There are clear reasons for the public Catholic split and everybody knows it. In the 60s-70s, public schools did much better vs Catholic schools because the immigrating groups were mainly Catholic. Now only Philipinos are mainly Catholic in the top 10 countries immigrating to Canada. Now the public schools have the vast majority of immigrant kids learning English. Still the difference is barely significant. There is a much greater deviation between schools than between boards, once more overwhelmingly SES based.

Interesting that the private school average is actually below the provincial average OMG.

Given that private schools usually function with far fewer resources than public schools they’d be at a significant disadvantage from the start, right?

I’m a little surprised you’re unaware of that.

why am I not surprised that Doug responds by dividing and conquering based on ethnic groups?

Quite a stretch. Have any proof at all to go along with your speculation?

Does SQE see anything that the Catholic system is doing differently than the public one to account for the apparent success of its students?

All I hear around here is the superiority of private education, then I hear that resources are not important, that teaching pedagogy is the critical matter.

Paul Greyson has already proven that when SES is controlled, public schools already outperform private schools. Now we see that private schools score below the provincial average on the tests? This should be the death nell of private school propoganda. It will soon be well known across the province that private schools score below the provincial average. With all of their SES advantages, their ability to select students, it is shocking that they score so badly.

Privatization as a major public policy debate is over I believe.

How much more poorly did the resources-constrained private schools fare than the public system, Doug?

As to the debate over private schools being over I suspect you’re using wishful thinking as a replacement for careful analysis; you’re hardly a neutral observer on the matter.

Between my 36 000 contacts and a few strategic media contacts, all of whom subscribe I suspect that the inferiority of private education will be quickly known.

don’t let the growing numbers of folks choosing private or alternative over public get in the way of your facts or your “contacts”. 

The fact that you feel you need to parade your um, qualifications leads me to believe that you’re not at all confident.

Parents choose private schools for a range of reasons—not just academic.  Many reasons are religious, safety, shares values, etc. Our demographic study shows this quite clearly. 

This is a good thing to see test results even for private schools.  What is forgotten in all the debate between public v. private is NOT that one is better than the other, per se.  There are lots of public schools that are superior and excellent.  The point is choice over what kinds of schooling parents want and ultimately, PARENTAL SATISFACTION.

Once those paying parents see these results, IF they are choosing schools for academic reasons, you can be sure that those schools will do whatever is necessary to retain parents.  If they don’t no one will choose those schools—-unless it is for religious reasons or some other reason.

Commenting on Doug’s take that the Catholic schools are out performing, because of ethnic groups is a load of crock. When the funding formula change, it made the difference for Catholic schools, who could now complete with the public schools. Before the changes, it could not.

As for your second argument, you are essentially stating that the public schools have worst students than the Catholic schools, and is the reason why they are better.

For your third argument, statistically speaking, as you go up the different levels of an education system, the higher levels will have the same type of numbers, that closely matches targets/goals. It is at the individual schools, where one will see significantly different numbers. It is the law of averages. It would be nice to keep this in mind, when leaping to the conclusion of SES factors.

All anyone can state, that the Catholic boards are doing something different than the public boards. It probably points to better use of resources, teacher quality, and perhaps the moral environment of the schools, or the discipline policies. There needs to more questions asked on the differences between public, private and Catholic schools.

My own observations are that the Catholic schools seem to be doing a better job in boards that are largely rural or composed of half and half urban and rural divisions. Even in places where there is local economic troubles, and a greater amount of low-income. It is why I am inclined to think it is other factors at play, rather than what is cited by Doug, race, gender and income.

The difference between the private school average and the provincial average is not statisically significant.
Another way to interpret the private school results are that private schools are probably more representative of average Ontarians rather than an “elite” selection of “creamed” students.

In other words, private schools are not for rich, smart kids, but are pretty much the mix of kids around the province.  Again. I stand by my previous post about why parents choose private schooling.

Since full funding thereis almost no difference between public and catholic schools any more except which groups attend. Those who preach a higher moral tone have not been near a Catholic school where the girls use any possible way to make their skirt as short as possible, the kids hang around just off the propety smoking and the swearing would make a steveadore blush.

“My own observations are that the Catholic schools seem to be doing a better job in boards that are largely rural or composed of half and half urban and rural divisions. Even in places where there is local economic troubles, and a greater amount of low-income. It is why I am inclined to think it is other factors at play, rather than what is cited by Doug, race, gender and income.”

this too is my observation Nancy.

New families and immigrants to our area seem to be heading to Catholic education. French Immersion here is also only offered in the Catholic system, so that too attracts even the non-Catholics who are also welcomed to their board.

For Mr. Little to suggest that he’s speaking for his flock of 36,000 plus those “strategic media” is a tad like what happens when parents confront the public system and they throw numbers around that don’t really mean much.
Same old, same old.

Doug, I meant moral in the context of the Catholic policies, and conduct code for teachers. It helps a lot when staff, including the board are conducting themselves in a most professional manner, practicing the same morals as the ones imposed on their students.

Hey, I went to a girls’ Catholic high school!  It’s where my friends and I became the social activists we are now.  I think you would be surprised at who some of my now famous classmates are.  )

In fact you may be surprised at how many prominant activists actually DID go to private schools…

Check the blue pages at the College of Teachers. Catholic public no difference. Nobody takes moral lessons from the Catholic church any more. I think we all know why. No credibility.

A number of activists went to private schools and the point is….....????

We’ve already discussed your “36,000 contacts”.

They’re the ones you won’t allow to discuss things at your site, right? 

There seems to be some question whether each and every one of the 36,000 actually signed up as individuals at the site…?  Each and every MPP in the province?  Almost every school in the country?

Then there’s the issue of why such a highly regarded and powerful ezine only has a few advertisers, all from the private sector.

Might not be a good avenue to use an example of your influence

I do not intend to spend my time monitoring a site. It was a policy decision to avoid federations and unions to maintain independence. I have all the ads I want. This is one of 3 jobs I hold right now not counting consulting. Not much time to get more ads.

There you go again, Doug, stereotyping people, based on race, religion and income. Morals crosses all sectors of society. Without them, we be a poorer society and a violent one too. Morals can guide people, to determine the goals. Goals dictated by government, and other agencies cannot be carried out successfully, if the goals do not match the generally accepting norms of the groups that are being impacted by the goals. It is probably why the new sex education curriculum went out the window, It did not match the accepted norms of society.

I don’t pick and choose. IMHO all religions are a crock, a hold over from a simpler time of myths and fables. A way to hold women down, a way to justify wars, a way to justify ruling classes etc. John Lennon “and no religion to” what a great day that will be.

Given the amount of time spent here it appears you’d have lots of time to monitor your site; certainly you have lots of time to monitor everyone else’s.

Someone who claims 36,000 subscribers doesn’t seem much interested in providing a good level of service or content; weeks pass between updates and there’s nothing ongoing between updates.

The issue rises again over how many of the 36,000 signed on individually.  Are you claiming they all did?

Not a greeat idea to use your site as a measure of your influence.

The mistake you are making Doug, is that morals are directly tied in with being human. Mankind is a social creature, that have innate morals built in. We need other human beings to survive, and in order to do so, we don’t go around killing each other, and other grievous amoral acts that will threaten our existence. Religion and other belief systems can be a facilitator for morals. But that does not mean there is no amoral people found in groups of people who believe in God. Nor does it mean that there is no amoral people who don’t believe in God. What is shared is the morals of being human.

Do you not have your own sense of morals, and when feeling outrage over the actions of others,  use your own moral judgment of that person and his actions?  Morals is not just connected with religion, but with all humans, regardless of their own belief system. Your mistake is your belief that religion due to its high morality, is the ruin of mankind. Religion is a factor, but not the cause of wars, oppressed people, and the ruling elite.  It is man himself, who inflicts the wars, oppression because of selfishness, greed, and a host of other vices and it is up to the rest of human race, to keep those individuals who inflict harm, under control.

I did weekly friends said comes too fast to keep up with. Recently consulting in China 3 weeks then tech guy a little ill. News issue few days.

Oh please, religion causes was it does not prevent them. It opresses women including RC church.

A great opportunity to enable the comment feature.

Just imagine the vibrant site you could have if the 36,000 movers and shakers could interact.

Go for it!

No time I rather bother Doretta (nand Nancy and Chuck and Malkin and Jon L and not Sheep and Europe and Jo anne et al)

We expect people to keep civil on this blog.  Any insulting discussion about particular religions is a no go.  Thank you.

No doug, by the amount of time you devote to us School For Thought exists just to bother you. 
Thanks for the help!

Im sure you want an open forum open to all POVs. People who support all of the same old stuff creates a boring board. I am not the only one. TDSBNW seems like a very bright independent person. Sometimes he (she?) goes one way sometimes the other. Besides you need a foil that represents the other side of the argument. If this is not available you tend to confuse your views with common sense or mass opinion which I can assure you it is not.

Doug, your point of view is so narrow-minded, that all education failures are blamed on outside factors. The education system is your world, is blameless.

“Julian Goodall had all the makings of a heartbreaker. A ward of the Crown by the age of 12, Julian had spent much of his life in various boys homes, where he and his fellow wards were bused to attend school in a portable and told to stay away from the main building and the regular kids.

“It’s like they didn’t want us to contaminate them or something,” he said.

He resented the power his teachers exerted and tried to embarrass them by loudly questioning the lessons they aimed to teach. It was a defence mechanism triggered by a setting where he had lost control, but one that kept him from learning. By the age of 16, Julian was a dropout with criminal tendencies living off social assistance.”

Now justified the actions of the school, and what part they played in contributing to the student dropping out, his juvenile delinquency, and the provincial handling of his education, since he was a ward of the state.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/toronto-program-lets-dropouts-test-drive-the-classroom/article1611026/?cmpid=nl-news1

Now justified the government’s role in providing adult education, and addressing the issues.

“However, the cumulative number of people who have given up on high school continues to grow, and Premier Dalton McGuinty’s goal of an 85-per-cent graduation rate by 2011 looks more and more like a long shot. Early this year, the province announced that Ontario’s high-school graduation rate had climbed to 79 per cent in 2008-09, and gave expanded co-op programs some of the credit. But graduation rates in Ontario only include students who complete their diploma within five years of enrolling in high school.

Julian and other like him don’t count toward Mr. McGuinty’s goal. A few weeks from now, when Julian turns 21, he will join the ranks of CALC’s approximately 2,000 adult students who receive about one-third as much ministry funding as their younger schoolmates. The average per student rate of funding for full-time non-adult students (up to and including those age 20) is $10,730, compared with $3,133 for adult day-school students. (And it’s worth noting that funding for adults is based on attendance, while for younger students it’s based on enrolment.) The result is that Ontario’s adult programs amount to an act of educational charity by cash-strapped school boards. And no board gives more generously to the adult cause than the TDSB, which has five schools like CALC that bring together programs for drop-outs, adults, immigrants and people looking to change careers. ”

All points of view are welcome as long as the debate is civil and focused.  As it is SQEs blog,  it will promote the mission of SQE.  Our views are our own and we are not confused in the least. 

Heck, Doug you are our biggest fan!

The latest OISE survey on attitudes towards public education found:

“Despite the improvement in satisfaction levels and, more recently, grades given to schools, public
confidence in both schools and provincial educational policy remains at low levels.”

It also found that while people didn’t want funding for religious schools, the public was evenly divided:
“between limiting funding to a single public system, continuing current
funding of public and Catholic systems, or extending funding to all private schools.”

and:
“40% now think the province has too
much control over local schools”

So I’d say the results are rather mixed.

“..and the point is….????” (question posed to Doretta by Doug earlier).

The point is that those activists who “progressives” hold in such high social esteem and like to look to for leadership for the masses, tout the benefits of public/state education while choosing private for their own children. It’s likely a prerequisite of the highest order.

Private for them….public for the rest of the world.

My guess was that 36,000 was one of those thin air products or a typo.

I’m still trying to coax a meaning from “I did weekly friends said comes too fast to keep up with. Recently consulting in China 3 weeks then tech guy a little ill. News issue few days.”

...I’m still trying to coax a meaning from “I did weekly friends said comes too fast to keep up with. Recently consulting in China 3 weeks then tech guy a little ill. News issue few days.“

My translation from Dougspeak to English goes like this:

“I tried a weekly Little Report but my friends said that was too frequent. Since I have been in China for a couple of weeks, and the tech person involved with the website has been sick, the newest edition of the Little Report is late but will be out in a few days.”

Thanks TDSBNW!  The translation raised far more questions than anything else, but I don’t want to start a war with China so I’ll refrain. I’ll leave the “consulting in China” to individual imaginations.

I want less provincial control Doretta. That just means I want more board control.

Chuck, I put my report out weekly. Friends said go to a 2 week cycle. Hard to keep up with every week.

Thanks TDSBNW, you can understand what Chuck seems to have difficulty understanding.

Great Doug, you really like backing a losing position - you want more Board control over schools.  I don’t think the BWDSB is far off the provincial average in terms of their attitude to the public, employees and students, and boy, are they doing a bang up job!  Just in the last two years:

- proposal to end rotary for grades 7 & 8 caused demonstration marches up the streets of two towns in the district
- plagiarism by two superintendents in the local paper
- refusal by a principal to allow two grade 6 students to circulate a petition among parents caused public outcry
- refusal by principal to allow grade 12 student to participate in day of silence causes another outcry
- unannounced change to Kindergarten schedule causes furor, superintendent lies to press while trying to allay fears
- and many more instances ...

To bring this discussion around to what you have been saying here:  this wonderful example of sterling management practices has parents removing their children from our board en mass (50 in one school in the last 2 months alone).  Where are they going?  The Catholic board.  Why?  They are fed up with the arrogance, lack of transparency and general dismissal of public concerns by the SAT.  In fact, EXACTLY those endearing elements of your appealing personality that has people so upset with you.  You are an object lesson for any outsider to see exactly what is wrong with the public system.  You make it so much harder for teachers like me to try to convince parents that there is still something worthwhile in the public system.

Thanks Doug.

“I want less provincial control Doretta. That just means I want more board control.”

I agree with you Doug.  I want less provincial control, too.  I want more board control also.  That is, more control over curriculum, text books, staffing and business model.

What I don’t want, is any more control over ME!

Looks like we have something in common after all! 

You cannot let problems in one board allow the centralization of power more and more in the isolated Mowat Block. Centralization vs decentralization runs at right angles on the Y axis to left and right. In other words you can be a right wing centralizer or a right wing decentralizer as we see in the national standards debate in the USA. It is the same on the left. I happen to be a left wing decentralizer.

The Bluewater board has its problems. There are these periodic events called elections. Stop carping and get organized and change the trustees. That will give Alana something to worry about. If they are re-elected no problem then they have indeed a mandate and you look a little stupid telling them everything they do is wrong.

And yet to me board control and provincial control are one and the same kind of bloated wastelands of cash and new ideas.

Some boards are horrible trusts of the education of children.

Can anyone here direct us to an excellent school board in the province and explain what makes it so?

Every post you make Chuck states an opinion and then appeals to “someone else” to prove it for you. There are literally hundreds of excellent schools in the province. If you mean schools with high test scores then you just need to limit your search to wealthy neighbourhoods.

Well, Doug, you keep firing, but you keep missing the target.  Yes, I know there are these periodic things called elections - duh!  Yes we are organizing a slate of candidates, duh!  I’ll stop carping about the BWDSB when you stop carping about: Finland, the nothing BoldApproach, OISE study and SES being a lock (not!). 

How about you answer the central point of this thread, and my post:  that parents are leaving the public system for exactly the attitude you evinced in your earlier posts and your last one.  Furthermore, many are leaving for the Catholic system.

Doug, I can’t turn my back for a minute, can I? Chuck didn’t ask about excellent schools, but excellent school BOARDS.  Try reading the posts.

Sorry, Chuck, I got called away.

I can direct you, but I can’t tell you why.

All the time the parent’s in the public board were ranting about the change in the kindergarten schedule, the parents in the catholic board (BGCDSB) were raving about it.  In the paper, it was mentioned that the did something wholly unprecedented for a public board - they actually consulted with parents before making any changes.  I know, sit down, take a deep breath, you’ll be OK.

The catholic board’s reasoning?  Families come first.  We’re not catholic, but I’ve only heard good things about that board.  Maybe someone else can chime in.

Yes, Doug, name one board that does an excellent job, that is not bloated with high paid staff. Name one board that is not micro-managing the SE department to the point, where acquiring services have become a giant nightmare bureaucracy. Name one board anywhere in Canada, that does not have the same problems as what Wayne has outlined?

Nancy, all you ever talk about is SE. The vast majority of kids are not in SE, are doing very well and their families are quite satisfied. On the other hand, I seldom meet SE parents who are satisfied because they expect that SE is designed to catch their child up to the rest some day. This almost never happens except for those with the very mildest LD. SE is more of a full lower stream than a pit stop where you get fixed up. Most SE kids are behind and will stay behind most of their life.

I have one daughter. I of course like any parent had dreams of Harvard or Princeton but my daughter has an anxiety psycological problem that seriously affected her ability to function. Finally after some years in the low end of retail and a grade 11 education, she went back to community college and became a dental assistant. Today at age 29 she is the manager of a dental clinic. I am very proud of her not for the level she achieved but for the barriers she overcame. I did not blame the school system for her problems. I was grateful for their help. Many SE parents need to get real on the life ahead for their kids.

I became curious. Here is the news release for the BGCDSB,  explaining why.
http://www.bgcdsb.org/news/what_s_new/news_release_-_board_maintains_kindergarten_schedule/

The local newspaper article - http://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2484436

“Cynthia Lemon, Bluewater administrator of employee relations, said Monday the government left the board little choice on the scheduling issue.

“If we have ministry directives, then sometimes you just have to do them,” she said when ask why consultation wasn’t done. The board had little “wiggle room,” she said.

She also said Monday: “The boards had been given a mandate by (former) Education Minister Kathleen Wynne, at that point in time. And so coming out of that was language that we had to embed in our collective agreements and one of those is the five-day cycle,” a reference to the new kindergarten schedule.”

Of course the Education minister has a much different take on it. I became curious once more to find out what is a 5 day cycle with the connection of collective agreements.

“The Limestone board and the Algonquin and Lakeshore Cath - olic District School Board are considering changing the schedules for children who attend full-day junior or senior kindergarten every other day.

“I don’t think parents have had the opportunity to express their concerns because a lot of them don’t know this issue is on the table,” said Bartlett, who learned a few weeks ago that schedule changes may be in the works.

“It’s been extremely hush-hush, intentionally or otherwise.”

The change in schedule stems from the recent collective bargaining agreement between the province and the elementary school teachers’ union. The Ontario government agreed to give the teachers 220 minutes of preparation time per five-day period next school year, 10 minutes more per five-day period than they received this academic year. Statutory holidays and professional activity days impact the five-day cycle.

One of the options being considered is an A/B format, also known as a rolling schedule. Kindergarten students would attend full-day classes three days one week and two days the next week—but not necessarily on the same days of the week.”
http://www.thewhig.com/PrintArticle.aspx?e=2528561

“Proposed changes to kindergarten schedules has been a contentious issue across the province. Earlier this year, the Bruce-Grey Catholic District School Board decided to leave its kindergarten schedule alone after an outpouring of phone calls from parents and consultations with daycare providers and school officials.

A school board news release to QMI Agency states: “Our community has told us the (present) schedule allows families and daycare providers the predictability they require to schedule work, recreation and family activities.”

The Bruce-Grey board will maintain its existing senior and junior kindergarten schedules: all day either Monday and Wednesday or Tuesday and Thursday, plus alternating Fridays.

Last week, that area’s Bluewater School Board shelved plans for a new schedule following complaints from a growing lobby against the changes. An ad hoc committee will explore options after public reaction prompted board officials to rethink the schedule, said Bluewater education director Mary Anne Alton. “

I would be really upset too, if I had a child going to school for 3 days one week, and the following week two days. What a nightmare trying to arrange the day around that schedule. Unions once again ruling the roost over the school yard.

Doug,

Again your exquisite diplomacy and tact are seen in this exchange with Nancy: “Nancy, all you ever talk about is SE. The vast majority of kids are not in SE, are doing very well and their families are quite satisfied.”

Let me rephrase that for you: “Doug, all you ever talk about is Finland. The vast majority of kids are not in Finland, are doing very well and their families are quite satisfied.”

Point proven.  Thanks Doug

” Most SE kids are behind and will stay behind most of their life.”

Well under the current and previous public education system, of course these kids are behind, because they are not, and it is a big NOT are receiving the proper educational services in the first place.

Having an anxiety disorder, and other disorders like it, does not necessarily mean that education services that impacts learning, will be given. It depends on the board, the school and the province that one lives in. A reason that is often given, that the disorder is considered a medical issue, and not something that is educational. Again it depends on what province, but from parents who have children with anxiety disorders, it can be a nightmare for obtaining SE services.

Being grateful is one thing. But on the other hand a patient who has been waiting a year for surgery, is grateful when it is done too. However, are you telling me that as a parent, you were happy with the services concerning your child? 

” Most SE kids are behind and will stay behind most of their life.”

Reading in between the words, you have just called most SE kids dumb, slow, stupid, or whatever dumb name one wants to insert. I let my child read your post, because I wanted to see her reaction. She saw red, he just called me stupid. Her words, not mine. She went on to say, I am not behind. I just have problems with reading and writing.

As for your dreams of Harvard and Princeton, it is your dream. It has never entered my mind, let alone other parents who have SE kids. At least I have never read or heard about it. Mine and others are down-to-earth realistic dreams. But than again, it is probably not realistic in your eyes, to expect a school to teach kids like mine to become good readers and writers, using balance literacy as their bible of reading instruction.

I would never say dumb but I would easily say “hard to teach” as Shapiro the former Dean of OISE called most SE kids. Despite the best efforts of many teachers, notwithstanding methods, most SE kids are behind and will end their education careers at some point behind most of their peers.

This is just a cruel fact of life. Time to adjust to reality. We all must keep trying but expectations must be held in check.

“I would never say dumb but I would easily say “hard to teach” as Shapiro the former Dean of OISE called most SE kids. Despite the best efforts of many teachers, notwithstanding methods, most SE kids are behind and will end their education careers at some point behind most of their peers. “

Well Doug, you have confirmed my theory, how children are written off early in the public education system and why parents have a difficult time to receive effective services in reading,writing and numeracy and timely interventions. It is these kinds of attitudes that prevents effective interventions for SE children.

So, Doug if you had been a teacher that taught my child early on, you would have been one stating to me, that I should not expect anything too much.  You also would have been the same teacher, who did take me to task for re-teaching my child at home, because it was a waste of time for my child and myself. Good thing, I never did listen, because she is a honoured student today, despite her learning difficulties. There is thousands of parents like myself, either home tutoring or obtaining private services, on improving reading, writing and numeracy for the most part. The majority of kids who are identified in the system, have only reading, writing, and numeracy problems either in all, or some aspect of a couple. All can be corrected, using effective programs. All of them can catch up in the actual learning very quickly, providing they get the right type of help for reading, writing, and numeracy. Most SE kids are behind because of the curriculum, and balanced literacy. They stay behind, if they do not get the right help for their reading, writing or numeracy problems. Just think about JumpMath, and the amazing results of SE kids who have major trouble with math numbers.

” “hard to teach” as Shapiro the former Dean of OISE called most SE kids”

One better come up with a little bit more than that Doug. I have a feeling, you are taking Shapiro’s words out of context. More than likely he was referring to children who have multiple problems, and not the children who have the garden variety type of language problems, and where most are sitting in the regular classroom.  These children are easier to teach, if given the correct programs and instruction. If you think my child is hard to teach, than you better come down to my corner of the world, and correct the teachers on their thinking. They have found her to be puzzling, but never difficult. And they are sure glad, that I picked up the ball in the early grades, the same ball that was dropped by the board staff, and where now, we share the ball between the school and myself.

I can`t say too much as I don`t have time.

Doug,the brain reads.Phonological awareness has been identified as the cardinal deficit in children who struggle to learn to read spell and /or write.
The Research is empirical-
The early reading interventions that are taught by teachers in the early grades prevent a behemoth of problems for these lovely witty bright children-Language processing and IQ are not relatable-as in your “difficult to teach”.
Teachers are untrained in complex thoughts and processes,they only learn simple simple views of everything.
The school boards hire these teachers,these teachers teach for years and become Superintendents and they go work for the Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat.
They are trained to honour their creativity and their gut instincts.
I have taught children and all those trained on my system affect the same change-as much as 3 grade improvements in Reading and Spelling and Writing in as little as 32 lessons-systematic,sequential and based on the research.
You should all of you involved in Ontario education be ashamed of yourselves for being so egotistical and not deferring to research.
Phone Dr.Reid Lyon-now there`s a workshop worth having.
Or phone Dr.Keith Stanovich and ask him why Ontario NEVER listened.

“Hard to teach?”  For whom?

Doug,invest in children and their parents.Not in your ridiculous one liners.
Unions are not what we all worry about-we worry what your views and what the Union dictatorship has done to our schools.
Become part of the solution.

For anyone Dave.

Union dictatorship - and you don’t like one-liners?

In many cases, but certainly not all, the way reading is taught in the primary grades causes a lot of the issues that need remediation. We create the problems then label the kids “hard to teach”—disgraceful!

I agree wholeheartedly with Doretta.

Prevention in the early grades is the key.Otherwise we have a 50% block lined up for remediation.

Oops-and the labeling machine starts-that way it`s the child`s fault.“Hard to teach.”

That was only the Dean of the grad school at OISE-UT but what would he know? If you think SE kids are easy to teach think again.

Thanks Wayne. I’ll check out the Bluewater Catholic board.

Not to worry about Doug. Our experience with him here shows he’s quick to pronounce judgements on the failings of others, their believes, their regligion, and their comments but when the tables turn he either changes the subject or tries to turn the discussion.

When that fails he relies on antiquated lines and those old worn out union lines that will be the death of the the public system as we know it.

It’s already dying of achievement rot from the inside.

Doug poses no threat to the move to parental choice in this province.

“That was only the Dean of the grad school at OISE-UT but what would he know?”

[OISE, that bastion of radical study of effective education practices?  I for one am shocked I tell you shocked.]

What would he know?  What would he not know? Where do I start?  Jo-Anne??

Below is a cut and paste from Wikipedia for “Bernard Jack Shapiro”.
**********************************************************

Bernard Jack Shapiro, OC, GOQ (born June 8, 1935) is a Canadian academic, civil servant, former Principal and Vice-Chancellor of McGill University from 1994 to 2004, and the first Ethics Commissioner of Canada between May 17, 2004 and March 29, 2007.

Born in Montreal, Quebec, he received a Bachelor of Arts from McGill University in 1956. In 1967 he received a Doctorate in Education from Harvard University. He then joined the faculty of Boston University and later became Associate Dean of the School of Education. In 1976 he was appointed Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Western Ontario and became Vice-President (Academic) and Provost in 1978. From 1980 until 1986 he was the Director of the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, and in 1984 published The Report of The Commission on Private Schools in Ontario for the Ministry of Education (Ontario).

In 1986 he joined the Ontario public service serving as Deputy Minister of Education, Deputy Minister of Skills Development, Deputy Secretary of Cabinet, Deputy Minister and Secretary of Management Board and Deputy Minister of Colleges and Universities. From 1992 until 1994 he was Professor of Education and Public Policy at the University of Toronto. From 1994 until 2004 he was Principal and Vice-Chancellor of McGill University. In May 2004 he was appointed the first Ethics Commissioner of Canada. His term was marked by controversy and then MP for Ottawa-Center, Ed Broadbent repeatedly called for his resignation.

He is the twin brother of Harold T. Shapiro, President Emeritus of Princeton University.

Doug, I notice Dr. Shapiro was OISE Director in the early 1980s.  Is that when he made his “hard to teach” remark?  Our understanding of spec ed as well as teaching methods has evolved enormously since then.

Nice catch Dave! Amazing what a little research turns up isn’t it?

OISE is a thick bastion of political opportunist wannabes fooling no one.

For any readers who didn’t read another post on this blog, my comment is a bit of an in joke regarding the CATO Institute.
I was really referring to reading instruction at OISE in general, not Dr. Shapiro in particular, who is actually highly respected.

That is the same Dr. Shapiro that, if I recall, recommended that funding be extended to ALL faith-based schools, not just Catholic high schools in his 1984 report.  Smart man.

Dave, I did a bit searching if Dr. Shapiro made a comment of hard to teach. Going over many of the articles written by him, I could not find anything related to special education, except in the context relating to the funding and history of the public education system. In fact, his writings shows if anything else, careful consideration of the facts, and being very diplomatic about the issues.

It is why, I think Doug has taken his words out of context. He should back it up with evidence, instead of smearing a man’s reputation. Personally, I think Doug is attacking OISE and the many studies and research that is coming out of OISE. In particular the research in SE issues, that often are in direct opposition of what is being practice in the present day public education system.

I do feel that we have gone the way of Doug and we are making our way back.
In no way will SQE get sucked into a discussion that denegrates Dr.Shapiro.Thanks for the bait Doug.

Dr.Keith Stanovich-our guy in Canada HIGHLY RESPECTED AND CONSULTED WITH IN THE U.S.
had his laboratory on the 3rd floor at OISE-In his research he found very important things out about Reading and was concerned the teachers were not learning it.He tried very hard to effect change in the teacher preparation arm.To no avail.It remained acrimonious and still is.Read his article” Romancing the Reality”.
A meeting with his department last year,cognitive research department,saw the situation exactly the same as it was then,at a standstill.The building is divided and the teacher preparation arm won`t budge.

They`re not alone-

http://www.nctq.org/nctq/images/nctq_reading_study_app.pdf

Your citation on teacher training is excellent Jo-Anne.  This passage illustrates why educators inadvertently have “hard to teach” kids.  No wonder.

“Over the past 50 years, the field of education has largely resided in a world separate from science, allowing many learning theories to grow and thrive. Many of these theories have held great appeal to educators, spreading easily because they sounded good. Position statements released by prominent professional organizations helped to sustain and indeed promulgate these theories, lending them considerable credibility. Even though the field has now sufficiently matured to rely on a research base over what some might think sounds right, many of the texts reviewed for this study continue to espouse romantic—but wrong—ideas about how children best learn to read. For example:

■ ‘Future teachers learn to teach children to read words by considering the context to guess any unfamiliar words.’ While context does play a role in word recognition, it does not play the primary role hypothesized in the 1970s. Poor readers rely too heavily on text when they do not have adequate decoding skills and only one in 10 words can be predicted accurately from guessing on the basis of content. Encouraging children to guess words means they are not able to focus on comprehending text.

■ Future teachers learn that students do not need to know how to read every word: “A selection can be read and understood without reading every word.”

■ Despite a definitive finding in the 2000 National Reading Panel Report to the contrary, “having children engage in sustained silent reading during class time is endorsed as a method for improving reading fluency.”
■ Future teachers learn that children who have a hard time grasping essential components will be able to find some other (albeit mysterious) road to reading success. “A child who is weak in auditory discrimination is not likely to master phonics and is best taught to his or her strength rather than
to a weakness.”42
■ Future teachers learn that it is not a problem if they want to skip the more difficult work involved in learning how to read. For example, students don’t need to be taught the less transparent vowel sounds formally and that the children will “form their own generalizations about vowel sounds.”43
■ Systematic teaching is not so necessary after all. “Letting children experiment early…may eliminate the need for isolated phonics later.”44 Teaching young students to become experimenters with literacy is a more desirable method than explicit phonics instruction.45
■ Future teachers learn that “t is preferable that teachers plan their phonics programs themselves” using trade books as a basis to guide the planning,46 leaving the staggering responsibility of choosing phonics components, planning lessons, and assessing outcomes to teachers who are not only new and inexperienced but who have never even been exposed to the principles of good reading instruction.