Although I don’t agree with all of it, there is a great deal of truth to the passage above. I think Malkin assumes that the private school rate is the correst one and the PS rate is therefore inflated. Of course I see the PS rate as closer to the correct rate and the private rate as exploitation which is why OSSTF is having good success organizing privates schools now. Even the threat seems to raise private wages.

As I said on another board or here below, in each round of bargaining, the board begins with a long list of strips (takeaways) that they must have and a 0% raise. The union presents its teachers with a list of gains to be made and a substantial raise. The teachers are furious at the boards proposals and further, they realize that this is what they would be getting for sure without the union.

SS principal used to hire right out of the Globe and Mail a we say but this broke down when all of the boards were amalgamated and became far too large for this. Supers began to prescreen and created “eligable to hire” lists. SS Principals still hire but from the approved lists. Not a lot of hiring these days with declining enrolement but this will correct itself in time.

Principal setting the wages assumes there is no union involvement? Unions will never allow principals to set wages. Too much favouritism. BTW principal love to see the unions get a good healthy raise because OPC will be in right after demanding the same % which for principal is more cash.

The right of the unions to spend money on political causes however they please has been to the Supreme Court and the unions won. Closed shop unionism was granted by Tory premier George Drew in the 1940s because of his fear that the teachers were all supporting the CCF, the forerunner of the NDP. This is the norm throughout the democratic world.

Certain American states do not have closed shop provisions. Wages, benefits, pensions and test scores in these states lag way behind because they do not attract the best people into teaching.

Unions in themselves, are necessary in today’s society, but my problem is accepting that the individual teacher, is manipulated by their own unions in toeing the line, is only partially correct. Teachers unions, have long ago been co-opted by government and others who have a personal, invested interests, to ensure that public education and the opportunities that can be avail, is in keeping with government’s stance and views on education, and to change the conception of the public, that it is the person’s responsibility if they fail to receive an education that has all the necessary skills needed to transverse society.
The top level of the teachers’ associations, work together with their partners, education boards, the education department and its ministry, on policies, studies, and the regulations/administration of providing services to the public. Many of which, do not benefit the students, but benefits the people who work within the education field. As a result, the individual teachers feel the heat of the public.
In the province that I live in, the teachers are prevented to speak publicly on matters of education regarding their children in the classrooms. It is why, we do not see a teacher voicing concern over education policies, where ‘little Suzie’, is not receiving the help she needs, because of rules, regulations, privacy laws that prevents ‘little Suzie’, from accessing services or to avail of an opportunity. It is where policies and the language use, where parents are called care givers, and where the State rises above acting as the parent. Parents become mere baby-sitters, with all of the responsibilities and accountability, and the education system, becomes the de-facto parent without being accountable or responsible for any part of the education system.
The education system, forces the teachers to be loyal, not only to unions, but also to the government and other completing agendas in the education fields. The education of the child vs being fired, suspension with pay, being fine, or being scolded by their peers, is a set-up, where the children/parents are disenfranchised from the public education system.
“If individual principals were free to hire teachers and set salaries, teachers’ loyalty to their unions would probably be greatly reduced”, I would say their loyalty would be divided between the completing agendas of the one side vs the parents who would have a bit more say in what goes on inside our schools. How much, that is any body’s guess.

The teachers were not very loyal to the Hrris/Eves PC government because they clued in very quickly that this was a government that did not have the best interests of teachers or public education at heart.

Inside the federtions you often hear people say “the teachers have their heart in the NDP but their brain in the Liberals.“

The vast majority of teachers understand that teachers who vote Tory are like chickens who vote for Colonel Saunders.

I was living in Ontario, when the Harris government came in, and it did impact my life, concerning health and education services, concerning my child. Now that I have the benefit of looking back, I still stand by my opinion, based on my own knowledge, observations, and experiences, that it does not matter one iota, who is in government. Harris brought down an agenda, that created a lot of busy work, and at the same time giving the optics that parents were empowered.
Governments come and go, but the bureaucrats remain in place. Add the unions, and other organizations that have their best interests in profits, rather than the welfare of children,, we have various interest groups with separate agendas, and an extreme politicized environment, where the children’s needs are not met, or met with only a certain percentage.
Add parents to the mix, we naturally find ourselves looking out for the best interests of their children, or the other way, withdrawing because of the lack of knowledge on how the system operates. The most recent example, in my child’s life, is dealing with a teacher who acts as a mentor, for decisions on potential careers and high school courses. The emphasis from above, is to get as many kids into the skill trades, whereas my child would like to get into the field of forensics. It has always been her goal, since she was 9. Yet, after a chat with the teacher, she feels let down because he does not believe she has what it takes, and will not like it. Than it is suggested, a career pathway of skill trades or worse. I get upset, since I am using her interests as a means to motivate her to study, take notes, etc, that will paved the road to independence, and learning on her own. But I don’t pick up the phone, like some parents. I put her back on track, and calm down any concerns she has in the near future or far off future. There is plenty to worry about, besides her learning disability. One fact, is that parents are not included in with the discussions of their children’s future. Nor have any influence over selection of courses.  When you have close to 40 % of kids in high school taking basic or general courses, there is something wrong with the system. In the days I went to school, 30 % took the arts/science or a combination of science/tech, 60% took the 4 year commercial or tech courses and 10 % took the basic courses. A basic diploma, does not get anybody into post secondary education, and where colleges are demanding a lot more than a basic course in math. So you have to asked yourself why is it allowed to happen?  I believe it is good politics, and where it allows the sitting government to make cosmetic changes without changing it much, and at the same time, increase the stats that 95 % of the student population graduated. It appears that they are doing a good job.
As a parent, I have pick this up, and there is pressure on my child, to select basic courses, rather than academic or advance. Than there is additional pressure, coming from teachers, who are urging her to take advance courses in science and math.  It is a toxic mess brewing, and as parent I am quite aware of the fact, that some do not have the best interests of my child, and are carrying out the agendas of others in the upper levels.
Schools now a days, is another clog in the wheel, where they have little power in looking out for the best interests of their students. If it was so, more than likely my child would have her learning needs met a long time ago, and today she would be a good reader and writer, and have the skills and strategies necessary to overcome her dyslexia, and be able to pass a CRT, by expressing herself using her current set of knowledge.

I have never agreed that their should even be a streaming system of differentiated levels in HS. The nations without streaming (AKA tracking) have more kids go further.

I don’t know where you get the figures for general and basic since those streams were abolished but to many are in applied (9+10) or workplace (11+12).

I mentioned on another site OSSTF polled constantly 3-4 times every year. There was an 85% satisfaction rate. About 85% also agreed with the statement “The schools system has never been better.“

If you break down the 15% give or take that disagree, they are in to distict catagories. 1) Parents of SE kids who expect them to further than the system does, and 2) Parents with traditional values (usually religious) who find the PS System too liberal for their liking.

Teachers Toeing the Party Line

Your article above said: “Some commenters believe that teachers are being skilfully manipulated by their unions into meekly toeing the party line.“  I agree.  Most teachers, anyway.

CBC is currently having a hot discussion, 245 comments so far today, on the matter of some BC teachers who protested giving standardized tests to students and wore black armbands when doing so.  The union is now going to Arbitration to judge if their Charter Right to Freedom of Speech was violated when they were asked to remove the armbands by administration.

See:  story and discussion here http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/02/26/bc-teachers-black-armband-fsa-protest.html?ref=rss#socialcomments

This is the comment I made:

Legalities

I’m very concerned about the effect this incident has on the young people involved and on society as a whole. 

Can this Arbitration hearing provide for expert witnesses and intervenors?  Can the public attend?

I would really like to see some expert witnesses testify as to any psychological damage or after-effects to students from this incident. How do the students see the black armbands? Are they associated with death?  With protest? Other views?

When the students asked a teacher what this represented, did the teacher explain black armbands or that it was a protest about giving tests he/she disapproved of?  Hopefully, the teacher did not go into a long political spiel about teacher union opposition.

I would also like to see some intervenors attend who can advocate for the interests of society, or for children as a class, in such instances of teacher insubordination.

You can bet the teachers’ union in its pursuit of the Charter Right to Free Speech will have the benefit of the best money can buy in legal defense, advocacy and supports. It’s prepared to go all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada if need be.

I’m sorry to say, here in BC, we see these teacher union campaigns against these standardized tests annually, every spring.  They are an embarrassment. These campaigns are “manufactured” causes and part of an international solidarity manifestation with other militant teacher unions.  It’s not always testing.  Sometimes it’s class size, or something else.  These manifestations are similar to the obligatory May Day parades unionists must participate in in many countries.

I would like to see someone, maybe a philosopher, comment on the effect these protests have on the public interest as a whole in British Columbia.

Testing is evil. It is well documented that it drives marginal students out of school, narrows the curriculum, and overall has a negative effect on the system. Even Diane Ravitch says so now. Twenty years of NCLB in the USA, no improvement.

The teachers were told they could not hand out leaflets on parent’s night about class size and composition. They went to court and won.

The interests of the students and the interests of the teachers are one and the same. It is a slander to say otherwise. The constant refrain from the right is that the teachers don’t care about the students and then the right wing wonders why teachers campaign politically against them duh.

I’m posting here to bring to the participant’s attention an untruth that was spun in the previous thread entitled “Picking Winners” in which the issue of the private-like schools in the TDSB Ursula Franklin and Rosedale.

In Doug Little’s own words there was “nothing special about Rosedale” and “Rosedale does not have auditions or pre-requistes.“

Not so.

A quick trip to the Rosedale website at http://schools.tdsb.on.ca/rosedale  shows us that indeed Rosedale conducts a very rigorous application process.

Applicants have to submit a portfolio along with letters of reference.

For Grades 10-12 applicants an “interview” is required for “successful” applicants before the “successful” candidates make their course selections.

Call it what it is. It’s a screening process likely designed to determine if the student is the right match for Rosedale. 

So Doug’s notion that any student can attend Rosedale is simple puffery and incorrect information.

Re: Ursula Franklin Academy - the tour was conducted by the two school councils reps. and the principal. In attendance for the tour was also a rep. from COT, EIC,
EQAO, TVO, OPSBA and a contingent of parents from across the province.  It was common knowledge we were told that only the brightest were referred to the Academy.

I offer up this information for clarification because wrongs need to be made right and spin needs stopping in its tracks.

Does Mr. Little speak for OSSTF? What else can we determine from his dropping of information on Tunya that he’ll be “making an appearance at the BCTF convention”? Are you their on official OSSTF business sir, or is this just more puffery designed to shock and awe us here?

Whether or not the teachers in BC have the money to hire the best lawyers in order to defend their action of wearing black armbands while administering tests to students, their behaviour was despicable.  One doesn’t need a philosopher to figure it out for us…

Doug, I am going to say, you are cherry picking again. As for my figures, there is research being conducted, in the literacy agencies, think tanks, and other organizations that are independent from the education system, but their field is in the education field.
It was confirmed to me, by Aims (Atlantic Institute for Market Studies) ,  the provincial and national literacy agencies, that there is a significant increase in students who are receiving a basic diploma, in the last 10 years, and decreasing averages in the next level of academic. As you have mentioned, general and basic has been morphed into other names, such as applied or workplace.
It is not as simple as looking at the stats that you cherry picked, as evidence to support your stance. There is an under lying factor, the elephant in the room, that has been ignored in the public school system, and that is the weak skills in reading, writing and numeracy, in either all or some aspect. The estimates for the student population, based on available published stats, the students with low reading, writing or numeracy skills, can ranged from 40 % to as high as 60 % of the student population. To confirm these figures, the groups have run into a brick wall, where there is out right refusal to release the stats concerning the ability to read, write and basic numeracy, and the skills necessary to do advance work, beyond grade 4.
Here is a link for Aims: One study called, Getting the Fox Out of the School House, is of interest to all, and how teachers unions have impacted education. There is other reports, on this page where the links provide PDF files.
http://www.aims.ca/education.asp?cmPageID=152

I also disagree with the statement, that testing is evil. Testing is a means to test for knowledge. My objection to standard testing, and especially the CRTs, what are they really measuring? The knowledge, or the skills of reading, writing, and basic numeracy?

From the site, People for Education, has a series of reports, with one that might be of interest regarding special education, and their literacy skills.
“The Ministry of Education allows boards to create and offer
“Locally Developed Courses” to serve students experiencing difficulty in the Applied stream. But the courses are only available in large high schools or in technical schools. They are not available in all boards, and they are not standardized across the province.
“Results of the 2001 grade ten Literacy Test show worrying trends. While 87% of the students in the Academic Stream passed the Literacy test, only 44% of the students in the Applied Stream were successful.11 Results for students in Special Education and Locally Developed Courses are even worse. Only 40% of students identified as special needs passed the test. 12 Successful completion of the test is a prerequisite for graduation,
which means that over 30,000 students may now be unable to graduate. In June, the Minister of Education acknowledged that the new secondary school curriculum is problematic for students who
would formerly have been in the basic or general levels. She promised to find a solution. When students returned to school in September nothing had been done to solve the problem.“
http://www.peopleforeducation.com/reportsbytopic

Than we have the OSSTF. Where the high school teachers associations, also dance around the elephant staring at them. Rich in reports, but no one is talking about the largest subgroup, where we have students with identified or unidentified LD, and the ones who are considered part of the normal student population, both groups have poor skills in reading, writing, and numeracy, either in all or some aspect of one of the three. The school, my child attends, has reported a figure of 60% with having poor skills that are needed to be successful in high school. My question is, what can a high school do, when these skills should have been taught in the elementary grades?  Improvement in these numbers is difficult, when there is other forces that hinders improvement in overall literacy.
http://www.osstf.on.ca/educationforum

Chuck,

I am RETIRED from teaching and the federation. I have many friends in the various federation and the liberal reform movement across Canada. BCTF invited me to visit their conference and promote my report

http://www.thelittleeducationreport.com

To Bev, the behaviour is called “free speech”. One teacher flatly refused to administer the test. The Dean of the Simon Fraser Faculty of Education called her a hero that other teachers should emulate.

Chuck, I taught history at RHSA for 10 years 1993-2003. I was the OSSTF rep for the school. The principal and I were in sinc that this would be a no auditions, inner city, first come first served school. If this has changed in recent years due to the fact that the building has a capacity of 700 and has twice the # of grade 9 applicants that they have room for so if they have instituted a screening process I am very disappointed and would not have supported it had I still been on the scene.

Nancy, nobody is going down in literacy. There was no time in the past when we did better than we do today. The fact is that kids in applied are not doing well and never have in the past either.

What do successful countries do is my constant refrain. The schools where kids do badly are overwhelmingly and almost exclusively poor schools. We need to focus on the poor with laser like precission. We need to lower their classes to 10 kids if need be. We need to pay a bonus to get the very best teachers to go to the schools with the lowest scores. I would pay $20 000 extra buy choose very selectively. I would start a high quality ECE program in these schools a 2 years of age. I would just keep throwing resources and talent at these schools until they come much higher up the scale. It costs money but it is cost recovered if you are successful.

Outside of school, much more has to be done in the areas of housing, health and income support for poor people.

Well, Doug, come out with your evidence that the public education system is doing a good job on literacy. Most children get 100 % on the reading portion of the CRT. and any standard testing in North America. It does not mean, that there is not a problem in the area of reading and writing. From what I have been told, that the CRTs, conducted across Canada, only measures the ability to read, and not the subskills such as decoding, fluency, etc. If children were given regular classroom assessments on reading and writing, that would give a good handle where the child is on reading and writing skills, than you can claim that there is no problem. Funny thing, one can debate and debate, but until the education system, releases the classroom numbers, and by the way, for the most part the assessments are up to grade 4. After grade 4, there is little to no work being done on improving reading and writing skills, let alone any assessments, people like you will ignore the literacy elephant . The other trouble spot with classroom literacy assessments, are often made up by education staff at the upper levels. Questionable and often gear where most pass it, even the ones who have great difficulty in reading and writing struggles. The reason being, is the pass mark is 50%. A student is consider reading well at the 50% mark, but also the same student is disqualified for any extra help. It is a well known fact that educators like yourself, ignore for the most part.
The premise that children that are passing, have no need or require help, beyond what is provided inside the classroom. In fact, that unwritten rule, is sometimes written in the SE and sometimes found in union contracts., what is and what isn’t a teacher’s job. As some teachers have said to me,“That is not my job.“  This is their response to teach her writing skills, using a teacher to grade it, keeping in mind of improvements. Ten minutes of their time, and I get that is not my job. At least that is better than being mock at, where what I do at home, is serious and targeted help, designed to improve her skills. That was in response, to my knowledge and abilities compared to their skills.
Referring to your comments on literacy, and in reference to this, “There was no time in the past when we did better than we do today. The fact is that kids in applied are not doing well and never have in the past either.“ There is also problems in the academic streams, where the majority are just passing. However here too, the public education system will not release the break down of the averages. I too, would like to know how many are in the range between 50 to 55 % and so forth. Ditto for the CRTs, no breakdown of the numbers between 1s,2s,3s,4s and 5s.  Not even parents are allow the average, for the whole classroom, so a parent can compare it their own children. The teachers here for the most part, are not permitted to release this bit of information, for reasons of privacy. I think not, more than likely the averages are in the 50s and 60s, and parents would start questioning the reasons why it is so.
What I am trying to say, one cannot make blanket statements, without assuring that that data and the interpretation of it, is correct. Ensuring what is being measure, is indeed being measured. In the data you cite, also shows the same elephant in the room. Without full breakdown of the data, misconceptions such as a child that does not show promise in the early grades, will always have poor grades. The perception is their in our schools, and it pushes at funding, and where that funding goes to.  Low income is just one variable influencing academic outcomes, There is a host of variables that the education system can’t do much, since they have little control over social and income issues. What it does have control over, is the education services being provided. It is too bad, they have taken it upon themselves, to bar most children from having a quality education, that includes becoming good readers and writers, without needing to take remedial classes in post-secondary or adult classes.

Nancy,
I would not be a critic of the system if I did not think we could do better. We can do better. I believe the goal of the Ontario education system ought to be that we would be #1 in the world and have a huge difference between ourselves and #2. We would be foolish indeed if we did not acknowledge where we are as a starting point.

One country on Earth has better reading scores for 15 year olds and that country (Finland just in case you wondered) does many things better than we do. The main thing though is that it trains its teachers much longer, requires much higher education to be a teacher and has about 1/2 the poverty that Canada allows to our shame.

I have seen the lists at team meetings year after year when I was in the classroom. Here are the 25 kids in the school who failed the Grade 10 literacy test. Of these 23 re already in SE and 22 are from very poor backgrounds.

Nancy, in fact most of the people on this board must take a much closer look at the poverty/literacy link. It is overwhelming. Yes it does not explain 100% of the causes of weak literacy but when you have one cause that explains 90% of the reason do you not concentrate on that? Of the non-poor kids who do badly on the grade 10 liteacy test, almost all have been identified by the system and have been in SE for years by Gr 10.

Reading past about grade 4 is not improved by reading skills classes. It is improved by reading and writing a great deal, especially in project/inquiry aspects of the curriculum. This can be social studies, science, good quality literature and other subject areas that the children are actually interested in. (Daniel Willingham).

If we really want to improve Ontarian or Canadian education and literacy levels, the secret is teacher education, smaller classes in poor areas, ECE, and a relentless drive to be first.

We need an Own the Podium mentality for education but it would be measured as below:

1) Greatest # of PhDs/capita in the world
2) Greatest number of MAs/capita in the world
3) Greatest # of BAs/capita in the world
4) Greatest number of CAAT grads or higher in the world.
5) Greatest # of HS grads in the world
6) Highest # for 15 year old reading on PISA

This is my goal but I don’t think we should just be first. If we want, highly productive, socially responsible, happy citizens in the future, we need to open up such a lead that all other nations are really playing for second place.

Go Canada!

Doug - another good day at the Olympics.
That said, and taking the Olympic theme further in education, in order to ‘own the podium’, the public education system has to change from the top to the bottom.
1. Teachers coming out of teacher’s colleges, should know all the ABCs of the English language, and the French language, if the teacher is heading off to teach French or work in that language. Teachers in grades K to 6, should be well verse on language, to be able to know when someone is struggling with language in any aspect.
2. The school system approach is a centralized approach, and it reminds me of the Russian communist type, where orders come from the top, and carried out by the ones below. It does not allow for conditions that are outside of the norm, and where the schools are constantly adapting to the constantly changing norms of the ones above, and does not allow for any conditions, that are not within the parameters of the norm. In a system like this, the schools become rigid , obsess with conformity, rather than moving fluidly with the pulse of their students. The school system needs to be decentralized, where the schools have the final say in the operations of the school, to allow the individual school to focus on their individual needs of their student population, that changes over time, and is never static.
3. If the schools have the final say, the levels above can focus on the higher priorities of education, looking for what are the best methods, materials, resources based on science, rather than imposing a non-evidence approach, and make it fit into a evidence-based approach. By removing all the busy work from above, the entities surrounding the top layers, such as text book publishers will be force to change their methods, and approaches. They will no longer be guarantee a seat at the table, or some will say, sleeping with the minister of education. The education researchers will now have an opportunity to present their methods to people who hold the purse strings, but be able to introduce the new findings for best-practice, based on 50 years of research. In my journey, I have even made contact with them. Yes, Canada does have a few working quietly in the background, and when a parent makes contact, the parent is often surprised that they are willing to talk to them. As I was, and to find out, that the top levels rarely contact them, or avail of them for advice. This is one of the reasons, why the researchers have moved from theorizing to formulating best-practices to developing programs, curriculum , methods that are ready-made for the schools. It becomes quite tiresome, from a parent’s perspective dealing with the many changes in curriculum in language arts and math, that my youngest had to deal with, going from one bad program to the next. Again, in grade 10, she can look forward to another change in a math series, which will be six times since she entered grade 1. This time, it will be leaving one math series that was OK, to one that is worse in my opinion, and I will have to go back to the tutoring at home. The only good thing about it, it is a good thing that I am good in math, but the bad thing, I am going to have spend hours on the computer to relearn math concepts, that have long been forgotten.

I am convince, if all three would be put in play, all schools no matter where they are in the social/economic ranking, they would be better off. Parents and teachers would be empowered, and focus on the child, naturally. Teachers would be able to make decisions on the spot, rather than waiting to fill out the paper work, to asked permission to move outside the parameters to improve the student’s learning. Parents, would more apt to be listen to, especially in grades K to 6, on their concerns, and would be more willing to listen to the advice of teachers. It is a two-way street, but what I have found is a one-way street, where if you do not comply, you will be terminated.  Often over the years, I swear there is courses in teacher colleges, secret ones that teaches newly minted teachers, how to handle parents with iron gloves, You might wonder where I would get this idea, but if you go up the ladder in the education system, the majority of masters and PHDs are in administration, with a BA in education.

Doug, your comments on, “Nancy, in fact most of the people on this board must take a much closer look at the poverty/literacy link. It is overwhelming. Yes it does not explain 100% of the causes of weak literacy but when you have one cause that explains 90% of the reason do you not concentrate on that? Of the non-poor kids who do badly on the grade 10 literacy test, almost all have been identified by the system and have been in SE for years by Gr 10.
Reading past about grade 4 is not improved by reading skills classes. It is improved by reading and writing a great deal, especially in project/inquiry aspects of the curriculum. This can be social studies, science, good quality literature and other subject areas that the children are actually interested in. (Daniel Willingham). “
Doug, glad you mentioned Daniel Willingham. Here is a short bio. “
Daniel Willingham earned his B.A. from Duke University in 1983 and his Ph.D. in Cognitive Psychology from Harvard University in 1990. He is currently Professor of Psychology at the University of Virginia, where he has taught since 1992. Until about 2000, his research focused solely on the brain basis of learning and memory. Today, all of his research concerns the application of cognitive psychology to K-12 education. He writes the “Ask the Cognitive Scientist” column for American Educator magazine, and blogs at the Washington Post. He is also the author of Why Don’t Students Like School? (Jossey-Bass). His writing on education has been (or is being) translated into Chinese, French, Korean, Thai, Portuguese, and Russian.“
I have taken his ideas, among the other researchers in cognitive science, and applied them to concerning my dyslexic child, at the same time, making mince meat of the standard practices that are found in our schools.
Although I do agree in part, that lots of reading and writing will improve over time, little improvement is shown in children that have a weak foundation in reading and writing. In one blog posting, Willingham states, “ Once students can decode, background knowledge is crucial to reading comprehension. Ensuring that students have wide-ranging knowledge of the world ideally begins at birth, through a rich home environment. Schools must do everything possible to support and expand that knowledge base, and integrating material from other subjects into the reading curriculum is an important step in the right direction.“ Once students can decode is the important factor, where schools spend far less time on, and the other necessary skills needed, to comprehend the knowledge.
http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2009/07/what-makes-a-good-fourth-grade-reader-knowledge/

Here is a series of articles written by Willingham, and Doug take a look at the one article, “How Can I Help Slow Learners.“ 
http://blog.coreknowledge.org/author/dan-willingham/

On another article, What Can Cognitive Psychology Do For Teachers dovetails nicely that a firm foundation in the skills of reading and writing, are necessary to advance learning. It would have made my life a whole lot easier, because I believe most of my child’s learning difficulties, were made more difficult, from the practices inside the classroom. “Although knowledge of physics is not necessary nor sufficient to the engineer, it is obviously useful because it allows the engineer to speculate on new designs and to calculate with confidence whether the planned design will stay up and carry a particular load.
The relationship of cognitive psychology to classroom teaching is like the relationship of physics to engineering. Knowledge of the mind gleaned from cognitive psychology experiments will not tell teachers how to teach children, any more than knowledge of physics can prescribe what a bridge should look like. “
http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2009/04/what-can-cognitive-psychology-do-for-teachers/

Doug, sorry for the posts, but this will be the last regarding comments, “If we really want to improve Ontarian or Canadian education and literacy levels, the secret is teacher education, smaller classes in poor areas, ECE, and a relentless drive to be first.“
You have claimed in other posts, that schools that have a higher proportion of students from the middle-class to the upper-class, have lower percentages of students who have learning problems. There is a reason for that, the higher the income, parents are more apt to seek out private services for their children, if they are struggling in any aspect of learning. Plus add the urban factor, where most of the private services are located, there is the widening gap between rural and urban literacy rates. Rural, where few if any private services are located, and where rural parents are more dependent on the schools, than urban parents.
The problem here, is that the public education system is willing and often promotes the premise, that if a child has a learning problem, their first response, is to make it the parent’s responsibility, because in their minds, they have provided the necessary and proper instruction and resources. A parent with the means, will often turn to private services, as a means to solve their child’s learning problems, quickly and more efficiently, avoiding the bureaucratic red tape that are found within the schools.
Low-income people do not have any choices, but are reliant on the system to provide. To provide increase funding, for low-income schools, and not to have it thrown down the drain, other parts of the system has to be fixed. Where the school, becomes the place to go as a community. These days, outside groups have to pay for that privilege of holding a meeting on school grounds. Public libraries, as well as the school libraries have to be improved and open longer in hours. These are two of the many variables that influences school and the education of children. One can have the best teachers, the best minds, but if the other parts of the system cannot be access, one might be spinning their wheels. Much like having health care centralized, without taking account the access points of entering into the health system. In my province, it is the access points that are block, and as a result, our top specialists and surgeons are dealing with very sick people. In health you find the same correlation, the lower the income, they are less likely not to be following good health practices. In this case, the price of fresh food is a lot higher than the processed foods, and the junk food.
With the funding formula for schools, is a problem where there is single funding, per student and there is no consideration of the school’s make-up and outside factors that will influence the outcomes and achievements of their students. It is where the mild to moderate LD group, plus students who are struggling in some aspects of their learning, do not received help over and above what the classroom provides, because the students are passing, not by much but are passing.

Nancy,

There are huge tracts of what you say that I agree with. Where we differ, and it is not a real difference of opinion but one of emphasis and priority, is that you see the education world throug the lense of a special ed girl who could be doing much better much faster.

I see the system through the lense of the poor kids I met in many years of teaching in Toronto’s poor neighbourhoods. These poor kids were quite bright at least they had ability in the same % terms as the kids I saw in wealthy schools. The problem was that the poor kids were not on a post-secondary trajectory and you could clearly see it after about grade 3.

The person I always felt who came the closest to understanding the situation was Paul Willis, a British sociologist who wrote, “Learning to Labour: How Working Class Kids Get Working Class Jobs.“

This idea that it is quite difficult (though not impossible) for a child to break out of their parent’s class position is the main problem in education in my view. We attempt to have a society based on ‘equality of opportunity’ but I believe our goals are too small and milquetoast. We need to aim for ‘equality of results’ and by that I do not mean dumbing down the curriculum but raising up the ones on the bottom to the top level.

Schools can play a central role in this but these kids also need to have other problems of health, housing and income support radically improved at the same time. One of the many reasons Finland does so well is an absolute poverty rate of about 5%, Canada 12%, USA 16%. This seriously impacts any plans for educational improvement.

Doug - I do agree with you, and schools can be a major player. I had to do a quick search on Willis, to know what you are exactly talking about, and there is not much out there, except paid articles. I did find one, describing Willis’s work, “In contrast to reproduction theory, production theory takes into account the effect of individual experience on the structure of ideology through their interaction and practices. The emphasis is not on the policies and practices of the schools, as is with reproduction theory, but on the lived experiences and interactions of students, teachers, and administrators that produce the status quo (e.g., Apple 1979; Arnot 1982; Giroux 1983a, 1983b; Kelly & Nihlen 1982; Willis 1977). Through these practices members enact the power and privileges deemed to some groups and not to others by way of capitalism, patriarchy, age, race, and/or gender (Holland & Eisenhart 1990). Production theorists contend that “people forge their own meaning systems in response to the societal position they face and its material implications” (Holland and Eisenhart 1990: 32). Note, however, ideology is still considered an imposed structure. From this perspective, ideology lacks the dynamic, multidimensional features resulting from members’ interactions that simultaneously produce, reify, and challenge cultural meanings and practices. The marionette of reproduction theory has evolved into a puppet. The visible strings of institutional policy and practice have seemingly transformed into autonomous, self-determined actions. Yet these experiences and practices are controlled within the limits of the puppet’s role, ultimately determined by the hidden hand of the puppeteer, the guiding force of ideology.“
http://www.linguistik-online.de/heft1_99/remlinger.htm

Where I live in NL, I have often felt as though I have been led by the nose, by the hidden hand of the puppeteer. I have seen this type of interplay with others, especially those who have a lower education and sometimes low income. This set of parents have come after me, accuse me of helping to teach my kid how to cheat, among other accusations. Now a days, I get a smile or two from them, and a tad bit more respect, that some of my methods are now being employed at the school, which many of them cost no money at all, and other methods long missing from the school system, such as tutoring sessions where we had none to speak of. The other battle is the division between children   are fit in the normal path of intelligence and the special needs children who are differing in the way they use their intelligence, and may or may not fit in with the normal pathway. Often here there is divisions, where parents who are perceive on a higher social ranking, their children will get the help needed and much more, compare to parents and their children, who are a lower social ranking. It is evident and can be observed easily in the small community that I live in.
Yes we may differ on the approaches, but for any of it to work successfully, the education system has to change.besides the other government institutes that operate in our society. One place to start, is to have people who work within the various substructures, to acknowledge that a class structure can do more to impede progress in the best of good intentions, and education programs.

I did learn something today, which provides me with more ammo, and parents and their special needs kids, have wondered from time to time, why there was little research in this area. Now I know why, we were looking in the wrong fields.

Where is NL ?

Doug??? Newfoundland and Labrador

One should address the old chestnut of allowing principals to hire and set the wages of teachers. Such a system works admirably in those cases (one of which exists in Halifax) where the principal owns the school. It works to some extent in independent schools as well, particularly when teachers are appointed to limited term contracts.

The system, however, is terribly problematic in public systems, particularly those with the sort of two-year tenure that is common in Canada. A single individual may be responsible for hiring a teacher who, after two short years of undersupervised and evaluated teaching, becomes a 40-year responsibility of a school board.

There may be a case for allowing principals greater say in hiring teachers from a pool of permanent teachers; one might ask, however, would this mean a staffing review, with all assignments open to change, each time a new principal was appointed?

In most boards principal do hire from approved lists that have been vetted by superintendents.

Most teachers do not work 40 years although it can happen 30-35 would be the norm.

Principal setting wages is a total non-starter unless you are going to abolish unions, in which case you have much bigger problems because you are now living in a totaliterian state.

Private schools are private schools. Most are not unionized but this will slowly change. The ones who don’t pay scale will soon be looking at a union.

Private schools exist to extend privledges of the upper class to a younger generation or to perpatuate “traditional values” to another generation or continue a pedagogical direction (Montessori, Waldorf, ...) , or just for good old fashoned profit motives. They are highly marginal to the nations goals of productivity, equity and happiness.

In response to Robert’s comment about the dangers of allowing principals to hire teachers since they will become tenured in two years and then the school board could be stuck with him or her for 40 years. There’s an easy answer to this conundrum - abolish tenure. Next?

PS And while we’re at it, let’s allow principals to hire anybody they like - certified or not.

Good luck with that Malkin,

You know how far out an idea is or what its chances of success would be when I doubt if you could find more than maybe 2 MPPs who would agree with you in the entire legislature, Randy Hillier the knuckle-dragger from Lanarck and who? Bill Murdoch is too smart to say this, LOL.

Standing up for uncertified teachers is like standing up for uncertified doctors. Yikes!

If teachers had to go through the same accreditation and continued upgrading as doctors then may we can talk.

Teachers should go through that kind of trining as I have advocated, they are constantly upgrading, most of it at their own expense.

Would we like uncredentialed cops, nurses, firefighters, ambulence drivers? Where this idea that any fool off the street can teach comes from I can’t tell you but it is a failure whereever it is tried. Teachers naturally see it as teacher bashing once again.