Right wing propoganda from a tiny group of malcontents. Issue that unions can do whatever they want with dues has been to Supreme Court in Canada. Unions won. Unionized states have much higher wages and much higher test scores. So called Right to Work states where you don’t have to join the union mainly in the old Red Neck south.

Unionized states teachers make $20-25000 more. Tough sell against that.

Teacher Unions Block Needed Education Reforms

The video: The Truth About Teachers Unions was very much to the point about the problem with public education today – in the United States and Canada.

The points made in the video closely parallel the issues Peter Cowley raises in his excellent article:  Impediments to Reform in the Public School System.

In both presentations it is the teacher unions who are the biggest obstructionists who block needed reforms, preventing more responsive and efficient education. 

-  they make it extremely difficult to remove bad teachers who negatively affect student learning
-  their adversarial approaches can poison teacher-parent relations
-  they actively engage in political activity far beyond teacher bread and butter issues
-  they oppose needed reforms when choice, such as charter schools, are proposed

It is parents who are most excluded from genuine engagement and advocacy on behalf of their children’s education.  And it is the teacher unions who are most active on the two fronts which, if removed, would aid parents in their active pursuit of the best interests of their children’s education in their immediate lifetimes. 

The two fronts where teacher unions are ever alert to threats to their status and power are:

-  any changes to the system, the apparatus, the status quo as it exists now
-  any alternatives or genuine choices for parents and students beyond the monopoly public schools presently in place

As Mr. Doug Little, a retired union official, is so quick to point out (in a previous post) the unions would mount their forces 10X stronger against any such reforms as could possibly be mounted by reformers.  And, this certainly has been the experience in other parts of the world where such political opposition is overwhelming and often succeeds.

For some idea of what can be done to send more money directly to the schools (which unions claim are underfunded) AND let parents be actually involved in the governance of their schools see what has been done in New Zealand.  They abolished school boards altogether and allowed for parents to be the governors of their individual schools.  See Charter Schools Kiwi-Style:  http://4brevard.com/choice/new-zealand.htm

Let us also not forget that the teacher unions have an outreach that includes some well-placed and high profile parents, parent organizations and school councils.

Whipping parents into union agenda carrier-pigeons can’t be overlooked, likewise the ways in which union-supported parent groups have free access to schools and school boards, and councils.

When setting up a similar “parent” group in my region,
our then board allowed the minutes of the organizing meetings to slip into the school council communications site. It became clear from those that the teacher unions at the time found benefit in befriending parent groups and school councils.

School council parents were invited to these organizing meetings but make no mistake the attending were union and parent “coalition” members.

From those minutes a union rep. is reported to have
suggested “Joining a School Advisory Council or the Ontario Parent Council”,

Yet another union attendee said “parents must get involved as teachers are in a hard spot because they cannot discuss issues with students, cannot explain our side of things.”

During the Bill 160 circus the teacher union coalition in their minutes shared that along with parents, they keep up the pressure on gov’t by “staging media coups, photo opportunities,etc., such as a symbolic cheque donation to local schools, try to get students involved.”

Parents should also know that teacher unions have within their bylaws clauses/sections re: their school council responsibilities.

Ah, the good old days, eh Doug? Good thing the OSSTF has turned a corner and is looked upon as the more compassionate of Ontario teachers unions.

Many of the things in the video are either outright false, false in Canada, or not all that surprising. Unions are quite supportive of choice WITHIN the public system. They are totally opposed to public money going to unaccountable private schools. This is perfectly understandable, as John Tory found out 85% of Ontarians agree with the teachers about this including the vast majority of parents.

Those who want public money for private education are a tiny minority of 15% on their best day.

Teacher federation reps are on school councils. I was one at one time. We had to constantly remind parents that they cannot discuss individual teachers. Naturally, the principal supported us on this.

Keep in mind that private school does not mean non-union. Teachers unions are organizing in many private schools in Canada, they already represent many private school teachers.

Across the USA the AFT and the NEA are signing up charter schools at an incredible rate due to the long hours low pay and favouritism rampant in these schools. KIPP and many others will soon be union schools.

Mr. Little, the Tory option that cost him the election was over faith based school funding, not accountability.

And as to accountability, I would like to know from you just what you mean by that, and how it might apply to A parent with A child in A real classroom.

Or would that just be another anecdote?

Since you despise those who disagree with you as “small” groups of “cult-like” “malcontents”, just how many “malcontents” would it take to comprise a group capable of discerning or telling the truth, or even to take over the whole system, and place you and your comrades into the statistical minority “malcontent” cohort?

And do you really think private schools and aftermarket educational agencies are unaccountable?  After all, they have no coercive power available to them to take customers by force; or to get a mandatory minimum contribution from every parent, even long after that parent has no minor children left at home, even if that parent never comes to them for help.

Think of Ford having a thousand dollars a year from every car buyer, even if the buyer prefers General Motors.

Bankrupt car manufacturers.  Now that is what I call accountability Mr. Little.

Accountability in education really means democratic control by elected school trustees at the local level and MPPS at the provincial level. If these two do not share absolute control over the curriculum, staffing and finances of a school said school should not get one dime of public money.

Schools that get public money should also be required to use 100% certified, federated teachers. They must also follow the provincially mandated curriculum. Failing these criteria, there is no accountability. Those who oppose this are indeed, a small band malcontents or should I call them Malkintents.

re: union reps. are on school councils

Just let’s inform parents who are unaware just WHY the union reps. are there and how they use parents - it’s certainly not to support parents in their partnership role.
If parents are to be used in this way they need to go in with their eyes wide open. The federation reps. aren’t interested in the workings of councils for the sake of parents. They’re there because they see councils as a means to further the union agenda…period.

“Accountability in education really means democratic control by elected school trustees at the local level and MPPs at the provincial level. If these two do not share absolute control over the curriculum, staffing, and finances of a school said school should not get one dime of public money.”

When trustees regain control of their school communities and begin to represent that other than what the province decrees come back to this Doug because the greatest myth in public education today is that our elected trustees mean local control - totally untrue. Elected trustees under the previous TWO governments had a hope in hell….under this current government, well, we got Bill177. Nothing short of the government lobbing the accountability for student achievement back at those elected trustees and moving the province as far away as having to account for achievement than every before.

I said at the time of Bill 160, the local boards are virtually dead. If you don’t control the taxes and the spending you don’t control much.

The reason you see the teachers as adversarial is that they re opposed to YOUR agenda, charters, vouchers, phonics, DI, testing etc. The overwelming majority of parents could care less about this agenda. They like the little public school down the street and just want to help the teachers and principal there to make it a better public school.

You don’t represent the interests of PARENTS, you represent a small cult that wants the above agenda. Very few parents or citizens care about this agenda.

Mr. Little, you represent the interests of parents?

Who cares what parents think; they’re not teachers.  They don’t know what they’re talking about when it comes to education.

Do they?

Isn’t that what you wrote earlier?

You speak of accountabliity completely in terms of political arrangements.  You refer to yourself as an academic.  You continually refer to phonics as a defining issue that separates teachers and school bureaucrats and unions from the “cult” of minority malcontent.

Yet you haven’t answered a single question or issue related to actual classroom or academic issues, with the exception of a comment about report card issues which are not an actual instructional issue.  You don’t show any interest in responding to current research or best practice in education, anywhere, whether it be home schooling, private agencies, or even any of the educational material on this website.

Your idea of improving education is to spend more money, and to totally marginalize anybody who disagrees with you.  You call us cultist malcontents, and lean heavily on the assumption that a minority MUST be wrong.  You demean those who opt out as religious and/or elitist people.

It seems your idea of democracy is the old Greek idea of an elite Guardian Class, which represents de facto the “General Will”.  You claim the dominant public program is the only way to proceed but refuse to acknowledge any member of the public who disagrees with you; and the fact they’re wrong is proved by their minority statues, that they’re not teachers so are just “blowing smoke”, and you know a priori they’re religious elitist malcontents.

I don’t think you’re even capable of understanding for instance what language is, how it’s acquired, what phonics are about; I don’t think you understand what direct instruction is, how it works, why it is effective, I don’t think you understand one single thing of fundamental importance to the processes of learning and teaching. 

Your responses are replete with abundant and repetitious political talking points.  You can’t even be bothered to write in complete sentences or make the number of the subject agree with the number of the verb, on more than one occasion.

You call us “Malkintents”.  Here’s a challenge to you; get up from your desk and out of your house and go out and meat some Malkintents and see what we’re doing.  Read the educational material on this web site and engage with it like the teacher and academic you are.  Find out what success rates are being achieved by people who use them; even if they are not trained teachers and are just “blowing smoke”.

Are you up to it Mr. Little?

You think research support you. It does not.

The winner of elections gets to set the education policy. You lost so it is not you. I answered all your questions, you just don’t like the answers.

Your patronizing tone on language does not square with expert opinion.

You can do whatever you want with your kids but don’t try to get your hands on public money. It is for public schools.

You can have whatever opinion you want about phonics and DI. I understand exactly what they are and for the most part reject them as do most language experts.

By the way meet is spelled MEET not meat when people are having a meeting. You should try spellcheck.

Teacher Unions Fund Political Actions Locally and Internationally

Teachers who willingly join a union for bread and butter issues may not approve of the political work done by the union on their behalf.  In the United States most teachers can sign off—for a rebate—that part of their fees that goes toward political actions.

In Canada unionized teachers do not have that right.  Their only option is to protest, make motions at conventions, or just grin and bear it.

Read this story from the Toronto Star, Did Teachers’ Union Fund Columbian Terrorists?

http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/article/744858—did-teachers-union-fund-colombian-terrorists

The claim is that donations from OSSTF to a group in Columbia have been directly used for bombings, hijackings and violent attacks on Colombian targets.

Roger Langen, the human rights officer with the Toronto branch of the OSSTF (Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation) says “This kind of slur against us is meant to show we were unwitting dupes.”

This international solidarity work is another objection raised by some teachers and citizens against the political and adversarial postures undertaken by militants in the teacher union movement.

The day shareholders have the right to tell publically traded companies what political causes they can donate to is the day they will have any face telling unions what to do. I mentioned previously, the case at hand has been to the Supreme Court in Canada and the unions won. Recently a new Supreme Court ruling has found that governments do not have the right to break contracts to roll back unionized workers wages and benefits.

International solidarity work is broadly supported in the union movement. The decisions are all democratic. Simply because an individual objects to how their money is spent is no reason to return the money or even reconsider the idea. It is only when a MAJORITY objects through what the Supreme Court found to be the democratic avenues of the unions that an idea needs to be reconsidered.

Roger Langen is a friend of mine and he is right, this is just a CIA smear and everybody knows it.

How is it tht stating facts is a smear?  Despite the fact that the unions won in the Supreme Court, shouldn’t your union leaders behave with more integrity?
All of the union dues originally come from taxpayers, so like it or not, taxpayers have a right to know exactly what is going on.

Who says they are the facts? The union leaders have an elected mandate from their members and a set of policies from their conventions. Their democratically elected conventions set their policy.

Whether the money came from the taxpayer or not it is the legal property of the teachers for services provided. It is none of the taxpayers business how it is spent.

There is one and only one legal way to make unions stop making political donations and that is to ban corporations from making political donations in the same legislation. The SC has said these two must be balanced.

It would be really great if some on the board here did a little more research about unions, and their rights before pontificating but if you simply wnt to be known as anti-union, knock yourself out. The teachers’ unions are very popular with their members.

Tax Dollars are for Public Education, Not State Schooling

Another problem with teacher unions is that they perpetuate the myth that tax dollars should be reserved only for government schools.

But, that is not true.  The public education movement arose out of the same belief system that gave rise to the public hygiene movement. State and charity interventions were undertaken, by and large, not so much to benefit individuals or families, but to prevent disease and poor morals from affecting whole populations.

Similarly, public education arose so that democracy, self-government, and moral citizenry could be sustained through a minimally educated public. 

Public education occurs in many ways – state schools, independent schools, self-education, home education and other means such as online courses.  What is not fair is that not all students have equal access to the public education dollar obtained through public taxation.

Public education is the outcome, the result, the harvest, the end result, from the use of public dollars spent on education. It is a public good. The public is generally satisfied if graduates are literate, know and practice the accepted norms of civil society, and are prepared to be as self-sufficient as possible.  Self-governing citizens who can exercise meaningful, informed choices in their own best interests and that of their community are what is desired.

Obviously, accountability has to be assured.  The education cannot be counterproductive to the well-being of the country as when terrorism, racism or other negative behaviors result.

So, when socialists, progressives, and teacher unions oppose education choices as a fixed ideological position it must be recognized what great harm is done to the concept of parental agency and family responsibility in the education and upbringing of their children.

The best quote I can find on what this disempowerment and usurpation does is from Berkeley Law professor emeritus John E. Coons:

“There are a lot of benign effects of school choice but, for me, choice is family policy. It is one of the most important things we could possibly do as therapy for the institution of the family, for which we have no substitute. The relationship between the parent and child is very damaged if the parent loses all authority over the child for six hours a day, five days a week, and over the content that is put into the child’s mind … They’re stripped of their sovereignty over their child.”

“And what must it be like for the child who finds that his parents don’t have any power to help him out if he doesn’t like the school?

“It’s a shame that there are no social science studies on the effect of choicelessness on the family. If you are stripped of power—kept out of the decision-making loop—you are likely to experience degeneration of your own capacity to be effective, because you have nothing to do. If you don’t have any responsibilities, you get flabby. And what we have are flabby families…”

There is a third way to operate schools—an alternative to the delivery-model system of either state or private schools (put your child in and expect results) and that is the communitarian model as endorsed by this year’s Nobel Economics winner, Elinor Ostrom.  She says “control by those directly affected” should prevail in schools and recommends “charter schools, voucher systems, and other reforms to create more responsive schools.” 

See my essay “Responsive Schools Key to Good Society”
http://genuine-education-reform-today.org/2009/12/22/communitarian-way-to-responsive-education-nobel-winner/

Tunya you can believe this all you want, your problem is that almost nobody else believes it. I have mentioned in the past that I work for a polling company and when I worked for OSSTF I was their assigned staff to their pollster. 85% of the population in Ontario believes the proposition that “public money should be used only for public schools.”

70% believe we should abolish the catholic school system. You folks at SQE need to understand that the overwhelming population of both parents and citizens do not share your views. The tide is actually going out on school choice since the Americans are slowly discovering they are getting nothing for it.

“You folks at SQE need to understand that the overwhelming population of both parents and citizens do not share your views. The tide is actually going out on school choice since the Americans are slowly discovering they are getting nothing for it.”

What absolute bullcrap Mr. Little.

If what you suggest is true you sure spend a lot of time fighting something you claim in not a big deal and not at all a threat.

The mere fact that you protest as much as you do speaks volumes.

You’re truly a legend in your own mind sir, but the old tired lines and myths simply aren’t playing out like they used to.

Competition for fewer students continues, as more and more alternatives take shape inside and outside the system and organizations like SQE educate the public and parents to the choices available to them.

I’m encouraged locally because as my public board closes more and more schools the Catholic board is growing steadily building new schools AND, when those public schools move out of towns new private schools are taking their place.

Even your former board Mr. Little is offering more choices to keep parents from looking outside the system. The TDSB is getting in the competition game,
isn’t about time the union relics do too?

Private schools are already working in tandem with our public schools and joining in events and sharing on gov’t money through accolades and rewards.

Seems to me if you were confident in the system you profess to support you’d ante up and show off how it measures up. Turning tail and lashing out with insults and put-downs is just very stale.

How many times do I have to say that I favour alternatives WITHIN the public schools. They must folow the provincial curriculum, follow the ministry and board rules re policy and contract provisions, they must be democratically accountable, they must use certified and federated teachers. To me this is a public school. Every alternative WITHIN the public system including the entire catholic system counts for my side not yours.

What I oppose is charters and vouchers only where public tax money is not subject to all of the above accountability rules. The only concern I have is alternatives OUTSIDE the public system where parents and students may not get full value or a good education.

To reiterate, all PUBLIC alternatives count for my side and against yours.

I’m fully in favour of our tax dollars (the voucher system) going to any school that is doing the job.
Since we’re are footing the bill, the choice has to be ours. 
When the voucher system comes to Ontario, I’ll do as I did in Tokyo and Singapore:  I’ll shop for a school that I think will deliver what is best for the children, and direct my tax dollars there. 
I don’t believe it’s a matter of if, but a matter of when the voucher system will come to Ontario, because it’s spreading in the States.

Don’t hold your breath. It is not coming. Even the Tories here know every time vouchers are on a ballot in the USA it is strongly defeated. It is not spreading it is contracting. Washington DC is about to lose its voucher program. The study of the Milwaukee program showed no educational gains over public education. Even conservative states will not pass voucher legislation because they know it has already been defeated in a referendum or it will be due to very poor polling results.

By the way, they are not your tax dollars to direct. People pay taxes for the general support of public education and public services for the good of all, not for their own children. Why do you think we tax childless people. You cannot simply opt out of this service or that one and expect to get your money back. If you could, I would like all my Afganistan mission taxes back and I would like to redirect them to public schools.

Vouchers are not going to happen in Ontario. Ask John Tory why.

Think about this. The people with no kids in school do not want vouchers because they believe it will lead to added expenses due to the failure to achieve economies of scale. They are right since taking 2 kids out of every class does not reduce the cost of education by as much as starting up new schools for those kids. People who are satisfied with the public system(s) do not want vouchers because they believe it will drain resources from already underfunded public schools. They are correct for the same reason as above.

Add the people with no kids in school, (60%) to the satisfied public school parents, (25%) you get about 85% of the population opposed to vouchers. It is a total non-starter. You know if a serious proposal is made the federations, CUPE, the Libs and the NDP will campaign at full speed against it. DOA. Put a tag on its toe, this idea is dead.

I think the voucher system is wonderful, and it will come to Ontario.
The current system will eventually collapse under the shear weight of the demands from the unions for higher pay and better benefits, less responsibility, fewer hours and days in the classroom, further watering down of the currucila, etc…

Keep dreamin’

Too bad so few think it is “wonderful”

In blogging circles it’s quite common for trolls to pop in and bait participants in a discussion. The trick is to recognize the bait, and refuse to bite, which is what they wish in order to give their agenda more profile. Has nothing at all to do with caring at all about adding to the discussion.

Just saying and encouraged that Mr. Little’s way of thinking hasn’t washed off onto newer, less jaded educators. That’s got to hurt.

Corruption Rampant in Education Systems: Don’t Think Ontario is Exempt

Continued…

Though I am shocked by the scale of the corruption in BC education, the long duration of some of the bad practices, and the depth, I an equally concerned about the lack of transparency and lack of accountability that is revealed.  Both oversight and procedures are flawed.

In the general field of corruption studies, perception is considered as important as the reality.  I am surprised and disappointed that it seems as if people don’t care.  As if this is the norm. The system is there to be milked – the children be damned!

Lest we get too agitated, however, a 6 year study by UNESCO has just published its report in English called: “Corrupt Schools, Corrupt Universities: What Can Be Done?” The blurbs about the study say things like: “Corruption in education is rampant globally”, and “Corruption is endemic in many education systems around the world, undermining them and costing governments billions of dollars”.

In discussions about this report, in addition to the wrong-doing and harm done, is the painful acknowledgement of the effect on young people.

“Lack of integrity and unethical behaviour within the education sector is inconsistent with one of the main purposes of education: that is, to produce ‘good citizens’, respectful of the law, of human rights and fairness.”

This entry was supposed to precede the above…s o r r y…

I consider conflict of interest as corruption, that is, it is wrong, compromises decision-making in school boards, and should have legislation preventing it.  However, in most parts of Canada there are not strict restrictions on who can be trustees.  This is one of my six corruptions I decry in our BC experience for 2009:

Conflict of interest – trustees who are teachers or ex-teacher union officials, have family on staff, in the role for 30 years, who have signed teacher union pledges to support teacher causes, etc. …

Here is my full essay on the topic:

CORRUPTION: BC’s Education Nightmare – I

It’s just a matter of degree.  Expect all schools and school systems to be vulnerable to corruption – anywhere from pilfering a pencil from a school to outright criminal embezzlement as we’ve seen in the Detroit Public School system. The education systems, being the biggest or second biggest spenders of public money, have few stringent accountability measures to counter what is a system replete with opportunities for wrong-doing.  All at the expense of childrens’ education, of course.  In Detroit the “culture of corruption” is so severe that only one in four students graduates.

For the New Year, the new decade (2010), I wish to see a rededication to the task at hand – proper education of the young.  All else is secondary or non-essential. And, I’d like to see a lot less corruption. The two go together.

Fortunately, tough economic times help in the task of eliminating waste and refocusing on the essentials. It’s like in the Depression – maximize the resources you have.

In New Zealand when the government saw that it had “created a massive, unresponsive educational system where parents had little or no influence”, which didn’t meet acceptable achievement levels, and which “consumed 70 cents of every education dollar, with only 30 cents spent in the classroom” they did something radical. They implemented a very simple organizational change to switch those figures around.  District school boards were replaced by parent boards at each school, very much as we have in our independent schools. Those who care the most were now in charge. Parent trusteeship is voluntary, no pay!  (PS:  The Ministry was reduced to half its former size. Money saved is ploughed back into the schools, special services, and indigenous education.)  See: http://4brevard.com/choice/new-zealand.htm

Does our government in BC have the guts to do something so simple? Something radical.  The present system is totally unacceptable and getting worse by the month. There never was a year like 2009, rudderless and full of holes.

Before I list some of the corruptions we’ve seen in the last year let’s stop a moment to review what corruption is. Very simply, it is anything that robs the intended recipients of goods and services and/or deviates from its intended mission.  This deviation might be as simple as pilfering a school pencil, which is not a criminal offense, to the criminal embezzlement of millions of dollars, as we’ve read about in the Detroit Public School system.

Basically, to corrupt is to spoil, alter, or debase something into less than what it is supposed to be. Passing the smell test is another way of putting it.  “Something’s rotten in the state of Denmark”, that is, the fish is rotting from the head down.

These are just some of the corruptions, debasements and questionable practices discussed on this blog this year:
1.  Cronyism, nepotism—which was outed in the debates concerning deployment of TOC’s (substitute teachers). A dedicated page on this blog now has over 1,000 comments.
2.  Double dipping—TOC’s who are retired but still working on call, superintendents retired and on pension and working under contract.
3.  Conflict of interest – trustees who are teachers or ex-teacher union officials, have family on staff, in the role for 30 years, who have signed teacher union pledges to support teacher causes, etc.…
4.  Using school property for private commercial purposes – producing materials for sale, organizing businesses, charging high telephone calls to foreign countries for business….
5.  Conventions, junkets, retreats in distant locations and in expensive settings.
6.  Overspending by a school board because of poor accounting practices and poor reporting…
… more later …

I guess the way corruption is defined in Canada it is through legislation. You have a perfect right to say the above items are inappropriate, morally corrupting in fact but they are either legal or illegal. Sometimes we find out that what everyone thought was legal (Oliver Carroll case) ws in fact, not legal but until someone changes the law or takes your situations to court, you may not like them but they are legal and therefore, to most people, not corrupt.

Tunya has worked hard to inform, which I’m grateful for…
Legal and moral do not always fit in the same bag, and one would hope that people whom we’ve entrusted our children to would demonstrate integrity to the utmost; otherwise they’ve let us down.
Thank you again Tunya

The problem is right or wroug is highly subjective. They believe that what they are doing is fine because it is legal.

Conference Board of Canada gives Canada an A and finds it is the second best school system in the world behind Social-Democratic Finland. Should we be satisfied? No, as education activists we should only be satisfied when Canada is first by a wide margin.

To get into first place I believe we need to do what is proven to work. We need to continue to extend the system downwards to 3 year olds, we need still smaller class sizes, we need better teacher training as pre-service and in-service, we need higher salaries to motivate the best to choose teaching and we need to demand a Master’s degree for new teachers.

I believe these reforms will put us in first place where we must be for resons of human capital development, for social anti-poverty reasons and for reasons of human fullfillment.

What criteria are the CBC using to determine the quality of our system?

And even if they are right, so what?  After all, right and wrong are subjective things, aren’t they?

Doesn’t that make everything you’ve asserted on these pages subjective?  Shouldn’t you respect the fact that other “subjective” views, eg. those that oppose your points of view here, are therefore equally valid?  So therefore what right do you have to control the money and resources of “the public” through public education? 

Other, that is, than your subjective desire to control everything that happens?

What then, is the difference between your point of view and that of any dictator randomly chosen from history, or from the present?

Remember, Mr,. Little, any reply you give here, any truth claim, is from now on to be understood as your own subjective opinion,.  And any evidence you cite originating outside of your own cranium is merely the subjective truth claim of another.  Even the evidence of your own eyes, the truth you see, is just subjective. After all, what can you do about the chemical reactions underlying your thoughts?

And so is your observation that your opponents are “Malkintent”, cultlike, elitist people who know nothing about education.

In fact, why even bother to claim that one either knows or doesn’t know anything about education?

If the system extends down to three year-olds, should the education act be amended to require attendance at school from the age of three?

And did I get your answer to the question “under the education act who determines whether the child is receiving a satisfactory education”?

And what about the question, “Why bother with a public system if it only makes a 1% difference in the educational outcome, since in your own words 99% of the success of education is related to social class?

Different Education Activists Have Differing Agendas

Not all education activists are the same.  There are many stripes, philosophies, and outcomes desired.  Some activists even believe the end justifies the means, thus questionable means are also up for debate.

In this current discussion I want to focus mainly on the ideological, self-interest positions espoused by teacher unions.  And since we have Doug Little as a long time union activist participating in these debates I will address his comments.

First, he thinks the Finland socialist model is one to emulate and overtake.  But first, he infers, we must adopt more socialist methods.  One of these being “to extend the system downwards to 3 year olds.”  Please note that both Finland and Sweden have school starting at age 7, with free voluntary pre-school available at age 6.  Even though Canadian provinces are moving in the direction of earlier provision of Kindgarten the jury is still out on the benefits and harms.  Just rereading David Elkind’s two books, “The Hurried Child: Growing up too Fast Too Soon” and “Miseduction: Preschoolers at Risk” should give parents, educators and policy-makers serious pause.

Secondly, I will challenge Mr. Little’s recurring opinion that what is good for teachers is, by definition, good for kids.  For this I will quickly skim through two areas where teacher unions have been a real deterrent to the best interests of children and families.

a)  Teacher unions oppose meaningful choice.  It is in their self-interest to have monolithic, monopolistic, central-command, soviet style delivery models of education through government (public) schools.  This style of distribution is dysfunctional, counterproductive and open to serious corruption.  This clinging to the device of ensuring a captive audience does not guarantee quality nor meeting of individual differences and preferences. However, government-funded choice through charter schools, vouchers, tuition tax credits, etc. enables the client, the consumer (not the producer) to fulfill their needs.  The needs and interests of the consumer are NOT equivalent to that of teachers.

b)  Teacher unions intervene and dominate education decision and policy-making. This is not incidental coincidence.  This has been a deliberate, incremental, insidious intrusion by unions into those areas that had previously been reserved for lay and community control. The fact remains that school boards are either heavily influenced by teacher unions or are made up of educators or ex-union officials.  This should be a clear conflict of interest but governments (probably because of union intimidation and threat of withdrawal of campaign donations) fear to police this distortion of democracy.

I could go on, but what I’m trying to conclude is that teacher interests—which collectively might thrive under socialist methods and policies – do not square with the interests of students and families, nor the general public interest. 

If there is such a trend in Canada, it needs to be turned around.

This is a famous quote from Albert Shanker, former president of the American Federation of Teachers:

“It’s time to admit that public education operates like a planned economy, a bureaucratic system in which everybody’s role is spelled out in advance and there are few incentives for innovation and productivity. It’s no surprise that our school system doesn’t improve: It more resembles the communist economy than our own market economy.”

I guess the answer to almost all of your questions is “democracy” . So far, in this democracy, people do not want charters or vouchers, they want a strong public education system, not a fragmented every person for themselves system.

Of course it is my subjective opinion but it seems most people agree with me although a few agree with you.

No we should not demand all children be in public ECE at age three but if it is free I would expect a maybe 90% enrolement rate.

Only a strong public education system can mitigate the effects of social class but it is so much easier with progressive social policies like higher minimum wages.

Meaningful choice has been put in front of the Ontario voters twice, once with the repeal of the Harris private school credit and once with the defeat of John Tory. Ontarians just do not want to fund options outside the public system, in fact if the United Nations “everybody or nobody” pint of view were put to the Ontario people 70% would opt to end the catholic system before they extended it to “others”.

Yes, a more socialistic approach to education does seem to work.

BC just made Kindergarten full day. This is the new direction mainly because it is becoming common sense that extending the system downwards is good for the economy.

Confessions from X-Teacher Union Activists—“More Harm Than Good”

The Society for Quality Education (SQE) has done a tremendous service to open up the question:  “Whose Interests Do the Teachers’ Unions Truly Represent?”

The Video – The Truth About Teachers Unions http://vimeo.com/2439019 is worth revisiting and forwarding to others.  Its message—How teachers unions protect bad and incompetent teachers, and block school reform efforts.

Posted over a week ago, the entry has generated a lively discussion and 34 comments.  I made 6 comments, and in each tried to show how teacher unions are detrimental to the interests of students and parents and to education reform generally.

I won’t add any more of my opinions now but will just bring forward the case of two ex-teacher union activists who are renouncing the behaviors of their unions in thwarting needed reform.

NUMBER ONE:  Myron Lieberman, over 30 years an activist, then turned academic,  wrote the book:  “The Teacher Unions: How They Sabotage Educational Reform and Why”. Just by reading the 9 customer book reviews (some for, some against) in Amazon.com you get a good flavor of the book.  One review starts out:

Don’t Let The Union Head Catch You Reading This Book!!

http://www.amazon.com/Teacher-Unions-Sabotage-Educational-Reform/product-reviews/189355421X/ref=pr_all_summary_cm_cr_acr_txt/177-8640172-6908661?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

NUMBER TWO:  David W. Kirkpatrick, teacher union member since ’64 and a top officer in the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and now a Senior Fellow at the Think Tank the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution wrote a very comprehensive article called – Teacher Unions and Educational Reform: The View From Inside.

http://www.psrf.org/gur/gur_19.2_kirkpatrick.jsp

These are some of the topics:

-  NEA and AFT Block Education Reform – consistently block or cripple any significant change, such as school choice and charter schools … the system forces teachers to prefer conformity for themselves and their students …
-  Unions Prevent Teacher Participation and Influence – “if you are going to hear from any of our members we will decide which ones it will be.”
-  Serious Research Only Used to Block Change – At the same time they claim they will support change if research proves it correct, they oppose conducting the actual research
-  Teachers Isolated, Silent and Compliant – “teachers give up their individuality…all the rank and file need to do is to co-operate, to follow faithfully the suggestions of the central leadership group.”
-  Voucher Opposition: Example of Union Tyranny
-  Union Control of Teachers, Administrators and School Boards
-  Union Violation of Teachers’ Rights
-  On Education, Unions Inept
-  Unions Attack Reformers

How is it that teacher unionism has grown so pervasive, adversarial and powerful?  Are there no challengers?

Teacher unions fight vouchers and private charters because they are bad ideas that simply take our eye off the ball of the real problems in education which are the lack of success of poor and some minority students.

You cannot have your police taxes back to hire your own security. You cannot have your fire dept taxes back to protect your own house from fire. You cannot have your library taxes back to buy your own books and you cannot have your public education taxes back to start your own schools or homeschool. If you want to pay for private schools + pay your public school taxes knock yourself out.

Tunya,  thanks for the recommendations. 

I’d also add that Mike Antonucci writes a scathing blog called Intercepts.  http://www.eiaonline.com/intercepts

He takes a look at the unions from an insider’s view.

The voucher system is racist. Stop arguing.

If the vouchers are racist, you’d better watch Dr. Howard Fuller on the topic.  I think, well I know, he would absolutely disagree.

http://www.tvo.org/cfmx/tvoorg/theagenda/index.cfm?page_id=7&bpn=779116&ts=2008-01-29 20:00:48.0

Mr. Little,

Re: “the real problems in education which are the lack of success of poor and some minority students. “

You forgot to mention Ontario Scholars who can’t write essays or in fact perform almost any University assignment to an acceptable standard.