More to the point Ed, the Fraser Institute constantly touts the opinions of so-called "Education Economists", protraying them as experts when they're actually bean-counters, who crunch students-as-widgets through various models, which are themselves preconceived to support their broader neo-con economic agenda. While doing so, they employ the Christie Clark gambit, spinning themselves as being on the side of parents and students, all the while pointing accusing fingers at teachers, administrators and faculties of education.

Theirs is really an anti-intellectual ideology, disguised as anti-labour and anti-elitist The ministry's policies reflect this ideology, and the system is increasingly turning out good consumer sheep, who couldn't reason their way out of a wet paper bag, nor think independently and critically to save their lives.

You said it, Ed!

We can't fault our own Premier Campbell for not doing his utmost to push through the Fraser Institute's neo-con recipe for school reforms. Make no mistake, the ultimate goal is nothing less than slaying the twin dragons of Canada's public health and public education systems, whose successes are a deep irritant to Cheney & Co. Too few BC parents and citizens understand the importance of the BCTF in this game--their power and staunch commitment to the goals of Canadian public education have been the major obstacle to Mr. Campbell's success. This epic battle--not details of salary and class size--is the main reason for the poisonous atmosphere surrounding the current teachers' contract negotiations.

Meanwhile, lest anyone remains unconvinced that this is about far, far more than pedagogy, witness the business clubs, along with CanWest and other FI media mouthpieces, rallying all their resources to aid in the ongoing campaign to convince the public that teachers are society's most dangerous enemy. It would be truly laughable if the prospect that they could succeed wasn't so downright scary.

Follow the strings of who has been influencing this agenda in BC, and they all lead back to Calgary and the FI, and ultimately to their senior partners in Washington, DC. (Oh, to be a fly on the wall when Mr. Cambpell, Mr. Cheney and the rest of the club sit down for the FI dinner in Calgary this? week).

Take our ideologically-schooled Deputy Minister of Education, brought in from Alberta by Campbell in 2001 to oversee the neo-con reform agenda. Take the carefully orchestrated propaganda campaign by FI-linked CanWest editors and guest writers who relentlessly bombard BC readers with the FI party line on education to support the changes he has introduced; take Campbell's own FI connections; witness the disproportionate resources that FI devotes to setting the agenda and influence debate on educational reforms (wouldn't you expect business interests to be more concerned with economic and trade policies?); follow the links and funding trails behind the so-called independent parent/citizen voices in BCCPAC and the Society for the Advancement of Educational Excellence whom CanWest so loves to quote...

The dismal performance of the US education system in comparison to Finland, Canada and other more "socialist" systems, and the growing evidence that the neo-con reforms in the US are making things worse, not better, illustrates the deep flaws in the Fraser Institute's agenda. And these dinosaurs are so dense that they don't even realize that the very public education system that they're so hell-bent on dismantling is a crucial factor in their own economic success, something even their "Liberal" colleagues back east have come to realize.

Great work, Rikia!

Yes, but the math-centric view is the biggest part of the problem. Music, art, poetry and dance are valid on their own merits, not because they also lead to greater intelligence in linear fields of study. That outlook still places math and linear language in a position of supremacy over these other crucial skills. Our society must start to view this lack of creativity as an intellectual impoverishment/deprivation as considerable as the inability to advance into logic-testing areas of math or nonfiction prose. The positioning of skills like math, science and essay writing in importance of contribution to our society is partly what created the problem in the first place.

Yes, and this sentence points to the greatest assault on public education in the past quarter century. Homeschoolers depend on one or both parents to remain at home. If the career, itself, is not home-based, then parents and child are out of luck.

Certainly, the homeschooling field is no longer limited to religious fundamentalists. The Guardian had a terrific article on this changing trend not too long ago. Parents are now using programs like Homelinks and DESK in order for their children to devote time to music, dance, art, theatrical productions and all the practicing and rehearsals that entails.

Please stop using the Fraser Institute as a source of information. It has about as much credibility as Fox News.

I'm so happy to be a home economics teacher! I don't have to teach to the test.
My students leave my courses with co-operative group work abilities, critical thinking and problem solving skills, work experience as well as improved time and resource management. Never has a student asked "When are we ever going to use this in everyday life?" as they often did when I once taught a block of grade 11 math.

Exactly. I think it's very important to keep in mind who does not WANT responsible global citizens and why.

Hear, hear, Ruby!

Home economics may sound like such an old-fashioned field of study, but look at the doors it opens up. Home economics is a microcosm of social economics.

The stated definition of economics is "The science for the management and distribution of scarce resources"

In other words, "Mother serving dinner to a large family, making sure that everybody gets a fair share and nobody's left out".

This has been scientifically changed by neoclassical economists to: "Everybody fighting across and on the table for scraps, which benefits all".

And they have the fantastic math to prove that this is what life and economics are about.
Ed Deak, Big Lake.

Oh come on, the Fraser Institute isn;t that bad. Look at one os their upcoming lectures.....

(Tor) Does Private Education Work for the Poor?
September’s United Nations summit in New York will assess progress toward the goal of achieving universal basic education by 2015. Many people argue that the only way for children in poor countries to receive a basic education is through more international aid for public schools. That view, however, ignores the crucial role that private education can play, and is already playing, in serving the educational needs of the poor. As surprising as it may be, private schools today serve some of the poorest people on the planet.

This event will include a presentation by Dr. James Tooley as well as a screening of a documentary film based on his research and commissioned by BBC World. The film will explore private schools in one of the poorest slums in Africa, Makoko in Lagos, Nigeria, and shows how 75 percent of the poorest children attend private schools that are better and cheaper to run than their public school counter-parts. Please join us for this unique opportunity to meet Professor Tooley and gain a new perspective on education solutions for poor families!

September 7, 2005

Back in the 70's I attended elementary school in Nigeria. Two points:
1. The schools were usually private and owned by the local chief. Much of the money being donated to the schools by other countries was funneled into the pocket of the local chief.

2. The kids learned through memorization. Many didn't have the ability to apply their knowledge in a practical sense.

I also attended BCIT in the early 80's, and had several Nigerian students in my class. Even after 3 years into a 2year course, these students were far behind the rest of us. They just couldn't complete the work that required skills beyond memorization.

The newer kids I see in the workplace these days think all they need to do is acquire temporary experiences, as they would credits in university. Learning seems to be a thing of the past, collecting merrits, the way of the future.

By the way I also know many Nigerians who are very intellegent and I hope I haven't offended anybody. The reason I can think of that private schools would be cheaper to run than public schools in Nigeria is because of the rampant coruption.

Alfie Kohn was a speaker at the BCTF Summer Conference 2005.

Here are some articles worth reading:

Test Today, Privatize Tomorrow

http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/testtoday.htm

FIGHTING THE TESTS

http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/ftt.htm

". . . [Of course it's possible to] succeed in raising average test scores. You deprive kids of recess, eliminate music and the arts, cut back the class meetings and discussions of current events, offer less time to read books for pleasure, squeeze out the field trips and interdisciplinary projects and high-quality electives, spend enough time teaching test-taking tricks, and, you bet, it’s possible to raise the scores. But that result is meaningless at best. When a school or district reports better test results this year than last, knowledgeable parents and other observers respond by saying, “So what?” (because higher test scores do not necessarily reflect higher quality teaching and learning) – or even, “Uh-oh” (because higher test scores may indicate lower quality teaching and learning)."

- "Standardized Testing: Separating Wheat Children from Chaff Children"

A very provocative article.

If education systems can find ways of producing students that can actually focus on the “ability to see the big idea, show tolerance for the ideas and opinions of others, know the difference between fact and opinion, interpret data intelligently, and provide appropriate examples to support ideas”, there may be hope for the future.

However, if the reasons for changing our education system are the same as China’s - “replacing the old system, dependent on rote memorization, with a new focus on communication skills, critical thinking, problem-solving and creativity” so that we may become, or continue to be, a global economic powerhouse – we need to rethink our reasons.

This planet’s resources can’t withstand the pressure generated by a handful of North American teachers preparing their students to find faster, more efficient ways of destroying the environment for economic gain, never mind 12 million teachers preparing 200 million students to do the same thing.

A few years ago I was on a worldwide World Bank forum, involving up to 6000 economists and other interested people.

As we know, one of the first demands of the WB and IMF, when they move into so called Third World countries, is the complete privatization of everything, including education.

One of the participants was the Ambassador of Tanzania to Taiwan. He described how privatization destroyed their schools and ended up with "....before that we had little, but we did have something. Now we don't have anything."

I happen to be a private enterpriser, but quite frankly, I hate big business with a passion. Over a certain size, especially when they're listed on the stockmarkets, big business survives on lies, fraud and extortion, to keep the values of their stock rising. The main tenor of privatization of the public sector is the installation of the multinational
mafia into dictatorial powers, which means instant corruption. Let's just remember, how many students of private schools have gone to their classes in Vancouver in the past few years, only to find the doors closed and the owners off with the students' monies? By the way , I have gone to private schools, but my children didn't. Ed Deak, Big Lake.

I am so impressed with the level of discussion here. I hope you are all taking your important voices out "there" as well.

KWD, I don't think we have it in us as a nation to become the kind of global economic powerhouse that China aspires to. But I do think that Canada has a unique position in the world, and we have yet to rise up to it. Reforming our education system to create globally-minded, creative, free-thinkers is the first step.

As for China's incredible draw on the earth's resources (not per capita, but by the sheer mass of their population) we can only hope that the next generation of thinkers will use their ingenuity to find a way to tread lightly.

According to Singapore, the race boils down to patents. They believe that the country with the most new patents, the best new ways to do things, will "win". There is no limit to the solutions those patents may provide. It's possible that the concerns we have now could be transformed in a decade, if we allow and embrace change.

Te Aro, you are completely right that the arts are valid in their own rights. They also wire the synapses to the brain in a way that allows for higher level thinking. Whether you measure this thinking in math and science, as the research to date does, or in the ability to entertain oposing thoughts simultaneously, the fact is that we need more brains on this earth that work this way. Plus good music.

As for the debate on privatization, I believe that education is too fundamental to the survival of our nation to farm it out to private interests. But I also believe it is too fundamental to put up with the current structure we have where teachers are rewarded by seniority instead of excellence, where our childrens' futures are put on hold by labour disputes, and where no one- not teachers, students, parents or society- feel that their needs are being met.

Of course it would make much more sense to let the BCTF set the curriculii. That way all of our children would grow up to be warm and fuzzy NDP wussies who couldn't solve a math equation or recognize a balance sheet if their lives depended on it. Of course once we're all NDPers there won't be any need for bank books, as the gov't will be giving us everything for free anyway. Oh how life will be wonderful.

Rikia, thanks for the feedback. I agree that Canada is not and may never be considered, by linear, non-creative thinkers, as the kind of powerhouse China aspires to. But using sheer mass of production or consumption, as a measure of economic power, is wrong headed.

If Canada’s economic status is viewed from a global perspective (because of existing North American trade agreements) Canada is already very powerful. Economically, Canada is an American state, it is as technologically developed as most, it sits on vast quantities of natural and intellectual resources and it has a big influence on the global economy.

However, the fact that Canada and the US, on a per capita basis, are the largest consumers and abusers of resources on the planet tells us we need to rethink a lot more than economic goals.

In a world where developed and developing countries are in a ‘race to the bottom’ of the resource pile, I would be surprised if China goes the extra mile and allows truly creative, free thinking.

Nemesis sputtered:

Hmmmm, thanks for the thoughtful analysis.

Anyways, I suggest you go have a look at the ministry website and examine that curriculum that was set up by the Ministry as well as with BCTF members. BCTF members do bear some of the responsibility for the move to standardized tests. After all, who distributes, supervises and marks these government exams? BCTF members do! And many of them quite willingly.

As far as your cheapshot at “NDP wussies couldn’t solve a math equation”, go to your neighborhood school and ask to see a math textbook. Most of the general public possesses the best math skills immediately after graduating from high school. Most people function at around a Grade 9 level – enough to do their taxes. This is due to lack of practice after high school. I received a C+ in Math 11, but I certainly could not solve a quadratic expression with ease today. And I am sure wether or not I had a standardized test back then would not have made any difference today.

Reminds me of a current government somewhere.

Thank you, nemesis, so forcefully helping to illustrate my point: That in order to elevate the level of political discourse in our coutry, we need citizens who can "see the big idea, show tolerance for the ideas and opinions of others, know the difference between fact and opinion, interpret data intelligently, and provide appropriate examples to support ideas".

It appears that you have failed to grasp the thesis of the article, have postulated a link between political party and educational achievement where none exists, and have incorrectly surmised my political leanings.

One can lean to the right and still see that the Fraser Institute is wrong.

There is so much room here for contrary opinions and debate, and I fully welcome the neo-con view, but I postings like these stick out like a sore thumb amid the intelligent and well-informed dialogue of the other readers.

I would very much like to hear your real views on education reform and how Canada can and should evolve to meet the challenges of democracy and global competition.

The BCTF had a significant hand in shaping the new Socials 11 Provincial exam and the new Civics 11 course. Both are jokes. Politically correct social engineering blather. It's a bloody shame.

Back to the article.

We need not compare our system or our projected improvements to those of China. The majority of North American students have little or no memorization skill, rote or otherwise. Active memorization is rarely taught. We tend to rely on osmosis and repetition in hopes that some attention is being paid to the entire process and that something may "sink in".

The Ministry of Education is responsible for the content of all courses in British Columbia. The BCTF is a union. It is paid for by teachers' dues and its purpose is to serve teachers, although the intests of students are usually served in the process (working conditions, safety, health, equality, etc.). Teachers from the public school system who volunteer their experience and expertise to work on course committees will be BCTF members, but not necessarily active or supportive members. Teachers' input in any form, whether directly suggested by the BCTF administration or otherwise, can be completed dismissed or overridden by the ministry.

The idea that teachers belong to one political party is a complete myth and about as valid as the idea that men can't cook.

typo correction: "although the INTERESTS of students are usually .... "
typo 2: "can be completeLY dismissed"

sorry.

'The BCTF is a union. It is paid for by teachers' dues and its purpose is to serve teachers, although the intests of students are usually served in the process (working conditions, safety, health, equality, etc.).' You need to qualify this statement Luceo, as most often these days the union leadership is spending most of its money and energy fighting the gov't for the sake of doing so. They are opposed ideologically and the executive has been hijacked by politicos. As most teachers are too busy to get involved and as most are also not politically active anyway, the exec has their way and anyone who opposes is branded a troublemaker or a neocon fascist blah blah blah blah blah. Very unfortunate but also very true. Ultimately the students in the classroom, their parents, and teachers who don't agree with the exec are the ones who suffer.

nemesis ... et altera who are interested:

Students and parents do not have votes in the BCTF. All teachers have the right to vote for their representatives. Also, every teacher has the right to run for any local or BCTF position. As in any democratic system (the BCTF is ultra-democratic) if that right is not exercised, being too "busy" to vote or being "not politically active" is not a valid complaint, despite the fact that classroom teachers are chronically overworked and have very little personal time, let alone political energy. It is likely that the BCTF executive has been decisively elected by the majority of voting members.

An in-depth description of the thousands of ways that school working and learning conditions, safety, health, etc. benefit students is beyond the scope of a forum on the above article. But ... here are two examples: 1) If a teacher refuses to breathe mould or bus exhaust fumes in the classroom, all his students (particularly those who are asthmatic) benefit. 2) If negotiations restrict the size of classes for the teacher, each child receives more attention in class and each child's work will receive more individual time and consideration. More time is available for individual feedback. Students are more rewarded. The scenarios are infinite.

It does not matter which of our political parties is in office for this to play out. The BCTF has nothing near the power to cause students and parents to suffer, that power is in the sphere of the Ministry of Education. The BCTF is legally required to bargain with its employer, the government. Of course, this will cost money ... much too much. If the party in power were to change tomorrow, the BCTF would still be condemned to spend hard-earned teachers' dues to "fight" (as you call it) the government for a reasonable contract. You may feel that this is "for the sake of doing so" but other employees may feel that it is a matter of personal and family survival, in a profession that they love.

Testing is not a problem; it's simply what and how you test. To equate testing with a whole host of adjectives of rote memorization, linear thinking, and memorization of facts entirely misses the issue.

You can easily ask questions that require creativity, connecting the dots in a non-linear fashion or critical thinking- it's simply a matter of question design and appropriate tests.

The creativity we need in our education is about letting the critical thinking part of the mind take a break, which enables a different response. One which is based on:

- unquantifiable qualities like love, joy, compassion, well-being.

- unstructured, but active play, as opposed to the passive movie-watching type.

- free exploration and openness, as opposed to a narrowed focus.

- helping-out style: An adult makes soup for their lunch; children help out by cutting vegetables or setting the table. An adult fixes a bike; children help by holding pliers, squirting oil, or pushing a hand-pump.

With these sorts of activities, it shouldn't matter if there's a measurable result. Who knows what the children involved are learning. The adult, in a typical linear fashion, might think, "Yeah, they're really interested in how these cogs and gears fit together." Meanwhile, the child is fascinated by the detail on a silver ring the person's wearing, and helps out so they can get a closer look.

It's not planned and purposeful.

Hi there, thanks for a very interesting article. I have been working to advance holistic learning in BC for years, co-founding the very innovative 'Virtual High' in Vancouver from 1993-1997, and more recently 'SelfDesign Learning Community', an online program that is registering up to 450 learners this coming year. A fully certified Group 1 Independent School, SelfDesign supports emergent, holistic learning (we don't impose the curriculum) and starts from the premise that all kids are excellent, natural learners.

In 15 years of working to advance holistic learning in BC, I regret that this province rejected the Year 2000 plan and that we have largely turned our backs on holistic learning. I also think the trend of increasingly embracing standardized testing and curricula as the model for education evaluation is dystopian and highly anti-democratic, at the very least. I'd write more but I'm invited for lunch
- Michael Maser

Luceo; That nonsense is the party line if you're a BCTF'er and I suspect you know it.
bc4me; The year 2000 was garbage. It didn't work. It can't work. It's premise, basically that students could advance at their own pace without structured guidelines from their teachers, was absolutely ludicrous. Check the average progress of students at Thomas Haney Secondary in Maple Ridge, which was one of the very few schools who adapted the Year 2000 philosophy. You'll find them at the bottom of the 'heap' and at a great disadvantage come graduation.

Maybe Nemesis is auditioning for class clown ☺ but I’d say he cut a couple too many classes, period, especially when he/she writes, “The Year 2000 was garbage.” Excuse me?! The Y2000 was the culmination of the extraordinary efforts of Barry Sullivan, chairman of the BC Royal Commission on Education, an event that was the most important democratic exercise in recent BC history (including the referendum on electoral reform in last May’s election). The results of his dogged, province-wide commission were clear: a majority of participating BC citizens supported a definite shift in our education system from the monolithic factory-based teacher-student system to an holistic learner-centred system. Admittedly, the bureaucracy bungled the Y2000 rollout but what really scotched it before it was implemented were: 1. An NDP government that couldn’t put aside partisan politics and support a Socred initiative (I remember the ill-concealed joy of caucus when Mike Harcourt gleefully spiked it and announced, “The Year 200 is dead,” as if it were some kind of virus), and 2. a whiny but vocal cohort comprised of the BCTF and secondary school, college and university teachers who liked the factory model just fine. You can look this up.

And as for your assertion that kids can’t learn unless they’re taught in school, well that’s just plain flummery. Humans are learning organisms, we learn to walk and talk and for centuries we learned countless other important skills without formal instruction. For a simple test you can simply ask most kids this week what they did during their summer and most will describe their most important learning experiences of the year. Ditto for weekend and after-school activities (homework not included). Or better yet, ask one of the many thousands of kids across North America that are not returning to schools this week but who will be learning in their homes and communities as part of a burgeoning homelearning movement that validates and values the kinds of learning that transcend the factory model. My 11-year old daughter is one of these learners.

If our education system were truly democratic, we would embrace and support equally a system of public and independent initiatives offering a plurality of learning enterprises including factory-type schools and innovative learning communities. We’re not there yet. But as this article illuminates, and many insightful education leaders have discussed for a long time, the time is fast approaching when the ability to think ‘outside the box’ will be required survival skill. Sounds like China is figuring this out.
- Michael Maser
Program Director, SelfDesign Learning Community

bc4me; Sounds great on paper. Doesn't work. Might if you assembled a school full of ideal students who are very driven and very intelligent, but it simply will not work in a typical school. That's why it wasn't adopted and never will be. Period.

As I understand it, the ideal in teaching is tutoring - the advantage of home schooling - but that in turn is highly dependant upon the ability of the teacher. The Montessori (sp?) system being the ideal and the small class size in a`public school being the most monetarily efficient available in a modern society in which few people are willing to ante up the bucks necessary for genuine quality education.

As usual, neocons are worried primarily about cost, and look for "efficiencies" which increase "productivity" - e.g. larger class sizes - which reduce tutoring. Hence we have their squabbling about what is taught and how.
Its got far more to do with money than quality.

On the other hand, we have the problem of the BCTF's predilection for Social Engineering, such as the situation in many rural communities wherein the curriculum is "dummed down" to accomodate aboriginal students, as has been amply illustrated in the FI's Annual Report. I'm not aware if the BCTF still harbours a dislike for academic competition, but this seems consistent with that perspective.

While this appears to be great for native children, it is unfair to the others who find then find the cutthroat competition in colleges and universities difficult to cope with. I suspect this ultimately does a disservice to native students as well.

Contrary to what most people think, the brain requires a great deal of energy to run, and as with our muscles, we have to train it for hard work - which explains why we have so many physical and intellectual couch potatoes.

Just one more thing. I've long been interested in why the Nineteenth century spawned so many innovative thinkers and scientists, including social scientists. It seems most came from priveliged classes where tutoring was the norm, and where academic standards and workloads were extreme. Even the working classes were given a "sink or swim" education.

Wasn't it Edison who said "Invention is 99% persperation and 1% inspiration"?

Yeah, I see it now, s/b "dumbed down"

Oops, "perspiration" and an extra "find" too. Why doesn't this site allow us a proofreading panel before we post?

Scylla, did you know that the famed Montessori schools have come under fire lately for underfunding and chintzing their schools? Private schools HAVE to make a profit, ergo something suffers. Usually the teachers'paycheques, or the quality of the teachers (no univerisity degree or fired for other causes) and the students'lessons.

I do not see the BCTF's predilection for Social Engineering, nor do I see any dumming down to accomodate aboriginal students. I'm not a teacher, although I have taught first aid courses. Anything vomited out of the Fraster Institute is never going to be accurate or remotely scientific. This is a group of people who not long ago insisted that the ozone layer was repairing itself! The FI's sole peurpose is to brainwash the average folk into thinking only the rich deserve to rule--unfettered, at that-- and that the environment doesn't need saving. TheÃ*r "tax free" day is total hogwash, but certainly a media-savvy ploy to get us to go along with them on getting more tax cuts. You and I won't see those tax cuts--only the rich. But we'll feel the loss of those tax dollars in education cuts, etc.

As for competition, it's is fine in bridge and other games. There should be no silly competition anywhere in education. Collaboration and cooperation is much better. Competition makes it so no one really "succeeds"in the true sense of the world. I know people with masters degrees who have not one ounce of common sense, compassion, imagination or vision, but they competed academically just fine. With their heads in the clouds, or way up their butts, I don't know how they survive. Unfortunately, they vote...

You are right on one thing-- "the brain requires a great deal of energy to run, and as with our muscles, we have to train it for hard work".

I think printing, ILO writing, is what is slowing down people's brains these days. I get so frustrated when I take a course and the teacher would get complaints that he or she was going too fast--complaints from students who were PRINTING everything she or he said! What is the matter with people? Printing should be over in Grade 2. How can anyone brainstorm enough solutions when one has to go as slow as to print? How can anyone possibly have free-flowing thoughts when printing??? SLOW thinkers, like slow drivers, drive me crazy--but maybe it's a short trip, anyway:)

I agree with your observation that the FI isn't known for objective reportage :-) But the only quibble I've heard from the BCTF about the rankings is that they do not show the social accomplishments of the schooling.

And yes, I too know Univ. types who cannot think beyond what they've memorised. But then, contrary to the neocon propaganda supporting the "Free Enterprise" mythology, ours is a business climate that seldom rewards innovative individuals. Rather, the focus is upon the formulaic approach, just as one would expect in any authoritarian institution like the corporation..

The fast thinker is not necessarily the best innovator. You can have all the bright ideas you want, but if you don't have the knowhow and the perseverance,forget it.

I'm all in favour of instilling "collaboration and cooperation" ethics in students, but not of foolishly eliminating competition in academic areas just to make little Johnny feel good. IMHO, that's one area where the BCTF has no mandate to interfere.

You can be sure the BCTF will interfere if it suits their social engineering mandate. They've been out to lunch for some time now. In fact they're even too far left for lefties like Kit Krieger now.

Scylla:
I am able to proofread on the posting panel, right here. However, if that does not work for you, you can write your contributions on your favourite word processor, edit, then copy and paste to this submission area. (Despite these facilities, I have still posted comments with errors included!)

nemesis: No, I don't know the BCTF "party line" as you call it. I do know that union members have the power to control or to change their union. I am not concerned with BCTF ideology or politics in this instance, but have described its legal functions and observed a few facts. It is simply not accurate to depict the BCTF as a dictatorship. It is democratic and accepts motions from any member, in any member local. Every policy is painstakingly voted on. Voting representatives for provincial meetings are elected. If you are a member, you are preaching in the wrong forum. Write your motions, get a seconder and open up debate for your improvements at the next meeting.

Year 2000 debate
Having read the "Sullivan" Report on education in great detail, it is my opinion that the B.C. Ministry of Education did not implement many of the recommendations in the way that the commission intended, particularly in the area of improving the quality of technical programmes at the secondary level, such as Industrial Education. Rather, it came up with vaguely related "no-cost" theories, some detrimental to learning, and ignored the best proposals because the changes suggested would require school level funding.

"I think printing, ILO writing ...."

"IMHO, that's one area where the BCTF has no mandate to interfere."

_________________________________________________________________

What are "ILO" and "IMHO"?

In My Honest Opinion.
ILO Marysue?????

I believe IMHO stands for "In my humble opinion." This is something that is rarely seen on this site.

I believe IMHO stands for "In my humble opinion." This is something that is rarely seen on this site.

North of Hope & scylla: Thanks for the IMHO meaning.

Marysue;
I found that ILO is the International Labour Organization, but cannot connect to how "ILO writing, is what is slowing down people's brains these days."

I have come to the opposite conclusion to you, about slow progress in adult courses ... not that cumbersome printing or writing "slows the brain", but that lack of training in engaging the brain's attention on the information being imparted, causes the student to feel that everything must be written down. The content is not being processed at the time, therefore the only hope of retaining it in any form, is to frenetically write it ALL and take it home. This may be the result of a "marks gathering" educational culture, as opposed to one with actual learning as its objective.

On "Canada's Leap Backward .."

Tests in Education:
When we discuss tests in Canada, it is assumed that the test will be a very poor assessment of the student's ability. It IS possible to produce excellent, broad, subjective tests which would showcase the knowledge and competence of students without restricting them to stock courses and primitive answers.

Why has our system not done this? It is expensive. The time of highly qualified professional teachers would be needed to create the exams and they can not be marked by computers or by checking off against a quick answer key. Marking would take a great deal of time and markers would need to be experts in the whole range of knowledge that students could present. The new B.C. Graduation Portfolio at the secondary level (Grades 10,11, & 12) has the potential to encourage creativity and self development, but it will represent an astronomical cost in teacher time, as it requires one-on-one guidance, ongoing assessement, and individual presentation time at the end of Grade 12. The ministry's financial plan, to date, seems to be for school districts to find the funds by depriving students of some other services or course choices, probably music, theater, art, modern language, etc. I know of one small secondary school which lost all its advanced computer applications courses and its web design courses to provide time for the compulsory Planning 10 courses required last year. These costs are being leeched out of educational course content.

Advertising is often very original and creative. It captures our interest and guides us right to the product. in 1998 a 30 second spot on network TV during prime time in the U.S. cost approximately $190,000 (USD) and the public is willing to have that cost included in the price of its purchases. When we are prepared to invest in public education proportionately, we may be able to have both: - reasonable standard measurement AND a versatile, well-educated population.

A week after Rikia Saddy's article, I'm still looking for clarification of her statements below:df FD

Surely it would have helped if she had told us just what the former "rote memorisation" was comprised of, and just how the new curriculum "help(s to) stimulate creativity and innovation"

Ms Saddy specialises in motivating businessmen, and hence, I think, her thinking that training future advertising specialists is the entry to a brave new world of market economics. Despite Singapore's economic success in doing so, I doubt very much we'd want to copy their social system, nor the values they seek to instill in students. As Ed has written here, we've had enough of Mr Freidman, thank you very much.

We can all agree that instruction in music and the other arts is instrumental in the formation of critical thinking and socialisation, and that the prime villain is our reluctance to spend the money necessary to provide these learning opportunities, as Luceo so aptly demontrated.

But nobody on this site has yet told us why testing or memorisation is as bad as Saddia intimates.

Could it be that we're obsessed with making education "fun" for our little darlings, instead of giving them the backbone to compete in this highly competitive world?

Why has our system not done this? It is expensive. The time of highly qualified professional teachers would be needed to create the exams and they can not be marked by computers or by checking off against a quick answer key. Marking would take a great deal of time and markers would need to be experts in the whole range of knowledge that students could present.

Actually, we already have these markers in the system. They're called teachers. They are with the students every day, and have been taught all the necessary skills and tools to test and assess students. Testing and grading students is not the problem. The problem is mass-produced, multiple-choice standardized tests from a large central authority that by definition can only test skills that can be learned by rote memorization.

These skills are important, but they are not everything a student needs to know to become an independent-minded, intelligent, person engaged in a democratic society.

I am appauled by the suggestion that it's about

In fact, most of what Scyalla says is gibberish. To say you are "still looking for clarification" of a part of my article implies that you've asked before, which you have not. Besides, the paragraph you've asked for clarification on is so self-explanatory I am unable to simplify it further.

I do not specialize in "motivating businessmen", and your comment that I think that "training future advertising specialists is the entry to a brave new world of market economics" is inane, and an impossible conclusion to reach if you have read my article, which I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt in assuming you have not.

Finally, I do not "intimate" that the current system of standardized testing does not work, I detail the many problems it provokes in our education system and society as a whole. Instead of my repeating the entire article for you, may I kindly suggest that you scroll to the top of this page where you can read it in its entirety.

My sole motivation in taking on the subject of education reform is that it is the first and most crucial step to ensuring political reform. People who are unable to comprehend the level of writing as you will find here on The Tyee, and who cannot entertain and debate opposing viewpoints, will never be able to demand or form good governments. As a result, we will all be at the mercy of vote-swaying lobby groups and think tanks who have their own power issues, and not our best interests, at heart.

That was posted without proofing as you all can tell.

I note Rikia hews to the American "z" rather than the more civilised "s" (now, how's that for being picky, eh?):-}

I'm not a teacher, and when I was in school Multiple question testing was not the norm, so how was I or anyone else to know that Her Ladyship was referring to? Should her many references to "standardized testing" have clued me in? Surely standardisation would seem to be necessary in a large system such as public schools? In reerring to Chinese and Singaporean "rote memorisation" does she refer to the collected writings of Chairman Mao or Milton Friedman? Those notions are not preposterous. The closest description to what she apparently meant is found is seen here:

In attempting to discredit my posting, she quotes Luceo regarding a statement for which I had already complimented him. I would suggest Her Highness take that speed reading course again.

It might help her comprehension skills too, for my/our being unaware that multiple answer tests are the sine qua non of today's "factory" schooling (which I've just learned), my statement makes sense. My two sentences are interrelated.
Surely it would have helped if she had told us just what the former "rote memorisation" was comprised of, and just how the new curriculum "help(s to) stimulate creativity and innovation"

Your Majesty, I'm not one of those faces out there hanging breathlessly on your next utterance, hoping to learn the cryptic NewSpeak which will gain me entrance to the Singaporean Boardrooms.

All that effing clutter makes proopreading a real task.

Freudian slips uber alles