Oh my goodness!! A reporter in BC presented a story without all the facts!!! Imagine that!!

Here we go again. Gee, I wonder if the BCTF throws any money at the Tyee?

The Sun really discredits itself with this sort of stuff. It's not as thought it isn't something that us average Janes and Joes can't see for ourselves. We've all been students at some point and many of us have watched our own kids struggling or thriving.

Of course class size is only one of several key factors that influence student achievement. I'm sure Mr. Naylor would agree that other key factors include class composition, support for diverse learners, school and family context, expectations and of course teacher dedication and adequate training/competence.

Time for all the folks with political agendas to get out of our classrooms and recognize that getting education right is critically important to the whole society--not just to those who happen to be in the system at this point. We all need to put our heads together and to park the outmoded adversarial approaches where they belong.

Class size is not the issue. The skill of the teacher is what drives this issue.
That is where the resources should go. To training and nurturing good teachers.
But, as with all unionized workplaces, the race is to the bottom. Whereas the skills of the most useless employee have to be subsidized by all others.
I don't believe in this system.
The alternative is privatisation of the education system with the use of the voucher system.
All this doesn't matter as the Govt. has NO CHOICE but to legislate an agreement.
Game over, how unfortunate.

This Tyee is becoming so predictable.

Education is like economics. You can find an "expert" who will argue in favour of whatever point of view you have. This article quotes six studies over four decades, plus a biased finding from someone in Kelowna. That's hardly overwhelming evidence. I bet there have been hundreds of studies, and someone with an opposite point of view could easily identify six studies also.

At least this author doesn't pretend to be impartial, since he's on the payroll of an organization that profits from smaller class sizes.

Intuitively, I think some things matter more than class size: like the education level of the parents; the stability of their home life and the absense of class disruptions (like in the case of one of my child's class... the screaming, shrieking autistic child that never is quiet.)

Forget the research! Wrong Earmuff doesn't believe it, therefore it can't be so.

I already questioned your slavish devotion to the voucher system, but you had no response. Don't let facts get in the way of good ideology eh, Ronny?

But, as with all unionized workplaces??? Oh, really. Do try to avoid the hyperbole Ron, someone might take you seriously.

Ya know, if teacher effectiveness is so important to you, one would think at some point the rather obvious fact that the more time a teacher can spend with a student might actually increase said teacher's effectiveness. But, don't waste time reading my comments, go get another job so you can afford private school for your kids. And, what Chris H. said about class sizes/private schools... what's your response to that? Lordy, your arguments full of holes and slightly nutty. Have you been into the Swiss cheese again?

...that's exactly what I mean :-)

Now let's start counting how many fall for Mr Erwin's's little trap, allowing themselves to be diverted from the susbtance of this thread into the usual senseless fisticuffs.

Oh Martin. sigh. Where does anyone posit that class size is the only problem in schools? Can't you see that reduced class sizes means teachers can spend more time with individual children... maybe even talk to them and identify some of the issues they may be facing at home and in life?

"This article quotes six studies over four decades, plus a biased finding from someone in Kelowna. That's hardly overwhelming evidence. I bet there have been hundreds of studies, and someone with an opposite point of view could easily identify six studies also."

How many studies will convince you? Where are the six studies that counter the smaller is better proofs provided. Back up your statement... if you can.

Don't worry Name. I won't bother to respond to him again in this thread. I've made my point.

Martin, perhaps you should be asking instead why the Autistic child is constantly "screamng and shrieking."

Such behaviour is not a symptom of autism, it is a symptom displayed by any human being who's being subjected to intolerable circumstances.

Does the school have access to trained specialists: psychologist, behavioural consultant, O/T, SLP or special ed teachers with autism expertise to assess the problem and recommend adaptations suitable to this child's individual needs? Are there sufficient resource teachers, programs and trained aides to implement an adequate individual education plan?

That's all required under the School Act and provincial education policy that dates back more than a decade, but how many districts can afford to do all this today? Students with autism have been mainstreamed in our schools for almost two decades--why is it suddenly an issue?

Might it have anything to do with what the teachers have been trying to point out for the past four years--i.e. erosion of resources and restrictions on class composition leading to unamangeable classes?

Perhaps you're one of those who think it's a waste of time trying to educate such children in the first place, or wasting all that money on teams of high-priced specialists? You think it's cheaper to prepare them for a life spent in institutions, costing taxpayers millions each over a lifetime? Or better yet, setting them loose in the Downtown Eastside to provide fresh fodder for the pimps and pushers? You don't believe that a "screaming, shrieking autistic child" is capable of growing up to be a productive member of society, living independently, or semi-independently, with friends, career, etc?

What do you think Breanne Voth was doing before she was so cruelly attacked and killed? Or tens of thousands of others in her generation, who finally got to show what they could do when people finally thought to stop and ask: "Why are they screaming and shrieking?"

Name; That last ridiculous paragraph has put you in the running for the 'blather of the year award'. What a crock of shite.

Anyone with a modicum of experience knows that smaller class sizes result in better education (other things equal).

I believe in public education. Nevertheless, I put my children into private school when the public system (not in BC) was obviously failing in its basic educational task. Now, much to my distress (not just financial!), we have acceded to my grand childrens' request to switch to the private system. They felt they were insufficiently challenged by their BC public high school.

Smaller class sizes are already showing their benefits in terms of much more written work, and more interaction with teachers. Other factors are also in play, of course, including more value attached to academic performance.

An unexpected "bonus" from the switch is that the kids at their private school are far more culturally diverse than those at their previous public school.

I wish the voting public would stop being bamboozled to support inequitable tax cuts and the resulting poor public services -- and would stop forcing reasonable people to make choices which are so individually advantageous, but socially destructive.

Nemesis, I suggest some reading on the concepts of "functioning behavioural assessment", behavioural intervention, ABA, EIBI, the work of Dr. Ivor Lovaas, the life and achievements of Dr. Temple Grandin, etc. etc. A couple hours reading the volumes of Web material available on autism might arm you with something more productive by wway of response than "blather of the year".

Or go talk to any parent, teacher or individual who's been there.

...or not. You're also free to just close your ears and hiss "crock of shite".

Name, take heart, never a higher honour than being placed in the running for "the infamous blather of the year" award... from you know who.

It means you have written something truly commendable in its compassion.

Crock of shite.

The real problem here is not class size, it is the lack of staff to help support those children with special needs who are integrated into the classrooms.

That is what is overwhelming teachers and causing problems.

...so getting back on topic, why would The Sun's leadership choose to ignore all competing evidence on this issue and to highlight one side of the story so unequivocally? Clearly, it defies all rules of sound journalism, no matter which side of the debate you fall on.

The timing (just before the election), plus their record on partisan political financing, plus the infamous hysterical pre-election headlines linking an NDP victory to a BCTF strike certainly suggests a concerted effort to ensure a Liberal election victory by counteracting BCTF-led criticism of the Liberals' education record.

The Sun is a commercial enterprise that consistently seeks to market itself as a champion of public education. The record belies that, revealing manipulation of education issues for political ends--i.e. to champion the political party seen as most friendly to its own commercial interests.

It's just marketing and self-promotion -- nothing wrong with that as long as you see it for what it is and don't actually take it seriously. Trouble is, many people still believe the marketing and self-promotion stuff is limited to the paper's advertising sections.

nemesis ou are so right that the Canwest newspapers are a "crock of shite".

A week ago, our school principal talked about encouraging reading and used the Vancouver Sun's "Raise A Reader" slogan. It is sickening to just hear that slogan. Why do they bother with the fundraising campaign for the "Raise a Reader" program? Where does this money go? Can this be the same newspaper that encourages the BC Liberal policies that severely damage the public school system and gets rids of all of the school librarians?

The Sun and other Canwest media are more concerned with neo-con ideological purity than information.

Fortuantely things are falling apart for the neo-cons in that they have been so wrong on too many issues.

To name a few:

-Their support for George W.Bush has been betrayed over and over.
-Public health care is still cheaper than private.
-the wheels are falling off free trade (otherwise known as trading with the U.S. only)

If reading the Vancouver Sun, Vancouver Province, or Victoria Times Colonist is part of the reason why we teach kids to read ... ya gotta wonder.

With fewer students in the classroom, there might be time to discuss things like credibility, bias, and yes, malicious intent of big newspapers.

Just a few follow up comments: Nemesis wonders if the BCTF "throws any money at the Tyee," the implication being, I suppose, that the Tyee favours the BCTF because they are paid to do so. I suppose that wouldn't be much different than the Sun favouring the Liberals by leaking an editorial to Mr. Campbell about a so-called teachers' strike, an editorial blatantly designed to scare voters right before the election. But where is the evidence that the Tyee receives money from the BCTF? Without evidence, there is not much of a point here.
Ron Erwin would like to privatize the educational system and use vouchers. Mr. Erwin's comments reflect a wide-spread misconception based about the way in which the educational system in this province operates. Mr. Erwin, students in this province have had the right to attend any school they wish for quite some time now. When they go to their new school, the funding goes with them, just as a voucher would. Calling for a "voucher system" is meaningless in this context.
As for privatization, this is a good deal for those who have no children, or whose children have left the system, but terrible for everyone else, and for society as a whole inthe long run. Currently education is paid for on a basis requiring everyone to contribute. In a privatized system, only parents with children attending school would pay. The net result would be a huge increase in costs, as it will still require about $7,000 per student per year. So if you have three kids...do the math for 12 years. Of course the result would be that wealthy people would be able to fund a decent education for their children, while everyone else would be forced to pay through the nose, or accept a lower standard. Although the States is not completely privatized, theirs is a much more two-tier system, with the result that although they spend as much as we do in Canada, they are 26th on the list in world rankings of literacy. We are second as a nation, with B.C. being in the middle of the pack nationally. The pont of having a public system, Mr. Erwin, is to ensure that all people begin with an equal chance for a good education and a good job. This is actually a basic plank in the platform of Liberal ideology (not the "Liberals" in this province, of course. They are more neo-cons.)

Martin argues that the article names only four contrary studies. Actually it names seven, all of which are named by a professor at UBC. OK Martin, if it is possible, as you say, to find an expert who will support any point of view you like, find seven studies on the other side of this issue.

Of course size matters. Only a person with a small size says it doesn't.

How do I join CIRE?

Go teachers go!

I'm sorry. I obviously joined the wrong message board. I thought this was a place for reasoned comment by a variety of people. I see it is just a forum for specific people who like to thump their personal drums. To those of you who are able to ignore the lunatics, congratulations!

frank2 writes:

That is true, but other things aren't ever equal. The question for educational policy is, which particular measures will cause the most improvement in the education of children. Reducing class size, or something else? I agree with Ron Erwin that the professional development of teachers is usually more important, as is the creation of a positive, school-wide learning environment. By "more important," I mean one gets more bang for the buck. Class size is important, especially in certain areas (e.g., foreign languages, composition), where one-to-one interaction is essential. But in many subjects, it isn't. Whether a physical education class has 20 or 40 students probably doesn't matter. Of course 20 students are easier to control from a class management perspective - less work is needed from the teacher to keep the kids in line - and at a certain point there are safty issues. Still, one doesn't necessarily learn more in a smaller PE class than in a larger one. Courses that incorporate lots of lectures are another. Teachers are not hired to be tutors - they are hired to teach classes of students. But teacher unions will always push for smaller class size: while smaller class size means better working conditions for a teacher, it doesn't necessarily mean students learn a lot more, especially when other measures would be more proeductive. And a union cannot discriminate amongst their members. While the French teacher might have a sound educational case for teaching fewer students, the PE teacher is still going to want to teacher fewer children, and the union can't say no. Making classes smaller is _very_ expensive.

Both Mr. Erwin and NA are correct that class size is not the only issue in improving education. But it may be a necessary but not suficient condition.In other words, it may be essential to have smaller classes, but not enough. Further, both Mr. Erwin and DNA set up a false dichotomy-- either we have better teacher ed or smaller class sizes. Why shouldn't we have both?
As for the cost, we had smaller class sizes just a few years ago-- most posters to this site seem unaware that what teachers are asking for is a return to previous conditions, not an entirely new situation. The calculation by the government that it would cost 35% to institute the teachers' demands simply shows how much has been lost over the past 5 years. And perhaps it wouldn't be too expensive if the government would quit giving tax breaks to the already wealthy.

Class sizes do not matter, or at least on their own they do not. A boring (or any) teacher who sits their and lectures, with 4 x 5 rows of desks, doesn't matter how many students are in the class.

Someone tell me how a match class, with fewer students makes matters better or worst. What matters, is the baility of teachers to move out side of the box. I had a high school teacher who would make us rearrange all the desks into a square, so that we could all see each other, and could have active discussions. We got more out of it than looking at the backs of each others heads.

Whats needed is more flexibility in schools, and I think the BCTF is stiffling that. Rather than allowing parents and volunteers to come in and help with smaller work groups, they treat this as infringing on their jobs. Rather than looking at ways of rewarding good teachers, the union seems to press a single set of demands. Yes, they are concerned with job security, but I've seen a lot to get frustrated with.

Perhaps they are asking for more, but they convey their message wrong, and all we see is smaller classes and more money.

Hey, if you think small classes are expensive, try ignorance! The fact is that schools have become filthy, bare, devoid of resources and spirit.

Bill 12 my ass.
Teachers, it's time to walk.

"Whether a physical education class has 20 or 40 students probably doesn't matter."

It would have mattered at my school. We had one soccer field. It would have meant half as much time on the field with 40 kids.

Dangrice needs to go back to school and listen during his or her grammar lessons. He or she should also not be afraid to look up spelling. The BCTF is not conveying their message wrongly.

There are none so deaf as those who will not hear.

Why is it that everyone who has ever been to school, thinks that thinks that he or she is an expert on education?

Fact is the BCTF and their supporters have failed big time. Jinny Sims blew the bugle and has lost.

Instead of doing things logically, step by step, the BCTF tried the big blast concept, but the fuse failed.

Class size just does not matter!

Don't think they're done just yet, but any action will be absolutely meaningless now, especially if it's deemed illegal. Can't garner support that way, but they'll at least have their day in the sun, so to speak. This group, initially led by Chudnovsky, has been itching for a strike for years. They're some ticked off that they're not going to get it.

"Class size just does not matter!"

Then we only need to keep one teacher. And either some really big buses or just give every kid a computer and have that teacher make an Mpeg of every one of his lectures. I'm sure it'll work out and we'll remain near the top while at the same time saving a fortune.

Ah Phude no like me spulling... BTW, using "he or she" in a sentence is utterly annoying, no matter how grammatical it is.

The reason all who have gone to school can count themselves as experts, is because we all have experience. Personally, I am going on 18 years of experience in classroom settings, (regardless of whether I proofread before posting on a message board).

Putting limits on class sizes isn't the answer, however, bringing more creativity to the process is. The call to strike has little to do with helping students.

If and when this legislation is passed Teachers will not go back to work. The Liberals are dreaming.

Teachers: It's time to walk.

It's better to die standing and fighting back han to live on your knees.

Thursday is the day.

Stay tuned.

And we're not talking about a silly-assed one day strike! Teachers won't come back until bargaining rights are restored.

The ideal is 1:1. Quality of education decreases from that point.

But now that teachers have been legislated back, even though they never did go on strike, I sincerely hope they stick to the absolute letter fo their contracts, and volunteer nothing extra-curricular.

It's about time parents sweated a little over their own kids.

Perfect! Teachers stick to the absolute letter for their contract, and we can reinstall the volunteer system of parents and interested folks.

A thing that the BCTF also does not like!

dangrice said:

"Personally, I am going on 18 years of experience in classroom settings"

Grade 10 can be a bitch eh? Keep trying!

Seriously, how about I come by and volunteer at your job? In fact there's four of us willing to do so. Turns out we won't need you in six months though. Better update that resume. Try to think it through OK?

Dangrice: On what basis do you believe that the BCTF is stifliing flexibility in schools? The fact is that they fund educational workshops that encourage new teaching methodology all of the time; furthermore, they have demanded teacher autonomy in contracts, a clause that protects teachers who wish to try out new ideas. Putting desks in a square is old news, by the way. Your vision of a regular classroom is 25 years out of date.
As for their being afraid of having volunteers in the schools,you have confused CUPE with the BCTF-- it is CUPE's members who will lose their jobs, not teachers. Teachers are quite happy to have parents and others come to help out with extracurricular activities. This would lighten the load on teachers who took up that burden 30 years ago because not enough parent or volunteers would get involved. Now parents think this is something that is demanded in teacher contracts, and for which they are being paid. And to add insult to injury, misinformed people then come along and claim that teachers actual don't want volunteer help. Jesus wept. Can't you guys get any part of your argument right?

Oh and by the way. Some time ago I asked Martin to give us seven studies that demonstrate that class size is not important. So far no response. Those of you who keep insisting that it is not, can you come up with six studies that support your position? Five? If not, then most of your posts are based on lack of evidence, aren't they?.
And by the way (again), the issue is not whether every class will be restricted by limits as to whether it is alright to go by an average size in a district. Right now if someone has a class size of 23, then someone else in the district can have a class of 37, in any subject. Limits that were imposed to restrict numbers in academic classes have been thrown out the window, along with the contract. Frank 2's comment implying that all classes will be the same size because the "union can't say no" relfects a complete misunderstanding of what the BCTF is actually trying to bargain for-- a situation that would resemble what we were able to fund quite adequately just five years ago.
And if you wonder why all you hear about is class size and pay, ask the Sun and Province why their coverage is so superficial.When you realize that the same people who fund the Fraser Institute also own both newspapers, and support the Liberal party, maybe you'll begin to udnerstand what's actually going on.

Today's Vancouver Sun (Letters) tells us that the CBC lock-out really didn't matter because actually things got better "with BBC News instead of Canadian News" etc.

Why would they print such rubbish, I wondered. Then I remembered. CanWest Global, which owns the Sun, Province, Times Communist, BCTV, Global TV etc., stand to gain a benefit from kicking the CBC when it's down. Surely that's profoundly unethical.

Then I began wondering why the Sun had rushed into print with that cockamamy story last May about BCTF taking a strike vote (they weren't) right at exam time (and Election time). Now they're crowing about the big hammer pounding teachers down with back-to-work legislation. Why? This one, I absolutely don't understand.

Any answers?

"Perfect! Teachers stick to the absolute letter for their contract, and we can reinstall the volunteer system of parents and interested folks."

Sdgreen is under the misconception that teachers and the BCTF do not like volunteers. I am a teacher and I value my many parent volunteers. Parents are needed for help in the classroom, fund raising, p.r., PACs, coaching and chaperoning just to name a few. What I don't need is someone who went to school, who now thinks they know everything about what goes on in a school, to come and tell me how I should do my job. That would be like me approaching anyone in any position, be it a police officer, a Starbucks emplyee, a nurse, a chef, or an air-traffic controller and telling them how to do their job. Its arrogant for anyone in the public to believe that they know better. If in fact they are so sure that we are overpaid and underworked why don't they become teachers and join the big party?

By the way Dangrice, I have spent 33 years in an education setting, and I don't profess to be an expert teacher. I am still learning as are most in the profession. And believe me, the system is flexible and will continue to be so as it always has.

It is forced to be due to under funding

My five cents worth.

"No matter how hard you try, you can't bend a cracker." - Charles Shultz

A hypothetical situation that I hope never happens:

The function of teaching AND tutoring students would be left to private school teachers, and their title would change to Teacher-Tutors. Kids sent to private school could be considered in need of tutoring, not as bright as the public schooled kids rising to the challenge of the new education system.

All the public school students could revel in the similarity of their situation with that of university students who receive little one-on-one attention and have large class sizes. We could call the public schools "university-style", especially when there are lots of students needing language or learning assistance.

Wait, can elementary and secondary students handle the responsibility of being entirely in charge of their own learning? Most university and college students take a year to adjust, and only the most academically apt ones hang in. We need to develop a new economy that can use the services of highschool dropouts for this vision to be successful.

Clearly in this vision, everyone who was friendly and servile to our neoliberal masters would become rich and well-employed despite their level of education or skill - just look at Paris Hilton and Barbara Amiel..... or at least favoured servants, if they weren't born into the hierarchy. Cunning and self interest seem to be what the current government is aiming for as a provincial social policy.

Ahh, yes, teachers are looking forward to striking because strikes are just like vacations, except without pay or a definite day when work starts again, oops, maybe teachers don't have it so easy after all and a strike isn't something they all wish for all of the time.

Phude says

... and that tells it all! Teachers and the BCTF think they are the Commanders in Chief of the educational system. That notion can not be tolerated.

The fact is that the parents and the government set the educational standards, not the BCTF or even the teachers. Teachers are hired to provide education based on approved curriculum. How the teacher accomplishes the impart of knowledge is no mystery; the process has been in place for a considerable length of time.

Teachers I have contact with indicate that the most difficult part of teaching is when they first start. Once they have established lesson plans for a given subject, the rest is relatively easy.

The major issue, aside from remuneration, seems to be teaching resources and the difficulty with the integration of special needs students.

Remuneration for teachers ought to be a set piece solution, with possibly with ongoing cost of living allowances from time to time.

The resource issue, in theory should not be a problem. School Districts are suppose to provide text books and other resources. I do think that the School District system is wasting a lot of funding on non-teaching items and administration.

The special needs students is an issue that clearly needs to be reviewed. Clearly if this is a problem creating a major burden on teachers, a new system is required for these students.

I still say that sufficient funding is provided in the education system. I am not convinced the funding is properly allocated from the school district system to the class room.

As usual, we have the neo-con crowd blathering on about things they know little about.

I teach in a BC high school, and can honestly and accurately discuss the importance of class size limits.

DNA begins with an idea that is partly correct when he states that class size issues vary across subjects, but he blows it using the PE example. PE class size should be determined by two factors: facility size and the numbers required for the game or activitybeing taught or played. In our school, we have several PE classes that have 36 or 37 kids in them. This is not a problem if the unit happens to be dance or distance running, but if the class is playing basketball, too many kids are sitting on their asses at any given time. Our PE teachers are excellent, but their abilities count for little if the numbers are awry.

And the same would be true in any business. Could one cop police all of Surrey on her own? (No problem, Ron Erwin might say, if she is a good one with lots of training.) Could a highly skilled waitress provide the same level of service to ten tables as she could to only five? Perhaps. But if we added another table each week, eventually the service would suffer, regardless of her skill level.

I teach English. Some posters have argued that class size doesn't matter in a lecture hall. This is true; I could deliver the same lesson to a group of a thousand kids in a packed theatre. However, if I am also asked to mark their work, tabulate grades, tutor at lunch, accept late-night calls on the homework hotline (Really, folks, I provide this well-used and well-appreciated service.), then the thousand-kid-class is a strategic problem.

What matters to an English teacher most is not the total number of students in any particular class, but the total caseload for all the classes combined.

Our district used to have contract language that recognized this: 30 kids per English class (shop classes and science labs were held at 26); 190 kids total enrollment.

Now, thanks to Liberal legislation eliminating such limits, I struggle to stay on top of the pile -literally.

But guess what, Ron? I have not increased my hours worked at all. That's right. I am sticking to the 50 -55 hours per week that I logged before the barbarians came to power. And that means the only people getting ripped off are my students. I used to assign 33-36 tasks per term, but have cut back to 27-31 tasks. Fewer assignments for my students = less marking for me. Problem solved, right?

Wrong. I didn't solve it. I passed it along.

Some time back, Fiat Lux posted in these pages a comment that went something like, "there are no cost savings, merely cost transfers..."

Now I know what he was talking about.

By the way, who is going to lobby the government on my students' behalf? Where is their big organization? Oh that's right... they don't have one.

Hell, even the parents lack a provincial voice, their P-Pac practically non-existent.

It's a damn shame the parents don't have their shit together on this one. Without them, the only group advocating for my kids is - by default - the BCTF.

It is simple

With the same quality of teacher and materials, would you pay $1200 dollars to attend a course with 50 people in it or 10. Nobody would take the 50 person class, because they want their monies worth, which they would feel the 10 person class would give them.

There are a lot of things I would like to fix in the school system, but it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out the effect of class size on quality. Classes should be as small as we can afford. The investment in our youth will pay off down the road.

1) Class size doesn't matter:
Ridiculous: Then why not one teacher for the whole school? Why do people pay for private schools and one-on-one tutoring if individual attention isn't important? Are they seriously denying the validity of market forces?

2) 40 kids in PE class is fine
PE class is hardly the same as math or language arts, where one teacher with a Grade 4 class of 30 kids (incl 3 special needs and 10 ESL) can't cover the curriculum while stopping to help all those different needs.

3) Allow parent volunteers
Our PAC can't even get more than 8 or 9 parents to show up for eight 90-minute PAC meetings a year after working hours -- we've tried wine & cheese, brownies, provocative topics, hyperbole, you name it! Why must parents do teachers' work for free? Do we expect patients to administer their own flu shots? How many of us are qualified?

4) More training
That's part of the answer and they're already doing that. The BC Liberals invested in in-service training, but far more is still needed (except the same critics also oppose funding this!). And no amount of training will enable one teacher to individually attend to five needy kids with five different problems at once.

5) Other factors are more important
School environment and parents' education levels may/may not have more impact than class size--depending on the intensity of each factor in each child's case. Thus blanket statements about what's more important are nonsensical. The education system can't change a kid's parents, nor the tough neighbourhood in which a school is located. But it can provide extra attention for struggling kids, via smaller classes and/or more support staff. (Except the very same crtics oppose funding that as well-- e.g. inner city program cuts!)

6) Put the needy kids somewhere else
Part of the reason we integrated them in the first place was to cut costs. Apart from the futility of trying to deny a fundamental Charter right, it will cost even more. Why do we think districts have slashed many of the great programs that were already in place?

The bottom line is these things all cost money: whether smaller classes, training, more support staff, extra supports for inner city/ESL/special needs kids. How about higher wages so working class parents can afford to volunteer in school or take the kids to the Art Gallery; or more funding for quality preschools & early intervention for 7,000 kids with special needs currently waitlisted, etc (They cut those too!)

The bottom line here is people who just resent contributing their tax dollars to public education, despite having benefitted from an education fully paid for by other taxpayers.

Dress it up in neo-conservative ideologies, circular arguments or just plain hissing and spitting but fundamentally, it boils down to a very simple and not very admirable human trait.

if the teachers don't like the wages here there are lots of other places they can work, Alberta is hiring and the americans are always looking for proffesionals they can get without paying for their education.

I know a few nurses working in Kuwait, one will be able to retire in a few years on the money she is banking, the other has her house paid off and is working to pay her daughters way through university.

More then a few tradespeople I know are working in Africa making good money and if they stay away which they will for a year or more they don't have to pay taxes here, that is incentive enough considering how us working people are subsidizing the rich and the corporations and the beating our environment is taking thanks to a government who supports business without any consideration for future generations.Good for the cayman account I have no doubt.

Wouldn't mind paying high taxes if they were going to our social infrastructure instead of corporate welfare, hell even milke the taxpayers rhetorical pit bull was whining about corporate welfare in yesterdays times colonist, didn't read it but I sure heard about it.

If I was a teacher I would be heading overseas and to hell with el gordo and his neocons.

Yikes! The utter horror of imagining SDGreen setting the curriculum for my kid -- or anybody's kid!!

What fools would waste good money hiring professional teachers if they think they know as much or more about their field of expertise -- i.e. education? Would anyone seriously suggest allowing SDGreen & co to establish medical protocols in hospitals? Good grief!

Teachers take heart. Many, many parents see the work you do, the extra time you spend, the challenges you face and the dedication that makes a difference in your students' lives, and we respect it. Many, many citizens who don't have a direct stake still understand and value the benefits to the greater society of a strong public education system. Heck, even the outside world recognizes this--Vancouver was just voted top city in the world and our education system was part of it!

What we all have to worry about is counteracting the barrage of nonsensical propaganda from the tax cutting lobby, especially as they clearly also control the agenda and tilt of the MSM.

...and if any doubts remain about the real rationale for The Sun's position on class size or my earlier reference to the tax-cut lobby controlling the agenda and tilt of the MSM, here's a little gem from "The Gazeteer" (http://pacificgazette.blogspot.com/) posted on Sept 29th.

An alert reader submitted the following quoted from a job ad for a new Editorial Writer for The Sun's sister CanWest paper, the Ottawa Citizen:

"The successful applicant should be an elegant writer with a commitment to the principles of small government and individual freedom."

To mangle a well-worn quote: It's all about the taxes, stupid!

I really think the neo-con position on education, whether it be smaller class size, the right to strike, or essential service legislation etc. has at the core nothing to do with a concern for education in the least.

What is at the core is their belief that nothing must disrupt the work day world, the corporate world of 9-5 and beyond.

Anything that threatens this becomes a target...so the daycare teachers provide ( babysitting for the children of working parents) can not be disrupted because this disrupts the neo-con's paramount concern which is, of course, the making of money.

Unions that protect teacher's rights are seen equally as a threat because with rights you have the power to disrupt...whatever you do in BC ...do not disrupt the making of money.

It is a cardinal sin against the religion of Greed now worshipped and practiced by the BC Liberals.

That is why the greatest crime of the present government besides the ruthless garage sale sell-out of BC has been the utter deterioration of human rights in this province, whether it be rights for health workers, for teachers, for seniors, for the poor, indeed for all citizens of this province.

When people have rights, they have power, and this government does not want people to have power, only corporations are to be so entitled. With power you can disrupt and as I have said above disruption to the making of money, no matter at what human cost, is now prohibited in BC. The worship of money has led to Governance by Greed in this province.

Nothing else really matters.

Certainly there is no longer governance for the people, people and the concerns of people no longer matter in this province, only capital and the concerns of capital do.

When it come to capital, (and its interests) for the BC Liberals, there is only one sign on the door: "Do Not Disturb".

nothing else really matters.

So the Ottawa Citizen is hiring someone committed to "small government and individual freedom".

This is earth shaking, Canwest is going to change the party it supports. The only party that fits this description is the Greens.

Conservative "social agenda" conflicts radically with the "small government" part of the job requirement.

Name' give me a break, we already pay about 65% of our wage in taxes, ( all taxes ). Are you saying this isn't enough ?
I don't begrudge education, but we also need to pay for healthcare , CBC, Indians and soon Public Supported Daycare.
When is enough for you?
I can't take it anymore, I am taxed to death.
The state cannot be expected to do everything for you. Take care of yourself for a change.

God, I'm sick of seeing that name and that malicious effort to inspire oppression.

Shouldn't there be some sort of quota on any commentor to a single topic? After which he's entitled to have a thing or two chopped off without anaesthetic.

Ron, don't for get to add paying for the business entertainment deduction(subsidies for hockey tickets and restaurant meals) and paying for seminars in the caribean.

Oh, I get it. You only oppose programs that help everybody instead of the business elite.

Here's a disconnect I don't get: if teachers are an essential serice, they why aren't they paid well? If education is essential, then why are classes a reasonable size? If literacy is at the top of Mr. Campbell's agenda (he was selling the Vancouver Sun for Raise a Reader Day-- seems fair: they sold him during the election) they why don't schools have enough librarians, ESL and learning assistance teachers? Apparently education is essential, but not important.

the right wing zealots don't seem to mind when it is corporate welfare or they are getting a big chunk of it but look out when it involves a union getting a raise.

maybe if the state wasn't so busy taking care of the parasites at the top of the porkbarrel we wouldn't have to pay so much in taxes!

Ron, if you're just looking for a tax break, quit the hypocrisy of pretending that your arguments for bigger classes have anything to do with the best interests of our kids or society!

...you're paying 65% in taxes? That's only remotely possible if you're actually a talking SUV and you're referring to your gas bill.

Ursus: which parasites do you mean, the corporate welfare bums like the oil companies who are still be given taxpayers' money while earning record profits, or the students who keep demanding taxpayers' money to pay for librarians ELS teachers and learning assistance? It's clear which ones the government favours, isn't it? The question is, which ones do you?

SD Green:

It's the school boards, not the BCTF. Ever heard of the word liability......? You wanna sue grandma if little Janie or Johnny scratches their precious self............?

BC Mary:

You will note that none of the "neo-cons" (more like neo-lithics, I would say), are volunteering to teach their own kids............

... and it's also the parents, RickW. Try even getting them to show up for the odd PAC meeting in the schools that need their help the most! Or imagine the outcry if other parents found out that some SDGreen type was volunteering to take care of our precious little Janies and Johnnies!

The BCTF are a bunch of whiners. Historically class sizes were always way larger than what they complain about today, and back then they actually took turns supervising recess, lunch, and after school as well. There was ONE librarian in your school period. There was no such thing as support staff unless you count the janitors and the lone secretary who usually worked out front of the Principals office.

Back then teachers made nowhere near the money they make today, and they worked way harder. All of a sudden things today are terrible? What a joke. About the only change I can think of between than and now is what NAME said, nowadays special needs kids are placed in the classroom and in the old days they were not.

Most of the teachers I know say this is the biggest problem, having a small amount of students take up way to much of their time at the expense of all of the other students. Something they see as unfair, and hence why there are the calls for more support for special needs students. Unfortunately the BCTF says anything but this and makes up BS like education funding has been cut when in reality more of our tax dollars are being spent on education than ever in history. Where did all the money go you ask? To the BCTF wages, another reason why the Union tries to lie about that fact. Their wages helped to create the situation they now complain about. It is crap and it is time it changed.

Mr. Irwin: I have more sympathy for your position than some others here, I think. Yes, we do seem to be taxed a great deal. The question, however, is one of economies of scale. In the States, for example, people pay less in taxes for health care. But if you want care equal to that in Canada, you have to pay for private insurance. They have a larger population, so economies of scale ought to work in their favour. But the United States actually has a lower standard of care in general than Canada, unless you can afford very expensive insurance. Privatizing health care has not actually worked in the States, and the reason is that private companies have to make a profit, while public ones do not. Public ones may run a deficit, but that's not because they're inefficient, but because they don't pass on all costs to the public. So if you're worth millions and can afford the private system Ron, go ahead and pay. But in the end, you'll still pay at least as much as you might here in Canada, where we have tried to bear the burden equally.Previously I pointed out to you that privatizing education was not a good idea either. You have never responded to that post.Have you never considered that the public system, both health care and education, are actually quite workable for the average person? Have you never wondered whose interest it is in to have you believe otherwise? Is it in your interest?
Oh and by the way Martin: the ante is now down to only four studies that support the other side of the class-size debate. Any takers yet?

"The BCTF are a bunch of whiners. Historically class sizes were always way larger than what they complain about today, and back then they actually took turns supervising recess, lunch, and after school as well. There was ONE librarian in your school period. There was no such thing as support staff unless you count the janitors and the lone secretary who usually worked out front of the Principals office. "

Teachers "back then" didn't have to deal with the amount of ESL students they do today. I'd also bet there are more special needs students now too.

Off topic: I have a theory about people who are unreasonable in their criticism of teachers and the profession. It's pent up hostility from a bad experience with a teacher(s) in their youth. Maybe they were given the strap one too many times. I heard they used to do that in the "good old days".

Switek claims that "Historically class sizes were way larger than they are today." No they weren't. If you go back to the 1930's and 40's, yes. But when I began teaching in the 70's, I had a total load of 120 students, with 14.5% prep time for three different courses. Last year I had 205 students, 12.5 % prep time, and 5 different courses to teach.
Switeck also claims that "Back then teachers made nowhere near the money they make today.." Hard to say-- certainly we make less money than we did a few years ago, if you take inflation into account. If you do the actual numbers, a teacher today is about 12% behind what he/she would be making if we had just kept up with inflation. If you go back to the 30's and 40's, yes we make more money, but most people do. And now all teachers must have degrees and teaching certificates, which was not required before the 1970's.If you want to see what happens if you don't pay teachers properly, or hire people without degrees, have a look at Mississippi or Alabama. They rank at the bottom of the US in terms of literacy rates, and for good reason. You want a good education system? You're going to have to pay for it. The good news is that the higher the literacy rate, the better off society is economically, every year of education for the general population translating into higher wages, higher taxes, and more general revenue. Education is just a good investment.

Switek, don't forget to include ESL as an added challenge -- 80% or more of students in many Vancouver schools today are ESL.

Plus ALL intermediate classes of 30-34 kids at my kid's school are split across two grades -- i.e. the teacher is teaching two grades at once.

Plus a typical elementary school is lucky to have even a half-time librarian these days.

Plus, having learned that we can teach even the most severely challenged students, we're now obliged, under our own Chater, to provide that education at great cost (though nothing like the lifetime costs of institutionalizing them in the old days!). And their numbers (e.g. autism) have been rising at alarming rates, no one knows why. And yes, the BCTF have spoken out repeatedly and strongly for more special ed funding.

Plus it's a far more demanding curriculum: kids today must cover more ground more quickly than ever.

Plus all the added demands of accountability and performance measures -- all that extra data to collect and report to the Ministry now.

You suggest we're spending more on education today than ever, but more compared to what?Spending as a percentage of GDP? Spending in real inflation-adjusted dollars? How much is going to teachers vs the billions being spent on computers and IT networks because society wants kids to be computer literate? How much are teachers earning today in real dollars compared to the past or to other professions that require similar preparation? Are we now doing to them what we did to our nurses in the 80s and 90s--and is it worth the pennies saved?

Let's consider all this before jumping to blithe assumptions based on what we recall from the good old days.

"I can't take it anymore, I am taxed to death."

Do avoid the hyperbole Ron, you're getting our hopes up.

I agree, rjay, the public doesn't really understand what we all get back from investing in a strong education system.

Look at any of the countries with top-notch public education systems and you will see what they have in common -- a higher standard of living.

Then look at those that have not invested heavily, either because they couldn't afford it, or they had other priorities like tax cuts, or because they just didn't want educated masses thinking for themselves

A few comments. First, I appreciate the responses. Second to verso, you are absolutely correct that we did not have ESL students in our classes, heck, back then we didn’t know what an ESL student was. Other than first nations, we only had two non caucasian kids in our entire school.

Next to rjay. I can only comment on my class sizes, however they were indeed much larger than today. Every class I was in had over 30 kids, every single one. As for money, I can’t make one of those accountant inflation arguments that suggests you only make $ 2 a year based on real inflation, but I can say you got more money under five years of Campbell than you got under ten years of Harcourt/Clarke/Miller/Dosangh that is a fact. And don’t take the BCTF position that you gave up money for other things because you never gave up anything, you were always LEGUSLATED back into work much as you are now.

You also ignored my comment that back in my day, teachers were expected to do ALL supervision and they did. Something they do NOT do now.

We also had strikes in my day as well, but I will save that story for another time.

The really funny part ? I always really liked ALL of my teachers until I got older in life and discovered the BCTF

Teachers at most schools supervise the kids before and after school (until the current job action) and they also organize and supervise extracurricular activities during lunchtime and after school (which they are still doing even with the job action, because I just picked my kid up from a sports meet entirely organized by teachers at 4:45 pm!)

I understand the point you're making that some things must have improved over the years, but hopefully that's something that we can say for every other working individual and it's certainly no excuse for the general erosion of services seen in our schools in the past decade.

NAME, you raise a valid point about funding. One of the problems is the amount of games being played about how much we taxpayers spend on education. What bothers me is that what we spend is often distorted to make a biased point. There is no doubt that we spend more on education today than ever before. That is a fact, and a fact that taxpayers DESERVE to know.

The REAL question we should be asking is, Is that amount we spend enough? Evidently you talk with anyone in the BCTF and they say NO. But as taxpayers we have to look at where our money ends up. Over the first term of Campbell MORE money went into education and that is a fact. Likewise MORE money ended up in teachers pocketbooks, that is also a fact. But for some reason the BCTF tries to lie and hide from this fact. This is wrong. Why is that? Why does the BCTF try and distort the amount of taxdollars put into education?

Switck: Actually, the deal reached with the last NDP government went like this: the government offered $300,000,000 for education, and asked us how we'd like to spend it. We accepted a 0-0-1 percent increase in pay, so that we could afford to fund ESL, librarians and Learning Assistance teachers. The Campbell government offered us 2.5% per year over three years (the inflation rate), but didn't increase funding (remember?) The result was that all of the ESL, Librarians and Special Needs teachers were laid off by school boards because there was no money to pay them. So we gave up a pay raise to help kids, and got kicked in the teeth. And now we're told we're greedy.I'd be happy to accept a 0-0-0 percent increase if they'd put the ESL and Learning Assistance teachers back. But they're not doing that either. Instead, I have to deal with kids who ought to have extra help, but can't get it because I'm fighting to deal with 33 kids in my smallest class. Meanwhile, the government just gave another tax break to corporations. What's wrong with this picture?

A couple of questions for rjay…if you made a deal with the NDP, as you claim, why then did the NDP have to legislate that contract into effect? Secondly, you NEVER gave up the 7.5% raise as you have suggested. You in fact got that 7.5 % increase and cuts were made in other areas, by school boards I might add, to fund that raise. And no, I disagree, more funding has gone into education. The biggest mistake that the Liberals made was putting more money into teacher’s pocketbooks. Evidently a mistake they will not make again. The BCTF would like to have their cake and eat it too. Has everyone forget that even the NDP election platform called for NO MORE money for teachers ?

Switek: the NDP legislated that contract because it couldn't be made at the table, the reason being that the bargaining arm for the government (Principals and Vice Principals) refused to bargain, and had managed to stonewall the process to a deadlock. To avoid a strike, the BCTF agreed to the contract as I have outlined. As for the 7.5%-- I never claimed we gave it up. You may have been misled by the way I put it. In order to finance the 2.5 % (which was a legislated settlement, again because the Principals/VP's wouldn't negotiate)the Boards were forced to lay off techers. The BCTF was never given any choice in the matter.The pay raise we gave up was the 0-0-1 percent in order to hire needed teachers,(by which I mean we could have taken the $300,000,000 for ourselves, but didn't) and in the end, we didn't get that potential pay raise or the teachers we helped to finance until the Liberals got in. In other words, they took back the deal that we had previously negotiated, downloaded the costs for the new deal onto Boards, and left techers with a 7.5% raise over 8 years, but no supporting teachers for kids.Over that same period, the cost of living increased by approximately 20%. Does this help?
As for more funding going into education...sure, the actual dollar amount has increased, but by a factor less than inflation. The real kicker here is that as the teaching population ages, the costs for salaries increase because of the way the grid is set up. I'm sure not one person in ten understands that teachers are not paid their full salary for up to ten years after they have been hired, thus subsidizing the system. The result is that if new teachers are not hired, the average salary increases as older teachers move along the grid.Combined with inflation, this means that you will indeed pay more, but less than if we just acted rationally and hired young teachers, and tasxed corporations appropriately.
By the way, you may be wondering why this has been happening lately. No one seems to remember that Bill van der Zalm took the power away from local school boards to tax corporations in their district. He centralized the system, and put the entire burden on the backs of taxpayers. Then when school boards bargained with their local unions (which they had done without many problems for over 60 years)the Boards were unable to meet the financial obligations because the province wouldn't fund the contracts, nor would they bargain in good faith at the table. Teachers are forced into legislated contracts because van der Zalm screwed the system, and no one has the courage to fix it, in fear of upsetting big business. Nor will the Sun or the Province tell you this, because they are big business themselves, and are supporting the Neo-Con agenda. So teachers are painted as the bad guys for sticking up for kids and demanding fair treatment.And guys like you, who have no other source of information than the local media, get conned every time.

Erwin, up until now, you were simply a philosophical and political buffoon, putting big scowls on the faces of those who take you seriously, and little smiles on the faces of others like me.

But now you are an economic buffoon, too! So you pay 65% of your wage in taxes? Are you a fool or a liar?

You need to talk to my accountant. In 2004, I pulled in roughly $235 000 from all sources. I got taxed quite heavily on the $70 000 of that that I earned as a teacher, but I payed little on my dividend income, next to nothing on my foreign investment income, very little on my unsheltered capital gains, and absolutely nothing on my sheltered investments. And 2005 looks to be better!

I do everything that the law permits: deduct, defer, distribute and divide. I figure that my tax bill was roughly $61 000 last year (sales taxes are always a guestimate), and that works out to a cool 26% or so.

What seems odd to me is that my tax bill is determined more by my spending decisions than by my income. This year, we are building an addition, and my accountant tells me that diverting this money from the investment portfolio will have serious tax repercussions! Oh well.

Are you sure that you paid 65%????

Ron, get off your lazy ass and get down to the accountant's office and get this damn thing fixed.

Send me your resume, at

. I'll talk in over with management and see if we can find you an opportunity. I generally put in 9 hour days, with a 10 minute lunch break. And call into work on my 2 weeks a year of vacation. However, if you want to put me out of work, you may want to talk to one of my competitors, work your ass off and win over some of my businesses. Just a not though, in my job your paychecks can vary by a few hundred $$ a month, but then again if your willing to volunteer it won't matter anyways.

If thats the case, I apologize greatly. I really said that BCTF may be doing a poor job of getting their message out, and thus it may be the case. However, of course if CUPE was to go on strike over such issues, so would the BCTF. So its not us, its them, really doesn't cut it. Which is an another issue all together, with how the word "solidarity" can be some self interest gets in the way of the greater good.

Hey, nor would I. However, you can't say the rest of us have no right having an opinion. I'm not sure how telling me the system is flexible due to underfuding helps your case. Its similar to Davie Boy, mocking neo-cons, and then stating he earns 70K as a teacher by engaging in seedy tax loops left in due to howe street lobbying.

Really, all of us respect teachers, except when the word strike comes up. Someone else was saying right wingers should offer to home school their kids, but that was exactly what a strike would force everyone to do. We're not talking about unsafe working conditions, we're talking about teacher walking off because the government caps their pay at 66K. I think the slaries for teachers now are excellent, and their entry wage is what I may be lucky to make in the next year or so. If they want to make more money, take those 20K in raises they get over the first 10 years and take an MBA course, or put it aside and start your own business. If its sensible measures they want, resources for classrooms and other issues, drop the wage demands and focus on those issues. However, educational Strike's do not hurt the wealthly, the upper eschelons, they don't screw the governments, or shut down commerce. They don't hurt single 25 years old such as myself, and they don't hurt small businesses owners who can bring there children to work, they hurt young parents who aren't that well off, the single mothers who cannot afford to miss work, and the kids.

I hope the teachers show some cajones and walk off the job for a while.

Not only am I appalled at the Liberals war on labour and working people, but I would really enjoy the extra time with my kids.

I wonder what Christy Clarks' position is. She is technically unemployed so wouldn't she mind the extra time with Hamish?

Go teachers go!

Dangrice: you work only 9 hours a day? That's about 45 hours a week. You realize this puts you 10 behind the average teacher, never mind a new one (more like 70 hours a week). Two weeks holiday? That's what I got when I first worked for the bank 30 years ago. Sounds like you need a union to protect your rights.Are you working to live or living to work?
As for the volunteer issue: my point was only that teachers don't mind volunteers helping with extracurricular work,because that isn't done by CUPE anyway. As for help in the classroom, CUPE doesn't help there - they only photocopy and type exams (or they used to before cutbacks-- now they work for administration most of the time, and teachers do the photocopying themselves). As for parents in the classroom, I've yet, in 29 years, to have one parent volunteer his/her time to help out. If some did, I would probably spend more time training them to be useful than they would be worth, unless they were willing to stick it out for an extended period. So this is basically a non-issue.
Martin: OK, we're down to only 3 studies supporting the class size issue.All I ask is for 3. Haven't heard from you in a while-- are you waiting until we get to two?
Ron buddy, where are you? Your boys are getting an ass whuppin' here.
And by the way, the Province is asking on-line for a vote about whether the government was correct in legislating teachers back to work-- so far 75% against the government. Go to the Province website to vote.

Gee thanks Dan, but I have a better deal where I work. I put in my years of volunteering at the start of my career when I was younger and more willing to be exploited in exchange for education and opportunity. I'm sorry my sardonic response went over your head.

BTW, I know spelling doesn't count here in the forums, but you've got one on your website. Perhaps you should run your copy thru a word processor with spell check before you post it for the world to see? Free advice, consider it my little act of volunteerism to 'supplement' my karma.

peace out

To return to the original topic .. I simply cannot understand how my 9 yr. old son can see that smaller class sizes are the best for the students but all these adults can't. I guess he spends more time in BC schools than some of the posters here??

And surely you must agree that there are huge safety concerns involved with a class of over 30 students in a PE or shop class, for example. A friend of mine who loves to teach shop is forced to do more paper and pencil assignments rather than hands-on due to safety concerns.

In regards to parent volunteers ... BCTF doesn't allow parent volunteers, huh? Tell that to the parents who volunteer to run our Speech Arts program, Jump Rope for Heart or the parents helping to coach sports. And whoever said it before was right. It was CUPE who protested the use of parent volunteers. I just checked with a CUPE member.

If I recall, the whole deal between the NDP and the BCTF angered teachers immensely. We felt like it was a backroom deal and we were sold out. I'm almost positive that wasn't a legislated contract. It was a deal made immediately before an election to avoid having education as an election issue.

I'm not even going to begin to get into the whole issue of inclusion of special needs children. As you can see by my sign-in name, it's a subject near and dear to my heart. Yes, inclusion is far more expensive than segregated classes. Yes, the research says inclusion is beneficial for regular and special ed. students alike but ONLY WHEN IT'S PROPERLY FUNDED!!!

And you know what? I'm tired of being told I'm overpaid because I chose teaching as my profession. Any of you could have decided to be a teacher. Many teachers, including myself, worked our way through university so you can't use tuition costs as an excuse. I'm sorry that some of you don't like your job. I'm sorry you don't make as much as some teachers do. But (and ohhh my mother would kill me for saying this) suck it up. You want the summers off, the pay cheque, the disrespect, the honor of helping a child learn to read, the overcrowded classrooms, the beautiful smiles of a child who finally "gets it", all the extra work at home during the evening and on weekends, etc. etc. etc. then go for it. It's a wonderful job when the government isn't busy undermining everything you are trying to achieve for your students. So come on .. what's keeping you?????

And Jeeves, I sure hope the teachers "show some cajones" too!!!!!! We will know soon enough!!

Newsflash: just checked the Province website again: an hour ago, it was 75% support for the teachers. In one hour, the numbers are now 53% against. This poll has been going on all day, and within an hour, a huge swing. Any guesses as to what's going on?

Just your normal everyday Province readership. They finally finished the entertainemnt section, which is pretty much the entire paper now, and started browsing.

Dangrice, you are 100% correct when you state that this strike will affect some people more than others, and you correctly identify some of these groups, such as single moms and small business owners etc.

But you should also realize that this strike will affect some teachers much more negatively than others. Some of my colleagues (but not many) are still at the "double debt" stage, paying off mortgages and student loans. With one spouse taking a few years off work to mind the infant children, this strike should hit them pretty hard.

Other teachers are in their final years, putting together their "best five", so as to maximize their pension calculation in retirement. Any days lost to a strike will hit them twice: they will lose pensionable time, and they will lose on the "best five" base calculation. In other words, this strike will give them a permanent reduction in their pension.

Despite the circumstances described above, these teachers voted overwhelmingly to take job action, and their decision comes as no surprise to anyone who has taken the time to find out what the issues really are.

As for your assertion that teachers' wages are "excellent", I suggest that a more appropriate adjective would be "mediocre". Many of my friends earn what I consider to be "excellent" money as bankers, lawyers, physicians and small business owners, and unlike some posters on the Tyee, I don't begrudge them a cent. But my teaching income doesn't come anywhere close to theirs.

On the flip side, some of my neighbours earn considerably less than I do, something I remind my colleagues about when they gripe about their "lousy" teacher's salary.

Dan, no matter how this mess gets sorted out, the correct adjective will still be "mediocre".

Will the outcome of the strike have a significant effect on my financial picture? Not much. I spent some time in my twenties earning better dough, and invested it well. I was also fortunate to inherit a few shekels along the way. To top it all off, I married a lass as Scottish as me in the penny-pinching department. Suffice to say that I'll come through this strike just fine, thank you.

As to your suggestion that I was mocking the neocons, please let me clarify: I was mocking Ron Erwin's outrageous assertion that he (and others) are paying 65% in taxes. If that were really true, I would abandon my post here in the political center and become one of the neocons leading the charge.

I mocked Ron's comments because they were truly mockable, as all his comments are. But I do not wish to mock all the neocons found posting on the threads of the Tyee. The dialogue sinks too low already, it seems. I would prefer a higher level of debate.

Besides, I'm an optimist: I figure there's always a chance that one of them might rise to the challenge, and bring some real thought backed by evidence to the table.

Will it be you, Dan?

rjay, you know that internet polls are VERY far from accurate, don't you? Anyone can vote as many times as they want. All you have to do is hit the back button.

I had a wonderful conversation with a parent of one of my students today. She has a child with special needs therefore she knows the truth about the lack of supports for special needs students. She told me "you teachers do what you have to do for our kids. We're behind you 100%!!!" And I voted exactly the way that parent (and many others) have urged me to do. BCTF didn't encourage me to vote one or the other. A parent who knows the facts did.

Thanks for the info spedteacher. And here was me thinking that the Province had fixed the numbers.Perish the thought.

Yeah, Ron's statement is a little over the top. The upper brackets only pay up to 42% in taxes in BC. Of course whn you realize that 12c of every dollar you spent goes to PST and GST, that number gets up to 50%. And I've rented for the last few years, so I'm not sure what the average property fax is. I guess if you add another 3-4% in propery taxes. Perhaps another percent or two if he drives a lot, maybe another if he smokes or drinks. So my estimate is, no more than 55-56% in taxes.

Unless he lives east of Ontario of course, where their income taxes are 8% higher.

rjay: hee hee well we all know that the media is always honest, don't we? I posted the link to the poll on our union local's chatboard. You will find that the results have changed a tad Last time I checked the vote was: yes = 29.72%; no = 70.28%

Why get lost in the standard education polemics?

The big picture is that the corpratists like Milton Friedman want to increase the market for private schools by making the public school system dysfunctional.

He is quoted in Bakan's The Corporation

So, the strategy is create a dysfunctional public education system which forces more parents to send their kids to private schools run by education management organizations. Again in The Corporation, Michael Moe of Edison Schools predicts that in 10 years 10% of the $800 billion education market in the US will be privatized.

When the Harris government was elected in Ontario it was the then neo-con star's Education Minister who was caught on tape saying he wanted to manufacture a crisis in public education in order to further its privatization.

The Liberals will win this fight if their agenda is to deliberately mismanage public schools is not highlighted. Watching the debate on Bill 12, I think some members of the Liberal Party do not believe in this fight.

Dangrice, your calculations might work out for someone earning (and spending) roughly 100k per year, but the truly wealthy enjoy income streams from several sources, and many of those streams are taxed at a low rate or not taxed at all.

If one can earn a quarter of a million and pay only 26% tax, how is it possible for Sun editorialists and others to throw around numbers like 42% or 55% or 65%?

I'll tell you how. They don't actually include all the income. It's not a total lie, really, but something I like to call a lawyer's lie, sort of like Bill Clinton saying he didn't have sex with Monica Lewinsky.

Trust me, if one has assets and a decent accountant, one need not fear the tax collector too much.

If someone out there is getting stiffed by the tax man, it's someone whose entire income consists of "earned income" listed on a T4 slip, and who never buys an RRSP or opens an RESP for the kids.

Granted, that probably describes a lot of people.

name:

It's actually all the parents' fault. If they didn't have kids in the 1st place.......
I went to some PAC meetings ('way back), where, out of a school population of some 500 there might be a dozen parents. Then, all that talked about were ways to raise money to make up shortfalls in budgets.............
Now all parents want (it seems) is one-on-one with teachers, to make sure their special little Janie/Johnny is receiving the personal attention the little genius deserves.

65% that's how much tax I pay. When is tax freedom day, sometime in late July.
PST,GST,income tax. There are taxes on everything we spend money on. Gas, food, booze, smokes, movies. Are people not aware of this ? I think you are hopelessly naive or stupid.
Again, I am not begrudging education, it just seems to me that it should be privatized like everything else should be.
The statist system is now toast.

RickW, your portrayal of all parents today wanting one-on-one for little precious is unfair.

My child is severely challenged. All through the intermediate grades, he's been in split classes of 30 - 33 kids, 85% of whom are ESL. He's not the only one with special needs in the class.

His Grade 4 teacher quit at the end of the year--she was a rookie teacher and simply couldn't handle it.

Apart from some support from a school-based resource teacher and part-time aide, he (and his teachers) get no help. When he started school 7 years ago, the district had dozens of specialists--access to speech therapists, O/Ts, psychologists, a team of autism specialists, behaviour specialists, intervention programs, etc etc -- almost all was wiped out from 1999 to 2004 and we are just now starting to be slowly restored.

I've just paid over $2,000 out of my own pocket for a psycho-ed assessment that the school is supposed to fund, but can't afford to, to provide some expert advice for the teacher on how to meet his learning needs. I also provided a laptop (which the schools used to provide for kids with writing challenges). I spent all of one summer re-teaching Grade 4 math and work part-time so that I can spend hours each week supporting the school and helping at home so that my child can keep up. (How many other parents can do this to ensure their kid gets a fair chance?)

Through all this, my son's teachers have had varying strengths and weaknesses, but the common factor has been their dedication and commitment to making it work despite all the challenges. And we have made it work -- my child is keeping up and even getting the odd A or B.

Yes, some of us parents are spolied, selfish, demanding people who will never get enough. But the problems that the teachers and moderate parents talk about are very real and very complex and deserve our attention.

My goal at the outset was that my child would grow up and be able to take care of himself and work for a living and pay taxes like everyone else -- he will not be a burden on society. We just need a little more help making sure that also happens for the kids of other families who can't afford to contribute as much of their personal effort to helping the teachers tackle these challenges as I can.

Mr.Irwin: You keep insisting that everything be privatized, but you haven't responded at all to the criticism I made of privatized education, or the fact that American health care is not delivering the goods as well as Canadian, in spite of their economies of scale.
Ultimately what's wrong with privitization of all goods and services is the notion that a solution that works well for some things, like selling pizza, must therefore work well for all things, like education and health care. But there is a distinction between personal and public "Goods". There are some things that we ought to pay for privately, because only we are affected, and we choose to buy that thing. But there are some "Goods" that concern us all in a community of shared values, such as the future of our children, or the health of our neighbours, just as we have a shared interest in maintaining our freedoms against oppressive governments or big business. Working out which "Goods" ought to be public and which private is a political issue, but philosophically, those who feel that everything ought to be private are as mesmerized by ideology as those who feel that everything ought to be public. In both cases, a simplistic view of the world leads to an unworkable and detrimental situation. Would you, for example, privatize the police force, so that you had to pay a private firm for protection? Suppose your police force and your neighbours came into conflict-- how is that to be resolved? Do you think the justice system ought to be privatized? How about the fire department? That's been tried, actually, in London in the 17th century, when only certain homes were protected. It led to the Great London Fire of 1660, which destroyed most of the city. Firemen refused to put out buildings of people not covered by private contracts, and so the entire city burned.
Ron, sometimes my personal fortune -- and yours -- is tied up so intimately with my neighbours, that it is my interest, as well as theirs, that we share the burden. I suggest you read The European Dream, in which the author points out how the Europeans are forging a new kind of state, one protective of individual rights as well as of communal "Goods". Over the next ten years, they are positioned to surpass the Americans in the production of goods and services, while maintaining individual freedoms in a way that is being lost in America. You have to understand that Neo-liberalism, or Libertarianism, is ultimately a return to 19th century values. They didn't work then, and they won't work now.

rjay' I am not backing down, statism has to go.
Screw Europe, I don't see their model as sustainable. They are already killing millions of Africans each year by subsidising farmers in France and Germany to grow wheat and sugar which means Africans market for these products is limited.
They basically are disfunctional. The only light at the end of the tunnel may be Germany, where a right wing party the Chritian Democrats may have unseated the leftist party.
The medical system in the USA is far superior to ours. Where would you go if you had a choice for medical care ? Tge Americans pay for medical insuranc, we pay in taxes.
131 billion dollars is the budget for this year. That roughly means the average Canadian is paying more for medical care than an American.
We will never surpass the Americans in GDP or productivity the way we are going.
So, I stand by my belief in privatisation of everything we possibly can.
50% of Canadians work for the government. That's 100% more than should.

Ron: Read the book. Europe is already economically surpassing the States in many key fields. As far as America goes, they are financing their lifestyle by borrowing money from the Chinese, who are also poised to pass them within ten years. In fact, American foreign policy is now severely compromised by their debt to China. As far as medical care is concerned, I'd go the the Mayo clinic if I had something that couldn't be dealt with here, and if I had the money. But that's not the point: many Americans don't have the money, and can't go to the Mayo either. Go and check into where America sits compared to the international figures, and you'll see that it's not even near the top in terms of patient care per dollar spent.
But you still haven't responded to my point: would you actually privatize the fire department? How about roads? Do you really want some large corporation owning the road you drive on, able to boost the cost of travel anytime they wish? How about the air you breathe? It works great if you have lots of money and can own things, but what happens to people who aren't rich? The gap betwen the rich and poor in America continues to grow, as it does here. There are only two possible outcomes here: continued oppression using technology to create an Orwellian state in which rights are completely curtailed (a road down which the Americans now seem headed) or a revolution. As a Libertarian, why would you want either situation?

Stop it Ron! Your bitter polemics are so funny I might strain a gut muscle laughing and then I'd have to go get physio. You don't want to be responsible for more taxpayer $$$ going down the drain I'm sure.

Rjay' yes I would privatize the fire dept. and everything else I could. I don'e believe in the welfare state or staism.
You see, I am for the " fair tax " system.
The fair tax system is a consumption tax of 23% of every penny you or anyone ( drug dealers, Hells Angels ect.) spends.
I guess you could describe me as a libertarian extemist.
Just pushing the debate way to the right, hoping it ends up somewhere right of center.

"Rjay' yes I would privatize the fire dept. and everything else I could."

Rent "Gangs of New York" for an example of just how well a privatized fire department (doesn't) work.

What's wrong with the Wright Report? Or should I ask, what's right with the Wright report. Both warring sides seem reluctant to endorse it which suggests to me maybe Don Wright is actually on to a better way of doing all this.

(I think his name is Don Wright...)

When all the babble/venting etc subsides the people of BC will still have the MAIN responsibility for the education of their children and will need to make things better.

Sorry Ron, but on the issue of health care costs the evidence is piled against your position. Try googling health care costs and benefits international comparisons, and read the first article that pops up. The OEDC study shows that over the past 20 years or so, America has produced the most expensive health care system in the world without becoming the most effective, costing twice as much as the system in Switzerland, for example, per capita. And all of this happened while privatizing health care, because private costs soared by 34% compared to only 22% for public care.
What you have to start asking yourself Ron is who has managed to pull the wool over your eyes (and many other Canadians-- and Americans) so effectively, and for what reason? For a guy who values his freedom so much (as I value mine) you are being controlled quite easily by corporate interests. If you truly believe what you're writing in your postings, that is.

asher writes:

The big picture is that the corpratists like Milton Friedman want to increase the market for private schools by making the public school system dysfunctional

.

To which I completely agree. While you are discussiing the implications of class size at one table, the BC Liberals are sitting at another completely different table. They don't give a damn. Face it.

All parts of the public sector from health, education, child and senior care are just a front now. Like an empty store front in a stage set. There is hardly anything behind them. They exist at the bare minimum the government can get away with...because they choose to place tax dollars elsewhere...which is in the hands of corporations.

They have made the public system intentionally dysfunctional; to destroy it and to allow the grip of privatization to take hold almost effortlessly.

Nothing in thie province is about education or health care anymore, it's about the making of money at any cost.

Face it. The deliberate mismanagement of our public sector by the present government must be brought to light.

You are going to have to escape the sanctuary of safe discussions....this government is not listening and has no intention of doing so...they have a privatization agenda to fulfill. Teachers, nurses, seniors, workers of all stripes are going to have to walk, to protest and make their voices heard.

Are you watching the legislature's question period on Bill 12? This arrogant government and its finance minister are refusing to answer questions. Read the hansard.

No, this is about the making of money at any cost...at the expense of teachers, health care workers, children, seniors, workers of all kinds...

At the core, it is about our loss of human rights, folks.

Time to take a stand.

Ron says the Europeans

Ron, that really is a bit alarming -- this degree of twisted logic, muddled facts and fuzzy thinking is not normal. Africans are dying because they don't have enough food at the grassroots level -- a tragic problem with complex roots. (Granted, aspects of Africa's history of European colonialism has a role, and granted that easier access to wealthy First World consumers can produce foreign exchange to buy imported goods like cars and TVs--which opens up other cans of worms).

But if African villagers had the capacity to produce tonnes of food commodities available for export to Europe, don't you think they'd eat it themselves instead of starving?

Looking outside, you can't just blame Europe for famine and poverty in Africa--Canada's policies of "tied aid" are just as harmful and US protectionism on imports like sugar, cotton and softwood lumber is no different.

Meanwhile, European political leaders are leading efforts to actually do something about Africa, whereas the US is leaving the task largely to Hollywood and the religious zealots who are withholding funding for condoms and preaching abstinence as the solution to AIDS.

Unbelievable:

What is most frustrating to me to watch is that, in the public sphere there is little or no debate and the Sun, unlike even the Globe and Mail(which is far from perfect) continues to publish opinion pieces as news and editorials then based on few, if any, facts. The question seems simple. Do you want to pay for some thing through a public system to provide a public good and provide a societal benefit (the original purpose of piublic education) or to produce a population capable of succeeding in the new global environment (the new purpose as you would find in Ireland which has greatly expanded its education system) -or do you not wish to pay for it? The Liberal government has successfully sold the idea that you can have your public service without paying much for anything. BC has, relative to the rest of Canada, and indeed North America, a starved public sector which has been cut to where the bones are failing (look up economic comparisons on this). Yet incredible tax figures are floated as fact. Even "dangrise's" calculation earlier is flawed as it uses the highest marginal tax of 42% or so. This is marginal, not total. for example at approx $100,000, the total income tax paid should be a little over $25,000, not $42,000 (42%) that conservatives float around. Do you want your taxes to pay for "high quality" services or not? That is the question.

Privatized organizations exist to make a profit and there is nothing wrong with that. I will place my investments with the organization that will generate for me the best return within keeping with the ethical guidelines that I set for my investment dealings Where we have a big problem is with politicians and members of the public who lose sight of this purpose of private sector business and have some idea of business altruism, that business is there to provide service, at the highest quality, based on need. Sorry folks, if this were the case AIDS would never have spread in Africa and most of the housing in the lower mainland would be "affordable" for all.

Public education in Canada was set up to provide education for all. I cannot think that teachers who feel undervalued, totally disrespected and severely overworked can, no matter how committed they are, provide high quality service.

On a final note, I fault neither the teachers union nor the employers association for acting in the way that they did. They played by a script that was written four years ago. The gov't had the opportunity to declare education truly and essential service (like firefighters or as it is in Manitoba) but they did not as it would have required binding arbitration to settle disputes, something the government did not want because teachers would probably be awarded a large raise based on comparitors in Alberta and Ontario and have similar working conditions imposed.

Think about it folks, there is no free lunch!!

October 5, 2005

ROBBINS Sce Research (1998)
robbinssceresearch.com

For immediate Release-

Glen P. Robbins President and C.E.O. of ROBBINS Sce Research (1998) is calling into question the motivation behind a well known Vancouver radio station’s decision to include an unscientific poll from their on-line website, into their regular news.

Robbins says “I don’t think it is fair, and it certainly does not help advance the debate, when a well known radio station’s on line news includes a potentially bias web poll as part of their news, particularly when terms like ‘wild cat’ are used.”

Adds Robbins “CKNW is one of a number of news agencies where parents of school age children may go to, in order to get information about school schedules, walk-outs etc. It is a little ironic that this ‘news suasion’ is being published two days before Friday when it is expected teacher’s will walk off the job in protest of Bill 12 legislating BC teachers back to work. Some of the parents who may not normally listen to or view on-line CKNW might be influenced by this so-called poll.”

In addition Robbins is concerned that this type of undue influence incorporated in news texts might denigrate the legitimate news. “CKNW’s listening or on-line demographic likely does not reflect a random sampling of respondents throughout the region, or the province. Most legitimate news on line polls includes a disclaimer that their polls are not unscientific. Few, if any use them to constitute honest to goodness news stories as CKNW has clearly done here.”

Glen P. Robbins

(604) 942-3757
-30-

I heard the report you're referring to Mr. Robbins. Like you I was appalled at Mr. Good's blatant barracking against teachers. For someone who should be setting the standard, his clear bias was absolutely inexcusable. A public retraction of his statements (which were not presented as part of an editorial) would be the least he should do. I expect however, that nothing will be done. That kind of blatant bias is proof-positive that the only way we can have good journalism is to make sure public broadcasters remain well-funded and answerable to no master but the public.

Stump'Forget it, toast the CBC, they only aswer to the Liberal Party of Canada. Do you think they are going to bite the hand tha feeds them ?

Ron:

Do try not to be an idiot. The CBC (and publicly funded arts/culture) has been around for a long time (under governments both Conservative and Liberal) and has given this country much more than HNIC. I would think for someone living in the past you might remember such stuff, but alas, it is not to be. I'd go to the trouble of pointing out specifics from the CBC's groundbreaking programming choices and the NFB's enviable record of international awards, but you'd have to pull your head out of your ass to watch those things and frankly that seems rather unlikely.

That's FOX News and the Republicans you're thinking of. The USA's version of Pravda.

Frank' we don't get Fox Cable News ( we report, you decide ) in Canada. But that aside, there are hundreds of choices for news. You can find any version you want. Isn't this wonderful ?
And Stump, I wasn't putting down the NFB, it was the CBC I was putting down.
I agree that the NFB has made some good films, but as I sit here now, I can't think of any in particular.

"we don't get Fox Cable News ( we report, you decide ) in Canada."

And yet you've memorized their slogans.

I saw the CKNW report and thought: "Hmm, sleazy, but I didn't think they'd be that blatant."

By the way, The Province online has been running a similar poll that's seesawed wildly back and forth for the past 24 hours as the antagonists rally their forces to block vote.

Fox News is available in Canada. See

http://www.shaw.ca/en-ca/ProductsServices/Television/ChannelsInMyArea/Channel+Descriptions.htm?theme=specialty

Re: CKNW. I heard this morning on the 8 o'clock news too and couldn't believe my ears. There was no mention that the poll was unscientific and that is open to manipulation. I've filed a complaint with the CRTC and would recommend others upset by this do the same.

The CBC is the most respected news agency in Canada. They have a mandate to cover all points of view. Compared tothe private media who tend to be slavishly devoted to the conservative party.

The first place everyone applies when they get out of journalism school is the CBC.

What's the big deal with the CKNW story? They were simply reporting what their website poll indicated. This entire teacher action has been so predictable for so long it's embarrassing if you're an adult. What a bunch of bloody fools. An illegal strike that will only make just about everyone in the province think you're a bunch of self-centred greedy whiners because no one's believing the rhetoric about doing it for the kid's sake. You don't shut them out of the school's for two or more days if you really feel that way. This walkout will definitely hurt the students who must write provincials this semester. This year that includes not only the grade 12's, but some grade 10 and 11 courses also. Thanks a lot Jinny. You're brilliant!

I am so proud of Jenny Sims and the BCTF. Go teachers go!

Thank you Jeeves.

The Freedom Train is leaving the station. All unions get on board!

Hmm, didn't Gordo sell that train off already. Well, either way its going to run on private tracks.

Those tracks aren't private Dan, they're only leased for 999 years :)

Schools can't find enough math/science teachers today. There are English majors and "nothing" degrees aplenty but there is a surfeit, ergo they don't get these teaching jobs.

A 90.5% vote indicates a real problem. Teachers feel bullied into a corner. That said, what will the governments response be? You cannot use "the law" as a blunt weapon and expect people to respect you or the law.

So - start over. How about a real negotiation? How about becoming parteners in education instead of treating educators as lackeys?

The next few days will show if the government is interested in public education for all or primarily interested in shifting education costs to the private sector. For the sake of the province, I hope we'll see a renewed interest in education. Seems to me that the future success of the province depends on it.

name:

I know it is. But we seldom ever hear from those parents who DO participate. The whining that is reported is invariably some form of "what am I going to do with my kids"..............

God forbid that (these) parents actually take on the responsibility of raising their kids 24/7......

Sue Clark:

Is there a fantasy channel where I might find it?
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/08/23/franken_fox/index_np.html

"What's the big deal with the CKNW story?"

Bill Good said according to a CKNW web poll 17% supported a wildcat strike. He then went on to say, that means 83% of you don't. No mention of sample size, no option of 'undecided'.

Shoddy, agenda-driven journalism is an insult and a disservice to us all.

Does anyone remember the parting words from our former premier, Mr. Dosanj (forgive me if I spelled his name wrong) when Mr. Campbell won his first election as Premier? Mr. Dosanj looked directly at the camera. and said;

"Mr. Campbell; My advice to you is: "Don't pick a fight with the teachers of this province."

I think Gordo should have listened to him!!!

"What's the big deal with the CKNW story?"

What Stump said.

CKNW never refers to online polls during newscasts. During their talk shows, sure, but never during the news. There was no mention that the poll was unscientific. Had that been mentioned, I would have had no problem with it. When you have ever heard a poll cited on the news without details like sample size and a plus or minus for errors?

Citing the poll was misleading. There is no credible news room that would let something like that fly. Public opinion may or not be against teachers but cknw can make such a claim based on that poll.

Should read, "cknw can make no such claim...

Notice that the BCTF has quite conveniently failed to mention how many teachers actually cast a ballot yesterday. They made it very difficult to vote. Rah-Rah Rally first in a central location and then a vote. I'd wager only about 50% of teachers actually voted.

Actually nemisis the turn out was 80%, that was on the news this morning. Thanks for coming out.

October 6, 2005

ROBBINS Sce Research (1998)
robbinssceresearch.com

For immediate Release

“The Robbins final solution to the education problem and teachers strike in BC”

Glen P. Robbins, President and C.E.O. of ROBBINS Sce Research (1998) claims to have the solution to BC’s education system woes and to the teacher’s strike, and it can be implemented by the end of today to avoid any further disruptions.

Wages:

First of all the government solves the wage problem by giving teacher’s a yearly raise based on the cost of inflation. Secondly, because a number of other BC groups like government workers, are looking for more money, I would tie the teacher’s wages to the government’s current zero dollars mandate (no money), so that is no longer an excuse on the government’s part. This means the teacher’s new contract would commence at the end of the zero dollars mandate, a number of months from now. Teachers would abandon a retroactive pay increase.

Non-Wages:

First of all education one size fits all policy in Victoria is not workable around the province. There are 50-55 school districts each with different needs. The teacher’s want a global amount per student and ROBBINS has determined this doesn’t work. Why do we have school boards and trustees who are elected?

Have each school district be accountable. This means providing a composite of their school district for government. How many children our regular learning, how many are gifted, how many are special education and how many are aboriginal? The regular children should get money from the Ministry of Education, special education and aboriginal children should get money from The Ministry of Children and Families, and gifted children should get money from Advanced Education.

What are you thinking?

The government has proposed an Industrial Inquiry Commissioner. These folks are responsible for safety in the workplace. This won’t work. Minister De Jong, Premier Campbell, BC Liberal caucus what are you thinking? The government’s plan won’t work, the ROBBINS plan will!

Helpful hints

Schools do not need to have more than one Vice-Principal and one Principal. One and one-half teachers, or two and one-half teacher’s assistants could replace each additional administrator in schools. There are too many superintendents or assistants. Each one of these means two teachers or three teachers assistants. This adjustment would place 20-30 new teachers or 30-40 teachers assistants on the front line. The taxpayer needs to pay for deployment of services to children.

Global accounting

We need a solution to the education problem today, not tomorrow, and not weeks and months from today. The government may believe it stimulates the economy with tax subsidies to business, however ask any retailer at the local mall or in the community what these types of community disruptions can do to hurt their business. During a strike the teachers, parents, and children aren’t the only ones who get hurt. If it’s a global economy than it is certainly a global community! What about the parents, who cannot find someone to look after their children, who need to go to work to pay their bills? Will these children be left at home alone? Perhaps the Industrial Inquiry Commissioner could look into this!

Glen P. Robbins

(604) 942-3757
-30-

I think it's an abuse of this forum to post press releases. Am I alone in this?

Nah, Stump, it's not an abuse of this forum, but I'll grant you that these convoluted pieces don't flow or fit well.

Abuse or not, the numbers that come to my website, and who receive my comunications and I imagine the numbers who read the Tyee's, will do significantly more to advance a conclusion to problems, than (with all due respect), often recycled theory or world views.

We are a (mostly) Conservative Research group with a number of very talented people who know and understand government, both here and in the United States. This last press release (as most do)are presented under my name. In the past, my associates, some who have links to organizations which by publishing their name, could in fact cause them potential harm.

The concepts are often put together by others, and than I challenge them, and in these last two cases cobble together a press release based on a combination of what we believe to be the facts and of course some speculation on our (my) part.

When the press, stakeholders, and interested parties receive this press release, no matter what they might say or think about it, they cannot ignore it, because this is the way politics in this day and age is going. The mainstream press is crude in its influence of public opinion because of their relationship to money. We have a different relationship to money which makes us far less captive to special interests.

I am bias in saying this, but I think the opinions which flow from the press releases become much more centred, and in fact they are less convoluted. Much the way a therapist helps to keep a group focused and not to wayward.

Look at those pieces which precede the CKNW press release and those which follow.

I believe it would be better to critique the solutions provided in this last press release (obviously these are special circumstances) based on your particularly level of Erwinization, rather than drift into esoteric commentary about whether or not I can play in the sandbox with my choice of toys.

An interesting concept, perhaps we should start a new thread on how to solve the pending impass that the BCTF and BC-Liberal Government find themselves in.

I for one can think of one or two legitimate ideas that would save the government $150 Million over three years which would transfer into a 2% pay increase for the BCTF.

Anyone interested in starting such a thread as opposed to beating each other up on this one?

Nice response, Mr. Robbins. You're right about one thing: the mainstream media cannot be trusted, and this is likely a result of its connection to money.

"rather than drift into esoteric commentary about whether or not I can play in the sandbox with my choice of toys."

I just think it's a bit opportunistic Mr. Robbins. If it were a Reuters, or CP Press, or any well-known organization's release forwarded by a third party, there's no apparent conflict to me. I feel like you're using the forum to publicize your little-known group. My opinion. Apparently I'm in the minority. So be it.

I appreciated your reply, RickW

...by the way, folks, the CKNW poll is now running at about 30/70. Are they going to change the story & headline every time the partisans rally their troops enough to shift it a couple percentage points?

And I'll be visiting the picket line at our school tomorrow to support our teachers. They have supported our kids and our schools--as individuals and yes, as the big bad BCTF. Yes, there go more billable hours down the tube but many things are more important than money.

Nice try verso, but the actual number of ballots cast was 20,545 out of a total of 42,000 teachers. That translates to 48.9%. Of those who voted 90% said yes, which means that only 44% of teachers actually voted to strike. Pretty grim. No wonder they didn't publish the number. Thanks for coming out verso.

name:

Bring muffins! When the nurses were on strike, they qite liked the muffins I dropped on the picket line. Teachers strike (pun intended) me as being of similar cast......

nemesis:

Gee! No one seems to get too excited by similar stats during elections..........

"Nice try verso, but the actual number of ballots cast was 20,545 out of a total of 42,000 teachers. That translates to 48.9%. Of those who voted 90% said yes, which means that only 44% of teachers actually voted to strike. Pretty grim. No wonder they didn't publish the number."

Funny how a survey that polls a few hundred people and is accurate within a few points 19 times out of 20 is considered pretty fool-proof, but a sample of nearly half of those eligible to vote somehow becomes skewed.

Perhaps you can explain that discrepancy please N?

Actuallly, I'd sooner Mr Robbins explained it. He seems far less agenda-driven.

Well, I don't know about other locals around the province but we had a turnout of almost 100% from teachers in my town. Yes, the vote was done quickly but I, for one, appreciate that it was done at all. We already had an 88.4% mandate, after all.

Please recall what happened to the hospital workers. The province was set to go out on a general strike and their Executive settled. This made many of their members very angry. (And they still are angry according to the people I spoke to at the hospital today who are more than ready to go out on a general strike). To avoid that, the BCTF Exec. has made the committment that there will be no changes to the job action until the members have had an opportunity to vote. That is why the vote was conducted at General Meetings as opposed to individual schools. It had to get done quickly to give parents lots of notice, after all. This is true democracy in action. Maybe the Liberals could take a few lessons???

The ad the Liberals placed in newspapers around the province cost $150, 000. Can you calculate how many teachers, or teacher assistants, or textbooks that would have bought? Why aren't people complaining about their tax dollars being used for that?? Yes, BCTF has put out an ad too but that was paid through union dues paid by teachers ... not tax dollars.

Paid for by teachers whether or not they support the actions of one of the most extreme left-wing executives the province has ever seen. The reason only 49% of teachers voted province wide is because the BCTF made it difficult to vote. The teachers that I know would much rather do it at their schools, thereby ensuring a stronger voter turnout. Many were too busy with commitments to vote at a distant location between 5:30 and 7:00. The opening of the polls was preceded by a ridiculous pep rally, where absolutely no options were presented, and the president of their local broke down in tears and got a standing ovation just before the polls opened. Is that democracy your style sped?

nemesis:

And labelling a profession "essential" is?
Just what does that mean in a democratic society?

Now that you've got your quick and easy answer out of the way N, perhaps you can tell me why the vote really isn't representative? Every teacher pro or con faced the issues you mentioned, yet the vote was overwhelmingly in support. Are these people mindless drones? I don't think so.

FWIW, I'm wondering what the legalities of holding a strike vote on the employers' premises are. Do you think the employer is going to volunteer a meeting space for a strike vote? Doubtful don't you think?

It was in a school gymnasium bright eyes.

Were all the teachers allowed to vote? Is so, those that chose not to have no choice but to abide by the wishes of those who did. If 10,000 people had a vote on an issue and only 1 voted,then the result would be 100% and the 9,999 who chose to abdicate their responsibility are SOL. That's democracy.

p.s. umslopogaas Ron didn't get it. Must have been to hard to comprehend....

I can't explain the discrepancy between the turn out numbers, except to say that the number I gave came from Simms on cknw the morning after the strike. I won't defend the 80%. If I'm wrong, then I stand corrected.

"the teachers that I know would much rather do it at their schools, thereby ensuring a stronger voter turnout. Many were too busy with commitments to vote at a distant location between 5:30 and 7:00. "

I have no sympathy for teachers who didn't vote. There was at least 24 hours notice that a vote was coming. If those who didn't vote didn't think it was important enough to postpone their other engagements that's their problem.

Of course, you assume those who didn't vote, were against the strike action. I'll make no assumption either way.

"It was in a school gymnasium bright eyes."

Well, there you go.

Now, why was the vote not representative of the whole?

The vote was conducted so quickly in order to provide members with an opportunity to vote under a time crunch. As said above, all teachers had the opportunity to vote. Personally, I was rushing around like mad trying to finish some applications for teacher assistant support for some learning disabled students before the strike started and I had to go for surgery. The applications need to be filled out because there is inadequate funding to provide support for these students through our regular school budget. I also had another meeting after the General Meeting held in our local. And I had to find daycare for my son. I had all of those things to do yet I still had time to vote.

I am not positive but the number of 42,000 teachers in this province is misleading. One teacher on our list is on leave and in Ontario. Obviously, she is unable to vote. Other teachers who didn't vote in our local were those working as TOCs. Most TOCs in my local chose not to vote although they were informed of the vote by members of our local Executive. I am sure similar situations exist around the province. That being said, our local had a turnout of almost 100%. One of our teachers had to go to a funeral that afternoon and couldn't make the meeting. She went out of her way to ensure that she had the opportunity to vote. If she could do it, I'm sure that other teachers who chose not to vote could have done the same. They just chose not to exercise their right to vote and sorry, I don't have sympathy for them.

To the best of my knowledge, there is an agreement between school boards and the BCTF that union meetings can be held in schools. Now that we are in job action, our local will be using union halls to conduct any meetings. Members have been informed of that already and will be reminded again when the time comes to vote again. I believe that this is democracy in action because the BCTF is going out of its way to ensure that ALL members have the opportunity to vote each and every time the job action plan changes. If they choose not to vote then that's their right but they shouldn't blame the BCTF for that.

When Bill 12 was announced, I saw teachers crying in the staff room too. I also saw some teachers who are typically very quiet become very angry. Many of our teachers who typically stay at school until 5:00 or 6:00 left that day because they wanted to go home and cry out of frustration. Don't tell me that the BCTF dictates what we as teachers do. We are not blind. We see the situation in our schools firsthand and it means a great deal to us to protect our students and our public education system.

I'm off to hobble around on picket duty now! Thank goodness the rain stopped!!

goat dancer:

The exception (naturally enough) being civic, provincial, and federal elections. The first is considered "successful" when it achieves a 25% turnout. The 2nd and 3rd used to be in the high 70 percentile, and is now fast approaching 50%. Yet the innumerable polls that are taken (I suspect) do not first ask a participant whether (s)he bothered to vote before offering opinions that help shape policy. Thus, the precedent has been set (many, many times) to allow non-voters the same privileges as voters (especially in civic elections).

Thus, your "argument" does not hold water in this, the greatest of all democracies (where, as is said in Uganda: "We all have our say, but they [government] all have their way.")

Listen up, all you right-wing inclined folk! Unions, however forthright and/or corrupt they are perceived to be, are absolutely necessary in this adversarial society of ours, as the ONLY marginally effective counter to the big business-government cabal. Government (by which I mean the political parties that form it), when required to choose between serving the people and the interests whereby their funds come from, ALWAYS choose the latter.
In this society, the only counter to the power of money is the power of numbers.

I ask this question. What size school is large enough to have a full time librarian. My school has 400 students across seven grades, plus it's a dual track french immersion school.

How many days do you think the library is open? Come on... how many...?

The answer. Three. Is that good enough for a government that professes a commitment to literacy?

Three days. With 400 students. And over half of them are under 10 years of age. I'm staying out until Campbell puts something on the table that I can vote up or down as I see fit. If 50 percent plus one are favour, then, and only then, will I return to work. Brace yourselves for a long one. Campbell doesn't get. De Jong doesn't get it. Teachers have had enough. Fine us , jail us, we are out until something is put on the table and we vote it up or down. If we vote it down, we're still out.

It's all in the government's court, now.

Good one, Matelo!

Wonderful to read teachers' comments in this commentary section of The Tyee.

Yesterday a teacher-friend was telling me that she teaches 9 classes, with about 30 kids in each class.

Good luck, B.C.T.F., for a better future.

Sorry Mary, but your friends full of it. Secondary teachers teach a maximum of seven.

nemesis, you rude toad.

Did I say she was a Secondary teacher? No, I didn't.

So, apologize. Not just to me, but to every teacher trying to remember the names of 270 kids as well as their special gifts or needs.

Last week I heard a girl on the bus talk about 2 classes she goes to with a class size of 42! Anybody who thinks a teacher can manage 42 hormonal boys and girls is absolutely nuts. Back in Ireland in the 70's the biggest class i was ever in was 33 and that broke th guidelines. It was 30 max.
And the teachers there get paid for the summer holidays too. And thats probably normal for europe. Someone told me teachers go on the pogie over summer. Are you crazy in BC? You lose a good teacher over the summer to the construction boom and you lose years of training too. You lose a connection between students and their mentor as well. I had some of the same teachers as my youngest brother (who was 17 years younger), and that is actually a good thing because they get to know the community in that length of time. I would ask people to remember that it is their children that are at stake. A teacher CANNOT control a class of 42. It is a perfect environmentfor disruptive elements to fester and become abusive and devellop a following. And then they will join the workforce with no respect for authority or age or learning and not a lot between their ears. Thats your kids! YOU might be the one who has to check into the mental hospital from work related stress or gets beaten up by some young thug because of campbell rebellion against learning.
Campbell is sowing the seeds for a pretty nasty future.