in real time, speak to the parents on strategies in real time, and not six week later? We were in Ontario at that time, I appreciated the little chats that took place, to work on rhyming, or the opposites, because they knew it was very important to nib learning problems in the bud, and not wait, in the hope it will go away. How many teachers are going to know that one?  How many teachers know the education system well enough, that in a lot of cases, the responsive rate, in terms of actions, are very slow, and where the teachers that my child had, asked me to make sure her name will not be taken off the child development centre, until she was at least 9 years old. They explain to me, in case she does run into any learning snags, instead of taking the school route, she can be fast-track to the centre for assessment. At the school level at that time, there was a six month waiting list for assessment, and the waiting list has increase since then.

As for the people lining up, I bet the majority are parents who are lining up for cheap day care, and qualify as such to received subsidized daycare. Another administration problem is collecting the fees. Most daycare, non-profit or profit have a process, where there is no chasing down the fees. It will be interesting how they are going to set up the process, in collecting fees. In advance? After services have been rendered?  Weekly, monthly, or will there be flexibility for the parent? 

What will be really interesting to watch, is the teaching methods, that are purported to be effective, and track the students over time. Will the system as in the past, and present times, missed the students who are struggling in reading, writing and numeracy, but are still passing? 

I rather have meaningful and effective choices that suits my children and their education. And not a one-size-fits-all approach, which is likely to happen, when you get 26 kids together with various skills and abilities. There is no time for meeting the needs of the child, and is easier to apply the one-size-fits-all approach.. At least in the nursery school that my daughter attended, two early childhood educators, and class size was limited to 12 children only for AM and PM sessions.

Like everything else this gov’t seems to do, they make an announcement, pass a Bill and then fill in the specifics later.

However you slice it I’m betting that by election time Dalton’s promise of full-day kindergarten will fizzle into another half-baked program that doesn’t amount to anything but employment for surplus teachers who can then take jobs away from ECE workers. Nice.

Finland offers financial incentives to parents to raise their kids or put them in daycare if they choose. “Today 10.7% of parents choose to put their kids in municipal daycare; 42.7% choose a child home allowance; and 29.2% opt for the parenthood allowance which covers parents with kids up to age one who stay home. The stay at home parents receiving gov’t allowances in Finland account for a whopping 72% of all children under three.”

I do believe we’ve discovered the TRUE reason those children thrive in school - it’s the parents who REALLY are the first and best teachers.

Looks like Stephen Harper’s on the right track.

Oh, and by the way, the way the Catholic board in my region rolled out the ELP was very different than the public board. The Catholic board said right in their very first press release that parents shouldn’t get their hopes up AND they also said that a child’s time with parents was always supported by that system.

Just saying….....

The Finland system is actually a good system for them because they have almost no poverty in their advanced social-democratic system. If we eliminate poverty we could do the same. In the meantime, our poor families need it. Universality is our tradition. I wish we could start with just poor kids and slowly work out but the government needs votes from all classes.

It’s all optics designed to impress and flatter(the McGuinty government). Nothing more.

This government is very good at setting itself up for the next election…it’s been doing so since the removal of Wynne as ed. minister to give the illusion it’s not in assumed collusion with the teachers unions….but we know better here don’t we Doug?

Doug you are probably right about the vote getting aspect of universality.  I just don’t think you will help poorer kids by giving wealthier kids the same start.  The acheivement gap will remain and will we have a very expensive program that will not make a difference for those who need it.

I stand by my original statement—it would be better if we made sure kids had effective teaching fundamentals in the current JK/SK/Gr 1.  Sorry, any mother who knows kids and their normal day, knows this is not “early learning” this is universal day care.

Also, this program does nothing for the moms who work outside the 9-5 day.  What about nurses on shifts or retail workers?  This does not give them time home with their kids when they are not working.  So if they want to see their kids, they keep them out?

There is a growing worldwide understanding that ECE and childcare from the state by the state are critical in human capital terms and to make the local economy function by freeing up women to work. Only the 20% social conservative block fights it any more. The business class has bought in. It is just an extension of public schooling. After this we will move to 3 year olds.

Popular? Yes it will be very popular.

I look at the whole ELP-ECE, package as “school” - school just got earlier. rich and poor both got public school so they both get this. The way to help the poor here is to make the daycare aspect free for them and easy to get.

We do not do anything like enough compensatory education. Why did we lower primary class size everywhere when we could double down on poor kids and still lower it a little everywhere?

I know it is much more difficult to identify outside big cities but in the TDSB, the 25% poorest schools have 80% of the learning problems.

If what you say is true Doug, than in a regular everyday public school, where income levels range more or less even, from low to middle to high, than what Chuck is saying may be very correct. The assertion that the gaps in learning will not be corrected, and there will not be any significant differences, even if you give only free daycare to the poor.

Now that is problematic in itself, because what you considered the cutoff point. In a two-parent home, where both are working, and bring in a combination of $60,000, will not qualify, even both jobs are near the minimum wage level. Nor can you take just the one income, that would mean a significant number of people getting free daycare. You either offer all free daycare, or offer subsidized daycare for all, according to income, which the latter would probably be the fairest, according to income. The numbers will drop, as you climb the income ladder, where many of these parents may very well opt for private daycare, pre-school, and private schools.

Either way, depending on the ratios of income levels in a school, the changing variables of society, and how families react to the changing variables, it may turn the kindergarten program, and by extension the school,  the biggest and most expensive babysitting operation, And it certainly looks that way, with 26 little ones in a classroom. By experience as a mother, try out a birthday party. Anything beyond 12, can be problematic even for the best of mothers. Or try it out, with all the neighborhood children in your backyard, and as parent, if something happens, legally you are responsible. I wonder what the costs of liability insurance will be for these schools, with the ELP. Within a wink, kids can quickly become very angry and seriously hurt someone. As a parent, I would not be too happy if my kid got seriously hurt, because the adults had turned their back.

Than there is the other side, where stories from the U.S., where parents are being told by the ECE, or even a certified K teacher, that are operating a daycare/pre-school program, within a school, are being told there is something wrong with their child, and suspect LD, attention deficit disorders, and a whole host of other conditions, that are pretty hard to determine, on behaviour alone. In a lot of cases, parent regretted their decision to enrolled their child in a pre-school being operated by a state. Especially for those parents, who found out later, there is nothing wrong with their child. Nothing at all.

I came upon something interesting, that the ELP has been the focus of daycare lobby groups, alone with, “Free daycare goal: “CCAAC’s goal is that eventually child care as an educational program would have no parent fee as does the public school system.” This goal is buried in footnote-like note at bottom of final page of “From Patchwork to Framework: Highlights of a Child Care Strategy for Canada” 2004 (a very influential document)”

“Helen Ward, President of Kids First Parent Association of Canada, says public funds are being used to fund the daycare lobby. “Code Blue for Child Care” is one lobby campaign launched by the Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada. Information released from the government to Kids First says that the CCAAC received $364,777 while the Child Care Federation received $1,429,591 over an unstated period.”

The daycare lobby, is supported by some powerful unions, but the good news not the teachers’ unions.

http://www.kidsfirstcanada.org/releaseapr242006.htm

Here is the CCAAC link, for the other side.
http://www.ccaac.ca/resources/Research/PtoF.php

Here is the advocacy link. What I find interesting, is the concern, for the daycare operators.
Child Care in Ontario faces Catastrophic Collapse

http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs088/1102506130457/archive/1103230052837.html

I think there is a lot more than what appears to be. Where there is very strong completing agendas, looking after their best interests, that may have nothing to do with the welfare of children, or their parents.

Never thought I’d say this, but there’s some aspects of what Doug has said here that I agree with.

“I look at the whole ELP-ECE as “school”. ”  Yeah, so do I.  I don’t think there’s a clear cut line between early learning and universal day care.  In the right hands **this is an assumption** the two can be one and the same.

“In the TDSB, the 25% poorest schools have 80% of the learning problems”.  I don’t know if that’s true, but it does sound plausible.

Where I disagree with Doug is the causation.  I personally believe that we have to tackle the education first.  Ultimately, It’s the improved human skill set that will drive higher SES.  (Flexible markets and competitive taxation policies need to be in the mix too.)

Here’s a thought about class size.  Sure, let’s cut class size in half on a targeted basis.  I say, ignore income though.  Run standardized tests in grade 1 (SK?) then cut the class size in those areas where the learning problems occur.  If there’s a connection with SES, it still gets addressed.

Doug, what do you think?  Lay it out.  I’m the mood for a debate.

The fact that I would abolish the EQAO makes it difficult to agree with using testing to determine compensatory education funding. You will find that there is a 95 percent congruency between poverty levels and low EQAO scores. If we were ever to find a positive reason to support testing, this would be it. SOME people would call it rewarding failure but they would be stupid people. We are left with the poor-low achievers who happen to live within the catchment of rich schools but this is rare.

Even where I come from in Bruce-Grey counties, Bluewater board, an idiot can tell you which schools will score high or low depending on the size of the housing lots and the percentage of home ownership.

* By all means, let’s get a baseline of the current situation with standardized testing at the end of grade 1 and perhaps at the end of SK.

*  If one “teaches reading” just by

- reading to students
- having books available for them, and
- making the students guess the words from the pictures in the book

cutting class sizes will not achieve substantially better results in reading !

It will definitely not help the students that need the most help whether due to poverty of other reasons.

* Since the above cause of poor reading performance in our students is hotly denied by most “teaching-certificate holders” since they don’t know any other way to teach, by all means let’s
- allow different schools try different methods to teach reading
- keep running the standardized tests

and then we will have real data.

* I very much doubt the current education establishment will allow any kind of additional testing, let aside standardized testing because it will prove that “the emperor had no clothes all along”.

They are trying to get read of the current EQAE testing, that for better or for worse, is all we have because it has already raised questions.

Yeah, Doug is probably right both daycare and ELP can be one. In Europe, what is call pre-school care, and operates with both elements. Any of the reports I have read, the Canadians and Americans have always commented a European’s daycare, operates like a pre-school, or a nursery school. I am interested in the Ontario’s ELP, and daycare, because I often wonder over the years, why the two could not combined. It has been only the very well-to-do that had this option, and the rest of us, depending on the situation, would opt for various choices.

Daycare always went to my mother, or some close family friend, but I always chose nursery school, long with other activities such as the library programs for the wee ones, skating, swimming, and dance lessons for the girls. At home, there was the educational toys, lots of exposure to music, paint, clay, and other such things that I thought would prepare them for school. And it did, according to the teachers, well advance in some things, average in others, and the only problem that came up, was in play activities.

They would exhibit no interest in some things, because the activities, were every day things, that were quite common. So my kids specialized to the activities that were of a high interest. One of the activities that my kids had no interest in, was playing in the kitchen set-up. Even at home, the toy kitchen set was not often used, and it was used, it was other kids visiting. Each one display strong interests, and with my youngest, it was building blocks. She would create little towns, and use the whole room to do so. When she enter nursery school, she showed the boys how to do it. When the ECE wanted her to go to the kitchen, and play there, she wanted nothing to do with it, and she would remain quietly standing, watching the other children play.

Here is what I worry about with ELP and the public education system. Since the curriculum is mandated by the ministry, and the way it is set up, it appears that the teachers must followed a strict format, where the differences in the children, will be focus on, rather than the whole child.  Will they see the difference as a strength, or a bad thing, that must be corrected, by restricting the child from the building blocks. In nursery school, they saw an advantage, where she taught kids, how to build with blocks, and it was kids who either had a physical deficit or kids who really did not have the blocks at home. They saw it as a strength of being a leader, even though she was way behind in oral speech. This carry on, when she went to kindergarten as well. The teachers saw it to, leadership qualities. It was here in this context, as expressed by the teachers, whatever is wrong with her can be corrected, and they predicted that if she did run into school problems, it can be easily corrected.

True in the case of my child, but I often found the public education system, differences are outside the norm, must be corrected and raised to the norm, because it is seen as a weakness. For example, in school problem solving is seen differently in an education setting. Often children like mind, are labeled with a poor problem solver. One would be a poor problem solver with poor reading and writing skills. But in a different environment, one would think, she has excellent skills in problem solving.

I would like more information on what the ELP, to explain how flexible in their thinking on the differences, and how rigid the system design is, that stresses the educational component. And how it would follow through in the primary grades.

I really do think they threw ELP and daycare together too fast, without thinking of the system design, the structure, the flexibility, and without taking into consideration the potential consequences. The knowledge, the system does not tolerate differences in children, outside the mandated norms.

Once the decision was made that ELP would be a signature piece for the Liberals, the political decision was made that it must be fully in place before the next election for two reasons. First, it must be real to get the full political benefit (votes) and second, it must be so established that a possible Hudak government would not dare to tinker with it. Thus it is being rushed. This does not mean there is anything wrong with it. It is a fantastic advance but don’t be naive about the politics of the implimentation process.

Dear Europe,

Are you a certified teacher? You have no idea how much real teachers resent being told how to teach by people who have never actually done it. You can read all the books, reports, you want but unless you have actually done it, you really don’t understand the situation.

Teachers liken this to laypeople telling doctors how to practice medicine or lawyers how to practice the law. Just because you have been to school means nothing. You have probably been to the hospital as well.

Politics to the side, programs thrown together in that light, often fail and the unintended consequences bloom, even with the best of intentions. Programs like the the fire arm registry, or the federal renovation program, were poorly design, where rural residents were impacted negatively. What about the electronic health record registry, which appears to be a big money pit, because of the poor design. I can think of other programs that were started, and a few years later they discovered that very few qualified to take advantage. I question the hiring of employees who are really not at busy, and probably have time to sit down and read the newspaper, waiting for the phone to ring.

Doug, Europe or anybody else has the right to criticize and make opinion on the state of teaching, and teachers, based on the factor, legally and in the law, parents are the true educators of their children. When I went to enroll my children in a public school, I did not write off my responsibilities and rights as a parent, and hand them over to the school, to be the sole decision maker, and final say on my child’s education.

Do not compare teachers to the professions of lawyers or doctors. Teachers on a whole, have a long way to go, allowing parents to be the final say on their education needs. Lawyers and doctors, leave the final say to their clients and patients, by providing the options with the advantages and disadvantages of the options.

Schools would rather manipulate parents, rather than giving them full disclosure, so they can avoid giving the kid the help they need. And Doug, a piece of paper does not, nor has it ever been stated, that a teacher will be good at their job. Ditto for the other professions. In my books, a teacher has to earn my respect, and where I see a teacher demanding respect, that is a teacher that will raise alarm bells with me, as being a bad teacher inside the classroom. It shows the most at parent-teacher interviews, where the teacher either listens politely, agrees even, and than does nothing after that. Or the teacher demanding from the parents to sign a piece of paper, that they will commit themselves to a study schedule, for an example in exchange that the teacher will provide a bit more one to one instruction. Of course that is not on the paper, and the one to one instruction, turns out to be 3 minutes more. Or what about teachers demanding that the parents must put this kid on medication, or even a diet or to order the parents to take the kid to the doctor, because they feel that this is best, and the implied threat if you don’t, I will have option but to child services. Respect is a two-way street, and not a one-way street.

Dear Doug,

Have you taught anybody at all how to read, write and do basic math ?
Unless you’ve done it, you have no ideea what you are talking about.

Yes, being in a hospital doesn’t not make one a doctor.

Yes, having a BA in English does not make one an expert in teaching math, much less in writing curriculum materials for math.

Yes, having a paper certificate does not make one a teacher unless that person is able to increase his students’ knowledge.

Yes, of course I have taught people to read and I still tutor kids with difficulties. Have you?

A teacher is a person with a teacher certificate. Those without them are not teachers. Period.

New York City is overhauling special education. The shift will be a return for most of the SE student back into the regular classroom. Everyone is expressing concerns.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/29/education/29schools.html?pagewanted=1

The solution to their concerns, is effective reading, math, writing programs, where almost all will be able to read well, write well and do basic numeracy calculations.

No mention of that solution anywhere in the article.

Doug, I be interested in your teaching methods related to reading. Just curious, since you do not believe in all the steps including phonemic awareness, how do you address the deficits in some children, who do not know their sounds, and as a result, have difficulty in decoding words. I am also wondering what your success rate is, compared to a reading specialists who are very well-versed on the steps, and would never start in the middle, trying to teach a reading strategy , to figure out the word, by looking at the surrounding text, to derive meaning.

Even the retired teachers would have love to tutor my child in being more skillful in reading, but they had to turn it down, because they felt they did not have the skills to teach her correctly. I was not, nor will I be the last one that have asked a retired teacher for tutoring services. As for the teachers presently working, the two that does have the skills, are not allow to have part-time employment tutoring students in exchange for money. Otherwise, they would do it, just for the money. I even put out an ad, to go further afield for help, but no takers. During this chapter in my life, the closest help was about 150 km away from my community.

I also discover, the literacy centres along the way. where it is all run by volunteers, and the majority are not teachers. It is only in Canada, where adult literacy programs are run by volunteers, and have been funded properly. The volunteers do an admirable job, considering the challenges they face. It is people like you, that makes their job that much more difficult, repeating misconceptions that a teacher with a certificate, are the only ones who should be teaching.

Whatever your methods are, I can say your failure rate is probably high with people who have reading difficulties. As the literacy centres have found, either due to poor instruction or unidentified reading problems or if they were identified, not receiving the proper instruction in the first place.

It has been a long time since I taught primary. I taugh grade 6 for 4 years when I started. I believe in balanced literacy, which is the system of most experts.

Yes doug we have taught people to read. Malkin devised our Stairway to Reading from 20 years of tutoring struggling readers to be successful readers.  I have tutored our program myself.

Basic math?  I used to take my kids’ texbooks and toss them aside because the books were so bad.  I then taught them myself, the way I was taught.  They used to tell me, “Why don’t YOU just teach us Mum?  We understand it better when you do it.”

Lots of parents do this all the time.  We have a mailing list of well over 6,000 people, most of who have come to us because they wanted to use STR.

Balanced literacy is the new buzz word and just as ineffective as ever.

Readers should look at Whole Language Lives On: The Illusion of “Balanced” Literacy Instruction by Dr. Louisa Moats

http://www.edexcellence.net/doc/moats.pdf

From the executive summary:
“The whole-language approach to reading instruction continues to be widely used in the primary
grades in U.S. schools, despite having been disproven time and again by careful research and evaluation.
Whole language still pervades textbooks for teachers, instructional materials for classroom
use, some states’ language-arts standards and other policy documents, teacher licensing requirements
and preparation programs, and the professional context in which teachers work. Yet reading
science is clear: young children need instruction in systematic, synthetic phonics in which they are
taught sound-symbol correspondences singly, directly, and explicitly. Although most state education
agencies, school districts, and federal agencies claim to embrace “balanced” reading instruction—
implying that worthy ideas and practices from both whole-language and code-emphasis
approaches have been successfully integrated—many who pledge allegiance to balanced reading
continue to misunderstand reading development and to deliver poorly conceived, ineffective
instruction..”

Balance literacy the system of most experts?????

Marilyn Jager Adams proposed a balanced approach to literacy in 1990.
This proposal was based upon the work of Patricia Cunningham, Richard Allington, Dale Willows, and Marilyn Jager Adams herself, along with other reading experts.

The Balance Literacy approach is based on:
Noam Chomsky’s conception of linguistic development.
Chomsky believed that humans have a natural language capacity, that we are built to communicate through words
This approach became popular in the 1990s and remains so through out the 2000s.

http://www.slideshare.net/guest964f55/balanced-literacy

Your so called experts, are and have been is disrepute for a very long time, and where it has been shown over and over, that balance literacy is a massive failure.

“If you thought whole-language reading instruction had been relegated to the scrap heap of history, think again. Many such programs (proven to be ineffective) are still around, but they’re hiding behind phrases like “balanced literacy” in order to win contracts from school districts and avoid public scrutiny. Louisa Moats calls them out in Fordham’s new report, Whole-Language High Jinks.

Moats, a psychologist and widely respected authority on early reading, authored a previous Fordham report in October 2000 called Whole Language Lives On. In it, she revealed that what was going on in many classrooms in the name of “balance” or “consensus” was harming students”

And further down in the article, “How is it possible that so many professional educators have been fooled? In some cases, no doubt, because they want to be-because their habits, their own training, or their ideology predisposes them to favor whole-language instruction, and the faux-SBRR programs provide a screen behind which they can continue doing what they want. In part, though, the problem arises from the five elements themselves. As set forth by the National Reading Panel, they oversimplify the complex scientific findings on how children learn to read, an oversimplification that can mislead unsophisticated purchasers. In many schools and districts, educators responsible for the selection of reading programs and methods use the five elements as a checklist. So long as all five appear in the product’s marketing materials or packaging, they assume that the product is faithful to SBRR.”
http://www.edexcellence.net/detail/news.cfm?news_id=367&pubsubid=1402#1402

I just presented just one of the reasons, besides the big one, it does not teach children to read well, and certainly not based on any science, besides another education philosophy. Does anyone think balance literacy is a education theory, that is wrapped up in the arms of science knowledge and methods? 

I bet Doug has a high failure rate in teaching his students to read well and fluently.

Ask Ms O’Sullivan at UWO your SW Ontario reading expert what works. Her answer? “Research supports balanced literacy”.

Sorry doug, but our experts Chall, Moats, Stanovich, Johnson, et al. say otherwise. 

This is one area that SQE has quite bit of knowledge about and 40 years of research to back us up. 
If any group are fanatical its it’s the so-called “experts” on whole language (oops “balanced” literacy) that got us into this mess we are still trying to get out of.

Balanced literacy is still whole language.
Read Moats.

Myth 1: Learning to read is a natural process

Myth 2: Children will eventually learn to read if given enough time.

Myth 3: Reading programs are “successful.”

Myth 4: We used to do a better job of teaching children to read

Myth 5: Skilled reading involves using syntactic and semantic cues to guess words, and good readers make many “mistakes” as they read authentic text.

Myth 6: Research can be used to support your beliefs, whatever they are.

Myth 7: Phoneme awareness is a consequence — not a cause — of reading acquisition.

Myth 8: Some people are just genetically “dyslexic.”

Myth 9: Short-term tutoring for struggling readers can help them catch up with their peers, and the gains made will be sustained.

Myth 10: If it is in the curriculum, then the children will learn it, and a balanced reading curriculum is ideal.

http://www.sedl.org/pubs/sedl-letter/v14n03/2.html

And now for a change of pace.
A short video, and take pause reading the quote at the end.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0fJKvdjQgs&feature=related

A short cute video, that is a typical in many primary classes, where some kids are struggling in reading, wherever you find whole language approaches. It is called Frustrating.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEmLFgk8Uso&feature=related

I find it illustrates, the reading process is not a natural process. Reading must be taught, starting with phonemic awareness.

Not on the Test, is another short video, where the last line of the song, “Don’t think about thinking, it is not on the test.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dAujuqCo7s&feature=related

Legally Stupid, may be what the advocates of balance literacy is shooting for. Obtaining the right for all, to be legally stupid.

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

The last one.
Indoctrination/Critical Thinking

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gI2Q8luLg8&feature=related

Balanced literacy does not teach critical thinking skills at the end, and it is another tool, to have people accept facts, without thinking about it, if it is true or not. I have two children, who are adults, educated, and often are willing just to accept the facts. I have not made the mistake with my youngest, where even now, she is the first one to question a teacher on a fact in school. I hope she keeps it up throughout her adulthood. We really need a lot more people questioning the ways and methods of the education system, government policies that sometimes defy logic.

Cunningham, Allington, Willows, Jager-Adams.

Almost all boards of education, the vast majority of reading experts, and on and on.

Dear Doug,

* Yes, I have. I have taught my son how to read and spell using Malkin’s “Stairway to Reading”.

I also taught my son how to hold the pen correctly, cursive letter formation and linking and punctuation. I had to do it because while my son’s grade1 English “teacher” asked the students to write stories in grade 1 she never bothered with such minor details as to show them how to actually write the letters, how to spell, capitalization and punctuation. 
My son was getting very bad habits.

After using “Stairway to Reading” and teaching my son cursive and punctuation for a total of about 20 min a day, 4-5 days a week for 3 months at the end of grade 1 my son was reading at a grade 5-6 level, writing with essentially no spelling mistakes, and knew how to use correct punctuation.

He has never studied for a spelling test since and he always got 100%.

If he had English for about 100 min a day for 10 months, why wasn’t his “teaching-certificate holder” able to do it?
What did my son’s “teacher”‘s “expertise” consist in?
For the record English is not my native language.
Because of Malkin’s “Stairway to Reading” I was still able to do a much better job than a “teacher” in - of all subjects - English!

Currently I am teaching my son extra math beyond the Ontario math curriculum because the expectations of the math curriculum are extremely low.
Our Ontario grade 7 math curriculum roughly corresponds to what I learned in grade 5.

* Going back to your experience in teaching reading, writing and basic math ...

- Why were you teaching reading in grade 6?

- Did you teach any math ? What grade?

- Please give us some examples as to how one teaches reading using “balanced literacy”.

Really, I’ve heard so many different opinions as to what it means ...
... what specifically did you do with your students as part of using the “balanced literacy” method ?

You never stop teaching reading in public school. It is a subject on the curriculum and the timetable?

I taught math everybody did.

Do you think teaching your own children makes you a teacher. Please don’t make me laugh.

You can read many experts on balanced literacy, try, Cunningham, Allington, Willows, Jager-Adams. Most boards, most experts, most consultants, most teachers, most principals, most superintendants support balanced literacy. Get a clue. It is you in the tiny cult.

You will be a teacher when you get a certificate and do it with 25 strangers kids at the same time. Please don’t insult us again. Any idiot can tutor their own kids. Why did all the other kids learn at school but not your kids?

Dave, TDSBW has graciously given us a link to samples of student work that the teachers should be using as a guide when evaluating a student.

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/math1ex/math1.pdf

If a student is at at least Level 1 he is considered ready for grade 2.

Leting aside the math part ask yourself the following questions:

- If, most likely, half the students can’t read well enough how can they read these problems?
Do you think a grade 1 student is solving them on their own?

- What do you think about the printing and spelling?
Do you think the students will start writing nicely and neatly on their own?
Do you think they’ll ever be able to write fast enough to take notes at a lecture?

As Malkin was saying “You can’t make these things up!”

Your problem Europe is almost all of your questions are answered in the way you don’t expect. They can almost all read, they can solve the problems on their own, they can print and spell, yes they can take notes, it is you who is “making stuff up”.

No country more literate at age 15,  except Finland and only barely,

Most post secondary grads in the world, per student cohort.

I know you would be very happy to hear that.

Hey Doug, your so called experts are working both sides of the fence. Producing the poor readers, forcing the schools to buy their products to correct the reading.

Jager-Adams, once own a company called Soliloquy Learning’ company, that developed the Solioquy learning assistance software, that is sold to schools only. She sold the company for 11 million dollars, to Scientific Learning Company, another company that sell products directly to school. Here is a site that most parents should be wary. Maybe it will work, and maybe it will not.
Now keeping this in mind, and remember working both sides of the fence. Well, they also have very close ties to the school book publishers, and I am sure there is some serious dollars being made their two.
http://www.scilearn.com/company/news/news-releases/20071218.php

But more importantly, they need to developed their products, to correct the reading problems caused by balanced literacy, because they too know that phonemic awareness is very important to have, to begin to learn to read. There is even research, written by them all, stressing the importance of phonemic awareness. I also read, in a grade 1 class, there will 2/5ths of the class that will have trouble in reading. That ratio climbs in grade 1 depending on teacher knowledge, the child and his knowledge, and than comes the outside factors.
They have also stated that direct instruction is the best reading method. Imagine that, and if you go on the net, how balance literacy came into being, not only is there money involved, but the same education philosophy inserted first, with just a tad of real science to make it real good. They certainly made a lot of money, on all the poor readers, the schools, and I guess the gravy train will continue, until someone starts to bring in some accountability.

Dear Doug,

Once somebody knows how to read, that person knows how to read for good; you don’t need to teach them anymore.

The fact that you were supposedly teaching reading in grade 6 means either
a) you are lying
or
b) there were students that did not know how to read in grade 6

At the time I started teaching him, his report card was stating that he was a very good reader.

None of my son’s classmates was reading better.
One of them still does not know how to read and spell well today.

I find it fascinating that you have never asked us out of professional curiosity - “wow, guys how did you manage to teach your kids without any training, how did you do it ?”
After all, nobody was supposed to be able to do it better than a “professional”.

I also find it fascinating that you show no concern whatsoever for the child.

Moreover, you automatically assume that if a parent is unhappy, their child is struggling.
And of course, struggling is the child’s fault.

It never occurs to you, that perhaps parents are unhappy because what your “professional” standards deem acceptable means that their child learns next to nothing.

Doug, I have a great respect for teachers, for real teachers, not for people for which being a teacher is a piece of paper.

I am grateful to Malkin, because she has taught me how to teach my son.
She is a teacher in the deepest sense of the word.
She increased my knowledge and my son’s.

She not only cared enough to offer the results of her work for free but she also had the knowledge of how to help me.

Hey Doug, how many parents came knocking at your door, looking for help for their kids?  Back in the early 80s, after I came home from work, it was a common site to see a few kids at my door, looking for help, on the small stuff, such as finding a way for their kid to study some history facts. Good strategies, that schools seem to be lacking. Parents saw me as being very good in doing the small bit of tutoring, and back than I did not think the skills I was building, would play an important role when I too began re-teaching the lessons of the day. I also pretty good with a whole whack of kids, and sometimes I might sound like a drill sergeant, but kids do like lots of direction, so they know the rules. As I mentioned, a kid that acts up in class, can always be sent out and make it someone else’s problem, like the principal. Some of the best teachers in life, are people who have never taught in a classroom. The very first one I met, who rescue me from a bullying situation, who was known around town as the local witch, turn out to be a wonderful teacher, teaching me how cruel this world can be. Former survivor of a Nazi death camp, and she taught me some principles to stand by, and the ways of evil.

Hey Europe, my own could not pass the math part and make it to level 1. But there is an out for the teachers, the kids who are struggling, can received support to help them solve the problem, so they too can get a level 1. It is probably the reason why she did pass grade 1 math. Grade 2 was a bit better, but it essentially was a repeat of grade 1 math, slightly more advance.

I also heard through the rumor mill, and from a very good source, that when a class does poorly on a major exam in high school, the next time it is watered down, so more students can passed, Along with this, there is going to be major revisions on grade 9 and 10 math courses. Far less to learn, and watering down of algebra and geometry, and going back to the basics, that are needed to do algebra and geometry.

Nancy,

Many people think they are great teachers because they taught somebody something usually one to one. Even if it is homeschooling at a three to one ratio it has nothing whatsoever to do with real life in a full sized classroom. Those who have not actually taught many periods per day all day every day have no idea what they are talking about.

I like the way you sidestep the issue. It does not matter how many students one has at once, it is the question if learning took place. As Europe stated, you never have asked us what is our methods, that induces learning in our kids. But the teachers have, including many at the board level. are impress with my child’s improvement in every major area, across all subject areas. In grade 3, she was at a grade 1 level in math, by the beginning of grade 6, the teachers raised her level to a grade 4 math level, and in grade 6, 8 months of hard work, on my part, and my child’s part, she was an A student.

Working on the basics, that is the key in math. One needs a solid foundation, once you have it,  anyone, is capable of doing advance trig. Her only weakness still is number operations, but that is improving bit by bit.

A common saying to me, by the teachers, keep doing what you are doing, and send me anything that you found effective. The other day, the special schedule that is colour-coded, for my daughter, a photocopy was in the office. Another idea generated, where perhaps a brand new outlay for the schedule is in the offering, for the new school year. Imagine that, getting organization ideas, from a non-teacher, and not the approved ones from the upper levels of the system. Most of my strategies and teaching methods, are very cheap, making do with the resources that are at hand.

Now that is good teaching. Make use of the resources that are at hand, by being creative, applying the prior knowledge to reasoning and logic, and expand if you have to, to think outside the box. Colour coded, is one method that is commonly used by good teachers, to help their students to get organized. There is a real science in behind it, and for some students, can be an effective way to keep organized. Now where are the lessons in organization that takes place in elementary school. Right, it must have been a day that my child was absent.

Or maybe it was just not on the test.

Nancy don’t make me laugh. Anybody can teach 1-2-3 kids at a time. It is the ONLY factor.

* Students in remedial reading are “taught” in small groups or one-on-one by professionals.

How many ever catch up?

So no, not anyone can teach 1-2-3 kids at a time.

* Parents are urged to have books at home, to read to their children, to be seen reading by their children. The great majority of parents do so.

That’s what balanced literacy says will ensure success in learning to read.

Do all these parents manage to teach their own 1-2-3 children to read?
So no, not anyone can teach 1-2-3 kids to read.

Again, if just
- having books around and
- reading to children
would “magically” result in kids learning to read the way “balanced literacy” says they would, all Ontario students would know how to read and spell well.

That’s not the case.

Our best students - the ones attending colleges and universities - would not need remedial English after going to school for 12 years.

Your posts are so full of errors, myths, distortions and nonsense Europe, I just don’t have the time to work on them. You just simply don’t understand education, that is the long and short of it.

Oh, the “expert” has spoken.

You know what your post reminds me of, Doug?

Of this joke ...

If you call the dog’s tail a leg, how many legs does the dog have ?
4 legs, calling the tail a leg does not make it a leg.

I too have not only a few books floating around, I have a collection of 500 hard copy books, plus I always had my nose in a book of fiction. I also watch the daily newscast too. Reading to your children is an important activity to undertake at home, being seen reading can be beneficial. I was brought up in a home, where I saw my parents daily reading a book, if not the newspaper, if not the American newscasts, and documentaries. Imagine that a farm family taking up activities that were not the norm for that class, and so very well ahead of the times.

To hear it from the balance literacy people, only the well-to-do know the importance of reading to their children. You really do treat us with contempt, Doug, that we are devoid of critical thinking skills, and we could not figure it out on our own that reading time was important, Too bad my mother was not alive, her Germanic roots, would make Hitler look like a pussycat, after she ripped into you, for making assumptions, based on personal biases and lack of knowledge. Than my father, with his Irish-Scots heritage, would state, only the ignorant would make such foolish remarks about other people. Than probably would recite some quote from some book, to make sure you got the point.

Europe is stating fact on her knowledge, her experience and what the science has told her. The trouble with you, like the other Dougs of the world, is that you avoid all questions that do not fit in with your theories. Just ignore them, because Europe was getting too close to burst your bubble, and if she did, all your beliefs would come crashing down, and than what would you do.

Reading to your children promote motivation in learning how to read. For some kids, that is all is needed, but for a lot of kids, they need proper instruction, and not the latest fad in reading instruction.

Check out the last post, and I was certainly surprise to find out my rather crude methods, was based on the science of reading. But than again, this would be impossible, a parent teaching their child to read, on such crude methods. Can’t be, she is not a certified teacher. Logic and reason, tells me those would be your thoughts swimming in your head.

Notwithstanding the general weakness of the traditional/conservative argument in education, there are some intelligent, articulate people who can make something of a case for it. Europe, this would not include you. Your arguments are amateurish and juvenile. You are not a credit to your cause. They would be better served without your contribution.

May I remind readers, it is not necessary to offend others on a personal level.  doug your last comments are not helpful to the debate.  If you have nothing else of substance to contribute, please refrain from insulting others. 

Europe has a right to express their opinion as do you.
Now who’s juvenile??

Read his comments. “experts” dogs with 5 legs, juvenile and insulting.

“Cunningham, Allington, Willows, Jager-Adams.

Almost all boards of education, the vast majority of reading experts, and on and on.”

And we still see reading problems in kids, and on and on.

You will have weak readers under any system. Canada does better than any nation on Earth.

The argument is getting stale and away from the original discussion of all-day kinder care.

“I stand by my original statement—it would be better if we made sure kids had effective teaching fundamentals in the current JK/SK/Gr 1.  Sorry, any mother who knows kids and their normal day, knows this is not “early learning” this is universal day care.”

I agree Doretta. Would Dalton be dovetailing with Michael Ignatieff on this do you suppose? The Liberals are really great at spending out money telling us how they can better look after our kids.

Dave - I agree totally with your statement that “I personally believe that we have to tackle the education first.  Ultimately, It’s the improved human skill set that will drive higher SES.  (Flexible markets and competitive taxation policies need to be in the mix too.)”

This is what’s missing in my opinion.

I know it is the education component that is missing, and one of the biggest problems, is the use of income, and other factors that automatically assigns a child, with a label. That label often prevents the child from acquiring the human skill set needed to open all doors of opportunity, for the individual.

“...to make the local economy function by freeing up women to work.”

And there we have it, freeing up women to a life of working slavery and the state will raise their children, because lets face it, according to Doug they are just too stupid to do it themselves.
Yep, you’ve come a long way baby!

Orwell was a prophet…he just got the date wrong.

Before my boy was ready for grade 1, as we were both working full-time in Toronto where the average commuting time is around 2 hours a day we struggled to find good place for him to be between 8am to 6pm.

Finding quality full-time care for a child under 6 that is reasonably close is very difficult and expensive in Toronto.

The JK and SK program at the public school being part-time, not 8am to 6pm did not fit the bill right of the bat.

If this program
- is going to offer full-time 8am to 6pm care and
- is going to be widely available in local schools and
- the out-of-the-pocket cost visible to the parent will be less than the current full-time alternatives

I think it will be extremely popular with families where both parents work full time.

If you are a family with 2 children or more, even if you are middle-class, you are extremely price sensitive.
After care cost of let’s say for the argument’s sake 500 instead of 900 will make this option the majority option for families were both parents work full time and have 2 or more children.

Quality learning, as long as the place is clean and the child looks happy, is not the biggest driver.

And anyway, unless you know specifically what to look for, how can you asses quality learning in a 4 or 5 year old?
It’s hard. All this edubbable around us has tricked a lot of parents into thinking that as long as the colours are bright, there are plenty of manipulative materials and picture books everywhere the place must be a good place. 

Most parents are too busy to have time to think and realize that the actual cost of this initiative to the society is going to be more than 850 and that in the end it will still be them paying for it.
The out-of-pocket cost is what is visible.

Will it be popular? Yes, I think so.

Will it be early learning? I very much doubt that because there are no specific goals or plans for it and because it will be organized by the same educrats.

Is it a good use of our common money? No, not without the early learning component, because

a) the_total_cost_to_society = paid_to_the_school_through_taxes + out_of_pocket_paid_by_the_parent
will be greater than the current cost of full-time daycare,

b) the care offered will not be of better quality

c) it would enlarge the current system’s monopoly.

Yes Mark, I happen to believe that the state can do a much better job with kids after toilet training, than leaving them in from of the TV or watching their mother fold laundry. The state can open up a wonderful world that maximizes the absorbant mind of the very young child say 2-5 with creative learning activities that strongly enhance their learning and lead us forward to a world with almost no poverty and fully developed human potential. We will have more productive economies, happier people, more equality and therefore much better lives together.

The business world wants it, the equity community wants it, the majority of Ontarians want it, most voters want it. Only a few backsliding socail conservatives, maybe 20% of the population don’t want it but they are totally free to opt out until grade one. Where is the problem?

Can the state do a better job with young children? The answer is a resounding YES!

Europe,

You say state ELP-ECE will enhance the monopoly of the current system as if that were a bad thing.

At least you acknowledge that it will be very popular. Some are still in denial about this because they have 3 friends who knock it. We will see when the JK part is free and down the street and is tied in with the paid portion.

A massive sign up means I am right that it is a good thing. A massive failure to sign up means the detractors are right. Guess who is going to win?

Hello Everyone,
I am the founder of http://www.kindergartencredit.ca which Doretta mentioned in her blog entry above. We are a growing grassroots group formed to fight back against the top-down, non-locally decided ALL DAY SCHOOLING of little kids that the McGuinty government is imposing on Ontarians.
Our website explains the issues and invites you to get involved to whatever extent you can.  Our Facebook page should be up in the next few days.
Doug – I don’t know who you are but it is so great you are posting because you are articulating so clearly all the suspicions that parents have against this program.  Serious international commentators are starting to see these universal state-run daycare and so-called ‘early learning schemes’ as something coming not at all from the left but more from the statist Right as an attempt to get mothers of young children out into the corporate-state economy. 
I invite those of you who truly have the best interests of children in mind to join our efforts.  I can be contacted at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) And, thanks Doretta for the mention.

You seem a little late out of the gate. The policy has passed and will be very popular.I guess you are not too late to try to stop people like me from extending the policy down to 2 year olds but we believe it cannot be stopped. Both capitalists and socialists agree this is the way to go.

The current education monopoly is a bad thing; its results speak for themselves.

While I think this policy will be very popular with the families where both parents work full time or want to work full time, with 2 kids or more and living in Toronto, these families are probably less than 50% of the total families with young children in Ontario.

A lot of mothers choose to stay home to raise their children, some families get help from grandparents, some families only have one child and are less price sensitive.
I doubt these families need or care about full-time day care offered through the public school system.

And the program is totally unfair to them.

The same unfairness that exists today for the parents that homeschool or choose non-public schools. They are ripped off.

If education results are the criteria then our little monopoly is great. World’s second most literate 15 year olds, world’s highest % of post secondary grads, 4th in University grads.

I actually advocate putting fairly heavy taxes on private schools as a luxury tax.

The parents that went home school gave up their free seat in a public school. Would they ask for their library taxes back because they buy their own books?

Eduspeak at its best!

40% of our grade 3 do not know how to read, write and do basic math well.

Some of our best students attending colleges and universities need remedial English and remedial Math after having attended school for 12 years.

Well, sorry, can’t share your enthusiasm.

You can keep repeating that nonsense but that does not make it true.

Doug, it is you that keep on repeating the identical crap coming out of the unions, boards, and even the ministry’s office.
12 years of school, and some do know how to write a complaint to the MP, without spelling and grammar mistakes. A letter like that, gets tossed, than a letter with correct syntax, spelling and grammar. People who have weak writing skills, are the people who are likely not apply in writing, to correct an injustice. They are less likely to participate in the community, such as writing a letter to the editor. Take note, editors of newspapers, and which is still a very vibrant business, in the last 20 years have seen a tremendous drop in letters to the editor. When they do, quite a few need editing to correct the spelling and grammar errors.
We also know, that the public education system is not interested, in improving the basic skills. As TBSBNW has stated:
“No, it’s that when the administrators and curriculum monitors look at student results, they do not see what you see. They do not see that “their methods aren ‘t working.“ They infer, instead, that they haven’t been rigorous enough in imposing and regulating these methods, so they will work harder, hire more “curriculum police” and monitor teachers more carefully to make sure they do not deviate from the prescribed regimen. It’s not like medicine, where if one antibiotic is ineffective, a physician will test to see which antibiotic is required and prescribe that one. In public education, the metaphor would be doubling and tripling the dose of the same medication, in the belief that more is better, and to ensure the patient took nothing else to supplement it.

The testing measures the kind of teaching currently required, not basic skills such as decoding, math computation, spelling or grammar. When the testing shows weaknesses in some areas (such as writing from a different “point of view”) they redouble their efforts because they do want the students toi improve.  What it boils down to is, instead:
—they disagree with you (and others) on what “improvement” in results will look like and consist in;
and
—they disagree with you on what methods or initiatives are effective and should be put in place.”

At least my child’s high school teachers has turned the corner, to where content is no longer focus on, but the structure, grammar, spelling, Where over-all quality is focus on and not piling on more and more of the same, their solution to correct writing problems. At least not yet, but than again as parents in NL, we probably do not have to worry about the enforcers coming in the school,. to make sure no teacher goes off script. The reason being our schools are far part from each other, just hiring the staff at board level, the costs of traveling would be a small fortune. I wonder what the true costs related to balance literacy, critical literacy, and ELP are?  It would not surprise me, that costs will rise, as more and more teachers are putting out the little fires, of poor reading, and writing skills, and begin to cheat, fool the enforcers, so they can help some of these students. ELP, should be really interesting to watch, while the enforcers micro-manage ELP and children.

Children should be left children, and not be seen through a filter, where every action of their’s, is a potential sign, of learning in the classroom. At the same time, they will over look the children that are showing signs of a potential reading problem. But learning the phonemic sounds is not in the works, and instead more play time, in things they hate to do, and take away the things they love. What a great way to kill the concept of liking school.

Perhaps you can enlighten me. I do not know of one board of education or one province or one state government or one serious reccognized curriculum organization that buys the program as described by SQE. Why is that again? Is it the great conspiracy?

You DO sound like conspiracy theorists. Ever wonder why?

EQAO grade 3 students at level two or better

Reading 87%
Writing 95%

By 15 higher % can red than anywhere on the entire planet.

The powers to be, is making a pretty penny this way. Our way, not so much, and changes made to text books, would not come as often as they are now. Our way would cost less, and less for the taxpayers. Our way, would increase the number of teachers, in terms of more math, science, reading specialists. Your way, drop the specialized teacher, in favour of an ordinary general teacher, to teach all subjects regardless if they have the necessary background. Our way, the savings derive from curriculum costs, will go to the increase in teachers, which will directly impact the student positively. Our way, will decrease the number of staff at the board level, and the rest will go out into the schools, and at the board level, to ensure the system is running smooth, for the parents and children. Our way, the teachers will finally have the time to teach, instead of evaluating, make check marks on a sheet, and other things that get in the way of teaching.

Nice rhethorical questions, Doug!
Good button-pushing words “serious”, “conspiracy” and CAPITALIZATION.

Doug is a politician.

His only interest is in propaganda for his political views and perhaps picking up suggestions SQE may make to advise the organization he consults for how to counterract them.

That’s why he endlessly repeats the same slogans not proven by reality.
Have you wondered why he always makes the first post and the last on a topic?

So that any casual visitor to this blog, who is just browsing will remember his message.

Do these look familiar?
>>
Persuasive Communication That Evokes Emotion

•NAME CALLING. This common technique, also called mud slinging, is used by politicians as a way of showing how much better they are than the other candidates. When a candidate states that she will refrain from name calling, the assumption is made that she is morally higher than the others. Using it or stating they will not use it has the same persuasive effect.

•GLITTERING GENERALITIES. Throughout campaigns words and concepts considered virtuous are bandied about. Patriotism, loyalty, honesty, freedom, responsibility to the people, and family life are some examples. How these particular concepts apply to the candidate may or may not be addressed. The politicians hope that use of these words will align followers to their cause.

•RHETORICAL QUESTIONS. Do you want to be free from debt? This rhetorical question has only one expected answer: yes. These types of questions are used to inspire an audience with a desire or emotion that will lead into the next topic, motivating to action.
<<
http://medialiteracy.suite101.com/article.cfm/power_of_persuasion_in_politics#ixzz0mczNENjh

Spare us the propaganda, Doug!

Who says this is your way. I favour math specialist teachers from grade 3 on. Moves like itinerant French teacher to each class.

None of this has to do with what separates us.

Doug, it has everything to do with. In your last post, you used a technique that is quite commonly used. That is to agreed with a small part of my last post, and than asked a different question to talk about what separates us. I imply in my last post, that my reading specialists, would probably be the general teachers, and be well skilled in direct teaching methods of the 21st century. Although I did not include it in the last post, it was implied. I know very well what you want to do. Our way would cost less, than the present system. In matter of fact, if I had it my way, I would get rid of that pesky second level, called boards. They have never been nice to parents, and make us run through a maze just to asked a question.

Those who get rid of boards soon feel the need to reinvent them. BTW we need to keep the elected democratic part of boards. I think we all agree that democracy is a good idea.

I guess Europe is out of arguments. He always goes to the propoganda theme when he runs out of arguments. Every time he is stuck, opposition to him is spin or propoganda. ZZzzzzzzzz.

Oh, more glittering generalities “democracy”.

Rhethorical statements, “I think we all agree that democracy is a good idea.”
Yes, we do, so what?

Doug, I like your folksy touch “ZZzzzzz”, very Bush-like.

No use of capitalized words this time? You forgot to sound urgent and important.

Opposition? Sorry to dissapoint, I haven’t seen any new ideea or argument in your posts, just your old slogans.

You need to work on your spelling Europe. Any point in there? Must have missed it.

“The TDSB has informed trustees of the proposed second batch of schools that should get the pricey, coveted all-day kindergarten program.

But when school trustee Chris Bolton saw that the high-needs Ryerson Community School in his ward wasn’t on it, he arranged a private swap with another trustee.”

http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/education/schoolsandresources/article/803384—all-day-kindergarten-should-go-to-neediest-schools-says-trustee

The fun begins, and I would suggest to all parents, to lie about your income, fudge about whether you own or rent, because it sure looks that the middle-class schools will be sitting there for a long time without the ELP in place. Basing on need by income, is highly unfair for parents who have higher expenses, without having any subsidization to help them. They do not get a break on their mortgage, or a break on their property tax bill, nor a break on daycare costs, and as a result their children, may indeed be suffering according to the the experts. Income alone should not be the sole measurement for which schools received ELP first.

Read the comments. Even a teacher with 15 years experience teaching kindergarten, calls ELP a grand glorified babysitting service.

Is “level two or better” considered doing well on the EQAO tests?

Somewhere else one of our more prolific posters made some claims about how well kids were doing, then it was pointed out that translated into large numbers of kids only hitting the minimally acceptable mark.

What is “level 2” defined as, or level 1 or level 3, etc?

It is like a “C”. They CAN read and write. They have not failed.

Simply put;

Level 4 = excellent (A)
Level 3 = good (B)
Level 2 = fair (C)
Level 1 = Not good enough. Problem. (D-F)

The detractors like to say only levels 3+4 can read. Not true. Even Level 1, most CAN read but with difficulty.

I’m not sure attaining a “C” is a good sign.  Reportedly marks of 3 and 4 are seen as successfully meeting the provincial standard.

Keep in mind that we keep being told we have the “second best education system in the world”.  There’s a contradiction here, folks.

Where is the contradiction? EQAO results show almost all grade 3 kids can read. PISA results show only Finland reads better at age 15 and not by much. Is it good enough? No is it world’s 2nd best system? Yes it is. Go Canada. Own the Reading Podium. Knock off those pesky Finns. Let’s get out there and spend some serious money.

The PISA testing, is at the end limit of grade 7, and the middle part of grade 8 reading and knowledge. So we have a brunch of grade ten students taking a test with a reading level of grade 8. Even my kid should be able to pass this one. As for EQAO testing, it should be like the other standard testing, where the reading level is 1.5 below. Which means if in grade 6, the reading level of the test is at mid level of grade 5 reading, if the test is taken at the end of the year. If not, if taken in the first half of the school year, the reading level is at the beginning of grade part of grade 5.

You can complain about PISA all you like but we are second best in the WORLD with 15 year olds.

We already do spend “serious money”.

One of the cardinal things we try to teach very young children is to play nice and share the toys.  In adult speak that means spend enough money to attain the desired results and let some of the other, every bit as worthy, parts of government pay for their needs.

Going on the premise that education is the first, and only, part of society deserving of unlimited spending just looks creepy.  Time to share the toys.