Home Education: The Quiet Revolution
In British Columbia we have a College of Teachers which has oversight over education, competence, complaints, etc. On June 4, 2010, I made a 5 minute presentation to acquaint the College of the value and validity of home education. I emphasized that home education: a) is effective, b) is inexpensive and not a burden on tax dollars, c) does not require teacher training or certification, d) is a non-bureaucratic methodology not prone to corruption, e) engenders few complaints, f) is not subject to political agendas, g) contributes to the public interest, and h) is a valid model of delivery that bears consideration in face of the plethora of designs now competing in the field of education.
Below are selections from the handout I provided:
Home education is as old as the hills, yet by many it is seen as an anomaly – a deviation from the norm. Quietly, many families are educating their children using choices of materials and styles that boggle the mind. Resources are easily obtainable and reasonably priced. There is even a complete program, K-12, based on using the great books as the main resource.
Home educators are a model of economy, placing very little demand on public money or services. Many would refuse vouchers if offered as that would compromise their autonomy and interfere with their sacred duty to educate their children. Their main public service they draw on are public libraries, where children’s librarians matter-of-factly assess reading levels as they suggest research materials.
I am not going to go into any further detail about the movement other than to say I have been involved since 1972 in pioneer efforts and keep a watching brief on any threats to its viability. About the worst things that can happen is what’s happening in Germany where it is forbidden and home educating families are applying in America and Canada for refugee status.
The reason I speak today is to encourage the BC College of Teachers to keep in mind this concept of education as a valid and effective way that serves the public interest. Home educators do indeed, unobtrusively, contribute to the public education of the citizenry in BC. They consider their style the norm — the normal thing to do.
In deliberations that BCCT Councilors undertake, and as the Special Investigation proceeds into whether the BCCT can fulfill its mandate as presently constituted, I propose that the issues surrounding home education can provide fruitful insights. I quote from the Sullivan Report on the Royal Commission on Education (1987):
“The home schooling issue clearly contains within it some of the most fundamental tensions between competing ideals and values to be found in educational and social policy today. It involves the question of parental rights in schooling versus those of the state, questions about where the public good should supersede private interest, questions about who should be accountable for children’s education and well-being, and questions about the limits of individual choice and participation in schooling.”
Homeschooling was written into the School Act shortly after the commission hearings even though it was never illegal in BC. The parents as teachers do not consider themselves as “professionals” requiring many years of preparation as is the case today. Their example is but one way in which home education challenges the prevailing beliefs and practices current today – beliefs and practices which may in fact be detrimental to the mission of education of the young. It is no surprise that the Obama education team headed by Arne Duncan, Education Secretary, are seeking different methods of training and certification other than through university facilities. They claim there is too much theory and not enough clinical training.
I’m hoping that out of this short presentation BCCT Councilors, Registrar and the Investigator (appointed by the government) can better appreciate that home educators in our midst are a wonderful model of effective and efficient education.
I wonder if more attention should be paid to the structures of the education institutions and systems themselves and how prone they are to the corruptions, abuses and cases of incompetence that BCCT deals with. I would suggest that any models that more closely respect the self-sufficiency models of home education have much more to offer for good practice than the plethora of systems we have now. Home education is a valid model to be added to the norms that prevail today.
Reference: “Home Education: the Third Option”, April1987, Canadian School Executive Tunya Audain …. http://education-advisory.org/Involved/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/home-education-third-option.pdf
The BC College of Teachers (BCCT), in place for 2 decades and designed to oversee the public interest in education is seen, by many in BC, as effectively being undermined by the union representing government (public) school teachers, the BCTF (BC Teachers’ Federation). The membership of the BCCT is comprised of educators in BC — government school teachers, independent school teachers and various administrators with teaching degrees.
The Councillors of the College, by law, are 8 appointed (by gov) and 12 elected from regional zones. It’s the elected zonal Councillors, elected largely through the endorsement and help of the union, who are seen as manipulating decisions in line with union interests rather than the public interest.
Some of the Councillors feel so emasculated from any purposefulness in the public interest that they have now called on the Minister of Education to convene an independent investigation. The Chair of the Council is taking the lead in this request. And, there is now a gathering list of related organizations who support this inquiry – former Registrars, Chairs of previous Councils, a parents’ group (BCCPAC), trustees (BCSTA), Superintendents (BCSSA), Principal-Vice Principals (BCPVP) and the Federation of Independent Schools (FISA). From all this alphabet soup of organizations the BCTF is alone, it seems, in opposing an investigation. (The Association of BC Deans of Education – ABCDE – has not said a word, so far.)
These are my two essays I produced as an interested observer and a long time advocate for genuine parent involvement – a cause far too often short-circuited by teacher unions. These essays appeared as comments on the blog, The Report Card, by Janet Steffenhagen, Vancouver Sun Education Reporter http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/blogs/reportcard/default.aspx
BCCT vs BCTF – Issues ISSUE # 1 – Power vs Authority, April 05/10
1. Power. If this BCCT vs BCTF dispute is a clash of Titans, there is definitely history here. As far as raw, physical, continuous force goes, one just has to read this history article to see how the BCTF has grown as a parallel force to the government since 1972 in BC. That is, steady, systematic, incremental growth for nearly 40 years. Please see “teacher power” in this article: The Decline and Fall of the BC Ministry of Education http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/edu_hse-rhe/article/view/454/611
2. Authority. Who has the authority in matters educational is not often questioned. Not much. Only some home educators would disagree as some claim it is a higher authority than man that governs their duty to educate their children. Nevertheless, most people would agree that it is the elected government that has the ultimate authority. That this authority has been emasculated and frustrated by the awesome extensive power of the teacher union is the subject of the history article referred to above and also a topic of conversation regarding the recent issues with the BCCT and the BCTF.
To put things into an international perspective the BCTF is not alone in its extraordinary influence and power in education. Teacher unions internationally have gained power incrementally over sleepy jurisdictions. There definitely has been witness and oversight failure. By school boards, by senior governments and by domesticated parents and unaware public.
In a recent TV debate in the US we heard the former Education Secretary, Rod Paige, say: “Teachers unions represent the most dominant political force in American education. We’re not talking about little wimpy organizations. We’re talking about mammoth highly financed, highly organized, highly peopled organizations. And political dominance is not something they got unintentionally. They intended to be politically dominant.” http://intelligencesquaredus.org/wp-content/uploads/Teachers-Unions-031610.pdf
Questions arising:
a) Does might make right?
b) Is this a case of an Irresistible Force against an Immovable Object ?
c) What are the political rewards or payoffs that the present government is enjoying by not intervening in this standoff of 22 years standing?
d) __________
BCTF vs BCCT – Issue #2: Politics vs Public Interest, April 26, 2010
I attended two public meetings of the BC College of Teachers (Jan and April 2010) and was disturbed with the behavior of the 8 Councilors considered BCTF elected members. I was troubled that they are role models to children in our public schools.
I was considerably relieved, however, to be told that they were not your average straight-arrow teacher but were select militants from BCTF ranks. They were elected by college members from their regions and who were endorsed and assisted by various union means to election. Some were fulltime union officials and not currently practicing teachers.
So, they are NOT everyday teachers but are obviously attached by apron strings to their union bosses. While my respect remains for teachers per se, my experience at the meetings bore out the perception and reality of teacher unionists as political, manipulative, controlling, aggressive and wily. (With a few exceptions.)
1. Dilatory Behavior: Calculated delaying tactics were evident at both meetings. The January mtg saw a massive campaign of s-t-r-e-t-c-h-i-n-g Roberts Rules of Order to the extreme. The April mtg was packed with presentations from union locals taking up considerable time.
2. Note-Passing: At the January mtg one of the appointed Councilors challenged the note-passing from members of the audience to elected Councilors. I watched for this at the April mtg and was shocked to see a prominent union local president walk up to a seated elected Councilor, pass a note, whereupon the Councilor proceeded on an extensive line of prompted questioning.
3. Mission Unclear: A number of the presentations by the union locals demonstrated their belief that the College was there to support government public schools. The BCTF president-elect, Susan Lambert, who spoke extensively in a session over 1 hr long, also conveyed that impression. However, the reality is that the BCCT oversees ALL public education matters in BC – public (government), private, independent and other. This is the public interest BCCT must adhere to. Perhaps the next Convention BCCT sponsors should be on the topic Public Interest in BC Education. It is clear to me that many in BC either sincerely do not understand the mission of a self-regulating college of teachers or wish to continue being the mischief-makers, the problem, rather than the solution.
a) Since both these meetings were dysfunctional and unproductive, with little business conducted, should the next public meeting have a Registered Parliamentarian conduct the proceedings with the power to declare adjournment if there is obvious obstruction?
b) Should the Oath of Office be administered to all Councilors individually before each meeting?
c) Since questions from the public never happened at either meeting due to ambush of the agenda, should this be an item priority at the early stages of the next public meeting?
d) __________________________________
Polls Can Easily Become A Tool Of Totalitarianism
BC is experiencing a deluge of organized attacks and destabilization maneuvers to force more funding for government schools.
Even though throughout the rest of the world the same constraints on public spending are being felt, and school spending is seriously being cut back, BC seems to be experiencing more than its share of grief from the lobbies which benefit from the education tax dollar.
Thus, we see the call for more funding for public service workers – teachers — in our schools, rather than more efficient spending of money. That independent schools do “more with less” is a thorn in the side of the public government schools.
On another blog, one in Ontario (School for Thought), we were discussing tools of totalitarianism and how the media was used to ensnare citizens to totalitarian thinking. The article started out with Hitler having said “Your child belongs to us already”’ and then we discussed how a totalitarian state used propaganda techniques to brainwash.
I contributed a classic case of how polls can be used to contribute to totalitarianism and I provided the link to the Vancouver Sun story about the Angus Reid poll: “Most British Columbians want more public-school funding: poll”.
This poll was commissioned by a group whose aim is in the name: BC Society for Public Education. Therefore, you know that they lobby for more public education and, of course, for less competition from independent schools. And that is what the poll delivered.
Briefly, there were three questions: 1) Should the government do more to support public education; 2) to increase funding for public education, and 3) to continue funding private schools? The scores were 81% YES 79% YES and 64% NO. What an outstanding result! It garnered considerable mileage in the press and meetings. The poll achieved what the client wanted.
The newspaper, however, through its blogging ability, received over 100 comments and, unfortunately (for the lobby), some serious questions were raised:
1. Were the questions loaded? Or leading? 2. Isn’t Angus Reid polling rather questionable considering they are left-wing and support massive social spending? Don’t they use questionable polling techniques, that is, online polling? 3. Who is behind this poll and who pays?
The answers:
1. See the pdf for the questions http://www.scribd.com/full/30311572?access_key=key-u1vfkvolw0eiygqp0qj Note how the preamble leads to a “correct” answer. How it “primes the pump”, so to speak, for the waterworks to follow. The questions were well “crafted”, manufactured.
2. The online polling is questionable. The “random selection” was done from the Angus Reid Forum, a self-volunteered array of citizens who get points for surveys taken, and qualify for monthly awards of $1000, $100, or other perks. The left-wing swing of the principal of the company is well noted in his writings.
3. The group commissioning the poll has been in place since 2005 and with Board members long associated with “progressive” activism, including Patti Bacchus, current chair of the VSB. (Wouldn’t they just love to deflect an accounting probe away from the VSB?) Two current BCSPE Board members, Helesia Luke and Catherine Evans, run a communications, public relations, guerilla marketing company. Their literature includes these statements: “How you ask questions is important – language matters”, and “Asking questions influences groups in some way.” Funding for BCSPE and expensive polls – who know?
What if, what if the poll did have more credibility. That is, what if a disinterested group (one without an agenda or self-interest) commissioned a poll on these issues? Suppose someone, just for an academic exercise, repeated such a survey, but with a different slant to the questions and preamble, could they have achieved a result of 81% NO, 79 % NO to more support or funding for public education, and 64% YES for continued funding for private schools?
The headlines would scream: “8 out of 10 British Columbians want government to stop supporting and funding public education: poll”. “2 out of 3 want more funding for private schools: poll”.
Wishful thinking? SURPRISE. The Angus Reid Chief Research Officer, Andrew Grenville, coincidentally on the same day as the BCSPE newsrelease came out (Apr 21, 2010), illustrates my point – that with the right questions you can get exactly 180 degree different answers, 100% opposites! Please see this article: Why The Way You Ask a Question Can Determine The Answer. http://www.visioncritical.com/2010/04/why-the-way-you-ask-a-question-can-determine-the-answer/
So, is this education underfunding crisis in BC a magnificent example of engineering disinformation and propaganda by ideological stakeholders? Isn’t that how agent provocateurs work?
PARENT RIGHTS AND THEIR CHILDREN’S EDUCATION
The Right to
1. Choice 2. Information 3. Be Heard & Consulted 4. Special Assistance 5. Involvement 6. Safeguards 7. Appeal
The rights compiled here are those that generally apply in most democratic countries. They have been gathered from sources in Canada, United States, England, and Australia. Some of these rights are self-evident, some are inscribed in law. Others are simply standards which parents have grown to expect when good educational practice is followed.
1. THE RIGHT TO CHOICE
"Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children." (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948)
This means, that while parents have a duty to see that their children are educated to a reasonable level of self-sufficiency and citizenship, they can choose how this is to be accomplished: public, private or church schools, tutoring, correspondence courses, home study, or other styles. If a style other than a public school is chosen and the parents are challenged, the onus is generally on the state to demonstrate that the child is not being educated at a level equal to his peers in a public school. The mandate of the public schools is to make available to all children in the community an education which is free, appropriate and equal. Parents have a right to choose and expect at least that minimum for their child.
2. THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION
In order for parents to make a proper choice, they need adequate information. They need to know enough details about schools so that when they do register their child into a particular school, they are in effect, giving "informed consent" for the child to be there. Equally important, they need ongoing information as the child progresses through the school programs so that they can maintain confidence and support for the school, or withdraw the child if things prove unsatisfactory. If theirs is a public school, parents need information for one other reason–to help them provide informed opinions to the school and to participate in school decision-making. Specifically, parents have the right: a) to obtain sufficient details about schools to enable them to make informed choices about schools b) to receive specific, understandable information about their child’s progress; strengths and weaknesses c) to see all student records and files on their child, to expect that the information therein is confidential and respects the privacy of parents and student, and to request that inaccuracies and damaging information be removed d) to obtain information about any program in which their child is engaged, the rationale for the program, the evaluation methods used, and the credentials and job description of those implementing the program e) to visit and observe any programs involving their child f) to easy access to those working with their child (teachers, principal, specialists) g) to receive information about school services–including alternatives in the system, procedures, rules, and to be informed about changes h) to see that the public school board is operated as an open public business, that is, that the public has a right to see all policies, budgets, minutes, and official reports, and to see that decisions are made at public meetings.
3. THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD & CONSULTED
As advocates for their children, parents have a responsibility to inform public schools about their expectations concerning their children’s education. And this means that if the public system is to be responsive, parents must be accorded the right and the opportunity to be heard. They have a right to be heard by the teacher, by the total school staff (for example, on such items as philosophy, goals and programs), by the local school board and the higher educational authorities. Parents, as individuals and in parent groups, have a right to be heard when policies are being formulated, when planning is undertaken, when budgets are being prepared, and when evaluation is being conducted. They have a right to present briefs, make statements, and try to influence decision-making about schools their children attend.
4. THE RIGHT TO SPECIAL ASSISTANCE
Parents have the right to expect special services for children with handicaps, limitations, disabilities or exceptional talents. Parents also have the right in these instances to expect special assistance for themselves so that they can understand the situation and be enabled to continue helping their child. Parents whose children have been taken into care by the state (e.g., foster care, correctional institution) also have a right to expect special services to help their children continue their education, and for themselves so that they can maintain a helping contact as much as possible or desirable.
5. THE RIGHT TO INVOLVEMENT
Parents, as co-educators and guides of their child’s total education, have a right to be involved in that part of the child’s day spent in school. Particularly, it is important to know that parents have the right: a) to understand the principles, aims and programs of formal education so that they can support, enrich and provide home follow-through to school programs. At times, parents have also found it necessary to have this basic understanding in order to provide external remediation or tutoring. b) to have their child excused from programs or prescribed reading which offends the values of the home, when specifically requested c) to consultation before fundamental changes are made which affect the parents, the child, or the total school climate d) to participate in evaluation procedures affecting their child’s programs, and in formulation of policy, goals and shape of education e) to be involved in the event their child is to be suspended from school. The student has the right to "due process" and parents and student are part of the affected parties to be heard before judgment or action is taken and before the student is suspended for just cause.
6. THE RIGHT TO SAFEGUARDS
Parents have the right to expect that a school system has certain standards that govern good practice. Specifically, parents have the right: a) to expect safeguards which protect their children from physical, intellectual and emotional negligence or abuse; b) to receive assurance that their school does not allow unauthorized invasions of their child’s privacy or property (e.g., questionnaires which pry into family life, searches of lockers) c) to expect that parental permission is required before psychological, psychiatric, or medical assessment and/or treatment of the child are undertaken; d) to expect strict supervision over new programs, innovations and experiments, and that parents have special rights in these instances: i) to receive a written description of the program, rationale, goals and supporting references; ii) to grant or refuse permission for their child’s attendance iii) to receive satisfaction that the program is run by qualified, well-prepared personnel iv) to be involved in the ongoing evaluation.
7. THE RIGHT TO APPEAL
Parents have the right to appeal decisions which they consider unsatisfactory and to report behavior which they consider might be incompatible with good educational practice. Parents should be informed of their lines of appeal, which generally start with the teacher, then proceed up through to the principal, the school board, to the government ministry in charge. Parents have a right to receive, on request, a written explanation which responds to their appeal, and which they might require in pursuing their grievance further up the ladder. Matters of law can be referred to a court for judgment, and the normal civil remedies exist when it is considered damages should be claimed.
Parent Role, Rights and Responsibilities in the Education of Their Children
With respect to educational rights, parents have a two-fold duty: to know and exercise their own rights, and to know and enforce their children’s rights. As users of the educational system, and as advocates for their children, parents are duty-bound to act well and wisely to see that the system works to the advantage of their children and the community’s children. If the rights here described are challenged by school officials, they have a right to ask why rights parents enjoy in other jurisdictions are denied them And they have a right to receive an explanation.
Interwoven with rights are responsibilities and some of these have been mentioned earlier. Besides all that parents have to do to provide the kind of home life and support for good education to happen, they also have to do their part in building a co-operative relationship with educational authorities. Parents need that relationship to ensure that policies and programs are developed as close "to home" as possible – close to the important parent-child-teacher relationship. The rights enumerated here should provide the confidence and background to help build that co-operative framework.
REMEMBER: It has always been, except in totalitarian states, the duty of parents to educate their children. England: It shall be the duty of the parent of every child of compulsory school age to cause him to receive efficient full-time education suitable to his age, ability, and aptitude, either by regular attendance at school or otherwise. (Education Act, 1944) United States: The first School Laws in America (1642) underlie the system to this day: “Universal education of youth is essential to the well-being of the State. The obligation to furnish this education rests primarily upon the parents.” Canada: “The responsibility is placed by law upon the parents or guardian to educate their children.” (You and the Law, 1973) The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) supports this parental duty.
The public schools do have a statutory duty to provide a free education to all students whose parents choose to register them. However, it is made clear in all school law that parents are to be kept informed of the progress of the child. This information must be accurate and understandable to the parents so that they in turn can exercise their duty by supporting, augmenting, intervening or withdrawing from that school. Public schools serve a two-fold purpose: to assist parents in meeting their parental obligation in the education of their children and to serve the broader public interest in seeing that citizens are educated to a certain standard.
- Compiled in 1977 by Education Advisory, an independent research and advisory service about effective parent participation in education.. Contact: Genuine Education Reform Today – http://genuine-education-reform-today.org/
Parent Power
(By Tunya Audain 100326, comment to blog Report Card by Janet Steffenhagen Vancouver Sun Education Reporter on: “Provincial parent group not in trouble, president says” 100324)
Why do parents have to beg for recognition from their school systems?
I’ve attended parent advisory meetings which spent most of the time on fund-raising matters. Current “advisory” councils differ little from the PTA meetings of old where the groups were the lapdogs of the teacher unions and the administration.
Research reveals tons of evidence that “parent involvement” helps students. And such research will even point to the progress and evolution of such relationships. From participation to involvement to engagement to consultation to advisory to collaboration to partnership and so on. As if each degree of greater servility and fund-raising is some great advance!
It’s all a wicked deceit for the present education establishment to say it welcomes any real instrumental role for parents.
Thus, it is not any consolation that the current president of the BCCPAC says she is ramping up her campaign: “Parent involvement is old hat – we want to be partners now.”
What will partnership give you in a dysfunctional, corrupt, counterproductive, and bureaucratic system?
Parents should not be beggars but should actually be running the schools. As they have been doing for 21 years in New Zealand. Each school has its own site-based school board with a majority of the decision-makers being parents.
In 1989 when the NZ government did an audit and found that two-thirds of the money allocated to education never reached the classroom they abolished regional school boards. They now have 2460 individual school boards.
Parents here are really wasting their wonderful time and energy in a system which treats them with tokenism at best and arrogance and disdain at worst.
Just look at some of the workshop topics that New Zealand parents-as-trustees will be choosing at their 21st AGM this July.
- student achievement – balancing the books – national standards – your board as the “good employer” – valuing our children and young people – formal disciplinary procedures – leading change – principal performance agreements – the chairperson: the most rewarding role of the board – the board and its leadership role – effective relationships: touchy/feely – productive or destructive? – self-review: a key enabler of board performance
And get this. They will be honoring long-term trustees who have served for 10, 15 and 21 years!
