Problem with College of Teachers?

I'm not sure what the problem with the operation of the College is now. Avison's report cites one instance of what might be improper behaviour by a College member, which involved who had custody of a laptop with child porn on it. The teacher who had the porn was dismissed and decertified.

There are other examples cited of teachers with criminal records being reinstated... but if the government believes no person with a criminal record should ever teach, that should be the law, and they should not give the College discretion to investigate the each case and make its judgment.

I suspect the government wants the College to take over professional development or, more controversially, impose some sort of evaluation of teachers - but it doesn't want to take the heat for policies that would be highly unpopular with teachers. It wants an "independent" College to do the dirty work. But government can't have it both ways... it can't tell teachers they are a self-governing profession, and then expect the professional regulatory body to impose unpopular policies.

That would be like asking an "independent" College of Physicians and Surgeons to abolish fee for service, and put all doctors on salary. No physician-run College would ever do that.

DNA

Thank you for that. I think you nailed it.

What is so scary about maintaining credentials?

Susan Lambert's comments about professional development seem rather hyperbolic. ("a boss/slave relationship"? Really?)

I realize this is a bit of a turf war -- the BCTF has experience doing the PD courses and of course assumes they are best to keep doing so. I'm not suggesting that there's anything wrong with the work they do.

But there would be nothing unusual about giving the College responsibility for ensuring that teachers maintain standards and keep up with new practices. Most other professional certification bodies do the same. And I'm also certain that if the College did have responsibility for PD training, they would make sure the required training was relevant to the teacher's field of specialization. (Although I could argue that a good school librarian should have a good understanding of science communication, but that's a tangent...)

These sort of comments, however, seem representative of the defensive, combative relationship between pretty much every organization involved in education in this province: ministry, school boards, PTAs, union, College.

If the BCTF really want an independent College of Teachers, they are going to have to let it be independent of the union as well. Otherwise, they are just giving the province an excuse to take it over completely. And I don't think that would be a benefit to anyone.

The division of powers between professional college and union works successfully in other fields. This includes the medical professions, where there is just as much battling with the government. The professional body focuses on qualifications and training, the union focuses on funding and working conditions. I suppose you could argue that the question of what makes a good or bad teacher is more subjective than the judgement of a good or bad doctor. But it seems like the bigger problem is that the BCTF used to have this responsibility and hasn't adjusted to letting it go.

Avison

A quick search of Elections BC's Financial Reports and Political Contributions System shows that in 2008 a Donald Avison donated $510 to the BC Liberal Party.

On being independent...

To be clear, when I say that the College should be independent of the union, I'm not suggesting any reduction in the number of practicing teachers on the College council. I don't even think it's wrong for the BCTF to endorse candidates (although I'd be interested in knowing if this happens with any other equivalent professional bodies).

But having pre-meetings to make sure all the union-endorsed council members get briefed on official union policy? That sounds a bit much. If the BCTF -- or any other stakeholder group -- has an interest in decisions of the College council, it should be expressed in a formal presentation to that council. If an opportunity to formally hear from stakeholders doesn't exist, maybe that's what needs to changed.

Liberals Picking on Teachers Again

BC's Liberal/Neocon parties love to pick on teachers, and on any other sector that doesn't wield corporate power. Teachers have always been an easy target.

But if the Liberals applied this analysis on principal, how would BC's other "self governed" profession fare with a similar "study"? Whether you choose the BC Law Society, College of Physicians, Dental College or Chartered Accountants governing body, they are all 'self governing' which of course contains an inherent contradiction.

Thus, we either accept this form of self-government, with the contradictions, or we jettison all of them. But we can't just pick on one group (like teachers) and ignore the others.

Great coverage as usual.

"Picking on Teachers" ?

Is this what the education "system" has come to in BC? A teachers union coordinates polices for the college ahead of any college meetings, uses its coordinated members to control the agenda and decisions and when someone objects "The teachers are getting picked on, again" ? What is this, Grade 2?
The college is set up to maintain a proper standard of accreditation and ethics in the teaching profession and SOMEHOW the teachers union is not happy with that?
Good Grief!

Maybe we need a college of college of teachers !

Although the examples given in the article are disturbing, I know for a fact (I am a teacher) than the college of teachers for decades now has been refusing PROPER certification for teachers who got their teaching certificates abroad (or not in BC). Now, we are not talking about 3rd world countries now. In one instance, a teacher from Paris could not teach in French immersion classes because she did not have the right BC courses, but --of course-- an Anglophone with a thick English accent could! I understand that boards (and perhaps the college) like to have polyvalent teachers, I can testify (as a true francophone) that teachers who had been chosen to work as French teachers had also been asked to teach the English component in their classes (even though they had a thick accent and a knowledge of English which was limited for the grade they were asked to teach). Surely, there would be many more competent and more judicious choices to provide the best education possible in BC! In other words, boards and colleges do not necessarily have the interest of students in mind when taking decisions. Often, it is a matter of dollars and no sense! In other words, boards and colleges have more than once spoken with a forked tongue! So, maybe we need an INDEPENDENT body to regulate the college AND the boards for malpractice! Full disclosure, I have never had any problems with the college of teachers!

Independent and neutral

is the key word and as such the College of Teachers should be devoid of BOTH BCTF and Government appointees, period.

The BCCT Board should be populated with professionals, yes, but they must be non-partisan. I would suggest that the Deans of Education at Universities/Colleges would be a good choice. I am also not totally convinced that you need the current number of Board members either.

Certainly the BCCT should be totally responsible for teacher standards,training, and certification. The BCCT should also be responsible for teacher professional developement as well. The BCTF and the Ministry of Education should be resource bodies only for input and critique.

I am not certain that the BCCT should be responsible for discipline however. Discipline is a function of Management in consort with input from the BCTF, and other authorities such as the Police. The BCCT on reciept of a recommendation resulting from discipline hearings could then de-certify the teacher concerned.

Bottomline, the BCCT must apear neutral and not be influenced by either the Government or the BCTF.

that big Liberal machine . . .

. . . keeps rolling along, regardless of who will be the next Liberal leader and premier.

Massive re-organization of the natural resource ministries as they continue to sell the province out from under us.

A Liberal business ally spreading fear and intimidation in Ida Chong's recall campaign.

And now a well-thought out move to clip BCTF's wings. Most interesting sentence in the whole article is Avison's recommendation that:

"it may be time for the government of B.C. to re-assert control over the regulation of the teaching profession by bringing all related functions back within the jurisdiction of the ministry of education,"

OK sdgreen.

You got a point here but let us do the same for every professional group out there not just teachers. Of course I really don't know how you would do that. Ever since the Socred days the government has worked overtime to put teachers in their place: compliant little civil servants to afraid to protest the conditions they work under ot the pay scales. Then the same socreds introduce the College of Teacher and suddenly they are professionals but still treated like civil servants. They hire one of their hacks to right a report as they like it and all hell breaks loose again.

I'd like to here about th specific cases he mentions in more detail. The cases are deliberately kept vague so that an impression is created. Not good enough and sound like a load of self serving bull to me.

Well, you have to bust the

Well, you have to bust the union in order to privatize the whole system, don't you? Surely, you don't want to have private multi-nationals in the education business contend with well educated teachers, who belong to a strong union, and whom are paid what they're worth, do you? Not if you're a BC liberal who apparently don't care about our children at all.

much ado about nothing

Each professional association, including car dealers, is made up of members of that profession.

I for one, not a doctor, cannot sit on the College of Physicians and Surgeons nor any other body in which I am not accredited, however, it seems, with this current government's record of integrity, morality and dishonesty, those appointed by themselves can sit in judgment of others.

It was the province itself that changed the BCTF from an association of professionals to an accredited labour organization or union. I think Vander Zalm was the Premier of the time and was well known for his inflammatory stance towards teachers as have almost every other Socred or so called Liberal minister since then, Christy Clark included.

Perhaps a more worthy organization to attack by this discredited government would be the association allowed to police car dealers in this province.

It seems Kruger et al have some axes to grind in all this and perhaps partisanship on behalf of the current minister.

It seems if you label something dysfunctional, and boy do we know how dysfunctional the current government is, you can then set about changing it to something even more dysfunctional...example Translink Board of Directors (in that case it was the infamous Dr. 35% Solution, the Falconator.

If anyone is out there, please send help.

just more distractions by this government

Imagine spending more than $1 billion of taxpayers money for cost overruns associated with the Olympics and then claiming you're broke. And this is the government endeared by the province's business community?

I used to love teaching and then ...

I used to love teaching! Every year I used to reflect on the past years' lessons and modify them and, then, some dumbo ministry's new appointee would try to make his or her mark by changing (apparently for the better) theme of units or subjects! I changed the units, starting from scratch and going through the whole cycle. Eventually, after 20 years, the themes or units that I started with came back to be taught at the grade that I was teaching again! Not to say that some changes are not needed, but the political system is setup so badly that changes are made every time there is another political party that comes on board. And I would argue that those changes are not dealing with the issues. Now, one initiative that would have made sense (but would have required a little bit more thinking) and would have made significant strides in improving literacy (and just about everything else AND reducing budgets at the same time) would be to reform English orthography to a more phonemically (phonetic, for the non-linguists) predictable system! Think I am an idiot, then G. B. Shaw, T. Roosevelt, M. Twain (and many others equally prominent people) were as well! Either our leaders do not want to do what IS LOGICAL. Maybe our ministers are illiterate on this matter. Were they chosen because they were or the system is completely screwed? Time will tell! That change alone would reduce illiteracy by half, according to many reports I have read on this matter. Google English spelling reform before you make up your mind!