1. Trustee System Does NOT Serve Parents Jan 12, 2012 In the 80s I asked a trustee why parents were treated so poorly by school boards. He said, "The trustees are there to protect the schools AGAINST parents." I was disappointed but not surprised. In '74 I presented a 5 pg brief on "School District Organization and Administration" to a Legislative Select Standing Cmt. About parents I said they were seen by trustees and officials as "either aggressive or nuisances." The Exec. Dir, BCSTA took me out to lunch (twice) to assess what kind of threat I was. In '75 our non-PTA parent group received federal funding for a consumer service for parents about education. The BCSTA protested to the feds that THEY were the avenue for parents. A new trustee seminar in '86 caricatured an "irate" parent in a very insulting way. http://education-advisory.org/2008/09/new-trustees-seminar-1986-vancouver-bc-canada/ What New West parents are experiencing is nothing new. Parents have little respect in this system.
2. Trustees' Job To Defend The System, Not To Serve Parents! Jan 12 Issues arising from New West story 1. More than one student is affected, therefore why shouldn't parents take this forward as a "class action"? 2. They are told it's a one-on-one process only. Divide and conquer. 3. The process is rigid, and slants in favor of the teacher. Winning by exhaustion seems to be the game. See teacher, then Principal or VP, then superintendent, then a review committee, then the school board. The teacher will try to have a union rep there. 4. Why aren't parents told they can have a rep too? Thankfully 1 parent has experience; otherwise this may never have come to light! 5. ESL parents would be highly disadvantaged. 6. Parents are reluctant to speak to a teacher for fear of retribution on the child. 7. To be fair, why isn't there a parent rights document as obviously teacher rights are well-protected? http://genuine-education-reform-today.org/2010/04/06/parent-rights-and-their-childrens-education/
3. Parents Betrayed By The Public School System Jan 16 Unfortunately, most parent challenges of the public school system usually come off as "David and Goliath" scenarios. But, even if events escalate to biblical proportions, it is rare, very rare, for the parent cause to win. Unlike the Bible story, parents and their causes are decimated. The public school movement is well-organized, well-funded, and committed to excluding interlopers to their neat arrangements. This is long-standing in BC (I've seen 40 yrs) and world-wide. "Parents as the Natural Enemy of the School System" was an article published in an education journal in1977 in the US. As a result of the UK government opening up the system to more choices, head teachers (principals) are taking new training courses entitled: "Parents – Partners or Enemies?" Clearly, the system is well-shielded from parents and well-trained to deal with them. A daunting time awaits New West parents! Most parents slink away. Don't!
4. Who Is Responsible For Education Of The Young? Jan 16 Clearly, parents are very disadvantaged, individually, or as groups, when taking an issue or complaint forward in the public school system. What is abundantly known, however, is that it is the parents who are ultimately responsible for children's education. The system is accountable TO parents, not vice versa! Why did school boards send out blank report cards to parents in this teacher strike? BECAUSE, it's illegal to withhold reports from parents (School Act). Parents are the ultimate decision-makers! Farcical as the blank reports issue is, it proves the law is on the side of parents! Today's Province columnist, Jon Ferry applauds these parents: "I raise my hat to the more than 15 parents who reportedly showed up at a New Westminster School Board meeting last week to voice their concerns about a secondary school teacher who, they claim, has been routinely dishing out failing grades. We clearly need more teacher accountability."
5. Remedies (New Westminster) Jan 16 The reason why the system is NOT parent-friendly and grievance procedures for parents are so onerous is that parental rights are given away at the collective bargaining table. No one speaks for parents' rights when public teachers obtain their right to withhold report cards. No one spoke up for parents when this exhausting, debilitating "protocol" was adopted to protect teachers. A whole year could very well fly by before there is a resolution (if any). Or the parent gives up! Parents might best approach this as contract negotiations. 1. Parents enroll the child for intended results. They expect "value-added" achievement for student's time spent. 2. The result is not forthcoming — the student strived, the parent monitored, the school failed their obligation. 3. Remedies should be sought. I think those were very just and reasonable remedies mentioned in the news story: a) summer school fees reimbursed; b) counseling for students; c) choice of teachers.
6. Disrespect Of Parents In Public School System Jan 19 The issue is that parents find the complaint process ineffective, fraught with discouragements and delays. To overcome all these obstacles parents will often express the wish to bypass all this rigmarole. They consider home education, private schools, or wish we had charter schools which bypass bureaucratic and union conditions. That is why school choice through vouchers is considered. However, don't anyone ever suggest that Diane Ravitch has good research to oppose both choice and charters. At one time she did strongly support these moves but has now moved lock, stock and barrel into the teacher union camp which blocks these moves. Don't say she is "non-teacher union affiliated" ! Just a brief scan of Wikipedia shows her connections: - NEA Friend of Education, 2010 - John Dewey Award, United Fed of Teachers, NYC, 2005 - Director, Albert Shanker Institute She does not trust parents to make decisions on behalf of their children !
7. Each New Generation Of Parents Re-Invents The Wheel Jan 23 It is so unfortunate that parents are so ill-served by the public education system. While all the other players, the teachers with their unions, the trustees with their lawyers and consultants, etc., etc. have loads of resources to advance their interests, parents are always starting fresh. There is little continuity between one generation and the next as parents try to navigate the system. For those parents going before school boards today, in 2012, to plead for some respect and regard for their concerns, please know we've been through this before. In 1977 we even codified some parent rights we'd like adopted. Please read them, print them out, ask your school boards to adopt these basic principles and put them into writing. Parents do have many rights as they advocate for their children. See: http://genuine-education-reform-today.org/2010/04/06/parent-rights-and-their-childrens-education/
Yet Another New Education Minister Tries To Tame The Beasts!
A new Minister of Education – the fifth in 9 years – has just been appointed (Oct 25/10) in British Columbia, Canada.
The field of education reform is rife with pitfalls – lurking dangers and ferocious adversaries. Any education reformer these days has their hands full. This has never been better captured than in this cartoon by David Parkins of the Globe and Mail, a national newspaper in Canada.
Both Parkins and the author of the article “The new kid in school: Abbott readies for education challenges” are to be applauded for getting the cartoon and story so spot-on! See story HERE
Look at the cartoon – threatening jungle beasts, hooded eyes, no smiley faces, gritted gnashing teeth – all facing a “Hi, glad to meet you.” sweet George Abbott, the new Education Minister. (Find 3 other sets of eyes – lurking in the background, scared and leery.)
OOPS, what’s that slimy, gooey, slippery green stuff he’s just about to step in?
The story by Justine Hunter cautions that the new “affable” Minister will have to be a skilled “mediator, tactful disciplinarian and ever-so-patient educator.” She mentions that at least two of the “beasts” he will have to deal with are the “BC Teachers’ Federation [which] has warred with government of every stripe” and the school boards with their “insatiable” demands.
Mr. Abbott will need all the sympathy, support and encouragement we can provide as he deals with the education snake pit in BC.
(UPDATE: A number of people close to education scenarios in BC have commented how apt and pertinent the cartoon is. Someone did add that the only creatures missing in the cartoon are Hyenas!)
Are Current Models of Education Delivery Dysfunctional?
(by Tunya Audain 100315, comment to blog Food For Thought (SQE) on topic: The Dance of the Lemons 100314 re: Newsweek cover story – Why We Must Fire Bad Teachers (Mar 15/10)
Many of the comments in this Newsweek story say the very model has become unwieldy. Yes, a lemon!
In BC, in our blogs, we talk about the need for a Royal Commission to start exploring more practical, efficient and effective models. The government is not responding to such calls. The last one we had was over 20 years ago.
On the discussion of better models I just brought forward the New Zealand model. See below:
New Zealand’s Self-Governance Education System
Considering different models in education, New Zealand immediately comes to mind.
What really sticks out is that in the early days it had a system like ours with large school districts handling many schools.
But this changed rather quickly when the government did an audit and saw that two-thirds of funding gathered for children’s education never reached the classroom.
School districts were abolished in 1989 and each school now has its own board of directors. A standard board of trustees’ membership includes:
- between three and seven parent elected trustees
- the principal of the school
- one staff elected trustee
- one student elected trustee (in schools with students above Year 9)
There are 2460 such boards in NZ.
“Well before American charter schools, New Zealand went much further in granting power to individual schools by abolishing all regional school boards and making each public school independent, with local parent and teacher involvement in decision making. Although not called charter schools, each school does have a charter under which it operates with a board of trustees and has a high degree of autonomy.” (Wikipedia)
The belief is that those closest to where education takes place are best placed to create the optimum environments for their students and teachers. The dictionary term is subsidiarity — the principle of devolving decisions to the lowest practical level; central high-level government should only be involved in handling things that cannot be dealt with effectively on a more local level.
Each of New Zealand’s public schools has a board of trustees. It is a Crown entity responsible for the governance and the control of the management of the school. The board is the employer of all staff in the school, is responsible for setting the school’s strategic direction in consultation with parents, staff and students, and ensuring that its school provides a safe environment and quality education for all its students. Boards are also responsible for overseeing the management of personnel, curriculum, property, finance and administration.
The orientation and training of trustees is a massive endeavor with frequent workshops, conferences and certified trainers. “Our training is practical, relevant and empowering”, says the school trustees’ association, NZSTA. Their credo: Effective governance: no excuses, no exceptions, high expectations.
The benefits to schools, community, and country cannot be overstated. Parent knowledge is a huge positive result of these responsibilities, a transferable skill to others, especially the young. School-based management works.
On the 2006 OECD ranking of countries on Science both Canada and New Zealand scored in the top seven of 57 countries assessed.
Issues the school boards deal with are similar to ours, but handled at a local level: bullying, funding, special needs, student discipline, assessment.
Opposition to standards-based assessments are similar to our anti-FSA issues and from the same sources. A newsrelease says: “School trustees say that scaremongering over league tables should not be allowed to overshadow parents’ right to know how their children are doing at school.”
New Zealand’s model is but one that can be considered in seeking fundamental and radical solutions to our current dysfunctional, frustrating and extremely wasteful education apparatus. It cannot be called a “system”!
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/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/home-education-third-option.pdf
1. Choice
2. Information
3. Be Heard & Consulted
4. Special Assistance
5. Involvement
6. Safeguards
7. Appeal
“Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.” (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948)
