64 replies to this topic

[Caramia]

You couldn't pay me enough to be a teacher. I love kids but there is no bloody way that I could handle 30 at once every day. They would eat me alive. It would be lord of the flies all over. In my current field I work sometimes 7 days a week, frequently more than 8 hours in a day. Cut my wage in half, and double a teachers salary and offer me the teaching position... I still wouldn't take it.

All children are children of a dark god.
Bless the good teachers, they are priceless. But I do agree that once a teacher is burned out, we need to get them away from the kids. Not that I blame them! But anyone whose seen the damage a teacher can do to a kid's love of learning in one year will agree.



(yes I am being dramatic - please take all of the above with a little tongue in it's cheek)

[think local]

All children are children of a dark god.
Bless the good teachers, they are priceless. But I do agree that once a teacher is burned out, we need to get them away from the kids. Not that I blame them! But anyone whose seen the damage a teacher can do to a kid's love of learning in one year will agree.



(yes I am being dramatic - please take all of the above with a little tongue in it's cheek)

Caramia, your post made me laugh yet shouldn't the approach be to ensure teacher's aren't being burned out? Seems to make the best sense to me yet they're being burned out at an pretty high rate these days which seems to indicate there's something systemically wrong rather than a "few bad apples." KWIM?

[mat]

Coming from a family of educators, and having lectured business classes, as well as experience of school systems in numerous countries, the BC system, very generally, is decent - not perfect, needs work, vigilance and continued funding growth; but compared to other top tier countries our children graduate better prepared than others.

There does appear to be a view of teachers (among non-teachers) as complaining, lazy, over-paid and being granted holiday periods many of us would dream of. Maybe this is due to union militancy, recent strike history and the politicalization of education funding - but it is a totally unfair and unreasonable characterization. No one goes into a teacher ed degree program believing it is a road to prosperity with summer holidays in Europe - all teachers spend an inordinate amount of 'free' time making lesson plans, writing evaluations, sourcing class materials, and ensuring pupils who need extra assistance are helped from a limited resource pool. All this while volunteering as school sports team coaches before and after the day, and trying to balance work and family.

As Caramia said - "you couldn't pay me enough to be a teacher". It is a professional calling that defies most peoples sense of a decent lifestyle. We are lucky to have so many well trained dedicated teachers and school managers - yes, there are some who do not, or cannot, meet standards - they mostly leave fairly quickly and go into politics ( )

[Caramia]

Caramia, your post made me laugh yet shouldn't the approach be to ensure teacher's aren't being burned out? Seems to make the best sense to me yet they're being burned out at an pretty high rate these days which seems to indicate there's something systemically wrong rather than a "few bad apples." KWIM?

Yes, I agree. However I am sure in your position you do know that there are also a few bad apples. If we managed to prevent burn out of the decent teachers, it might be easier to remove those who really need to not be around children, before it comes to the point where violence or worse occurs.

Set up the system so the teachers can succeed and the kids can succeed, and then it will be easier to weed out teachers who cause damage to the children in their care.

[davek]

When was a product ever improved by strengthening the monopoly/trust that supplies it? Until education is provided by institutions that face robust competition for business, it will never be first rate.

Public education is not the same thing as public schooling, no matter how the special interests try to convince you it is.

[mat]

When was a product ever improved by strengthening the monopoly/trust that supplies it? Until education is provided by institutions that face robust competition for business, it will never be first rate.

Public education is not the same thing as public schooling, no matter how the special interests try to convince you it is.

How about nuclear missiles - or the US/Canadian/Nato defense industry.? That is a prime example of monopoly interest generating incredible products, if not service - and yes, with an incredible amount of money.

Dealing in public education (what, general information services?) with, as you say, 'schooling' is a step too far. Show me a K-12 market driven educational model that works (for the investor, provider and with a positive result) and I might consider changing my opinion.

[LJ]

LJ, I would encourage you to walk in the shoes of a teacher.
Do you have children and are they in the public system?

1. Been there - done that.

2. Two kids- started in public school until I could no longer abide the abysmal education they were receiving, (not just the schooling but the rampant unionism displayed by the teaching staff) then enrolled in private school.

[Caramia]

Ms B should get in on this conversation. She was explaining to me one dark night on a street corner of Victoria, that if a student is not satisfied by the level of service a teacher is giving, it is that student's right to go and get it somewhere else in the school system. I don't understand the specifics of it, but it strikes me that this is one way to provide a healthy competitive environment. I wonder if it works in the practical way?

[Ms. B. Havin]

Ms B should get in on this conversation. She was explaining to me one dark night on a street corner of Victoria, that if a student is not satisfied by the level of service a teacher is giving, it is that student's right to go and get it somewhere else in the school system. I don't understand the specifics of it, but it strikes me that this is one way to provide a healthy competitive environment. I wonder if it works in the practical way?

Oh boy, don't drag me into this, Caramia! It's a never-ending conversation... ;-)

Yes, as far as I understand it, the BC Ministry of Education (to the chagrin of quite a few teachers) changed the rules some years ago, at least for grades 9 to 12 (or is it 8 to 12?). As it has something to do with funding/money, let's start by talking about how schools used to go about determining who is an FTE (full time enrolled) student and who isn't.

In the past, FTE students were exactly that: they were taking a full course load at a particular school, and that school was funded on the basis of how many FTEs it had. It was also the case that if you (pupil) really hated some of your courses, your main option was to take your complete FTE self out of the school, and instead take your whole FTE self to another school (where you might run into the same problem).

Under the new system/ regime/ order, you (student) aren't an FTE anymore. You are a conglomerate of units (courses), and schools are paid by those numbers (by units or courses). Meanwhile, you (student) can mix and match your courses -- you can take some courses at a neighbourhood public school, take some through one of BC's distance education schools, or even mix & match distance ed & private (I know a couple of kids who did this: they took some hard sciences at St. Andrews, and their other courses through distance ed.).

You will still have a "school of record," and it's typically the one where you're taking most of your courses. But you are completely entitled to opt out of taking all your courses there, and can instead go take your courses where your needs are best met/ where you find the best course/ the best instruction.

This also means that bad teachers will eventually find themselves without students....! (Supply & demand?)

AFAIK, this new system has not revolutionized the neighbourhood (aka brick-and-mortar) schools, since most of them still jealously hoard "their" students and certainly don't go out of their way to let them know about these new freedoms.

Add to that the fact that school districts implicitly compete against one another, too, and you get into really mine-laden territory. Try attending a school in SD61 and telling the counselor that you want to take, oh, Science 10 through SD63's distance education school (by the way, that's a great course). They don't like that. But remember: it's your right to do it anyway.

I've heard numerous stories of how the SD61 people will do everything they can to keep you from exercising your freedom, and I'm sure it works the other way around, with SD62 and SD63 neighbourhood schools also doing everything they can to retain "their" students. Their funding depends on it, after all. (That said, I have no pity -- I think students should get what they need, basta.)

It's really hard finding specific information on this initiative, either on AchieveBC or on the Ministry of Education sites. I googled "school choice under open enrollment" but most of the links were dead. Not sure why -- I don't think the policy has been withdrawn.

[Ms. B. Havin]

PS: This AchieveBC page gives the details:

Open boundaries

The provincial government recognizes that children should be enrolled in schools that best fit their interests, skills and abilities. That's why the government has made it possible for students to attend any school they want, as long as there's space.
Creating more 'magnet schools'

Every child is unique. That's why the government is encouraging school boards to meet the diverse needs of their students by offering specialty programs or developing 'magnet schools' whenever possible. Some districts are already offering specialized programs, such as fine arts, international baccalaureate, Montessori, online learning, First Nations studies and Mandarin immersion. Opening boundaries for more school choice gives B.C. students more opportunities to excel.
Open boundaries mean greater school choice

Open boundaries give every child the chance to attend a school that suits his or her particular needs, anywhere in the province, as long as space permits.
Catchment areas protect local schooling

The government has amended the School Act to require school boards to establish catchment areas around schools in their districts. This means local children get first consideration for places at their neighbourhood school. After local children are placed, the school is open to any child from around the province.

• Choosing a School in British Columbia - A Checklist for Parents
• Developing More Choices Within the K-12 Public Education System
• Un plus grand choix
  au sein du système d’éducation publique de la maternelle à la 12e année
• Le choix d’une école en C.-B.
• Petit aide-mémoire à l’intention des parents

It doesn't say anything about distributed/ distance education, which is however a keystone in the whole open choice system, imo.

BC Ministry of Education site for students, also helpful, which includes specific links for distributed ed/aka distance education:

Distributed Learning

Distributed Learning (DL) gives both rural and urban students in British Columbia improved access, more choice, and flexibility to learn outside classroom schedules. Distributed Learning occurs when you are learning at a distance from your teacher, whether you are at home, at school or at another learning facility.

See in particular the Course Finder:

The Course Finder will help you search for the courses you need and sign up for the course(s) that best match(es) your learning style. There are courses that allow you to start at any point during the calendar year and are completed at your own pace.

BTW, the special services program at SD63's distance education school (SIDES) is by all accounts superb.

[Jessica Van der Veen]

All or nothing thinking at work here. You can support universal public education and be for quality and accountability on the part of the teachers. These things are not mutually exclusive.

[Ms. B. Havin]

All or nothing thinking at work here.

I don't understand your comment (uncontextualized) coming on the heels of my description of what the Ministry has done. Or is your comment aimed at ppl who disparage teachers?

To me, it seems the Ministry is trying to create a situation where choices aren't mutually exclusive.

[davek]

Show me a K-12 market driven educational model that works (for the investor, provider and with a positive result)....

Show me one that has failed.

Seriously, so long as everyone is required to fund government schools in the name of public education, what chance has there been for a market driven model to develop? Still, that is no matter. The market has made it possible for any 14 year old with a paper route to buy a laptop that contains more computing power than existed on the entire planet forty years ago. Are we somehow to believe that the mechanisms that provide us with ever better cars, computers, homes, etc., at ever decreasing prices, are incapable of providing education? Anyone attempting an intellectual stretch like that should be careful to warm up first.

Public education does not require public schooling.

[think local]

The US system where principals are now called CEO's and schools revenue generators, or whatever the correct term is, they've failed. A system such as you describe creates an unfair advantage, a 2 or even 3 tiered system. If nothing else at all we need a universal system for education (I believe health care and others should be universal as well) because ALL kids deserve the very best opportunities. To not provide the very best to all is discriminatory and not building the foundation our country needs. We only need to look south to see the debacle of a system they've created and destroyed. Such a system where only those with money can afford the most competitive schools would create a situation where one's socioeconomics could mean they never achieve their potential. This kind of system does not lend itself to healthy, strong communities which should be the back bone of our country and the foundation of the future of all children.

[davek]

The US system... should be the back bone of our country and the foundation of the future of all children.

Public schooling is not the only way to provide public education, does nothing to provide all kids the best opportunities, does not eliminate discrimination, and does not build the foundation our country needs. What it does do is create a large number of politically powerful special interest groups that are protected from the competition needed to drive improvement. This keeps prices higher, and choices and quality lower than they would otherwise be.

If government was the best way to provide education, then it would be the best way to provide food, shelter, clothing, and all other goods and services. But it's not, and history has shown it. Widespread, high quality education will arise only when parents regain direct control over where the funds for their child are spent, and schools have to compete for students.

[mat]

Public schooling is not the only way to provide public education, does nothing to provide all kids the best opportunities, does not eliminate discrimination, and does not build the foundation our country needs. What it does do is create a large number of politically powerful special interest groups that are protected from the competition needed to drive improvement. This keeps prices higher, and choices and quality lower than they would otherwise be.

If government was the best way to provide education, then it would be the best way to provide food, shelter, clothing, and all other goods and services. But it's not, and history has shown it. Widespread, high quality education will arise only when parents regain direct control over where the funds for their child are spent, and schools have to compete for students.

Davek - maybe you should clarify what you mean by public education vs public schooling, it confuses me...

There is a limited system already in SD 61, and other regional school boards, of 'competition'. Parents are not really confined to catchment zones, and certain public schools, which have specialzed programs and facilities, (music, mechanics, sports teams) are over subscribed.

Distance learning is also a big priority out of the Min. of Ed - and that is allowing certain students to choose which courses they take in school, and offers the ability to follow other lessons at home.

Don't forget private schools - SMUS, Glen Lyon, St Andrew's and others do offer parents with the funds alternatives from the public system.

[davek]

Davek - maybe you should clarify what you mean by public education vs public schooling, it confuses me...

Public education is education financed by the taxpayer, based on the idea that education is a public good and a necessity to a democracy. Public schooling is one method of delivering public education, in which government dictates curricula, graduation requirements, teacher qualification requirements, and virtually every other aspect of a child's education. All citizens must pay, whether they make direct use of the system or not, and regardless of the level of satisfaction they feel with the performance of public schooling. Vouchers and tax credits are two alternatives for providing public education. In those systems, parents use public funds or tax credits to pay for education provided by either the public OR private sector. These systems insure each student receives an identical amount of funding while ceding greater choice in education options to the parents and increasing the degree of competition between schools.

There is a limited system already in SD 61, and other regional school boards, of 'competition'. Parents are not really confined to catchment zones, and certain public schools, which have specialzed programs and facilities, (music, mechanics, sports teams) are over subscribed.

BC parents benefit greatly from even the limited amount of choice available to them. Something as simple as permitting a student to attend any school within the district provides a powerful incentive to schools. The correlation between choice and performance is indisputable.

Don't forget private schools - SMUS, Glen Lyon, St Andrew's and others do offer parents with the funds alternatives from the public system.

It is a testimony to the power of the market that it can supply a product so good that people who can afford to will purchase that product even when they are forced to pay for an alternative. Giving middle-class and lower-class parents the ability to dictate where their education dollars go would enable them to harness that power.

[Caramia]

Actually my understanding is that if you put your kid in a private school then the school gets the funds that the public system would have otherwise received. You just have to pay extra as well.

Can someone who knows more about this either confirm or deny?

[mat]

Actually my understanding is that if you put your kid in a private school then the school gets the funds that the public system would have otherwise received. You just have to pay extra as well.

Can someone who knows more about this either confirm or deny?

Yes - accredited private schools do get BC funding (this does vary). Funnily enough the 1st good link on google for 'private school funding bc' offered a cupe webpage. (2004 - and regulations may have changed since then)

Independent School Categories

o Group 1 schools - offer programs consistent with the goals of the British Columbia curriculum, employ certified teachers, maintain adequate educational facilities and meet municipal codes. They receive, per student, grants of 50% of the per student cost in the public school district in which they are located. e.g., mainly religious schools.
o Group 2 schools - meet the same requirements as Group 1 schools. They receive per student grants at the 35% level, because their per student costs exceed those of the local public school district. e.g., usually University-prep/British model schools (often coined “elite schools.”)
o Group 3 schools - must maintain adequate facilities and meet municipal codes. They do not receive provincial grants.
o Group 4 schools - cater to non-provincial students, i.e., more than 50% of their students are from out-of-province. They meet the same curricular requirements as Group 1 and 80% of their teachers must be certified. To be eligible to issue the B. C. Graduation Certificate, the “Dogwood”, 100% of the teachers must be certified. These schools must be bonded, and are not eligible for grants.

[LJ]

Independent School Categories

o Group 1 schools - offer programs consistent with the goals of the British Columbia curriculum, employ certified teachers, maintain adequate educational facilities and meet municipal codes. They receive, per student, grants of 50% of the per student cost in the public school district in which they are located. e.g., mainly religious schools.
o Group 2 schools - meet the same requirements as Group 1 schools. They receive per student grants at the 35% level, because their per student costs exceed those of the local public school district. e.g., usually University-prep/British model schools (often coined “elite schools.”)
o Group 3 schools - must maintain adequate facilities and meet municipal codes. They do not receive provincial grants.
o Group 4 schools - cater to non-provincial students, i.e., more than 50% of their students are from out-of-province. They meet the same curricular requirements as Group 1 and 80% of their teachers must be certified. To be eligible to issue the B. C. Graduation Certificate, the “Dogwood”, 100% of the teachers must be certified. These schools must be bonded, and are not eligible for grants.

Hence my statement that if all the kids in private school went to public schools the costs for public education would rise dramatically.