We're in the grips of teacher strike fear in BC  –  just a few days before school start.  Of 31 union "threats" to withdraw services, the go-ahead has been granted by the Labour Relations Board for all except 1.  Teachers must take attendance and transmit this information to the office.

My biggest complaint has been about the ILLEGAL withholding of preparation and sending of report cards to parents.  This leaves parents bereft of critical information by which they can monitor their child's progress  –  or decide to supplement with tutoring or withdraw the child from that school.  I wrote the following essay to a local newspaper blog with my views.

“THAT'S JUST SOME PARENT ON HOLD  . . . ”

“That's just some parent on hold who called complaining about something. If you let it blink long enough, she'll go away.”  (office assistant to Joel Klein, NYC schools chancellor, about a blinking phone in the office,  from “Class Warfare” by Steven Brill, 2011)

Well, it’s finally happened!  Parents have been rendered redundant to the cause of education of their children.

In the international scheme of things teacher unions generally follow the same agendas, the same demands, the same narratives.  But, it’s only in British Columbia that the powerful BC Teachers’ Federation has gained so much in asserting control.  No doubt the air-waves are congratulating the vanguard BCTF!

I saw the Education Minister’s interview where he was pleased that the Labour Relations Board ruled that attendance must be taken and transmitted by public school teachers during the upcoming “strike”.  That ensures the babysitting function.

I read the VSB chairperson’s opinion column state this “teach only campaign” would not harm children and was in aid of building a “fair society”. 

I read and heard the BCTF president proclaim that teachers will not do administrative or bureaucratic work.

I saw how the LRB was snookered into declaring “OK” an illegal withdrawal of services  –  they are excused from preparing and sending report cards to parents and guardians.

Now we are seeing school boards abolishing recess and cautioning parents that principals and vp’s may not be available for answering questions about their children due to administrative overload.

Do not be quieted, parents.  You have very effectively been squeezed out of the picture. Deliberately and opportunistically.  Pray tell, how can parents be responsible for the education of their children?.  It’s parents who are legally responsible but the state and its employees always diminish the parental role.  In fact, many parents say they actually are disempowered and made to feel inadequate.

For people in the public school system to say that parents can still talk to their teacher, or the teacher will call is not good enough!  Remember, in BC, it is legal for teachers to complain to parents about their grievances such as opposition to FSAs.  Who wants their ears filled with this stuff?

It is patently ILLEGAL to withhold report cards.  See my selection of legalities that says so here: 

http://genuine-education-reform-today.org/2011/08/08/withholding-student-reports-is-illegal/

How come the state socialist agenda to erode and diminish the family is so successful in BC?  It’s Orwell all over  –  War is Peace  –  Families First means Families Last!

I have seen ads for teachers in British newspapers in the 80s which had on their masthead “Socialism At Work”.

And I remember reading the USA Congressional Record of 1963 during their inquiry into communist infiltration with these quotes about communist goals:

- “Discredit the family as an institution”

- “Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents”

- “Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.”

Victory for socialism but not for parents or civil society! I’m sick to my stomach with this takeover and parents usurped!

Sweetheart Government/Union Deals are Costly to the Poor Taxpayer

The new Premier of British Columbia (Canada) has just announced a new Cabinet and some restructuring of responsibilities in government.

Christy Clark, Premier, has reduced Cabinet from 23 to 18 Ministers.  Hopefully, that means LESS government, and LESS government spending.

We are in the midst of collective bargaining with the teachers’ union (BC Teachers’ Federation) and already the signals are threatening.  It’s a tight financial state of affairs in BC.  To the south of us we see some American states near bankruptcy and these provide cautionary tales for us to learn from.

The Wisconsin case is worth watching, for example, because it’s not just the decent salaries of public servants that are being examined, it’s their generous benefits and pensions that are under extreme scrutiny.  The teachers, for example, have non-salary items amounting to over 43% of payoffs and these have been gained incrementally through collective bargaining. 

The clash between the Governor and public service unions in Wisconsin is being seen as a faceoff between good guys and bad guys, depending on which side you are on.  However, increasingly, people are seeing BOTH sides as BAD GUYS.  See Mar 13, 2011, Cartoon by Michael Ramirez.   

In BC the sorry state of teacher bargaining has been the subject of considerable comment and hand-wringing for the last 40 years.  When a historian reports that the BCTF “functioned, more or less, as the government’s ‘unofficial opposition’ in all matters educational, regardless of which party was in power” that says something about the “cozy” relationship, hinging on “collusion” between the two so-called sparring partners.

Please read Thomas Fleming’s article: “Decline and Fall of the BC Ministry of Education 1972-1996”, especially the section, Teacher Power.  “Through the help of the Teachers Political Action Committee (TPAC) the NDP for the first time in BC swept into power in 1972 …The BCTF executive was by now firmly in the hands of militants, notably supporters of the ‘radical Marxist’ Jim MacFarlan, to use historian F.Henry Johnson’s description.” http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/edu_hse-rhe/article/view/454/611

To me, all this tussle is similar to show wrestling – not a real contest.  Whatever concessions are lost or gained in these periodic “collective bargaining” shows are concessions for the sake of peace and harmony and not in aid of the public interest, the students’ interest, nor the interest of the taxpayer.

This Ramirez cartoon applies equally to BC as it does to Wisconsin!

NeoMarxism in Public Schools

How much of the curriculum in public schools is driven by ideological agendas? I’m wondering if progressive education is now becoming more Marxist.  More bold and confident.  

For a time we had, at our university (Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC), a two-year Masters program in teacher unionism in the works.  Can you imagine what a professional, university trained teacher unionist must be like?  The first cohort would have graduated this year  (2011). Can you imagine what a doctoral degree  –  a PhD in teacher unionism  –  would be like?

Or worse still, is progressivism and NeoMarxism such a given, a fait accompli, that it’s not worth challenging?  Is the penetration that bad?

Today I had an essay published in our local newspaper’s blog on the topic of the lack of leadership in education.  It’s a rather long essay and I mentioned NeoMarxism a few times.  Imagine my immense surprise when Google Search engine picked this up within a few hours:  NeoMarxism in Public Schools.

I see that the topic is not new, so let’s have a go.  I need to know more and so do others.  Just what are we dealing with here?

Below is the essay I mentioned.

Opportunists Love the Vacuum

(in Vancouver Sun blog, The Report Card, 2011 02 24)

I’ve written many essays on how the public education system in BC has been hijacked by special interests.  The “real leadership” in BC education is “behind the scenes” – pulling the levers and calling the shots. The system is one Big Swiss Cheese – full of holes and opportunities for squatters!

I will try to show how opportunists – the keen movers and shakers – assume leadership roles, influence and control in BC.

1.  Teacher Union Calls the Shots in BC

I explain how the BCTF, through stealth and intimidation, has acquired the role of “parallel government” in BC.  I point to Thomas Fleming’s research paper which pinpoints the year 1972 (NDP wins the provincial election) when the teacher union under “radical Marxist” Jim MacFarlan gained its foothold in education matters. I point to the current president, Susan Lambert, arrogantly acting like THE BOSS, saying BCTF should be consulted as a matter of course on educational matters.

http://genuine-education-reform-today.org/2010/12/14/teacher-union-calls-the-shots-in-bc/

2.  Teacher Union Narrative Sets a Toxic Tone

I ask why should the BCTF’s left-wing ideology continue its dominance.  The population in BC generally splits 25% committed left, 25% committed conservative, and 50% uncommitted middle. Why not have people choose from a plurality of school choices? The ideological left, however, opposes school choice because they want everyone “socialized” in one system for one system!

I bring in the matter of university professors adding to the left-wing education narrative.  UBC’s Charles Ungerleider decries the media reporting “neoliberal” values of “individualism, choice, competition, productive efficiency, and private enterprise.”  The opposite of neoliberalism is neoMarxism.  Does Ungerleider suggest the media should extol neoMarxist values?

SFU Professor Donald Gutstein quotes a Marxist economist in his plea to reframe BC education.

http://genuine-education-reform-today.org/2011/01/21/teacher-union-narrative-sets-a-toxic-tone/

3.  Wiping the Slate Clean Won’t Solve the Testing Wars

The BCTF has a predictable annual agitation campaign. Any union issue will do.  This last decade it’s been the FSAs. (Campaigns are used for purposes such as — to stay in the public eye, to radicalize teachers, to test mobilizing techniques, to threaten and cajole, to form coalitions, etc.)  Many trustees, school boards, and now the principals/vp association have joined the resistance.

The BCTF exploitation of parents in this cause is unconscionable. It is the height of usurpation and violation of the trust of parents – parents who are so eager to do what’s best for their children.  Parents don’t readily see the politics behind their ill-usage. I show how a BCTF article in their magazine boldly says that in lieu of a teacher boycott there should be a “Parent Boycott”.

http://genuine-education-reform-today.org/2011/01/25/wiping-the-slate-clean-wont-solve-school-testing-wars/

4.  Who Should Rule Education – The Government or Teacher Union?

BC is seen as cowardly in face of BCTF threats. The national paper, the Globe and Mail had an article on the matter.  Over 130 comments. I made 4 comments explaining to other Canadians our pitiful circumstances.  I reiterated how it was time for school choice, that vouchers would be welcome so that parents could choose non-conflicted schools.

I showed how lay control via school boards is compromised by trustees who pledge to support teacher union causes in exchange for electoral support. I mentioned C&D and SLAPP tactics being used to chill debate and criticism by the public.

I was delighted when the story and comments flushed out another element in the “behind the scenes” control of education.  I said:  “What has remained hidden till now are the Masters of the Game, the university people behind the scenes.  And, there are many professors, deans, departments, programs, foundations.”

http://genuine-education-reform-today.org/2011/01/28/who-should-rule-education-the-government-or-teacher-union/

Ungerleider in another paper on Globalization states that teachers in BC “have achieved a measure of professional autonomy and influence unparalleled in other North American jurisdictions.”  The upcoming bargaining promises to be fierce!

Frankly, talking about THE SYSTEM is part of the problem. We don’t need big-time leaders! There should be no one big system.  No hierarchies. No central control.   Devolve the system so that the smaller units, the schools, are self-managing with their own local leadership subject to their own boards of directors. The model of our independent schools should be followed. New Zealand did the devolution route in 1989 (the same year the Berlin Wall fell and the Soviet Union dissolved.)

We need to devolve in BC education and the mechanism for that is equal vouchers for all qualifying students K-12 with the funding following the student to the school of the parents’ and students’ choice.  Let there be strong leadership at the local, grassroots level!  That is what contributes to a more civil society versus our volatile hostilities now being suffered.

Every year the teacher union in British Columbia (Canada) mounts a militant protest against standardized testing in public schools.  This year the Principals/Vice-Principals Association has added their support.  Below is the essay I wrote showing that underlying the FSA (Foundation Skills Assessment) protest is the political ambition of the left-wing union to dominate education matters in BC as well as politics generally.  I show a history going back 40 years of the BCTF maneuvering itself into dominance.  

Toxic Political “School Wars” Harm Parents and Children

(by Tunya Audain published Jan 20, 2011 in the blog The Report Card of the Vancouver Sun)

For those people who see themselves as mediators or healers or therapists of some kind or other in this never-ending “School Wars” scenario — I wish they would see the harm they are causing. It’s like saying to a bully, “It’s OK, just don’t do it again.”  “No problem, let’s just get on with our lives.”

The bully won’t stop; in fact will be emboldened.  The victims will continue to suffer.

We really should not be using the idiom of an elephant in the room.  This is too mild! I think the image of the 900 pound gorilla is more fitting.  It seems to fit the BCTF, don’t you think?

Large and powerful that lives by its own set of rules.  A dominant player, an overbearing entity, an unbeatable presence always to be reckoned with whose experience, influence and skill threatens to defeat competitors with little effort.  

Add on top of that a political ideology, a left-wing Marxist agenda, tied to international solidarity movements with other teacher unions in the world, and you have an entity both powerful and committed to persevere in its political victories. Some say the BCTF should be considered a political party.

I’ve noted before that BC generally splits three ways politically: 25% committed left-wing socialist, 25% committed conservative/traditional and 50% uncommitted middle.

Parents and students no doubt split that way too.  Why then should parents and students be badgered by the BCTF and to be under their sway?  This is when the desire for real choices such as vouchers to choose non-BCTF schools comes to the fore.

BC has seen over 40 years of this unrelenting political agenda foisted on them.

The history is there. In BC this goes back to 1972 when we gained our first socialist government (NDP) and the teacher union established a foothold in the Ministry of Education and provincial decision-making in general.  This beachhead has not been relinquished since.

In 1975 the outgoing BCTF President, Jim MacFarlan, said to the Annual General Meeting about his presidency:

“During those four years some of my political opponents both within and without the Federation have called me a militant, a socialist, a Marxist, a radical. Well, although those terms were used by frightened people, I have never attempted to deny those allegations because they are all true.”  (March 27, 1975)

Some of those old teacher unionists from those days are still active, stirring the pot, never forgetting their political agendas.  They have gained positions as trustees on school boards, a number have high positions on staff at BCTF headquarters, while others keep trying to organize parents.

University professors and Deans of Education also get into using the BCTF as the vanguard in pushing for left-wing agendas through the public education system.  Their code word is “neoliberalism” as in “We need to stop neoliberalism in education.”

The best description of neoliberalism comes from a former Deputy Minister of Education, Dr. Charles Ungerleider (1998-2001), now a sociology professor at UBC.  In a paper condemning the predominant slant of our media towards conservative/traditional values, he says

“•…Canadian media express predominantly neo-liberal values.  

 • The economic interests of individuals should not be fettered by considerations of social equity.  

 • Choice, as a manifestation of freedom, is a virtue in its own right and the means by which individuals are able to express approval or disapproval in the market.  

 • People are better served through private entrepreneurialism than by public regulation or provision of services.  

 • Productive efficiency is the primary – perhaps singular – criterion by which any public policy should be judged.” 

He goes on to say: “This list is not surprising. A substantial number of Canadians subscribe to neo-

liberal values”  and, he continues to explain how provincial governments and media cater to this value set.  They “extol the virtues of individualism, choice, competition, productive efficiency, and private enterprise.”   

See his essay: Government, Neo-liberal Media, and Education in Canada

http://www.csse-scee.ca/CJE/Articles/FullText/CJE29-1/CJE29-1-ungerleider.pdf

If the parents of my grandchildren subscribe to those values: individualism, choice, competition, productive efficiency, and private enterprise, why should my grandchildren have neoMarxist values imposed on them?.

In the current FSA fight another professor has gotten into the fray, Donald Gutstein, communications, SFU.  The Nanaimo Teachers union is using his paper on debunking the neoliberal agenda in their moves to oppose the FSAs.  In his 28 page paper “Reframing Public Education” http://bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/Issues/FSA/Gutstein-ReframingPublicEducation.pdf Gutstein  references the work of a well-know Marxist, David Harvey who has been credited with helping to bring back social class and Marxist methods as serious methodological tools in the criticism of global capitalism. 

Nanaimo story is here http://www2.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/news/story.html?id=e7b01d7a-f55a-4e84-948d-680e772bfd33 

What I’m trying to show is that the BCTF is definitely heavily promoting its Marxist agenda and using neoMarxist literature to do so.  We should not be pussyfooting around and say BCTF is doing its job, helping teachers.  No, they’re also re recruiting people into their agendas and people should be able to say “No”.  

Obviously the Principal/ VP association has now been swayed to join the BCTF in its agenda.  And Stepan Vdovine a young progressive trustee is proud to point to his article where the ex-Dean of Education at SFU, Paul Shaker, is also on board. http://www.vdovine.ca/2010/12/does-education-advocacy-weaken-public-support-for-the-system/

So parents, be aware of the hidden agendas, and the hidden curriculum here in BC politics and education.  And don’t accept those words from people who say, “Let’s just get on with it”.  We need to know when to say “No” and when to retreat to better choices.

BCTF Will Continue To Call the Shots in BC Education 

(This essay was published Dec 10 in the Vancouver Sun's blog, "The Report Card")

The Avison Report clearly illustrates how the current BC College of Teachers is dysfunctional to the fulfillment of its mandate.

Even if the BC Teachers’ Federation would agree to any concessions, or even if it is unwillingly dragged in to a different future relationship with the BCCT, the teachers’ union will likely remain unchastened and unbowed.  The BCTF’s political and union agendas will continue.

The attitude that the BCTF sees itself as THE boss in BC education has been borne out by several recent statements from BCTF Headquarters — as IF the BCTF is the parent to whom children must come.  This is an attitude of grandiose self-appointed superiority!

In a CBC interview President Lambert said that in a forthcoming meeting with the Minister of Education she will ask why the BCTF was not contacted about these three cases as revealed in the Report.  My inference here is that the BCTF feels this was a negotiable issue between the Ministry and the BCTF.  

The BCTF just doesn’t get it, does it?  After a certain point, some things are just NOT negotiable!

Avison made this point in the Report.  After some rather blatant delay and waffling in a child pornography case, Avison wrote about this inappropriate behavior: “With respect, this response acknowledges that the member who didn't get it right the first time wouldn't get it right the second time either.

"Why this was considered an acceptable response is, at best, puzzling,"

A regular reader to this blog, DLM, also picked up on this haughty attitude: “… why does the president of the BCTF believe that the minister of education should contact the BCTF regarding the specific cases rather than the college who are the regulatory body responsible for certification?  I would like an explanation on Ms Lambert's comments as to why she believes that the BCTF should have been contacted on this issue.”

A further instance of arrogance came up in a recent interview with News 11:30: "We are left kind of perplexed as to what the intention of the report is and why it's been released without any consultation with us."  http://www.news1130.com/news/local/article/154786–report-bc-teachers-college-is-dysfunctional

I’ve written in other essays that the BCTF has, by stealth and intimidation, acquired the role of “parallel government” in BC education.  How has this happened?  

From a research article we see that the newly formed socialist government in 1972 seems to have given away the keys to the schoolhouse to the BCTF leadership. 

Please read Thomas Fleming’s article: “Decline and Fall of the BC Ministry of Education 1972-1996”, especially the section, Teacher Power.  “Through the help of the Teachers Political Action Committee (TPAC) the NDP for the first time in BC swept into power in 1972 …The BCTF executive was by now firmly in the hands of militants, notably supporters of the ‘radical Marxist’ Jim MacFarlan, to use historian F.Henry Johnson’s description.”

http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/edu_hse-rhe/article/view/454/611

Don’t forget, we are entering into a collective bargaining period between the BCTF and government representatives. Is this ever a peaceful time?