Edu-Babble or Remedial Education?

December 18, 2010
Kenyon Wallace presents an interview in the National Post with teacher and now author, Michael Zwaagstra of Manitoba. Michael has just published a new book co-authored with two of his former professors at the University of Manitoba's Faculty of Education, Rod Clifton and John Long. The book is entitled, What's Wrong with our Schools and How to Fix Them.


Michael had a feeling that the "progressive education" he was taught in the Faculty of Education, University of Manitoba may be more "edu-babble" than reality when he stepped in front of a class of uninterested teenagers. 


The article points out that the "progressive" idea of simply being a "guide on the side" just did not fit with what he thought made sense. 


When he took courses outside of the faculty of education, he felt empowered because he was actually learning about the subjects in question whereas the de-emphasis on conveying knowledge did not seem to accomplish anything tangible.

[Editor: As a former teacher, I agree wholeheartedly with the author as reported by Mr. Wallace. The idea of child-centred learning sounds WONDERFUL but when it means that the child should decide exactly what he wants to learn, it rings hollow. 


I had the daughter of a "consultant" for our board of education who did not receive a good mark because she did not finish her project. This consultant stated to me that as long as she knows how, is it really important to finish the project? I was shocked that someone was appointed to her position and did not realize that people need to know stuff and finish things.


Do we not want doctors who know where the body parts are and how to safely extract or fix injured parts? 

Hmm! Where is that heart anyway?

Do we want lawyers who know HOW to find out information but know nothing about how the law works? Do we want drivers who know WHAT those highway signs mean or just "how to find out" what they mean? 




Do we want engineers who actually have KNOWLEDGE of stresses and how to build bridges that don't fall down or do we want them only to know HOW to find out?


Do we want cashiers who can actually give the right change or just find out from someone else what the amount should be?


In the real world, do you want a road-builder who knows how but never finishes a highway, a doctor who orders several tests in order to diagnose your medical problem, and then never fixes it? Surely this is ludicrous. But it was the state of the profession in Niagara during the 80's and 90's. 


I did see some hope for change when tests were introduced at Grade 3 and 6 to test WHAT the students knew about math. Even tho they needed a lot of revisions to be more accurate, it was a start. I profess ignorance of what the current philosophy of learning is in Ontario.]


The article points out that after ten years as a teacher, the ideas he was force-fed do not work. He concludes that "we will continue to fail our kids if we do not change the way we teach and the way public education systems are administered."


The book mentions a number of controversial practices such as "no-fail" and "no-test" philosophies, the "spread of edu-babble in curricula" and the reduction of the teacher's authority in the classroom.


He points out that there is something fundamentally wrong with teachers having to make students experiences "fun" instead of teaching facts which are the building blocks of knowledge. [Imagine a student not having to know how to add, subtract, multiply and divide but just "how to use a calculator". Nothing wrong with learning their use but will a person always have a calculator with them when they need to do math? Will someone KNOW if an answer is wrong even if calculator-generated if they don't know HOW to check it with pencil and paper?]


When students' education is tailored to them, how can the student be evaluated on what he has learned? The quality of textbooks, he points out, has been "dumbed down" recently in order to follow the curricula handed down from on high. 


The article also points out that the consolidation of power at the administrative level in school boards has accentuated the problem because the teacher is micro-managed from the top and evaluated on what they have been told to do. But where is the measurement of the final product, student learning?


In his own classroom he tries to balance the good parts of the "progressive" philosophies with direct instruction.


It is also mentioned that in Edmonton, schools are allowed to specialize in music, sports or drama with principals given considerable control over budgets. "Alberta's standardized testing system ensures that students are learning common material."


Mr. Zwaagstra is a research associate at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and a city councillor in Steinbach, where he lives with his wife and four young sons.


Editor: If this philosophy is continuing in 2010, 2011 and beyond, will we be graduating students into our labour force who know HOW TO but never TO FINISH, a job?

Celebrities Show Their Support...

A Must Watch Video February 2009 “Celebrities Show Their Support For Children's Educational Network & Club TUKI” See what Joan Collins, David DeLuise, Nancee Borgnine, Taylor Dayne, Bobby Brown, Steve Stein & Kate Linder have to say about CEN & Club TUKI. To: All Customers, Fans and Supporters of Club TUKI From: Greg Writer, CEO RE: Celebrities Support For CEN Dear Friend, I wanted to share a very special 3 minute video with you of a number of celebrities showing their support for Children's Educational Network and Club TUKI. Pleaseclick the image of Joan Collins to watch this video now! Keep us in prayer and thanks for your continued support! Greg Writer CEO Children's Educational Network P.S. Here is an email from a 11 year old boy who won a autographed football from our TUKI Auction and gave it to his dad. These are the emails we get that keep us going! If you have nice things to say please send us your note! Hi Peggy its Delano, my dad loved the football and honestly he couldn't stop staring at it all weekend! My dad is happy and that's all I could ever ask for. Your friend, Delano:) P.P.S. Here's one more, that I got yesterday. We get these on a regular basis. Hi Can I just say that after checking out your site i am VERY thankful for the person who made it all happen! I'd pay just for the safety area for my daughter to go to online so the fact that its fun and educational is just wonderful!! Thank you!! Debbie

Your Kids Health - Is It Important to you?

Home :: KidSafe Blog :: Shopping :: About Us :: Support This Week's TeleSeminar Brought to You by Children's Educational Network Our Children's Health is in Crisis! Dr. Edwards joins with Teen Success Coach, Jim Brogan and me, Greg Writer, in this amazing teleseminar on improving your children's health. Discover the benefits of Mangosteen Fruit and the dangers of malnutrition in our youth with world renowned physician and expert, Dr. John Edwards. Dr. Edwards works at the Healthy Oakland Foundation in Oakland, CA where he provides liquid supplements to his patients for relief of a wide variety of ailments that are being cured or managed with proper supplementation. According to Dr. Mehemet Oz, another world renowned doctor and children's health advocate, our daily diets do NOT provide the minerals and nutrients that our bodies need to function properly. This is especially concerning for our children, because without the proper nutrients thier little bodies won't develop to be the best that they can be..... ....but "kids won't take vitamins" you say? That's exactly why CEN has teamed up with Vemma, because KIDS like it and that's the biggest obstacle. To be a part of this insiders group of amazing child advocates - visit KidSafe.com and click on the audio button, You and your family will be glad you did! Thank you for your time, Greg Writer CEO & Founder Children's Educational Network PS We would love your thoughts on our seminars.... Please fill out this very short survey at KidSafe.com

Children's Educational Network

Listen to Harry Giles

Listen to Harry Giles

National Post

The editorial in the National Post on Monday, October 15, 2007 suggests that we listen to Harry Giles .... it says ....

"On Tuesday, this newspaper brought you news of a fascinating paper by Harry Giles, the legendary headmaster who founded the Toronto French School in 1962 and who now runs the small, elite private Giles School in Don Mills. For years, Mr. Giles has been criticizing the Ontario education system for its declining standards and its political correctness; his new "Giles Report" is a broad summary of how he would change the public system if he were given god-like powers. His proposals include charging babysitting fees to parents who send disruptive children to school; up to eight hours of classroom instruction a day, every day, for older students; and replacing B.Ed. requirements with undergraduate university courses in the subjects the teacher intends to specialize in.

Although his manner of proposing his reforms is somewhat startling, Mr. Giles says little or nothing that we have not already heard from other outstanding older and retired teachers, and in truth there is little that someone who hadn't been brainwashed by an education degree program would find to disagree with. Mr. Giles is a strong advocate of second-and even third-language education, beginning very early in life. He believes parents need to keep their children away from television and get them reading. He sees old-fashioned phonics training as the key to building reading skills. He favours independent, high-stakes standardized testing throughout the career of the student --and not just testing, but tough testing, modelled on classic versions of the British A-levels and the baccalaureat francais. He believes children should be expected to perform acceptably at their grade level before advancing to the next.

It is particularly interesting, at the end of a bitter and somewhat brutal Ontario election campaign, that Mr. Giles should have brought up that loathed A-word: Alberta. He makes no secret of his admiration for public education in that province. "I believe that monopolies are always dangerous to the consumer," he writes, "and given the steady decline in standards in public education, any monopoly must be curtailed. Charter Schools, publicly funded independent schools, [and] Model schools ? should all be considered ? Insofar as independent schools are concerned, I would have them receive 50% of the funding normally given to public schools."

In all these respects, Giles is basically recommending the Alberta system, in which accredited independent schools receive roughly 60% of the per-student instructional grant available to the public schools. Many if not most of these tax-funded Alberta schools could even be described as -- horrors! -- faith-based. Alberta also permits charter schools, and makes fractional funding available to individual kids being home-schooled. These policies, which Ontario educational unions would mostly regard as heretical, have fostered greater school choice and entrepreneurial spirit on the public side, particularly in the widely admired Edmonton system. Parents there can send their children to any school in the city, without regard to postal code, and as a result, what were formerly indistinguishable, cookie-cutter education factories have met the challenge of follow-the-student funding and blossomed into a dazzling array of unique options.

The evidence, as Malkin Dare points out in a foreword to Mr. Giles's essay, suggests that school choice is delivering good results for Alberta students, and that for all provinces there is a visible correlation between performance on international tests and school choice. Yet, strangely, when John Tory proposed to fund what would effectively be "alternative" faith-based schools in Ontario, the debate did not revolve around how school choice can enhance the public system for everyone. Certainly no one pointed out that there exists a real-world example, not so far away from Ontario, of how this actually works. The Conservative leader instead accepted a battle on the ground of "fairness" to religious minorities. As a consequence, he got trapped in a silly argument over how far this fairness ought to be carried and how much it might cost (a great deal, thanks to the top-down centralized nature of his scheme; in Alberta the taxpayer saves money when parents choose alternative arrangements outside the public system).

Small-c conservatives who might otherwise have rushed to Mr. Tory's defence have probably had quite enough of ostentatious cosmic fairness toward minorities. And he failed to provide reassurance to those who believe that public schools are an instrument of social cohesion. Plenty of Albertans believe this, but school choice is widely accepted there, not only because it is a more individualistic-minded place, but because parents know that every child must pass the same departmental tests at the end of Grades 3, 6, 9 and 12. The goal of uniform education in intellectual and civic basics is served by the imposition of common standards, not by uniformity in the schools themselves.

John Tory chose to pose as an apostle of interest groups instead of playing the populist crusader busting up a failed monopoly. One hopes that the next high-profile politician who picks up the school reform baton won't make the same mistake."

McGinty TELLING LIES AGAIN!

Education finances in Ontario: A pre-election fact guide

David R. Johnson

National Post

Wednesday, October 03, 2007

Apromise to expand public funding for education to include religious schools has figured prominently in the Ontario election campaign. John Tory's announcement Monday, that should his Progressive Conservatives win the Oct. 10 election, the debate will be settled in the legislature with a free vote, may reduce the issue's heat.

Yet the funding proposal remains contentious and poorly understood. Concern arose over whether it would drain substantial resources from the public and Catholic system without benefiting the rest of society. What kind of facts could be useful to voters and legislators in understanding the issues?

First, enrolment in public and Catholic schools is declining. From 2003-2004 through to next year, the total number of students in both systems will drop by about 46,000, or 2%. Over the same period, and including current plans for 2008, provincial grants for student needs will have risen by $3-billion, almost a 20% increase.

With about five million households in the province, and an annual increase since 2003-2004 in education spending of roughly $600 per household, Ontario's per student funding will exceed that of every other province except Manitoba.

Does spending more money per student increase student learning? A vast research literature asks if smaller elementary classes, or more teachers per student, actually improve elementary assessment results. There is little evidence they do.

The best way to assess student learning in Ontario is to compare results with Canadian provinces where students at the same age write the same test. In the 1999 School Achievement Indicators Program (SAIP) science assessment, students in Alberta performed significantly better than students in Ontario. In the 2004 SAIP science assessment, Alberta's students again performed significantly better than Ontario's. Alberta's students outperformed

Ontario's in SAIP assessments of mathematics and of reading in 2000 and 2003.

Ontario spent more money per student than Alberta, had smaller classes than Alberta and obtained poorer results. This and many other similar examples show there is no obvious relationship between the amount of money put into the public education sector and the outcomes.

How does this discussion relate to John Tory's apparently moribund proposal to publicly fund religious schools that adhere to the Ontario curriculum? The estimates of the money needed to fully fund these schools range between $400-and $500-million dollars annually. That is far less than the currently planned increases in educational spending at Catholic and public schools between the single years 2006/2007 and 2007/2008.

If the funding proposal were to be phased in between 2006/2007 and 2008/2009, the increased costs could be covered entirely by currently planned funding increases. Thus, new spending on faith-based schools could be easily accommodated without reducing spending on public education.

If the discussion about public funding of religious schools is not about reducing the level of funds spent on public and Catholic schools, what are the issues?

The main issue is whether it is a good thing or not to give parents more choice in education. In Alberta, where students perform better than in the rest of Canada, the province fully funds alternative schools and has gone further than any other Canadian province in allowing charter schools and other forms of school choice.

Public funding allows those choices, and all schools are part of Alberta's assessment system. The success of schools in Alberta -- where independent and religious schools receive public funds -- is something more Ontarians should know about when they contemplate their own future school funding options.

-David R. Johnson is a professor of economics at Wilfrid Laurier University and fellow-in-residence at the C.D. Howe Institute.

Another School Year Begins!

Okay!

The blackboard was washed in the summer and is deep charcoal black inviting you to make the ever so neatest chalk introductions on this ancient source of communication, but one that works, and so will probably be with us for a long time.

I don't think teachers are jumping to PowerPoint presentations by the masses... It just takes more time than a teacher can muster except on those special occasions to make a very special point for a change!

The students are wondering what their new teacher will be like.

The teachers are wondering the same about their students. The students want a fun year with a not-so-grouchy or fussy teacher who makes you do EVERYTHING HER WAY!

The teachers are wondering if this year she will have students who really care about their work and want to do their best.

And then some students are wondering why they have to participate in an educational system that often thinks it is much smarter than their parents about what students SHOULD learn. And some parents are wondering why the secular humanist agenda of many systems must be crammed unwillingly down their children's throats. A task that requires some up-chucking of family-unfriendly facts.

Some students are wondering why their beliefs are mocked as being somewhat stupid if not downright unintelligent and childish.

Some parents are wondering why in a democracy like Canada [or United States], we DON'T GET WHAT WE PAY FOR. They are wondering why Roman Catholic parents and students are more privileged than they. Their schools are funded by the Government of Ontario. Why not Jewish or Muslim [the ones which don't teach hate], Christian or other faith-based schools who wish to pass on their belief system? Why are public schools and the Catholic "separate" schools more favoured?

They are wondering why Mr. McGuinty was able to send his children to a school system paid for by his taxes and why they have to help fund the education of Mr. McGuinty's children. Why?

They are wondering why they have to support a system they do not approve of that does not respond to their needs and beliefs and also pay to have their children go to a a school of their choice. Isn't democracy about choice?

Yes the students, the parents, and the teachers are all wondering....

And waiting ......., Mr. McGuinty, for real democracy to emerge in the learning venues of Ontario. [and perhaps elsewhere]

As a former public teacher who favours diversity of education instead of monopolies, I also wonder .......................................................

Charles Pedley