Peel Passages, Summer 2005 - Peel Elementary Teachers` Local
Transcription
Peel Passages, Summer 2005 - Peel Elementary Teachers` Local
VOLUME A ROCKY ROAD TO SUCCESS Collective Bargaining in Peel A LOOK AT TEACHER EXCHANGES WHAT ARE WE TESTING FOR? Examining Standardized Testing 7 NUMBER 3 Summer 2005 CONTRIBUTORS Peel Elementary Teachers’ Local PASSAGES VOLUME 7 NUMBER 3 Summer 2005 TIM CUNNINGHAM is Second Vice President of the Peel Elementary Teachers’ Local. ETFO Peel Local DOUG HITCHCOCK is the Peel Elementary Teachers’ Local Occupational Health and Safety teacher advisor. PATRICIA McADIE is a research officer with the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario. SHARRON RAYMOND is Chair of the Collective Bargaining Committee and president-elect for the 2005/2006 and 2006/2007 school years. CATHY SMITH is president of the Peel Elementary Teachers’ Local. 6435 Edwards Blvd. #5/6 Mississauga, Ontario Canada L5T 2P7 Tel: 905 564 7233 Fax: 905 564 7236 Toll Free: 877 772 3836 www.etfopeel.com The opinions expressed in Peel Passages do not necessarily reflect official policy of ETFO, PETL or the Editorial Board. EDITOR Kurt Uriarte EDITING TEAM Sabina Freemantle Matthew Curran Gail Novack PRODUCTION Thistle Printing Ltd. MARGARET STEWART is past president of the Prince Edward Island Teachers’ Federation. DESIGN & LAYOUT Blind Pig Design CONTRIBUTING ARTIST Rick Taylor KURT URIARTE is First Vice President of the Peel Elementary Teachers’ Local and editor of the award-winning Peel Passages. MARINA WILLATS is a Grade Seven teacher at Fletcher’s Creek Public School. Advertising Inquiries should be directed to Kurt Uriarte at 905 564 7233 [email protected] ETFO Provincial Tel:416 962 3836 Toll Free: 888 838 3836 www.etfo.on.ca LOCAL EXECUTIVE EDUCATIONAL ISSUES 2 13 From the Editor Kurt Uriarte 3 The Long and Winding Road Cathy Smith 7 If You Don’t Take a Stand for Your Students, Who Will? Kurt Uriarte 8 The Perils of Testing Margaret Stewart 16 What Are We Testing For? Examining Standardized Testing 18 Testing the Limits Patricia McAdie The Year in Retrospect Tim Cunningham EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES AROUND PEEL 10 Collective Bargaining 22 A Look at Teacher Exchanges 12 Occupational Health & Safety 24 Book Reviews QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? Send to [email protected] visit us online at www.etfopeel.com FROM THE EDITOR It has been a very busy year in Peel and around the province. We have made some positive gains in planning time and working conditions. Now teachers need to ensure that this new contractual language is followed. In this issue of Peel Passages, Sharron Raymond reviews the bargaining process here in Peel and looks at where we are going, while Cathy Smith looks back on her career as she prepares to enter the adventure of retirement. Tim Cunningham reflects on his first year as a release officer in Peel and Doug Hitchcock reviews ministry procedures for violence in schools. With the beginning of summer comes the marking of EQAO. Despite the revamping and watering down of the testing process this year by the Liberals, EQAO remains a tool of the government to demonstrate to the public “improvements in education” come election time. However, EQAO continues to be destructive to public education and teachers should not assist in marking it! Last year Peel Passages covered the issue of so called “standardized testing.” Considering the continued relevance and importance of the issue, we have included the article once more. I know many of us are looking forward to the summer break in order to get caught up on reading we have put off throughout the year. In case you are looking for any suggestions, we have included two book reviews – one professional and one leisure – both of which are sure to keep you turning pages. Have a relaxing and re-energizing summer. You deserve it! In Solidarity, Kurt Uriarte 2 PEEL PASSAGES LOCAL EXECUTIVE The Long and Winding Road BY CATHY SMITH My initial career aspirations did not include being a teacher. My family included a long line of teachers: my great aunt had been a teacher; my mother and older sister were teachers; many of my friends went from Grade 13 right into teachers’ college. In fact my great, great grandmother’s teaching certificate from the Normal School of Upper Canada in 1855/6 was signed by Egerton Ryerson. I was going to do something different. In September 1969, I attended the University of Western Ontario where I elected to take mainly science and math courses. Being a true product of the “sixties,” I was discounting the notion that these courses were more suited for males. After first year I went to Bark Lake Leadership Centre for a week in June with a group of Grade 8 students from my sister’s school. This experience dramatically changed my career plans, as I realized how much I enjoyed working with young people. In 1971 I attended Lakeshore Teachers’ College and received my teaching certificate. I applied for a job with the London Board of Education, but jobs were scarce as many Boards were facing declining enrollments. I got married in June 1972 and moved to London believing that I would begin my teaching career as an occasional teacher. I was granted an interview late in August for what I thought was a supply teaching position, and to my great surprise, at the end of the interview I was offered a job to teach Grade 5 at Clara Brenton Public School. My starting salary was $6300 and I got a $300 raise at Christmas. That was the beginning of many different assignments over the next several years. At that time, there was no provision for planning time, with the exception of the Grade 7 and 8 teachers who had planning time when their class had French and Home Economics or Industrial Arts. Primary and junior teachers received no planning time. I have always believed in the importance of being a part of the professional organization. I began my involvement with the Federation serving as the “Key Teacher” for my school in 1973. This was the beginning of a very tumultuous time for education. That fall, teachers in several school boards submitted resignations en masse, effective December 31, when their bargaining reached an impasse. The government responded with Bill 274 that changed the effective date of resignations to August 31. Next came Bill 275 that banned the right to strike and mandated compulsory arbitration, introduced on December 10. On December 18, 1973, teachers across the province walked out of their classrooms and 30,000 gathered in Toronto for a rally at Maple Leaf Gardens and a demonstration at Queen’s Park. The offending bills were withdrawn on December 21, 1973. I attended my first Annual Meeting in August 1974. In 1975 the government passed teacher bargaining legislation: the School Boards and Teachers Collective Negotiations Act of 1975, commonly called Bill 100. That October, SUMMER 2005 3 LOCAL EXECUTIVE the federal government passed the Anti-Inflation Act. The legislation covered all public sector workplaces and private sector companies with 500 or more employees. Wage increases were capped at 10 percent in the first year, eight percent in the second, and six percent in the third. However, in 1978, as declining enrollment continued to hit the elementary schools of the province, Boards responded by laying off teachers. The federations developed model language containing objective criteria for measuring seniority to be used to identify those to be laid off or transferred, a procedure for declaring layoffs and fair recall procedures The federations also countered the move to lay teachers off with creative alternatives such as deferred salary leave plans, part-time positions with the guarantee of return to fulltime, early retirement incentive plans, relaxation of pension requirements for part-year employment, smaller class sizes, job sharing plans, leave opportunities and retraining for other positions. In 1979, the elementary teachers in Peel Region were the first public elementary educators to exercise their right to strike with a full withdrawal of their services. This included my mother and sister. My mother had the difficult task of being a principal of a school at the time and so was required, because of her role, to cross the picket line. She did however support the strike by donating the wages she earned to the strike fund. The result of the 4 PEEL PASSAGES strike in Peel is the Transfer and Surplus language that is in Peel’s current collective agreement. During this time I continued my involvement in the federation by serving on the Joint Economic Policy Committee now known as the Collective Bargaining Committee. In June 1981, my first daughter was born. At that time I qualified for eight weeks of paid maternity leave. I returned to a full time position in September 1981. By the time my second daughter was born in December 1984, improvements to maternity leave provisions allowed me to stay home with my new baby for 12 weeks of paid maternity leave. Changes to legislation continued. In 1982, Ontario passed wage controls with Bill 179, the Inflation Restraint Act. It curtailed the bargaining rights of public sector workers, including teachers, by extending their collective agreements, removing the right to strike for the duration of the controls and capping salary increases at five percent. In 1987, the public elementary teachers of Metropolitan Toronto went on strike for 18 days to get preparation time provisions in their collective agreement. This agreement paved the way for others to include guaranteed preparation time in their collective agreements. In 1988, Ontario passed the Pay Equity Act. The federations negotiated the collapse of the three pre-degree grid categories into one, improving the salaries of thousands of members, mostly women. In 1989, thousands of teachers rallied at Copps Coliseum in Hamilton, site of the Liberal convention, to protest pension negotiations. Teachers wanted a partnership; that partnership was achieved in the 1990s under the NDP government. In 1990, I decided to move back to Mississauga and was hired to teach Junior Kindergarten at Settler’s Green Public School. Once in Peel I became involved with PWTA serving as “Key Teacher” and as the “E.A. Rep” for my school. When the Government of the day in its wisdom cancelled all funding for JK and the Peel Board decided to cancel the program, I found myself looking for a new position. Over 200 teachers were laid off from the Board and my seniority number came uncomfortably close. I was offered a position at Settler’s Green to teach the Primary Interval Program, which I accepted, and remained in that assignment for seven years. The years at Settler’s Green provided me with the opportunity to work with exceptional and supportive colleagues. During this time I served on the executive of both PWTA and the Educators’ Association. In 1993, the same NDP government under Premier Bob Rae imposed the social contract. It limited public sector salary increases and froze teachers on the grid. Included in the social contract were unpaid days off. Changes to education continued when the Royal Commission Report, For the Love of Learning, CONTINUED ON PAGE 28 SUMMER 2005 5 LOCAL EXECUTIVE 6 PEEL PASSAGES LOCAL EXECUTIVE If You Don’t Take a Stand for Your Students, Who Will? BY KURT URIARTE As a Grade 3 teacher, I know full well the amount of work that goes into EQAO and it has bothered me more and more each year. What bothers me isn’t just the two to three weeks wrenched from our schedule during the busiest time of the year in order to subject our students to stress inducing, timed tests. Nor is it just the fact that the the province, and presently decision every year to mark the whole Grade 3 team has been ETFO has an advisory to test, ensuring that the EQAO planning the entire year’s members not to participate in cycle continues without a glitch. curriculum with its multitude of the marking process. Most markers don’t look at the expectations, topics and units, If each teacher in Ontario larger issues and just see the to be completed by April, in followed the advisory and money at the end of it. But isn’t order to make room for testing. refused to mark the tests, then a strong education system Nor is it just the fact that even maybe, just maybe, the governwhere students aren’t stressed though the testing costs millions ment would be forced to listen. out and ranked by ill-conceived, a year, it ranks schools and The Ministry might hear our timed tests more important than students like commodities, and concerns that the tests harm a few extra bucks in the sumgoes against the best of current both the system and students. mer? teaching pedagogy. We can send this message only Often, markers feel that they No, what really outrages me with our actions – or in this case are just one person and that if is how we as teachers allow it to our inaction. Do not mark the they don’t mark it this year then happen! Why do we permit the test! someone else will. But what government to waste would happen if we precious time and and all the other resources, and people who think, subject our students “someone else If you are already signed up to mark the test, to so much anxiety will,” refused to it’s simple, just don’t show up. over tests that we mark the test this know do not paint summer? What if Actively encourage others not to sign up, talk an accurate picture teachers across to as many colleagues as you can. of our students’ Ontario took a ability? Why do we stand on principle not stop the entire process in its and refused to voluntarily As a professional I will tracks? It’s simple! If we don’t participate? We would send a follow my EQAO and report mark the tests, the cycle is strong message! card paper filing duties as best I broken. The government and public can even though my energy In 2002, at our Provincial need to know that EQAO is a would be much better spent AGM, I put forward a resolution harmful, expensive and stressfocused on my classroom. I will that stated “That ETFO encourful, waste of time. Teachers need not however, participate in the age members not to participate to take a stand on principle this parts of the process I’m not in any EQAO marking exersummer and say no to EQAO. required to. cises.” It was passed unaniDo not mark the test! ÿ Many teachers are continumously by delegates from across ing to make the conscious WHAT YOU CAN DO… SUMMER 2005 7 LOCAL EXECUTIVE The Year in Retrospect BY TIM CUNNINGHAM In reflecting on the school year, I realize it has been quite busy. Having come to the position of Second Vice President in late September, there was much to learn. I also found that the year reinforced my old concepts about ETFO, particularly that ETFO is about teachers and public education. One of the most important aspects of the Federation is its support of teachers and therefore letting them concentrate on doing the best job possible in questions related to it, can be quite complex and confusing. Why is it that a leave around such a natural event in one’s life can be so complex? Different laws and legislation govern maternity and parental leaves. Federal legislation, provincial legislation and our own collective agreement, when inter- We have seen an unprecedented number of members interested in being a part of the delegation to the Provincial Annual Meeting. the classroom. This support is offered in different ways. Whether it is creating professional development opportunities, supporting teachers through TPA difficulties or assisting teachers with difficulties with their principal or fellow colleagues, ETFO is there to support them. One of the areas that has generated a large influx of calls over the year is maternity leave. It became apparent to me that maternity leaves, and the 8 PEEL PASSAGES twined with individual circumstances of due date, time of year and when the teacher is going to start their leave, can make for some challenging questions and issues, which the Local can help you sort out. Member support also comes in the form of assistance with the Long-Term Disability (LTD) process. Part of my job this year was to help educate members on what exactly LTD is, and how it worked. As questions came in, it became clear to me that there are many misconceptions about Long-Term Disability, which can unfortunately result in disappointment and frustration for members. The Local will continue to try to make this process run as smoothly as possible for members. This year we have seen an unprecedented number of members interested in being a part of the Peel delegation to the Provincial Annual Meeting in August. This in itself is important and exciting. It demonstrates a renewed interest in our professional organization, both at a local level as well as at the provincial level. Communication continues to be an important issue between the Local office and the membership. The office is continually developing more effective means of communication between the membership and the Local office. Vast improvements have been made to the website (www.etfopeel.com) resulting in improved communication between the Local and the membership. Important LOCAL EXECUTIVE documents have been put online, and a secure-site for stewards was created so that they could keep members abreast of breaking news, as well as updates during negotiations. Communication continues to come in the form of publications such as the Local Link, Steward Bulletin, Health Matters and Peel Passages. This was the first year that every school in Peel was visited by a released officer. These visits were a great opportunity for us to meet with members, hear their concerns and speak directly to them about negotiation issues. This has been a pivotal year for negotiations and our Collective Agreement. Many issues needed to be addressed and were. Inroads have finally been made on issues of maternity benefits, working conditions and planning time. All of these gains could not have been made without the resolve of the membership. Without your support for the bargaining team and each other, these gains would not have been possible. It became quite evident to the Board that Peel elementary teachers would not back down and were demanding respect, and that these issues needed to be not only recognized, but also addressed. As we move forward into next year, it is imperative that this momentum continues. ETFO must strive to improve the support it offers its members, and members need to stay informed and involved. With this dedication we will build a professional organization of which we can be proud. ÿ SUMMER 2005 9 COLLECTIVE BARGAINING A Rocky Road to Success BY SHARRON RAYMOND Every contract negotiations have a flavour all their own. This round can only be described as ‘Rocky Road.’ For Peel elementary teachers, negotiations were marked by a series of unprecedented milestones. There was the RESPECT button campaign, job actions, a historic provincial framework and a 52hour marathon negotiation session. Through it all the negotiation team and membership remained resolute in their determination to achieve a fair collective agreement in order to improve the working lives of teachers. Ten months ago, the negotiation process was set in motion. From the first meeting, it was evident that achieving a fair settlement would hinge on a well informed, united membership. Visits by the released officers to close to 200 sites took information and facts directly to the membership. The RESPECT button campaign became the visual demonstration of our 10 PEEL PASSAGES unity. Whether in the hallways of schools or the boardrooms of CBO, teachers delivered a loud, clear message. Even the Minister of Education, Gerard Kennedy, was presented with a RESPECT button and reminded that teachers required and deserved additional preparation time to ensure a quality education for all Ontario students. Elementary teachers would no longer wait quietly to be given respect; they demanded respect now. If facts and logic guaranteed success, the Peel elementary teachers’ trek would have been a direct route to success. But negotiation isn’t about reason – it isn’t about doing what is right – it is about withholding, taking and sharing power. For the majority of local members, having to enact strike sanctions was a new experience. Peel elementary teachers had not exercised their collective resolve through the implementation of job actions since 1979. But as one Steward put it so eloquently, “If not now, when?” The dedication of school Stewards was remarkable. Distributing bulletins, answering questions, rallying the support of their colleagues, as well as attending and holding meetings, marked the valuable contribution made by a few teachers to guarantee improvements for all teachers. Just as hard as it was for teachers to withdraw their many voluntary services, it was equally difficult to lift job sanctions without having achieved a tentative agreement. As unprecedented as this was, the imposition of a provincial framework added a second extraordinary element to already complicated negotiations. Many boards of education took the position that the framework was the deal, or at least the upper limit, of any settlement. At the same time, teacher locals saw the framework as a starting point for discussions. Both parties brought their own interpretations of the framework to the table. Suddenly, negotiations were no longer a two-party exercise; there were now five distinct and separate agendas operating: the Local’s, the Board’s, ETFO Provincial’s, the Ontario Public School Boards Association’s and the Ministry of Education’s. While the framework embodied many of the working condition issues Peel teachers had given their negotiation team a 95 percent strike mandate to achieve, there still remained many local issues that were not going to go away. With the June 1 deadline looming and the clock ticking, the Board and the Local met on May 25 to attempt to hammer out a fair settlement. As was reported to Stewards at the time, negotiations were painstakingly slow. Late on Thursday, May 26, what appeared to be an Ratification by the Local membership and the Board marked the beginning of a new era in Peel for elementary teachers. No one would pretend that all of our issues have been completely resolved, but we are clearly heading down the right road. Successful implementa- Fifty-two hours after negotiations had begun, the Local and the Board representatives shook hands and signed a tentative agreement. insurmountable obstacle blocked the road to agreement. Members were quickly informed that a return to job actions was probably unavoidable. It was at this time that the negotiation team drew heavily on the will and strength of the 5,600 elementary teachers. It was the knowledge that we jointly held one vision and one goal that energized the negotiation team. Fifty-two hours after negotiations had begun on May 25, the Local and the Board representatives shook hands and signed a tentative agreement. tion of the new collective agreement will require the united efforts of a vigilant membership. As each new clause takes effect, we must ensure that it is done correctly. We must guard against breaches of new provisions. Improvements to working conditions were hard-won and came as a result of the solidarity demonstrated by the membership. Successful implementation will also require the same demonstration of resolve. Our work is not complete. We must continue to work together for a better future. ÿ SUMMER 2005 11 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH & SAFETY Workplace Violence BY DOUG HITCHCOCK This article contains summary of key legislation concerning violent incidents in schools. The ratification of our new contract has brought with it new Health and Safety obligations. Contract clause 20.05 states “Violence shall be defined as any incident in which a teacher is intimidated, threatened or assaulted.” Violence must never be an expected part of your employment. The Peel District School Board, like any employer, has an obligation to “take every precaution reasonable” to protect the safety of its workers. POLICE INVOLVEMENT The Peel District School Board works in conjunction with the Peel Regional Police and the OPP using the Police and School Response Protocol which states that the following incidents must be reported to the police: possession of weapons; threats of serious physical injury; physical assaults causing bodily harm; sexual assault; robbery and extortion; hate motivated violence; vandalism causing extensive damage to school property or property located on school premises. SUSPENSIONS Ontario legislation called the Safe Schools Act states that A student must* be suspended from school for: 1. Uttering a threat to inflict serious bodily harm on another person. ing possessing a firearm. 2. Using a weapon to cause or to threaten bodily harm to another person. 3. Committing physical assault on another person that causes bodily harm requiring treatment by a medical practitioner. 4. Committing sexual assault. 2. Possessing alcohol or illegal drugs. 5. Trafficking in weapons or in illegal drugs. 3. Being under the influence of alcohol. 6. Committing robbery. 4. Swearing at a teacher or other person in a position of authority. 5. Committing an act of vandalism that causes extensive damage at the pupil’s school or to property located on the premises of the pupil’s school. 7. Giving alcohol to a minor. 8. Engaging in another activity that, under a policy of the board, is one for which expulsion is mandatory. It is mandatory* that a pupil be expelled if the pupil commits any of the following infractions while he or she is at school or is engaged in a school-related activity: There are two types of expulsions: limited and full. Principals can hand out only a limited expulsion. School Boards can issue a limited or a full expulsion. A limited expulsion means that a student can be expelled from your school for between 21 days and one year. In order to return to school, a student must meet the requirements for return set out by the Board. A 1. Possessing a weapon, includ- CONTINUED EXPULSIONS ON PAGE 28 ETFO’s DEFINITION OF VIOLENCE A violent incident encompasses any aggressive act that causes physical or emotional harm to a member and includes violence or any threatening statement that gives the member reasonable cause to believe that there is a risk of physical or emotional harm. Intent is not a factor in determining risk to members. It does not matter that an assailant may be incapable of making a reasoned judgement prior to acting. Visit www.etfopeel.com to download a form for reporting violence to the Local. 12 PEEL PASSAGES EDUCATIONAL ISSUES The Perils of Testing BY MARGARET STEWART Recently I was asked to provide some information on standardized tests, with a view to explaining why so many educators and teacher organizations are so opposed to this particular mode of evaluating student learning and school success. While I am no expert on this subject, I have done a good deal of reading in the area and have attended a couple of assessment and evaluation conferences. While proponents claim these tests increase accountability (of teachers, schools, systems), I have found virtually no philosophical support for them, a multitude of articles in opposition to them and a good deal of material designed and marketed to help teachers and students prepare for them. There are several issues to consider. THE NATURE OF THE TEST A standardized test is one that is given and scored in the same way, no matter where or when it is given, so that scores of all students can be compared, one against the other. Often the format is multiple choice, so that they can be machine scored. Of these, normreferenced tests are used to evaluate the performance of one student in relation to the performance of others, or to compare individuals to a “norm.” They are designed so that results fit a “bell curve,” with most in the middle, and a few at the high and at the low end (questions are chosen on the basis of how they contribute to spreading out the scores – those answered correctly 50 percent of the time). Criterion-referenced tests, on the other hand, are supposed to measure how well an individual has learned a specific body of knowledge or set of skills, or how well a student has learned what is taught in a specific course or grade. The passing or acceptable level of performance is often set by a panel of “experts,” which might include teachers, members of the business community, etc. Tests are described as “high-stakes” when the results are used to make decisions about placement, retention, graduation, etc. It is these high-stakes tests that have been most criticized by educators and teachers groups across the country, and indeed around the world. In Standardized Testing: Undermining Equity in Education,1 Bernie FroeseGermain argues that while standardized tests may be useful in the sorting and ranking of students, they do not effectively measure student learning or development. The following are among the most common arguments (parentheses mine): While tests can be standardized, students cannot. Without considering the characteristics of the students being tested, results may be misleading or misinterpreted. Many types of student ability which are clearly among the goals of education are not captured by standardized tests. Examples include sense of citizenship, ethics, aesthetic appreciation, respect for others, self-esteem, social competence and intellectual curiosity. The reality of multiple intelligences is largely discounted. Tests which are to be used for a large number of students must be very general, which leads to frequent mismatches between test questions and curriculum – or what is taught and what is tested. (SAIP2 tests are administered to a random sample of over 35,000 13- and 16-yearolds across Canada. PISA3 involved 265,000 students in 32 countries). An international math and science assessment in 1996 (TIMSS4) reported testcurriculum matches ranging from 53 percent in one province to 98 percent in another. Standardized tests tend to SUMMER 2005 13 EDUCATIONAL ISSUES measure what is easy to measure (lower-order recall), and penalize higherorder thinking – analyzing, synthesizing, forming hypotheses and problem solving (for example, there might be three logical answers to a multiple choice question, but only one will be marked right because there is no opportunity to explain one’s answer). each school and district in the province. In the United States, results are regularly used to inform decision making about funding levels, with higher performing schools being rewarded with increased funding, and lower performing schools losing funding; and to select teachers for rewards such as enhanced salaries for high or improved test results. HOW THE RESULTS ARE USED NEGATIVE IMPACT ON TEACHING AND LEARNING While many are concerned with the nature of the tests, the greater concern is often with how the results are used. Standardized tests results across the United States, and increasingly across Canada, are being used to place, retain and track students; and to compare and Most opponents of standardized testing maintain that while results say little about the quality of teaching or learning, there are a number of ways in which their use may impact negatively on both. For example: In an attempt to raise test Standardized tests tend to measure what is easy and penalize higher-order thinking. rank students, teachers, schools and school boards. In Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, provincial exams in a number of Grade 11 and 12 courses account for 30 percent of the students’ final mark. The Fraser Institute has used test results in Alberta and Ontario to produce and publish “report cards” which compare results and then rank schools throughout the province – currently an impossibility in Prince Edward Island which does not administer provincial exams. “Report Card 98,” released publicly by the New Brunswick Department of Education Evaluation Branch, gave provincial exam results for 14 PEEL PASSAGES scores, teachers may teach to the test, and curriculum may become test driven. (At a recent meeting, I spoke to teachers from other provinces who admitted doing just that – even though they had previously thought they never would. Alberta publishes old achievement tests on the government website so that teachers and students may use them to get ready for the next round.) The curriculum may be narrowed, in order to make what is taught match more closely what is tested, and subjects which are not routinely tested may be relegated to second-class status. (Larry Booi, President of the Alberta Teachers’ Association, in an interview with Today’s Parent, expressed this very concern. “Fine arts, languages, practical arts, all these other areas – physical education, health – none of them factor into the schools’ rankings, and so we’ve seen the deterioration of those programs because everyone’s obsessed about what their school gets ranked on.”5) Methodologies which are meant to promote critical thinking, problem solving, analysis, hypothesizing and synthesizing may give way to an emphasis on recall of facts and rote learning. Test preparation and administration take up valuable time which could be used for instruction. (The Grade 6 Language Arts Assessment in Newfoundland is administered over nine days: three days for the first component and 60–90 minute blocks each day for the next six). In extreme cases reported in the U.S., because jobs, reputations, schools, etc., are on the line, students have been encouraged to cheat, and/or results are doctored to make a school look better than it is. RESOURCE ALLOCATION With parents and teachers in most jurisdictions feeling that education is underfunded, many are concerned that money spent EDUCATIONAL ISSUES on external exams and standardized tests is necessarily money which is not spent on staffing, resource materials, teacher in-service and professional development. And there are large sums of money involved. For example, in June, 2001, the Ontario Ministry of Education estimated that a new, expanded testing program would cost $16,000,000 annually, in addition to $33,000,000 already spent on testing in Grades 3, 6, 9 and 10. The last provincial exams were written in Prince Edward Island in 1969. We have not administered any standardized test to all students at any grade level since we discontinued use of the Canadian Test of Basic Skills in 1991. A cursory look at the documentation around the elimination of both of these programs will show that they were dropped for many of the reasons that educators currently oppose standardized tests. While the Canadian Teachers’ Federation and its member organizations have expressed some concerns about SAIP and the interpretation of the results, Prince Edward Island, along with most provinces and territories, has participated in this program, and in PISA. These tests have a multiplechoice component, but are not solely in this format. They are criterion-referenced tests, are administered to samples of students only and are not highstakes. For these reasons, they are perceived as being more palatable than others. There are some indications that there is a backlash beginning against standardized tests as a means of assessing teaching and learning, and a move toward what is generally called “authentic” or “performancebased” assessment. In Prince Edward Island we are already there! By continuing to work with teachers to hone their assessment/evaluation skills and working to ensure that assessment is closely linked to learning, as it should be, we can continue to lead the class!6 ÿ This article is excerpted from Passing the Test: The False Promises of Standardized Testing, Marita Moll, editor. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2004. NOTES 1. Froese-Germain, Bernie. Standardized Testing: Undermining Equity in Education. Canadian Teachers’ Federation, 1999. 2. Student Achievement Indicators Program a project of the Council of Ministers of Education Canada (CMEC). 3. Program for International Student Assessment a project of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Co-ordinated in Canada by Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC), Council of Ministers of Education Canada (CMEC), Statistics Canada and provincial ministries and departments of education. 4. Third International Mathematics and Science Study conducted under the auspices of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). 5. Waytiuk, Judy and Brearton, Steve. “Making the Grade: Your child’s success in school may depend on where you live.” Today’s Parent, September 2002, p. 60. 6. For those who would like more information on this topic, there is an abundance of material available. Look at several issues of almost any recently published educational journal and you are likely to find a number of articles. Check out the Fair Test site on the web (www.fairtest.org) as well as the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (www.policyalternatives.ca) and the Canadian Teachers’ Federation (www.ctf-fce.ca); read almost anything by Alfie Kohn (much of it online). Passing the Test: The False Promises of Standardized Testing EDITED BY MARITA MOLL 552 African-American high school students with low skills were expelled from school in Birmingham, Alabama, just before a big state test. Test scores went up and the superintendent got a bonus. “Maybe in the twenty-first century, satire about the schools is no longer even possible,” says U.S. testing critic Susan Ohanian. February 2004 ISBN 0-88627-334-X $24.95 In recent years, and without much public scrutiny, large-scale testing projects have become firmly established in Canada and around the world. These tests are now self-perpetuating industries. They divert large sums of public monies from resource-starved schools. Teachers and students are pressured to increase the school’s test scores. Low ranking schools are publicly stigmatized. Does any of this improve learning? In this collection, researchers, teachers, parents and students speak out about the problems of standardized testing and the growing opposition to it. SUMMER 2005 15 EDUCATIONAL ISSUES Ontario Elementary Teachers Vote to Boycott Marking At the ETFO (Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario) 2001 Annual Meeting held in August 2001, delegates passed the following resolution: THAT ETFO ENCOURAGE MEMBERS NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN ANY EQAO MARKING EXERCISE. Delegates informed the annual meeting that the results of these assessments have been misused to undermine the teaching profession and the students on Ontario. As such, if teachers continue to participate in marking of these assessments they may be perceived as condoning and supporting the inappropriate use of assessment results. What Are We Testing For? What’s So Standard About Standardized Testing? “Where high-stakes testing has become common practice, there is evidence of low-achieving students being dismissed on test days, students with low test scores being placed in special education programs to avoid having their scores reflected in school reports, students being refused admission on the basis of low scores and students with low test scores even being encouraged to drop out of school.” Froese-Germain, B., Standardized testing + High Stakes Decisions = Educational Inequity, Interchange, 32(2), 111-30, U.S., 2001 TEXAS Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario. Advisory to Members, August 2001 http://www.etfo.ca/documents/EQAO_Marking_Update.PDF Every year, the Texas board of education establishes a “cut grade” – the number of questions a student must answer correctly to pass a test. Between 1998 and 2002, the cut grade for tests has decreased by as many as 11 points, including in the math tests for Grades 4, 8 and 10. The board says the fluctuations simply reflect the varying level of difficulty of each test and are necessary to maintain equivalent passing standards. Others worry politics are muddying the results in Texas. “Once you start digging, its amazing how these scores can be manipulated for political purposes.” League Tables Cause Student Burn Out Schmidt, Sarah, “Texas: Miracle or Mirage?” National Post, November 19, 2002, p. A12 The emerging trend within the media of ranking schools by assessment results has been unfair to students and is potentially destructive to the education system. Some experts believe that exam mania could scar the emotional health of a generation of children because of its relentless appetite for high grades at almost any cost. A paper for the Institute of Public Policy Research published in the summer argued that high-achieving students could become success “junkies” and lose sight of themselves, only feeling accepted if they got straight As, while those who didn’t make the exam grade could feel like failures. The paper, Learning to Trust and Trusting to Learn by Elizabeth Hartley-Brewer, cited the apparent rise in eating disorders, burn-out, male disaffection and behaviour problems, even in the more academic schools, as signs that all is not well. It argued that schools which focus too heavily on getting children through exams and pushing themselves up local league tables by hook or by crook risk damaging childrens’ – and teachers’ – emotional health and skewing broader educational objectives in the process. The latest official study acknowledges that one in 10 children aged five to 15 will experience a clinically defined mental health problem. This can lead to children under-achieving to avoid the risk of failure and, she says, schools have to provide an environment in which children feel valued beyond delivering “success” to parents, the school or the government. “When there is so much pressure and focus on doing well, children can feel they are only being valued for being successful, so they can become depressed if they are not. They are working for and trying to meet someone else’s expectations. They end up with very little pleasure from their own work and they can end up losing the plot – burnt out or opting out.” Excerpted from: Wendy Berliner. “Success, the New Drug” UK Guardian, Thursday November 22, 2001. 16 PEEL PASSAGES CANADA In 1998, CMEC decided that SAIP results would be reported in relationship to “public expectations of student performance.” Claiming to be too resource-strapped to use any other method, CMEC developed a shortcut process of chatting up focus groups to generate numbers that are then represented as public opinion. CMEC now reports all SAIP results by comparing them to expectations set in this haphazard way. The media duly reported that, in the most recent tests, Canadian What’s the Cost of all This Testing? There is little information available on the financial costs of standardized testing. Especially for the international tests and surveys, the costs are spread over the various partners involved in the exercise and are not easily accessible. The cost in teacher and student time and resources, often called “in kind contributions” is frequently not calculated. Nevertheless, the information below, collected from news releases and newspaper articles, shows that the costs are considerable. Unfortunately, the benefits, for students and the system, are not at all clear. NATIONAL ASSESSMENTS Federal support for SAIP: $1.5 million direct contribution from HRDC (Human Resources Development Canada) Provincial (shared) support for SAIP: $1.5 million “in the form of human and material resources” National Clearing House For Assessment Data: $100 million in 2003–04 for the establishment of the Canadian Council on Learning PROVINCIAL ASSESSMENTS (ONTARIO) Grade 3 and 6 (reading, writing and math): $6 million/yr. EDUCATIONAL ISSUES EXAMINING STANDARDIZED TESTING students had failed to live up to the public’s expectations, but no reporter questioned how these expectations were set. The public might have been interested to learn that its views were generated by 85 people invited by their respective ministers of education to guess how well students should perform on tests that these judges weren’t even allowed to see. Robertson, Heather-Jane,. “Bogus Points” in Moll, Marita (ed), Passing the Test: The False Promises of Standardized Testing, Ottawa, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2004 ONTARIO In the 1996 Third International Mathematics and Science exam, the Grade 8 test results, presented in graph form in a mailout to every household, showed math and science results for the top 7 of 40 countries followed by the scores for Canada and Ontario indicating the province ranked “the lowest of the low in lowly Canada.” In reality, Canada ranked above average in both subjects when compared with all 40 countries. Ontario’s math score was one percentage point below the international average. Its science score was two percentage points over the international mean. Froese-Germain, B., (2001), Standardized Testing + High Stakes Decisions = Educational Inequity, Interchange, 32(2), 111–30 In the 2002 Grade 10 literacy test, the provincial improvement of 8% pass rate (over the trial run administered in 2001) was a travesty given that students knew the test would count and tried hard and many schools had been drilling students on sample questions. The passing grade was probably lower as well, but the EQAO method of establishing the pass rate caused so much confusion that no one was sure. Lipman, Peter, “The Ontario Grade 10 Literacy Test and the Neo-conservative Agenda” in Moll, Marita (ed), Passing the Test: The False Promises of Standardized Testing, Ottawa, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2004 Is There Any Merit in Merit Pay? Imported from the US, where it continues to fail as a useful system for teacher remuneration, performance-related pay (PRP) is a tool that flows logically from the current mania for measurement activities. “It’s ironic that the system of connecting teacher pay to test results…led to the founding of the NUT 100 years ago,” says Tony Brockman, President of the National Union of Teachers, the largest teacher union in the UK. Research and practice have continuously found PRP systems to be counterproductive and even destructive. “One of the real impacts of a system that bases pay increases on student performance is that teachers of disadvantaged students are rarely eligible for such increases,” he noted. As a result of intensive lobbying and a court challenge, the NUT achieved important improvements to the original proposal including additional funding, a set of appeal mechanisms and a review of the entire process in 2002. In the meantime, NUT is developing an alternative that would connect teacher pay increases to the identification of professional development needs and the accreditation of enhanced qualifications. –Marita Moll This article is excerpted from Passing the Test; The False Promises of Standardized Testing. Marita Moll, editor. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2004. See www.maritamoll.ca for more articles and order information. A Ten Step Alternative to High Stakes Testing 1. Eliminate the Grade 10 literacy test as a graduation requirement; replace it with ongoing evaluations and appropriate remedial assistance. 2. Use random standardized testing in certain subjects, grades and schools, followed by an analysis of the test results and intervention to improve areas of weakness before testing again. 3. Provide time and resources to ensure that all students have success in school. Grade 9 (math assessment):$6 million/yr. Grade 10 (literacy test): $15 million/yr. Cost of running Education Quality Assessment Office (EQAO) which also administers TIMSS and SAIP: approx. $20 million/yr. Estimates of total cost vary from $50 million to $59 million each year Provincial plans (currently on hold) call for more testing to be phased in to the point where there are exams in two core subjects per year from Grade 3 to Grade 11 In June 2001, the Ontario Ministry of Education estimated that a new expanded testing program would cost $16 million annually, in addition to the $33 million already spent testing Grades 3, 6, 9 and 10 Ontario directors have asked for a 3-year moratorium on the expansion of the current testing regime Source: Standardized Testing in Canada, www.maritamoll.ca 4. Provide on-the-job training for teachers in curriculum delivery and use of performance-based tests that measure not just the ability to memorize facts but also the capacity for original thinking, perseverance and social responsibility. 5. Support students at risk with full service school teams, including counselling and support from educational assistants and professional student services personnel. 6. Implement a consistent template for the content and marking of Grade 12 examinations. 7. Implement a curriculum renewal cycle, beginning with a systematic review and revision of each grade and course that has been offered in the new Ontario curriculum. 8. Recognize the value of subject expertise by pilot testing Grades 7 to 12 schools with qualified subject specialists. 9. Develop a self-evaluation process for schools and school boards every five to seven years. 10. Measure and publicize accountability using a number of indicators. The Education Quality Indicators Project (EQUIP) collects data on nine indicators including school climate, student achievement, education financing, community characteristics and stakeholder satisfaction. www.osstf.on.ca/www/issues/studentesting/tenstepalternative.html SUMMER 2005 17 EDUCATIONAL ISSUES Testing the Limits BY PATRICIA McADIE Standardized testing at the elementary level in Ontario began in 1997. This is not the first time that we have had province-wide standardized tests, but it is the first time that these tests have been used for such young students. Grade 3 and 6 students are now tested every year in reading, writing, and mathematics. Provincial standardized tests are also given in Grade 9 mathematics and Grade 10 literacy. Students must pass the Grade 10 literacy test in order to graduate from secondary school. Plans are under way to bring in more standardized tests in Grades 4 to 11 in other subject areas. Currently, Prince Edward Island is the only province that does not administer provincial exams at some level. Alberta, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, and Ontario all have provincial tests for Grade 3 students. New Brunswick does not report the results for individual students. British Columbia starts testing at Grade 4 and Saskatchewan begins at Grade 5. Saskatchewan’s testing is only a sample of students and is only reported at the provincial level. Is this what we want for our students? For our teachers? For public education? Do the results provide any useful information or help improve our education system? The short answer is no. This focus on standardized testing and a rigid curriculum that goes with it has changed 18 PEEL PASSAGES the nature of public education in Ontario and elsewhere, but not for the better. Some find standardized tests as an indicator of the success of our education system appealing. Some parents feel confident that the results of the tests give an accurate picture of the achievement of their child and of the education system as a whole. Regardless of where in the province you may live, each child gets the same test and presumably is scored in the same way. It also appears to take the politics out of education by providing a so-called objective measure of achievement. The disagreements between teachers and the government can be ignored – at least when it comes to how well their child is doing. We have been told repeatedly by politicians, the media, and those advocating for privatization of education that there is a crisis in education. This crisis, they say, is the result of an approach to education that favoured child-centred policies that did not teach the basics. The claim is that Canada, and particularly Ontario, has not measured up on international tests and students are graduat- ing that cannot read or write adequately. With all these supposed problems, standardized testing, along with its partner, standardized curriculum, are portrayed as the solution. Bring in the tests, bring in the rigid standardized curriculum and then we will have an education system that meets the goal of ensuring our society is ready for the new global economy. Policymakers like standardized testing. Robert Linn, a specialist in education measurement, outlines this appeal: They are relatively inexpensive, compared with reforms such as reducing class size or improving professional development for teachers. The testing can be externally mandated without relying on substantive changes in the classroom. Testing changes can be rapidly implemented – “ within the term of office of elected officials.” Results are visible, especially when reported to the media. “Poor results in the beginning are desirable for policymakers who want to show they have had an effect. Based on past EDUCATIONAL ISSUES experience, policymakers can reasonably expect increases in scores in the first few years of a program…with or without real improvement in the broader achievement constructs that tests and achievements are intended to measure. The resulting overly rosy picture that is painted by short-term gains observed in most new testing programs gives the impression of improvement right on schedule for the next election” (Robert L. Linn, “Assessments and Accountability,” Educational Researcher, March 2000, Volume 29, Number 2, 4–16). The news releases from the Ontario Ministry of Education are interesting to follow from year to year. Before the new curriculum was in place, the test results were described as reflecting the poor common curriculum of the previous government. Then the results on the tests got better, but there was room for improvement. Each year they are described as getting better as a result of the reforms in curriculum, testing, the new standardized report card, but they are never quite good enough. More testing is brought in and more reforms are instituted. The figures reported in the news releases are most interesting. In 1997, 50 percent of students in Grade 3 scored at level 3 or above in reading. But these students were using the old curriculum, so the results were not good enough. The next year, the Ministry of Education news release states that 42 percent score at level 3; it states that only 34 percent scored at this level in 1997. What the release fails to mention, however, is the percentage of students scoring at level 4 in both years – 16 percent in 1997 and four percent in 1998. The total of level 3 and 4, which is the usual measure, is then 50 percent for 1997 but only 46 percent for 1998. This is a significant drop in scores when students go from the old curriculum to the new “improved” curriculum. Maybe it takes more time to get used to the new material. In 1999, the news release says there was a 13 percent increase in mathematics scores, but only states that the reading results were similar to the previous year. In fact, there was a one percent decline in reading scores. The news release for the with the old curriculum. We have gone full circle. It took four years with the new curriculum to achieve the same level as with the old curriculum. Do these news releases sound like political messages, rather than reporting the results? Depending on the political agenda, the reports vary. The Ministry of Education news releases can be found on their website at www.edu.gov.on.ca. The EQAO reports can be found at www.eqao.com. The latest example of reporting the data to fit a political agenda is for the Ontario Grade 10 literacy test. Students first wrote the test in 2000. The results from the first year did not count and the students knew that. Beginning with the 2001–02 year, students must pass the test in order to graduate from high school. The results from the second year were reported as 75 percent passing, compared with 68 percent in the first year. EQAO has always reported results The tests represent a distinct shift in focus from learning to performing , from thinking to performing or responding. 2000 results gives no numbers for any of the results. In 2001, the news release reports figures for Grade 3 mathematics (up from 43 percent in 1998 to 61 percent, both numbers the same as reported by EQAO), but no other Grade 3 results are reported. For Grade 3 reading, the actual results show a small increase. In fact, by 2001, Grade 3 students are now performing at the same level as they were using Method 1, which includes all students in the cohort, whether or not they actually took the test until now. For the first time, they have switched to Method 2, which includes only those students who actually wrote the test. Under Method 1, 69 percent passed the test this year, compared with 61 percent last year. It appears that 75 percent sounds more acceptable than 69 percent. It remains to be SUMMER 2005 19 EDUCATIONAL ISSUES seen whether Method 2 will be used to report test results from now on. There are a growing number of books and countless articles and monographs pointing out various problems with standardized testing. See, for example, Alfie Kohn, The Case Against Standardized Testing, 2000; W. James Popham, The Truth About does not include other Ministry costs or district school board cost associated with preparation, administration and followup of the tests. It does not include the time spent in class preparing for the tests and administering the tests. It does not include the time spent at the school or the school board on various aspects of the tests. This questions are becoming more abundant. They do not allow for creativity, for differences, for explanations or for more than one right answer. “If one mousetrap catches one mouse everyday,” she reads slowly, “and two mousetraps catch four mice, and three mouse traps catch nine mice, and four traps get sixteen mice, then how many traps will be needed to catch twenty-five mice?” How many traps then, Jiri?” asks the teacher. Jiri smiles. His glasses are filthy. His whiskers shine. “One,” he says. “Of course, you would need almost a month.” (p. 75–77, Of Mice and Nutcrackers: A Peeler Christmas, by Richard Scrimger, Tundra Books, Toronto, 2001). How would this response be scored? Standardized tests do not improve student learning, but they do help to separate the winners from the losers. Bringing these tests into the elementary level ensures that young children are initiated into the competitive world of markets and meritocracy. Lisa Graham Keegan, Arizona Superintendent of Education and an advocate of standardized testing, refers to “gatekeeper skills” (PBS Online Focus, School Testing, Feb. 15, 2001, www.pbs.org). In other words, not everyone should be allowed to pass through the gate, to pass, to succeed. You can’t have winners if you don’t have losers. “Such tests do not measure creativity, judgment, persis- Accountability is not the same as testing. Accountability should be a measure of the purpose we hold for school. Testing, 2001; Bernie FroeseGermain, Standardized Testing: Undermining Equity in Education, 1999; FairTest website www.fairtest.org. Yet we continue adding more tests, publishing the results in newspapers, checking the rankings, comparing one school, board, province or country with another. We have more than enough evidence that such tests are inappropriate and even damaging. So why do we continue with them? Because the people that are making the decisions don’t really care about the research. They are concerned with promoting a different agenda, one that values markets, profits and social stratification. The results are presented to support the arguments. The annual budget for the Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO) in Ontario is about $50 million. They administer the provincial Grade 3, 6 and 9 tests, the Grade 10 literacy tests, the national SAIP and the international TIMSS tests. This cost 20 PEEL PASSAGES is a huge investment for something with a very questionable return. And this does not include the costs of the growing test preparation companies. For $10, you can buy Help Your Child Prepare for Ontario Grade 3 Language Tests or Help Your Child Prepare for Ontario Grade 6 Mathematics Tests or Helping Your Child Prepare for Ontario Grade 3 Mathematics Tests. You can enrol your child at Sylvan for a few hundred dollars. You can hire a private tutor for hundreds of dollars per year. It is estimated that the tutoring and test preparation industry is worth close to $4 billion (“The Education Industry Reports. Pre-K–12,” February 7, 2002, eduventures.com). The tests represent a distinct shift in focus from learning to performing, from thinking to performing or responding. Essay questions must be answered with five paragraphs. Short answer questions must be no less than three sentences and no more than five. Multiple choice EDUCATIONAL ISSUES tence, higher-order thinking, stamina, motivation, imagination, determination, sense of craft or civic mindedness.” (G. Bracy, A Lesson Plan for the Schools With Little Learning Behind It, Center for Education Research, Analysis and Innovation, Jan. 28, 2001). But that is not the point of the tests. The point seems to be to stratify students. Is there a legitimate reason for trying to construct better standardized tests? Some, such as James Popham, (The Truth About Testing: An Educator’s Call to Action, 2001) argue that you can develop fair, appropriate standardized tests that would address accountability. Others, such as Alfie Kohn (The Case Against Standardized Testing: Raising the Scores, Ruining the Schools, 2000), argue that no form of standardized testing is appropriate; to address accountability, we should look at more subjective measures – observe you child’s behaviour, visit the school, talk with the teachers. None of this means we should not or cannot hold high standards for students. “Having high standards is not the same as having common standards for all, especially when they are tied to a lock step of age or grade level.” (Robert L. Linn, “Assessments and Accountability,” Educational Researcher, March 2000, Volume 29, Number 2, 4–16). Teachers do expect the best from their students. What Ontario’s schools need are the resources to be able to ensure a high quality education system for all students – lower class sizes, particularly in the early grades, more resources, more supports for students and teachers, a full range of programs. And none of this means we should not or cannot be accountable. Accountability is not the same as testing. Accountability should be a measure of the purpose we hold for school. If we are interested in democratic citizenship, then look at voting rates, particularly among young people, volunteering and participation in the community, crime rates. If we are concerned with social efficiency, of educating our future work force, then look at students’ ability to take their place in the workforce (not unemployment levels, which measure market factors, not the ability of the workforce). If we are interested in social mobility, in perpetuating the meritocratic, class-based society, then keep the tests. Public education is more than just public ownership of the schools. It should include public control for the common good, for a common purpose. Public education should be the responsibility of all of us, not left for a handful of politicians. ÿ Huh? TESTS BREACH U.N. CONVENTION Article 29 of the Human Rights Convention says that education should be “directed to the development of the child’s personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential.” A special reporter for the U.N. Human Rights Commission has said that the case could be made that the British Government’s target-and-test regime is against the convention because it is designed to meet government objectives, rather than the development of the child. Katarina Tomasevsi told the Guardian: “Wherever testing is introduced…it tends to overwhelm the whole design of education. Teachers have to teach to the test because that’s how children are evaluated and how teachers are evaluated. The voice of children is missing.” Our Schools Ourselves Vol.13, No.2 (issue 74) Winter 2004 SUMMER 2005 21 AROUND PEEL A Look at Teacher BY MARINA WILLATS Dan Rollings stood in front of the classroom bulletin board. It was typical of what you would find in most classrooms: two countries drawn and labelled in the familiar venn diagram with the title ‘Similarities and Differences.’ One side was England and the other side was Canada. In the differences section, Dan read, “You can ski in Canada, but not after 5 p.m. because you may be attacked by wild boars.” Dan chuckled. He and his colleague, Lynne Burnett, are Canadian guests in this classroom and the English students hope to hear first-hand accounts of these savage attacks. Lynn, 29 and Dan, 26, arrived in London, England just before the beginning of the March break, chosen to represent their school in a teacher exchange. They planned to spend their time observing teaching practices and delivering a few lessons on Canadian history. Unfortunately, they had not planned any lessons on how to survive a wild boar attack. After their six-hour flight, they took a three-hour-long bus ride to Somerset to meet their hosts, Kate and Coralie, who would travel to Dan and Lynne’s school, Huttonville PS two weeks later. During their stay, Dan bunked in the town of Willeton at the house of an educator assistant while Lynne stayed in the country at Coralie’s cosy thatched annexe. Their time would be spent at Danesfield Academy, a school which has forged a close relationship with Lynne and Dan’s home school. Last spring, Huttonville’s principal, Mary Jane Hardy, traded places with the headmaster of Danesfield. “The exchange is a great professional development opportunity for administration and staff at both schools,” says Hardy. “It allows us to learn from each other and apply that knowledge in our own schools.” Both administrators decided to encourage staff to take advantage of the partnership and consider applying for the exchange. For Lynne, it was more than just a P.D. opportunity. “My parents are both from Somerset. They came to Canada soon after they married.” If her parents had stayed in Somerset, Lynne would have likely attended a school much like Danesfield. It was a chance for her to see a different side of her history and to connect with the family members who remained in Somerset. WHAT DO LYNNE AND DAN SAY ABOUT DANESFIELD? They observed the set-up of ability groupings which vary from subject to subject; they felt the organization of the groups really empowered the students. Lynne plans on studying England’s National Standards Curriculum to compare and find links to our Provincial Curriculum. 22 PEEL PASSAGES EXCHANGES After Dan and Lynne settled into their respective ‘homes’ and used the weekend to reset their internal clocks, they were ready to face their new students. Dan started his day with what he called a traditional English breakfast – coffee, burnt toast, marmalade and cereal – while Lynne had a gentler start to the day with a cup of tea delivered to her room. “It was the best tea I’ve ever had,” exclaimed Lynne. Once they arrived, they found that school couldn’t be more typically British, in fact, much like a popular children’s novel, minus the magic. The students wore uniforms – not a glint of jewelry in sight – and, without an intercom, gather daily in the gym to hear the announcements. “It’s like Harry Potter,” commented Dan. “The students sit in their assigned houses named after the historical families of Somerset.” Kate is the staff leader of the Luttrel house. The earliest known Luttrell was Sir Geoffrey, aid to King John, who joined his rebellion against Richard the First. “I was constantly struck by the history of the surroundings which seemed so commonplace to them,” says Dan. Lynne adds, “I was impressed by the behaviour exhibited by the students. Sure they chatted as they walked toward the gym but as soon as they entered, they became silent and respectful. You could hear a pin drop.” As the students made their way to their classrooms, Dan and Lynne expected to face students waiting to listen attentively. But they soon realized students are much the same across the pond. “The students were attentive as long as our history lesson appealed to the interests of 12year-old boys – blood, guts and war.” But the real fun started when the students posed their own questions: In Canada, do you all drive dog sleds? Are all you police dressed like Mounties? Do you have houses? Do you have cars? This same question would be directed at Coralie when she stood in front of the Canadian students. Dan and Lynne’s day ended much like back home, though the teachers gathered at the local pub where they talked shop with the staff over fish ’n’ chips and ale. Plenty of ale. Dan and Lynne spent the rest of their days observing classes at Danesfield, which houses Grades 4–8, and the feeder school, Knight’s Templar. When they were not in the school, they visited Plymouth, Dartmouth and Lindton. They were constantly in awe of the juxtaposition of the historical and modern-day conveniences; though refreshingly, not a mall in sight. Dan and Lynne ended their trip with a desire to continue their connection to Danesfield, possibly by creating student ‘epals.’ And one last trip to the pub. As a special treat, Lynne’s uncle brought his group, The Morris Men, to send them off with some traditional songs. As the fire roared and the band played, Lynne and Dan danced the night away with their new friends. ÿ WHAT DO KATE AND CORALIE SAY ABOUT HUTTONVILLE? They were impressed with the relaxed nature of the teachers; they felt the teachers had a much better rapport with the students and are not as rigid as the English teachers. They were interested in gaining more information on how we integrate our special needs students. In England they are slowly moving in that direction. SUMMER 2005 23 AROUND PEEL Book Reviews TEACHING GREEN: THE ELEMENTARY YEARS Tim Grant and Gail Littlejohn Subtitled “Hands-on Learning in Grades K–5,” this 240-page, large-format paperback contains over 50 of the best teaching strategies and activities contributed to the non-profit Green Teacher magazine during the past decade. Almost all were updated and revised for this special 2005 anthology. As in their 2004 book, Teaching Green: The Middle Years (for Grades 6–8), Toronto editors Tim Grant and Gail Littlejohn have assembled a wealth of kidtested ideas contributed by educators from across North America, covering a wide spectrum of environmental topics and presenting a large 24 PEEL PASSAGES diversity of practical projects and learning strategies. In the “Approaches to Learning” section, readers will find innovative ideas for exploring the natural world, promoting environmental citizenship and integrated project-based learning, along with opportunities for taking action and practising authentic democracy. A particularly interesting article is “Guiding Your School Toward Environmental Literacy,” which outlines a step-by-step, whole-school approach used successfully by dozens of Calgary schools over the past decade to evaluate what a school is already doing and then develop a workable plan. In “Exploring Nature Around Us,” the largest section of the book, a Grade 1 teacher describes taking her class on an overnight trip; a naturalist suggests ways to get the most out of a pond study; an article titled “The Numbered Forest” gives ides for incorporating schoolyard trees into mathematics lessons. One author describes how observing patterns in nature – such as the nest-building behaviour of squirrels – can help students to discover basic concepts of ecology. Two others discuss the use of creative journals as a springboard to fresh insights and discoveries about the natural world. The “Plants and Animals” section includes activities for studying forests and monarch butterflies, as well as a “Great Lakes Food Web Drama” and instructions for creating a tropical rainforest simulation in a school gym. One of the most compelling articles looks at the research showing that having animals in the classroom contributes both to learning and to the development of empathy and respect for all living creatures. Included are useful guidelines for animal care and recommendations on the most appropriate classroom pets. While the book focuses on helping kids develop a strong connection with the natural world, there are many articles that focus on the social and global aspects of our environment. For example, readers will find activities for promoting global awareness in Kindergarten, ideas for organizing a school-wide Development Days theme, and a recipe for baking a “One World Cake” to help students understand how food links us to people and places around the world. One section describes a variety of projects to link school and community, such as creating community green maps and building watershed models that educate AROUND PEEL the community about local threats to water quality. The final presents ideas for exploring the environment through literature, imagination and celebration. The book is attractively designed and organized, and, for each article and activity, the editors have identified appropriate grade levels, subject areas, key concepts, skills and materials. One other teacher-friendly detail is the practical “lay-flat” binding. The hands-on projects and learning strategies in Teaching Green: The Elementary Years are sure to inspire all educators who are seeking innovative ideas for incorporating green themes into their programs. For more information, or to order a copy for $27.95, contact: Green Teacher 95 Robert St. Toronto, ON M5S 2K5 (416) 960-1244 (888) 804-1486 www.greenteacher.com THE PROFESSOR AND THE MADMAN Simon Winchester sus·pense n. 1. The condition of being uncertain about an outcome or decision. 2. A feeling of anxiety or excitement resulting from such uncertainty. 3. Producing a pleasant excitement. Who knew? Simon Winchester eloquently crafts a biography of the main players involved in the making of the Oxford English Dictionary – an undertaking that began in 1857 and took 70 years to complete. It is a social and intellectual history which throws light on the deep connection between madness and genius. Along with plenty of interesting details, which you can casually throw out at your next Trivial Pursuit game, he also keeps you pleasantly excited as you make your way to the “I didn’t see that coming” climax. This is not a newly released novel, but a relatively undiscovered one. It’s just a wonderful story. Marina Willats War, prostitutes, murder, madness…and the dictionary? Huh? AFFLUENT PARENT INDEX California ranks all of its schools on Academic Performance Index (API) that is available on a web site. This has become a driver for real estate prices as buyers look for houses in areas with high API scores, with the scores affecting prices by as much as 20 percent. Because the test scores are largely correlated with socio-econimic status, some educators call the API the “affluent parent index.” Our Schools Ourselves Vol.14, No.2 (issue 78) Winter 2005 SUMMER 2005 25 AROUND PEEL Writers Wanted! The Peel Passages Editing Team is looking for contributions to be considered for the next edition of the paper. Submit your articles to Kurt Uriarte What can you contribute? Staff Lines Share with your colleagues the comings and goings at your school; celebrations, exciting events and special announcements. Quality Teaching, Quality Program A great chance to celebrate the excellence that goes on in your classroom or the classroom of a colleague that you admire. Book / Resource Review Read a good book lately? Have you found a resource that you like? Write up a summary of a new resource or book you have found helpful or enjoyable and perhaps add tips to integrate the ideas covered by the resource into the classroom. Editorials / Letters to the Editor What education issues matter to you? Share your feelings and insight. [email protected] All submissions will be considered for inclusion by the editing team. the Pride Committee of Peel presents the second annual PRIDE DAY PICNIC IN PEEL when Saturday, July 16 Noon to 4:00 p.m. where Heart Lake Conservation Area Food available for purchase from Peel HIV/AIDS Network Come and help us celebrate! Prizes, Draws, Games, FUN! For more information contact Jen Colborne · [email protected] 26 PEEL PASSAGES AROUND PEEL PETL Anti-Racism/Equity Committee invites you to MARCH WITH PRIDE when Sunday, June 26 at 1:30 p.m. where Southeast corner of Bloor St. and Church St. Marching in the Pride Parade sends a powerful message to our LGBT colleagues, students and their families that they are safe in our schools. What better way to end a year of hard work but with the cheers and thanks of the communities we inspire? For more information contact Jen Colborne · [email protected] Parking and a mileage allowance or GO Train fares will be paid for by PETL for those who march with ETFO. Keep your tickets/parking receipts and see Jen at the marshalling area for your claim form. SUMMER 2005 27 THE LONG AND WINDING ROAD CONTINUED FROM PAGE 4 recommended to school councils the creation of a College of Teachers, the creation of EQAO and mandatory testing. In June of that year, the Progressive Conservatives led by Mike Harris won the provincial election. In November, the government slashed $500 million from education funding. In 1996, the government repealed the Employment Equity Act. In addition, the Harris government passed the Education Quality and Accountability Office Act, which established EQAO and introduced standardized assessment across the grades. In addition, the Act established a college of teachers made up of teachers and government appointees and included disciplinary procedures. In 1997, Bill 104, the Fewer School Boards Act, altered the system of education governance by reducing the number of school boards from 129 to 72; 31 of them public district school boards. On August 17 of that year, officers of FWTAO and OPSTF signed the application for incorporation of a new federation – ETFO. In October, the government introduced Bill 160, the Education Equality Improvement Act, and 126,000 teachers left their schools for two weeks in protest. In 1998, I was elected to the position of Second Vice President of the Peel Local. During my first year in the Local office, changes to education continued to be made by an unsympathetic government. Bill 160 was implemented; principals and vice-principals were removed from the federations but occasional teachers were added; class size and preparation time were regulated in legislation; the province took control of funding. In 1999, the Tories were reelected and continued their assault on the public education system. Bill 28 PEEL PASSAGES 74, the Education Accountability Act, passed – although the provision making extra-curricular activities mandatory was never proclaimed. Bill 81, the Safe Schools Act, established criminal record checks, introduced a student code of conduct and downloaded student suspensions to teachers. Bill 80, the Stability and Excellence in Education Act, 2001, introduced teacher professional learning and recertification, and required that all new collective agreements have three-year terms. ETFO responded with its ‘Accountability Yes/ Recertification No’ proposal and creative bargaining strategies. Lastly, Bill 110, the Quality in the Classroom Act, 2001, established an entry-to the-profession test and a provincial performance appraisal model. In September 2003, I began my first term as President of the Peel Local. There were elections at all levels of government: provincial, municipal and federal. On October 2, 2003, after eight years of destructive power, the Conservatives were defeated by the Liberals, who campaigned on a platform of education improvement. The federation has continued to press for changes to the regressive legislation passed by the Conservative government. Although the battle must continue, the Liberal government has made some positive changes which demonstrate increased commitment to public education. It is through continued action by the Federation and its members that the battle will be won. After 33 years in the profession, it is time for me to step aside. I am confident in the ability of the leadership and members of the Local to carry on the fight. It has been an eventful ride, and I have enjoyed every minute. ÿ WORKPLACE VIOLENCE CONTINUED FROM PAGE 12 full expulsion comes only after an expulsion hearing. If a student is fully expelled, they can’t attend any publicly funded school in Ontario until after they have attended a Strict-Discipline Program or an equivalent program. The Ministry of Education’s Violence-Free Schools Policy 1994 requires a Violent Incident Form to be completed and filed in the OSR if a student is suspended or expelled for violent reasons. This is not always being done. As a result the reader of an OSR does not always have a complete picture of a student’s behaviour and the resulting risk. Staff Development and Student Support Services has assured me that future improvements to the SIS system will make completion of such forms a component of generating a suspension letter. These forms remain in the OSR for a minimum of three years. If you feel that a violent situation is not being remedied appropriately, please contact the Peel ETFO office. The Ministry of Education’s Violence-Free Schools Policy can be viewed at: www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/ document/policy/vfreeng.html ÿ Doug Hitchcock ETFO Occupational Health and Safety Teacher Advisor Tel: (905) 890-1010 ext. 2686 Pager: (416) 370-5927 Fax: (905) 890-8893 NOTES *The expulsion/suspension of a pupil is not mandatory if: (a) the pupil does not have the ability to control his or her behaviour; (b) the pupil does not have the ability to understand the foreseeable consequences of his or her behaviour; or (c) the pupil’s continuing presence in the school does not create an unacceptable risk to the safety of any person. O. Reg. 37/01, s. 2. Reg. 106/01, s. 1. Members are reminded that the delegates at the 2001 Annual Meeting passed the following motion: “That ETFO encourage members not to participate in any EQAO marking exercises.” Delegates informed the Annual Meeting that the results of these assessments have been misused to undermine the teaching profession and denigrate the success of students in Ontario. If teachers participate in the marking of these assessments, they may be perceived as condoning and supporting the inappropriate use of assessment results. EQAO has been granted “provider” status by the Ontario College of Teachers. The EQAO has applied for accreditation of one or more marking processes under the Professional Learning Program. Therefore, by marking, a member would be supporting the government’s recertification legislation. The ETFO position Accountability Yes/Recertification No advises members to avoid taking any professional development from providers accredited by the Ontario College of Teachers under the Professional Learning Program. Members are advised: •Not to participate in any EQAO marking exercise September 1, 2003 480 University Avenue, Suite 1000, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1V2 Telephone: 416-962-3836 Toll-free: 1-888-838-3836 Fax: 416-642-2424 Website: www.etfo.ca Your resolve made the difference. Working together, anything is possible.