Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[The Big Chill]

Originally Posted by Slava

Sure, but is there a middle ground here? No one is saying that the teachers are terrible and that this is all on them, so take what you get. The argument is that having them strike and close schools has a negative impact on the students, as evidenced by Covid.

And yeah, salary negotiations can suck. It's not fun and it's also part of the deal for most employees in some capacity.

I think most agree there should be a middle ground, and it’s still fairly early in the negotiations so hopefully a deal can still be reached without disruption.

I also think many of us are just so sick of this gov’t that it’s hard to believe they are negotiating in good faith. It seems that all they want to do is fight public servants, limit their ability to do their jobs, and then blame them as a reason why they need to privatize.

This negotiation hasn’t even reached the voting stages yet though, so it’s still a ways off from a strike.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I could spend another 15 mins looking up studies on the impact of school disruptions on learning, including the wealth of data showing the learning loss from North America’s unusually long summer breaks compared to the rest of the developed world. Or I could provide a bunch of links to the danger to at-risk children of not having a safe place to go to every day. But it’s not worth the effort with people who don’t care enough to look up the readily-accessible information themselves.

Vibes > empirical fact isn’t just a failing of the populist right.

Actually, the pandemic data isn't so clear. While there is some correlation between school closure length and learning loss in North America and Europe, it doesn't necessarily follow that closures were the primary causative effect there because it's impossible to isolate it from other pandemic variables.

To do that, it's probably better to look at places that had little health burden from COVID and didn't experience as many economic issues, but still went through school closures. Australia is a good example of that, where there was little COVID, but some regions had long school closures. And there at least, there was no long-term loss in learning outcomes. And what's more, there was basically no variation between regions that had longer closures and those that had little to no time missed. So Southern Australia and Western Australia had virtually no school closures, whereas metro Melbourne students missed almost a year's worth of in-person. Despite the disparity, learning outcomes were basically the same between the regions.

[woob]

Originally Posted by Slava

Sure, but is there a middle ground here? No one is saying that the teachers are terrible and that this is all on them, so take what you get. The argument is that having them strike and close schools has a negative impact on the students, as evidenced by Covid.

And yeah, salary negotiations can suck. It's not fun and it's also part of the deal for most employees in some capacity.

Sure, nobody is saying this is all on teachers, but you've witnessed discussions around teachers on this very board and how often they get dragged for a plethora of reasons.

And as it has been mentioned, rarely do these negotiations start from a place of good faith with the current goverment. I believe their current pay trajectory has been out of sync with rate of inflation by some margin, so would middle ground be bringing them back in sync or close to, instead of 3% year over year?

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

The most popular move that they could do would be to follow BC and put a cap on class sizes. Helps everybody.

Remember, if you will, that the goblin that is currently dismantling the health care system was put in charge of the education system before that, with the same mandate of destruction.

I have very little faith in the UCP to do anything here that will help teachers, parents or children. Whatever it will end up being will help private schools, the truancy arm of the UCP police corps, and the industry being built around the hunting of endangered species (somehow).

Not disagreeing but it's not that simple and there would be consequences to this as well, just like there are consequences for anything. Two off the top of my head, and these are not necessarily a bad thing but might not be popular:

1. higher taxes to pay for the additional teachers required to do this. The only way you reduce class size is with more teachers
2. potential closure of underutilized schools (rural areas in particular) as school boards scramble to find ways to get more teachers into larger schools where class size is a problem. Or alternatively bussing students further to those underutilized schools and away from overpopulated ones.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by woob

It's always hilarious to me that people essentially think teachers need to get bent when it comes to raises and salaries, and yet we talk about many societal issues which often can be attributed to poor or lackluster education. Yes, there are other factors that contribute to education quality (class sizes, policy, schools) but teachers are the ones "delivering the product."

These are the people who educate our children and have to deal with the ####show of education policy and class sizes in this province. The fact that we always try and nickle and dime them on salary must be such a demoralizing experience.

And then we have Cliff yammering on about education loss during a pandemic, like that decision solely rests on the shoulders of the teachers or something (I'm sure he doesn't fully think that, but still). I can compartmentalize the fact that having that education gap may have not been the best decision, while also wanting teachers to be well paid and fully supported.

It's just so typical of this province.

Where did I say teachers should get bent? Or say school closures were their fault?

Everyone in the world believes they should be paid more. Plumbers, truck drivers, accountants, retail clerks. Teachers do too. And good for them. I don’t hold it against them at all.

But why should teachers’ complaints about pay be treated differently from those of plumbers, truck drivers, accountants, and grocery clerks? Why are we expected to regard that particular job as more noble and selfless than others? It’s such a weirdly sensitive topic.

I’m happy for teachers to press for better salaries, just like I’m happy for plumbers, truck, drivers, accountants, and grocery clerks to earn more. But if teachers go on strike as a negotiating tactic, it will hurt children. Sorry, but that’s the unwelcome truth.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Actually, the pandemic data isn't so clear. While there is some correlation between school closure length and learning loss in North America and Europe, it doesn't necessarily follow that closures were the primary causative effect there because it's impossible to isolate it from other pandemic variables.

To do that, it's probably better to look at places that had little health burden from COVID and didn't experience as many economic issues, but still went through school closures. Australia is a good example of that, where there was little COVID, but some regions had long school closures. And there at least, there was no long-term loss in learning outcomes. And what's more, there was basically no variation between regions that had longer closures and those that had little to no time missed. So Southern Australia and Western Australia had virtually no school closures, whereas metro Melbourne students missed almost a year's worth of in-person. Despite the disparity, learning outcomes were basically the same between the regions.

I haven’t claimed it’s the only reason for learning loss. But it doesn’t have to be.

Yes, the data can be muddy and difficult to isolate. And no doubt you can cherry-pick individual studies to cast doubt. But this OECD meta-study has taken those variables into account, and the conclusions stand.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-022-01506-4

We also have a studies predating Covid (so isolated from the effects of Covid, like you want) that show serious long-term learning loss from interruptions in education. From the article above:

One may expect that children were able to recover learning that was lost early in the pandemic, after teachers and families had time to adjust to the new learning conditions and after structures for online learning and for recovering early learning deficits were set up. However, existing research on teacher strikes in Belgium13 and Argentina14, shortened school years in Germany15 and disruptions to education during World War II16 suggests that learning deficits are difficult to compensate and tend to persist in the long run.

Kids missing school is bad, and the consequences can last a lifetime. This is well-attested and uncontroversial among researchers in the field. The fact people in this thread are trying to downplay or dismiss these findings is frankly depressing. We already have partisan culture warriors on the right rejecting research and facts that challenge their preferred narratives. We don’t need ostensibly educated people on the left doing the same because they can’t reconcile the fact that the interests of teachers and students sometimes conflict.

[woob]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Where did I say teachers should get bent? Or say school closures were their fault?

C'mon, Cliff! Your reading comprehension is better than that.

Originally Posted by woob

It's always hilarious to me that people essentially think teachers need to get bent when it comes to raises and salaries

I didn't attribute this solely to you.

Originally Posted by woob

And then we have Cliff yammering on about education loss during a pandemic, like that decision solely rests on the shoulders of the teachers or something (I'm sure he doesn't fully think that, but still)

Again, clearly stated I'm sure you don't fully think that.

And to your other points, it's not about the job being more "noble and selfless" its about their salaries being more in sync with inflation metrics.

And to your point about kids missing school being bad, there's a simple solution; enter negotiations in good faith and put an economically current offer on the table, instead of another 3 years of 0/1/2/3 percent wage increases.

[Drak]

Long term health problems, death, imploding our healthcare system, spreading Covid to mom and dad, grandma at grandpa at the time of the pandemic are consequences that can last a lifetime.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Where did I say teachers should get bent?

While perhaps not specifically stating they should get bent, arguing that they should be declared an essential service and thus have a significant portion of their bargaining leverage taken away certainly implies that you’re not looking to reduce the likelihood of them getting bent.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I haven’t claimed it’s the only reason for learning loss. But it doesn’t have to be.

Yes, the data can be muddy and difficult to isolate. And no doubt you can cherry-pick individual studies to cast doubt. But this OECD meta-study has taken those variables into account, and the conclusions stand.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-022-01506-4

We also have a studies predating Covid (so isolated from the effects of Covid, like you want) that show serious long-term learning loss from interruptions in education. From the article above:

Kids missing school is bad, and the consequences can last a lifetime. This is well-attested and uncontroversial among researchers in the field. The fact people in this thread are trying to downplay or dismiss these findings is frankly depressing. We already have partisan culture warriors on the right rejecting research and facts that challenge their preferred narratives. We don’t need ostensibly educated people on the left doing the same because they can’t reconcile the fact that the interests of teachers and students sometimes conflict.

But the data really isn't as clear as you're suggesting. Sure, all other things being equal, kids learning in person is better than not. But the level of learning loss from short absences isn't necessarily all that notable and there are a million confounding factors.

There have been a lot of studies on worldwide PISA scores (international standardized tests) post-pandemic. And yes, the scores have dropped, but the magnitude of the drop really wasn't abnormal compared to drops in other non-pandemic periods:

Math:

2003 -> 2006: 16.3 point drop

2012 -> 2015: 6.9 point drop

2015 -> 2018: 7.3 point drop

2018 -> 2022: 11.2 point drop

Reading:

2003 -> 2006: 18.5 point drop

2012 -> 2015: 7.3 point drop

2015 -> 2018: 12.8 point drop

2018 -> 2022: 9.6 point drop

Science:

2003 -> 2006: 1.3 point drop

2012 -> 2015: 8.3 point drop

2015 -> 2018: 12.7 point drop

2018 -> 2022: 1.8 point drop

Do those 2018 -> 2022 numbers seem all that notable in that context? Not really. But despite that, people convert those numbers into things like "7 months of learning lost during the pandemic". But does that mean they lost 11 months of learning between 2003 and 2006 (given that the point drop was 60% higher than during the pandemic)? No, because there was no disruption in those years, so obviously there are other significant factors at play.

And I mean, BC didn't close schools outside the first 2 months of the pandemic; is there robust data showing that BC students had better learning outcomes than the rest of Canada? It doesn't really show up in PISA scores, where BC was 5th among the 10 provinces in terms of point drop.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I haven’t claimed it’s the only reason for learning loss. But it doesn’t have to be.

Yes, the data can be muddy and difficult to isolate. And no doubt you can cherry-pick individual studies to cast doubt. But this OECD meta-study has taken those variables into account, and the conclusions stand.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-022-01506-4

We also have a studies predating Covid (so isolated from the effects of Covid, like you want) that show serious long-term learning loss from interruptions in education. From the article above:


Kids missing school is bad, and the consequences can last a lifetime. This is well-attested and uncontroversial among researchers in the field. The fact people in this thread are trying to downplay or dismiss these findings is frankly depressing. We already have partisan culture warriors on the right rejecting research and facts that challenge their preferred narratives. We don’t need ostensibly educated people on the left doing the same because they can’t reconcile the fact that the interests of teachers and students sometimes conflict.

You still haven't come up with any alternative to what should have been done, or we should do in the future, given the reality of the situation. Ya, it's bad to be forced to close schools because of a pandemic. We get it.



The solution is actual education for society around public health, immediately shutting down bull####, certainly not electing antivax morons to government, and have healthy and robust public insitutions(healthcare, education) that can withstand adversity. We've done none of that(and arguably are worse off), so if you expect schools to remain open throguh the next pandemic, I've got some shocking reality based news to share, and it's exactly what happened last time, but worse.

[Amethyst]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Where did I say teachers should get bent? Or say school closures were their fault?

Everyone in the world believes they should be paid more. Plumbers, truck drivers, accountants, retail clerks. Teachers do too. And good for them. I don’t hold it against them at all.

But why should teachers’ complaints about pay be treated differently from those of plumbers, truck drivers, accountants, and grocery clerks? Why are we expected to regard that particular job as more noble and selfless than others? It’s such a weirdly sensitive topic.

I’m happy for teachers to press for better salaries, just like I’m happy for plumbers, truck, drivers, accountants, and grocery clerks to earn more. But if teachers go on strike as a negotiating tactic, it will hurt children. Sorry, but that’s the unwelcome truth.

Teachers can ask for more money, but they need to remember they're just the same as plumbers, truck drivers, accountants, and grocery clerks. They're not special.

If teachers can't come to an agreement, they shouldn't be allowed to go on strike, because they're special.

[Major Major]

End of the day, if they want a healthy public education system, they will need to pay enough to lure out of province teachers. Been that way a while now. This is nothing more than a market based conversation with the consideration that our market is less attractive, particularly to public workers, than others.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

While perhaps not specifically stating they should get bent, arguing that they should be declared an essential service and thus have a significant portion of their bargaining leverage taken away certainly implies that you’re not looking to reduce the likelihood of them getting bent.

I don’t think police should be able to walk off the job. I guess I hate cops too?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Major Major

End of the day, if they want a healthy public education system, they will need to pay enough to lure out of province teachers. Been that way a while now. This is nothing more than a market based conversation with the consideration that our market is less attractive, particularly to public workers, than others.

So do we have a teacher shortage because we can't find them? I just assumed it was because we weren't hiring more for financial and capacity reasons.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by opendoor

But the data really isn't as clear as you're suggesting. Sure, all other things being equal, kids learning in person is better than not. But the level of learning loss from short absences isn't necessarily all that notable and there are a million confounding factors.

There have been a lot of studies on worldwide PISA scores (international standardized tests) post-pandemic. And yes, the scores have dropped, but the magnitude of the drop really wasn't abnormal compared to drops in other non-pandemic periods:

Math:

2003 -> 2006: 16.3 point drop

2012 -> 2015: 6.9 point drop

2015 -> 2018: 7.3 point drop

2018 -> 2022: 11.2 point drop

Reading:

2003 -> 2006: 18.5 point drop

2012 -> 2015: 7.3 point drop

2015 -> 2018: 12.8 point drop

2018 -> 2022: 9.6 point drop

Science:

2003 -> 2006: 1.3 point drop

2012 -> 2015: 8.3 point drop

2015 -> 2018: 12.7 point drop

2018 -> 2022: 1.8 point drop

Do those 2018 -> 2022 numbers seem all that notable in that context? Not really. But despite that, people convert those numbers into things like "7 months of learning lost during the pandemic". But does that mean they lost 11 months of learning between 2003 and 2006 (given that the point drop was 60% higher than during the pandemic)? No, because there was no disruption in those years, so obviously there are other significant factors at play.

And I mean, BC didn't close schools outside the first 2 months of the pandemic; is there robust data showing that BC students had better learning outcomes than the rest of Canada? It doesn't really show up in PISA scores, where BC was 5th among the 10 provinces in terms of point drop.

You’re getting into do your own research territory. Why are you skeptical of the figures and conclusions presented by Unicef, the OECD, Nature, the NYT, etc., and a bunch of Canadian studies that you can look up? Not to mention pre-Covid research on the impact of school closures and extended summer breaks. I appreciate you went to the effort to look up that data, but you realize you’re on an island there, right?

Learning loss aside, child welfare experts have implored schools to remain open as safe places for children from distressed households. Again, that’s a completely mainstream and uncontroversial conclusion in the field.

Covid gave us a wealth more data and research to affirm what experts already knew: keeping schools open is absolutely essential to the wellbeing of children. Anyone who thinks a teacher’s strike would be anything but bad for children is blinded by partisanship or self-interest.

[The Big Chill]

Is anybody saying they want schools closed? This is such an odd argument as pretty much everyone will want a deal to get done without a strike.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I don’t think police should be able to walk off the job. I guess I hate cops too?

Now you’re just being lazy.

Police are considered an essential service and have limited options for job action as a result. By saying you don’t think they should be able to strike you’re not advocating for them to lose any rights they currently have.

Teachers are not considered an essential service and don’t have the same limitations. By saying you think they should be deemed essential you’re advocating for them to lose rights they do currently have.

So while you may not be explicitly telling them to “get bent”, you’re not exactly wishing them well either.

Can you understand now why people would consider your position to not be supportive of teachers or even neutral on the matter?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

So do we have a teacher shortage because we can't find them? I just assumed it was because we weren't hiring more for financial and capacity reasons.

I know there are some days with insufficiently available subs. This would suggest that we are reaching the limits of available teachers right now. This would be ccsd no idea about other districts.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GGG

I know there are some days with insufficiently available subs. This would suggest that we are reaching the limits of available teachers right now. This would be ccsd no idea about other districts.

But I mean are we trying to hire and can't get them, or are we not hiring because we don't have budget for more?