Canada's Education System May Not Be As Good As Some May Think

[jolinar of malkshor]

In order not to derail the MLA thread I have started a new thread to deal with some accusations made by some other posters.

bcb originally posted

I'd like some proof to support your contentions regarding several of your posts:

1.) More and more graduates can barely read
2.) Parts of the Alberta curriculum are useless crap
3.) The education system is broken

If you can't provide quantitative evidence, you'll have to admit you're just towing the party line by repeating rhetoric.

Like I posted before I have read a few articles in the past and listen to a segment on a radio show regarding this issue. Here is some evidence to support what I had suggested.

- more than one million Canadians aged 25 to 44 have
not completed high school and approximately 1.6 million
16- to 25-year-olds have less than Level 3 literacy, the standard
considered the minimum to function effectively in a

knowledge-based society such as Canada.

- In 2006–2007, the high-school dropout rate for 20- to

24-year-olds living in small towns and rural areas was almost
twice the rate for the same age group living in large cities

(14.9% versus 8.3%).

- Although Canadians are more educated than ever before,

numerous surveys of business leaders indicate that employers
are dissatisfied with their employees’ so-called soft
skills (including teamwork, communication skills and selfmotivation)
and with some of the skills necessary for their
jobs (including the management of information, use of
numbers and problem solving). As a solution, many businesses
are turning to post-secondary institutions for specific
courses that meet these particular needs. This presents an

opportunity for growth in the PSE sector.

-20% of the university-educated population in Canada
had prose literacy skills below Level 3, the internationally

accepted level required to cope in a modern society.

- Poor literacy skills at age 15 can become a chronic problem.
In 2003, almost 1.6 million individuals (37.8%) aged 16 to 25
years were functioning at literacy levels 1 and 2. Although
low literacy is not the same as illiteracy—in reality, very few
Canadian adults are truly illiterate (unable to read or write)—

evidence suggests that literacy skills decline with age.

10 The number of young adults with low levels of literacy is, therefore,

of particular concern given the social and economic implications
for individuals and the country as a whole.

Just a few examples from a 160 page document. There were a lot of good things in the study as well regarding access to PSE but the listed points support that there is a growing problem.

http://www.ccl-cca.ca/pdfs/PSE/2009/PSE2008_English.pdf

A physics teacher in Ontario -

A dramatic indication that there could be a serious problem was the performance of my introductory physics class on their November test last year. It was identical to one given in 1996, but the class average over this 10-year period had plummeted from 66 to 50 percent.

When I enquired elsewhere at Trent University, I found the same pattern in the mathematics department, where the first test in linear algebra was down some 15 percent from its historic mean, and the calculus average had dropped nine percent from the year before.

Brock University has seen a significant increase in the failure rate for students in first-year physics with similar results in mathematics.

What could have caused this dramatic shift in the approach of our students? I do not believe the problem is with the teachers, who are generally well trained and dedicated. The main possible explanations seem to be the following:
1. In 1997, the Ontario government introduced a new, content-intensive curriculum for grades K to 8 in mathematics and language, followed in 1998 by the science and technology curriculum.

And he continues on with his reasons with the decline.

http://www.universityaffairs.ca/has-...-to-think.aspx

Here are some comments from educators in the post secondary system.

I'm a U of A researcher and Faculty member.
In the sciences, the increasing use of multiple choice questions is creating a generation who can rote-learn, but who can not reason, argue and ultimately deduce what the correct response should be.
The quality of intake that arrives on our doorstep from high schools, with regard to capabilities in science, mathematics and mental arithmetic, is plummeting. More emphasis on MCQs will NOT improve things. I certainly do not blame the teachers in Alberta's school system. It would seem that they are having their hands tied by policy makers and politicians.

http://communities.canada.com/edmont...16/366624.aspx

In another survey conducted by the Ontario Confederation of University Faculty Associations this year, 55 per cent of university professors and librarians said first-year students were less prepared than students just three years earlier.

Respondents reported a decline in students' writing and numeric skills, an over-reliance on Internet resources, lower maturity levels, and an expectation of success without the requisite effort.

http://news.aol.ca/article/students-...survey/709313/

After 41 years of teaching math at UBC, professor George Bluman is a little apprehensive about what’s going to happen this September. The department has already had to introduce a course called Math 110. It’s the equivalent of Grade 12 math, taught at university for university credit, for students who show up with numeracy skills too weak for them to succeed in first-year calculus courses. The prerequisite: Grade 12 math.

UBC isn’t the only postsecondary institution that’s introduced courses aimed at getting students entering from B.C. high schools up to snuff. But at UBC, which has some of the tightest admission requirements in the country, it’s striking that any student would arrive unable to do the work.

http://www.straight.com/article-2155...students-snuff

[jolinar of malkshor]

Other studies -

The research shows that 42% of Canadians aged 16-65 do not have the literacy skills considered necessary to live and work in today’s society.

http://nselwiki.cllrnet.ca/index.php/Canada's_Hidden_Deficit:_The_Social_Cost_of_Low_Li teracy_Skills

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2528650/

As far as parts of the curriculum are crap, well that's a personal opinion and I believe that you also posted that there probably could be some change. We need to teach our children about real life things. Almost every person will get a drivers licence by the time they are adults. Vehicle accidents are the biggest killer of young adults yet we teach them nothing in high school. We don't teach them how to drive, we don't teach them the rules of the roads, we don't teach them how to respect the power of the vehicle. We all live in this society but we never teach our children the laws of the land. We do very little preperation on how to write reports, resumes and cover letters. Yes, they may cover it over a 2 day period in CALM class but these are very important. More important than reading Shakespeare IMO.

As far as the system being broke, I said it is close to being broke, it is on the path.

What's wrong with program choice within a school board, like the CBE currently has?

Nothing is wrong with it. All I am saying is we need to be open to new ideas and try things out, we cannot be closed minded.

So a teacher isn't qualified to assess students' preparedness? A cop is in a better position? You're joking, right? Maybe a cop doesn't get to see a representative sample?

I did say that post secondary teachers are more qualified to determine if they are prepared. They are the people that have to deal with the students. How would a teacher of grade 10 know if they have prepared them well for PSE? That don't really know, in fact they would be more biased to say they are becuase they taught them. As for police knowing. All I am saying is that these people, police, PSE teachers, business people are the ones that are now dealing with them after they leave high school. Granted, police would deal more with the drop out losers than ones trying to become successful.

Don't weasel out of this. This is legitimate criticism of a screwed up policy plank put out by a fringe party. And you didn't derail the thread, I did.

I am not trying to weasel out of anything. I have no problem debating with people that are reasonable.

[jolinar of malkshor]

IFF wrote -

But according to you, teachers aren't a reliable source anyway!

In any case, it sound like your evidence is "no evidence at all." I'm sorry, but a news program plus biased anecdotal evidence doesn't prove a thing.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...&postcount=135

Please see above.

[jolinar of malkshor]

IFF wrote -

Well, I'm sure this will make you "cring" too... but actually, there's no point in debating with anybody if you're unwilling to be accountable for your own words.

Your exact words to bcb were: "quite frankly, a teacher wouldn't know." You later qualified your statement to include post-secondary educators--and since I have been a post-secondary educator for the better part of a decade, I was glad to assume the mantle of expertise and debunk the unfounded nonsense that you were spewing. You then cited a news program that relied on the expertise of "educators"--i.e. not post-secondary educators but real educators--teachers. The very people whose expertise you dismissed just a few posts before (ironically, they're about the only people whose expertise I might be inclined to accept--certainly I would never believe a police officer, whose experience is likely skewed toward the lower rungs of the scholastic success ladder).

I guess you can read it how ever you want. You knew what I meant when I said teachers (meaning primary and secondary) and you knew what I meant when I said educators (PSE). Yet instead of having a debate you try and pick a fight about semantics. You talk about how you "debuncked" unfounded nonsense. Yet you did nothing but blab on about what YOU believe. You accuse me of just making arguement without any facts yet you do the EXACT same thing. You provided not one shred of evidence to the debate and actually accuse me of "bsing". So, I guess everything you have said is BS as well.

As for the police officer comment I would agree that they most likely see the dead beats and most would not represent the majority of graduates. Having said that, I know a few resource officers in several police recruiting centres and some of the stories I hear about the kinds of applications they have received not just from High School grads but college grads as well would make any think how they ever made it through grade 10.

The fact is, on this issue (as with a few others) you once again show that you have too many opinions and not enough knowledge.

Opinions I do have. I did not once say I was an expert but my opinions are based on legitimate information from news articles and other programs. The fact that you believe that there is no problems at all makes me believe you know less of this than I. Not once did you acknowledge any of the facts that I have posted above.

Next time try a little research before leaping headlong into some hackneyed ideological stance. Put me on ignore if you like: I'm not going to cry about it. But maybe there will be more point in other people having debates with you if you're willing to take the time to construct a rational, reasoned argument on the basis of evidence, rather than making a claim because you saw a TV program one time that kind of seemed to support something you already believed.

Excuse me, I didn't realize that a prerequisite for posting on CP was having all the facts and rational before you could post. Forget the fact that I had read some of this information before and heard it on the news, it is now required that I have it available immediately upon posting.

The fact is, that if you think I'm an "expert in everything," then you profoundly misunderstand my style, and my approach to these issues. My academic training tends rather to make me think that I don't know anything at all yet, and that any opinion I form ought to be backed up by evidence and reason, rather than the tissue of emotional appeals and alarmism that seems to be your preferred approach. I'm prepared to back up my claims. Why aren't you? That's not "doing my work for me"; the onus is on you to prove that you're not full of crap.

I guess I did misunderstand your style, because that is most certainly not how you debate on this forum.

However, I will gladly agree with you on the topic of the sun, and will add that it rises and sets equally on liberals and conservatives alike.

Well, would the sun not rise sooner on the libs than the cons?

[bcb]

Oh boy,
I'm not getting any work done tonight because of you

Alright. First of all, I appreciate that you've tried to back up some of your contentions.

I wouldn't go as far as to say you've proved your point, however.

In 2003, almost 1.6 million individuals (37.8%) aged 16 to 25
years were functioning at literacy levels 1 and 2.

First of all, your evidence regarding literacy doesn't show any trend over a given period of time. There is no back data to compare your data to. What I can tell you, though; in the past 20 years, educators have made great strides in early diagnosis of learning disabilities, especially in the areas of reading and writing.

More than likely there has always been a segment of the population that had literacy problems, but it just wasn't diagnosed. In the past, these kids just left school early because they couldn't 'hack it'. Now a days, with better resources, these same kids will graduate high school despite their difficulties in reading and writing.

Although Canadians are more educated than ever before,

numerous surveys of business leaders indicate that employers
are dissatisfied with their employees’ so-called soft
skills (including teamwork, communication skills and selfmotivation)
and with some of the skills necessary for their
jobs (including the management of information, use of
numbers and problem solving).

The above quote taken from your own data contradicts your notion that our education system is broken, or near broken, for that matter.

The physics teacher blamed poor performance of his students on:
"the Ontario government [for introducing] a new, content-intensive curriculum for grades K to 8 in mathematics and language, followed in 1998 by the science and technology curriculum."

Please keep in mind that this has no bearing specifically on the public system, as in Canada, private schools are required to teach the same curriculum as public schools.

As far as parts of the curriculum are crap, well that's a personal opinion and I believe that you also posted that there probably could be some change. We need to teach our children about real life things. Almost every person will get a drivers licence by the time they are adults. Vehicle accidents are the biggest killer of young adults yet we teach them nothing in high school. We don't teach them how to drive, we don't teach them the rules of the roads, we don't teach them how to respect the power of the vehicle. We all live in this society but we never teach our children the laws of the land. We do very little preperation on how to write reports, resumes and cover letters. Yes, they may cover it over a 2 day period in CALM class but these are very important. More important than reading Shakespeare IMO.

I agree that schools should make learning relevant to kids' needs.

At many Calgary high schools, private driver schools offer discounted rates if a large number of students sign up. If you are sugesting that I, as a math/science teacher should be teaching my students how to drive, give your head a shake!

Students in CALM class are required to create a portfolio including a cover letter and resume.

I don't like Shakespeare much either, but if we are going to do English class justice, the old guy is pretty hard to leave out.

All I am saying is that these people, police, PSE teachers, business people are the ones that are now dealing with them after they leave high school.

First of all, most kids don't have run-ins with the police. Second, while no one doubts we are in the middle of "generation me", you still haven't provided any concrete proof that kids are not prepared to enter the workforce.

This entire debate has been about whether it is right for the government to offer vouchers for children to enroll in private schools. Nothing you've provided indicates any support for that.

[REDVAN]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

As far as the system being broke, I said it is close to being broke, it is on the path.

For someone with such a condescending viewpoint on Canadian education, you seem to have skipped the grammar class.

Thus, you'd be part of the 42% who can't use the language properly.

[First Lady]

Oh cool... this is where I can post my beefs with the education system?

Actually on whole, it is "acceptable". But I don't think the education of our youth should be left at acceptable. It could use some serious tweaking. These are my prime issues:

- The "whole language" approach. It might work for a large percentage of students; the there is no saving those who fall through the cracks.

- "Social promotion". Just passing kids to avoid the stigma of being held back. And then they are surprised when little Johnnie can't read when he hits junior high (or beyond).

- No flexibility to pay teachers based on merit. There are some excellent teachers, but they get paid the same as the useless ones who simply keep a big chair warm.


This comes from personal experience with one of my kids. The other two went through with little problem. I wish my son's experience had been an isolated thing, but sadly I know it is not. Luckily we were able to get him the education he needed and it is thanks to a teacher who really did care and really did listen to us.

The reality is kids do fall through the cracks and we could (should) do better.

[flylock shox]

Also, note that many employers and managers are Generation X.

They're not impressed by anything.

[bcb]

- The "whole language" approach. It might work for a large percentage of students; the there is no saving those who fall through the cracks.

- "Social promotion". Just passing kids to avoid the stigma of being held back. And then they are surprised when little Johnnie can't read when he hits junior high (or beyond).

agreed

- No flexibility to pay teachers based on merit. There are some excellent teachers, but they get paid the same as the useless ones who simply keep a big chair warm.

I don't personally know any 'chair warmers'. Not saying there aren't any, but then again most companies have a few. The chair warmer notion is a tad stereotypical.

How do you determine merit? popularity contest? good looks? parent survey? Remember simply linking teacher performance to standardized testing results is erroneous, as tests only tell part of the story, and because results swing wildly from class to class.

[bcb]

Originally Posted by flylock shox

Also, note that many employers and managers are Generation X.

They're not impressed by anything.

broad generalization?

[Ashartus]

Compared to other countries, our education system is still pretty good, and our students score pretty well compared to other countries on international tests (especially Alberta students). However, there is always room for improvement.

As an employer, the biggest weakness I see is writing and communication skills. Part of this is the fault of the post-secondary system; I hire scientists and engineers, and the post-secondary programs in these disciplines don't put anywhere near enough emphasis on the "soft" skills, but it all starts with primary education. Learning to communicate effectively isn't something that comes in a few weeks - you need to start learning how early and keep working on it.

[Ashartus]

Originally Posted by bcb

agreed
How do you determine merit? popularity contest? good looks? parent survey? Remember simply linking teacher performance to standardized testing results is erroneous, as tests only tell part of the story, and because results swing wildly from class to class.

I agree. Standardized test results are more a function of which students are in the class than the teacher. If you ask the kids to evaluate their teachers, they'll rate the popular ones high, not necessarily the good ones. To some extent school administrators can tell which teachers are really poor though, and the system currently makes it pretty difficult to get rid of those ones.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by bcb

This entire debate has been about whether it is right for the government to offer vouchers for children to enroll in private schools. Nothing you've provided indicates any support for that.

Currently public schools get base funding of $5971.00 per student.
Private schools get 70% of that per student. ($4179.70)

Yet the people who send their kids to private schools pay 100% of their Education Property tax. Can you explain or justify that for me?

[bcb]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Currently public schools get base funding of $5971.00 per student.
Private schools get 70% of that per student. ($4179.70)

Yet the people who send their kids to private schools pay 100% of their Education Property tax. Can you explain or justify that for me?

I didn't get sick last year. Can I get a tax refund for the unused portion of my taxes that went to health care?

EDIT:
Remember that the majority of education funding comes from the province, not from collected municipal education taxes.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by bcb

I don't personally know any 'chair warmers'. Not saying there aren't any, but then again most companies have a few. The chair warmer notion is a tad stereotypical.

I consider the teachers my son had from K to 4 as chair warmers...ok maybe not the K teacher. The others all said, "don't be concerned" "there's nothing wrong" "he will pick it up when he is ready" "you are not doing enough with him at home", etc, etc, etc..... and "socially" promoted him every year. To this day I think his constantly being pulled out of classes for "tutoring" did him more harm than holding him back ever would have.

How do you determine merit? popularity contest? good looks? parent survey? Remember simply linking teacher performance to standardized testing results is erroneous, as tests only tell part of the story, and because results swing wildly from class to class.

Agreed.
It must encompass many aspects. Principal reviews, parent reviews, peer reviews, but it does also need to have some outcome assessment. You can build in realistic benchmarks based on the unique challenges. ESL as one example.

[bcb]

Originally Posted by First Lady

I consider the teachers my son had from K to 4 as chair warmers...ok maybe not the K teacher. The others all said, "don't be concerned" "there's nothing wrong" "he will pick it up when he is ready" "you are not doing enough with him at home", etc, etc, etc..... and "socially" promoted him every year. To this day I think his constantly being pulled out of classes for "tutoring" did him more harm than holding him back ever would have.



Agreed.
It must encompass many aspects. Principal reviews, parent reviews, peer reviews, but it does also need to have some outcome assessment. You can build in realistic benchmarks based on the unique challenges. ESL as one example.

Remember, they promoted your son because they legally had to, not because they were lazy.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by bcb

I didn't get sick last year. Can I get a tax refund for the unused portion of my taxes that went to health care?

If your healthcare tax dollars followed you (the patient) that might be an option.

EDIT:
Remember that the majority of education funding comes from the province, not from collected municipal education taxes.

True, but those monies also come from taxpayers.

Why imbalance?

And what is your fear of freedom of choice for parents?

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by bcb

Remember, they promoted your son because they legally had to, not because they were lazy.

HUH???? It's a law? Since when? That's the first I have ever heard of that.

[bcb]

Originally Posted by First Lady

If your healthcare tax dollars followed you (the patient) that might be an option.



True, but those monies also come from taxpayers.

Why imbalance?

And what is your fear of freedom of choice for parents?

I have no problem with parents seeking out choice.

My view is that, with regards to both health care and education, we need a strong public system. If individuals wish to seek out alternative private alternatives, they may opt to do so, provided they pay for it themselves.

I don't think that's such a radical viewpoint.

Keep in mind that in the end, spreading money around won't save money or make the system more efficient.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by REDVAN

For someone with such a condescending viewpoint on Canadian education, you seem to have skipped the grammar class.

Thus, you'd be part of the 42% who can't use the language properly.

Wow, I just posted three pages of stuff and you pick out one little mistake and then try to say I am in a stat that was never used anywhere regarding "proper language". By the way the "system being broke" should have been in quotations.

Well done.