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

[bcb]

Originally Posted by First Lady

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

Sorry, to clarify, it probably isn't a law. (You can read the Alberta School Act) to find out. It's more convention, based upon so called 'best practice' in education circles. All I'm saying is that the teachers likely didn't have any say in the matter.

I do agree with you though. Automatic social promotion isn't sound policy. The vast majority of my math and science teacher colleagues also agree, after all, secondary teachers end up having to reteach all the skills missed in the primary grades.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by 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.



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.



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.



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.



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.

All I have been saying is that it is not as simple as saying the system works hunky dory and we shouldn't stop thinking of ways to improve it. At least people can have a decent discussion with you.

And of course I wouldn't expect math teachers to teach driver training unless they themselves were trained to do it AND they wanted to do it.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by bcb

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.

Having the $$$ (already allocated) follow the student (voucher system) does not pay for private schooling. They still have to pay the additional fees.

A voucher system brings in an element of competition. Schools would have to excel to attract the students in order to get funding. I know that sounds a bit scary, but it would actually create a stronger public system.

We would actually see schools start to emerge to address the true needs of students. We would see more Dr. Oakleys (literacy immersion) or James Fowlers (trade development). It would open the door to all sorts of possibilities; arts schools, music, etc.

No, this wouldn't save money (though the potential is there), but it absolutely will make the system more effective and student outcomes would be higher.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by bcb

Sorry, to clarify, it probably isn't a law. (You can read the Alberta School Act) to find out. It's more convention, based upon so called 'best practice' in education circles. All I'm saying is that the teachers likely didn't have any say in the matter.

Well, we as parents certainly did not have a say. The idea was rejected every time we broached it.

It seems a bit silly to me. If they can't determine if a student is ready for the next level, who does?

Also, it is not just about auto-passing. It was his grade 5 teacher who actually listened to us and had some additional testing done. It was determined he was reading at a grade two level and his writing skills barely registered at grade one level.

When I was in elementary (many, many years ago) they did this type of testing every year. It was a good measure of progress or lack there of.

I do agree with you though. Automatic social promotion isn't sound policy. The vast majority of my math and science teacher colleagues also agree, after all, secondary teachers end up having to reteach all the skills missed in the primary grades.

Which indicates to me we are not using our tax dollars to there best advantage. A lot of duplicity going on.

[bcb]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Having the $$$ (already allocated) follow the student (voucher system) does not pay for private schooling. They still have to pay the additional fees.

A voucher system brings in an element of competition. Schools would have to excel to attract the students in order to get funding. I know that sounds a bit scary, but it would actually create a stronger public system.

We would actually see schools start to emerge to address the true needs of students. We would see more Dr. Oakleys (literacy immersion) or James Fowlers (trade development). It would open the door to all sorts of possibilities; arts schools, music, etc.

No, this wouldn't save money (though the potential is there), but it absolutely will make the system more effective and student outcomes would be higher.

Okay, but in the States, where they've had voucher-like systems, public education has gone to the dogs. Americans, especially in the south east do their best to get their kids into whatever private school or parochial school possible, just to avoid the public system.

Public schools already compete for students, as, in Alberta, parents may send their child to whatever public school they want (even if it's not their designated school), provided there aren't in-jurisdiction students wait listed, who would have priority.

I have sat in at admin meetings where our principal is trying to come up with a way to make our school unique, thus attracting more students. Remember, when enrollment decreases, teachers get surplussed. Even though they don't get fired, moving schools is akin to having to start a new job.

You've listed some examples of choice within the public system (which I strongly support). In Calgary, we have Arts and science based, traditional, trade, vocational,all girls, alternative, etc.

Public demand will spur that on.

Maybe I'm wrong, but honestly, I feel the whole point of this "school choice" movement is more social policy than fiscal, based on the notion of attracting religious voters who don't like their kids being "indoctrinated" by the secular state.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by bcb

Okay, but in the States, where they've had voucher-like systems, public education has gone to the dogs. Americans, especially in the south east do their best to get their kids into whatever private school or parochial school possible, just to avoid the public system.

Public schools already compete for students, as, in Alberta, parents may send their child to whatever public school they want (even if it's not their designated school), provided there aren't in-jurisdiction students wait listed, who would have priority.

Well, no we don't have complete freedom. My son's school could only submit 3 names to attend Dr. Oakley (though they had far more that would have qualified) then from those 3 one name was drawn from a hat.....my son was the lucky one.

I have sat in at admin meetings where our principal is trying to come up with a way to make our school unique, thus attracting more students. Remember, when enrollment decreases, teachers get surplussed. Even though they don't get fired, moving schools is akin to having to start a new job.

You've listed some examples of choice within the public system (which I strongly support). In Calgary, we have Arts and science based, traditional, trade, vocational,all girls, alternative, etc.

Public demand will spur that on.

Exactly and a voucher system would expand on this.

Maybe I'm wrong, but honestly, I feel the whole point of this "school choice" movement is more social policy than fiscal, based on the notion of attracting religious voters who don't like their kids being "indoctrinated" by the secular state.

Yes, you are wrong. It is about freedom of choice. Sure for some that might mean they choose the Christian Heritage School (they already do or they home school). But your argument makes for great fear mongering.

[kirant]

I'm not sure how much I can say on this, but from a student's perspective, I've noticed the decrease in quality of students.

I'm in 2nd year Engineering, but I've already noticed a massive decrease in difficulty of our exams. A first year course (ENGG 205, Statics) recieved a record number of failures even AFTER the passing grade was dropped to 33%. The kicker? The exam, in my opinion, was easier than all the old ones. Several courses have made their finals easier than old ones and are still getting approximately the same marks as the older, more difficult ones. Now, it might be because I'm in a math/science field, I haven't noticed any problems with mental math, but certainly the abilities of the students I'm with out of High School are weaker at, in my opinion, almost everything (Myself included).

Just the info I can add.

[bcb]

Yes, you are wrong. It is about freedom of choice. Sure for some that might mean they choose the Christian Heritage School (they already do or they home school). But your argument makes for great fear mongering.

I've already explained that parents have freedom of choice. Choice doesn't imply the government must fund all possible choices. If you think I'm fear mongering, that's fine, but I'm just basing my opinions on an already well traveled path.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by bcb

I've already explained that parents already have freedom of choice.

And I gave you an example that, that is not true.

Choice doesn't imply the government must fund all possible choices.

They virtually do now. Education dollars go to public, private, charter and even home school.

If you think I'm fear mongering, that's fine, but I'm just basing my opinions on an already well traveled path.

I said your argument was fear mongering; not 'you' in particular. Sorry, I wasn't clear on that.

[longsuffering]

LOL - You know it's going to be a doozy of a thread when the OP starts begins by making the first 4 posts.

And don't worry, it doesn't look at all like you poached links and studies you'd never seen or heard of, then cut and paste them into a post all in an (unsuccessful) effort to make yourself seen to be informed on the issue.

Some people may have edited the cut and paste text to make it less obvious that they'd simply poached Google search results, but I admire your brash approach.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by First Lady

But your argument makes for great fear mongering.

Ah, the "fear mongering" card. The blunt tool of choice for those who don't want an open debate.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

LOL - You know it's going to be a doozy of a thread when the OP starts begins by making the first 4 posts.

And don't worry, it doesn't look at all like you poached links and studies you'd never seen or heard of, then cut and paste them into a post all in an (unsuccessful) effort to make yourself seen to be informed on the issue.

Some people may have edited the cut and paste text to make it less obvious that they'd simply poached Google search results, but I admire your brash approach.

Careful, jolinar's really grumpy with people who have him dead to rights today...

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

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.

One little mistake??? You do know Firefox offers a spell-checker, don't you?

We do very little preperation on how to write reports, resumes and cover letters.

How would a techer of grade 10 know if they have prepared them well for PSE?

You knew what I ment when I said ...

You talk about how you "debuncked" unfounded nonsense.

You accuse me of just making arguement without any facts yet you do the EXACT same thing.

Excuse me, I didn't realize that a prerequisite for posting on CP was having all the facts and rational before you could post.

Perhaps you meant rationale? Or maybe you did mean posters should be rational?

At least people can haev a decent discussion with you.

That's just the spelling. I don't know where to begin with grammar.

The good news is, you are making a strong (unintentional) argument that there are real problems in our education system.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

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.

In a previous post you quote a professor who griped about student's ability to rote-learn only and not actually think, but then you say filling out forms (resume's, cover letters) is more important than reading Shakespeare.

I'd call that a contradiction.

You actually have to think to figure out Shakespeare. You don't have to think too hard to come up with some buzzwords and HR-friendly nonsense that goes into the typical resume or cover letter. Two days in CALM class is plenty to learn how to write a resume.

[bcb]

They virtually do now. Education dollars go to public, private, charter and even home school.

So you admit then, people DO have a choice.

It looks like our only point of contention is funding.

[opendoor]

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?

What about people who don't even have kids? Using your logic, why should they pay anything towards educating other peoples' children?

[MelBridgeman]

Some people fail the education system, not the othe way around..
I know some pretty damn brillant people who never finished high school, and i know some idiots with degrees up the ying yang...bottom line, it comes down to how much you as a person get out of it....

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

One little mistake??? You do know Firefox offers a spell-checker, don't you?















Perhaps you meant rationale? Or maybe you did mean posters should be rational?



That's just the spelling. I don't know where to begin with grammar.

The good news is, you are making a strong (unintentional) argument that there are real problems in our education system.

Maybe I should use fire fox then. A lot of those mistakes are simply typing errors. It tells me something when you only attack spelling errors in a debate rather than the content. For sure there are errors in my post because I put it all together in a matter of a few minutes. I could careless. What I am not doing is spending hours proof reading a 3 post posting. When I am trying to get it on as fast as possible so I don't spend my entire night on CP there are going to be mistakes and I could care less.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

In a previous post you quote a professor who griped about student's ability to rote-learn only and not actually think, but then you say filling out forms (resume's, cover letters) is more important than reading Shakespeare.

I'd call that a contradiction.

You actually have to think to figure out Shakespeare. You don't have to think too hard to come up with some buzzwords and HR-friendly nonsense that goes into the typical resume or cover letter. Two days in CALM class is plenty to learn how to write a resume.

Not even close. Anyhow, I provide examples form multiple sources, they are not all going to be saying the exact same thing. Many of those sources showed a decrease in reading and writing.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

LOL - You know it's going to be a doozy of a thread when the OP starts begins by making the first 4 posts.

And don't worry, it doesn't look at all like you poached links and studies you'd never seen or heard of, then cut and paste them into a post all in an (unsuccessful) effort to make yourself seen to be informed on the issue.

Some people may have edited the cut and paste text to make it less obvious that they'd simply poached Google search results, but I admire your brash approach.

Haha, again we have someone who is going to attack the poster and not the content. You can't win with some of you. I presented an idea what I had heard and read before and provided some proof to back it up. There is most certainly more out there but this is a CP debate not an academic study. I supplied the link to all the studies and like I ALSO said in my posts some of the studies provided positive feedback about our system.

I guess one can't even use google now to find info. Nice to know.