Posts filed under ‘Education’
Teachers, late assignments, and hierarchy
I had a great discussion with a teacher who works in a school in the riding. Similar to concerns about the no-fail policy that I have written about previously, he talked to me about his hands being tied around the marks he gives students. The division policy is that students can hand in assignments late, even up to the last day of school, without a penalty for lateness. The teacher reflected on how our youth will gain the skills they need for post-secondary education and for the workplace, where doing things in a timely manner will be expected of them.
He also talked about how this policy was implemented by those in high positions without consultation or agreement by the teachers who are required to follow it. That is one of the things that concerns me about how government delivers services, whether it be education, health, or social services. Hierarchical structures sometimes lead to bad decision making unless we are conscious of how we wield power. It is my belief that our systems operate better when we give more autonomy to front line workers in deciding how to perform their jobs, and that policies are decided with front line staff, not for front line staff. There can be too much disconnect between administration and the people actually serving the public, which often results in policies that look good on paper but don’t work well in practice. Hierarchies without respect for staff in lower branches of the organizational chart frequently become ones where bullying and disrespect reside.
Can government, one of the most hierarchical and bureaucratic organizations, become more creative, more flexible, and function at a higher level? It will take time and vision and will, but I believe it can be done.
I welcome your feedback on this. Write me at judiheppnercampaign@gmail.com.
February 22, 2010
Post-secondary education
I’ve met a number of people who have talked to me about post-secondary education, so today I want to post a few thoughts about these conversations.
1. Government’s support of post-secondary education
We cannot have quality post-secondary education without government support. Decisions by government always need to take into account the long reaching effects. For example, the tuition freeze undoubtably benefited students. However, during the time of the freeze, costs at universities continued to rise. When government decreases the ability of an institution to gather financial resources and does not make up the difference, quality of education can suffer as a result. This benefits no one.
2. Taking into account previous learning.
Post-secondary education is expensive. Ideally we never want someone to have to pay to do over what they’ve already learned. But that happens sometimes to newcomers to Canada and even to students whose education has been in Canada.
Ever ask your cab driver or manicurist who is a newcomer to Canada what his or her job was before coming to Canada? Chances are, they were highly valued professionals in their former countries. Canada seeks out professionals to immigrate to Canada, but then often doesn’t recognize their credentials when they come here. We need to ensure that we have systems that are equipped to recognize the knowledge and skills newcomers bring with them.
Some students begin their education at some of the smaller colleges and university colleges in Canada, and then later seek to transfer credits or apply for a graduate degree. Canada does not have an accreditation system, and this has posed a problem in that some universities will not recognize the learning done in other institutions. This can result in students not being able to go on to advanced degrees because of the time and money it would take to do over their education. I have been part of the push for degree recognition of smaller colleges, and we have seen progress, such as University of Manitoba recognizing the degrees of institutions that have provincial charters to offer degrees.
3. Making post-secondary more accessible
The post-secondary world is changing. More people are pursuing education later in life, or are changing careers which require new training or a different degree. Not all students fit in the late teens/early twenties category. We need to ensure that our funding programs take into account all types of students. For example, some students have trouble obtaining a student loan if they own a vehicle. Presumably the idea is that students should sell their vehicles to pay for education. While a realistic option for single urban students who have access to public transportation, this guideline could propose significant problems for rural students, students who have children or students whose jobs require reliable transportation.
There are many people who can pursue education part-time but not full-time. There are also people who cannot easily move to pursue education. We need to ensure that opportunities are available evenings, weekends, by distance education and via internet.
We also need to ensure that adequate funding is available for disadvantaged students. Education is vital to rising out of poverty.
February 18, 2010
No-fail policy
A few weeks ago an educational assistant from one of the schools in Concordia voiced her concern to me about the “no fail” policy. The idea behind this is that kids are moved forward with their peers, even if they haven’t achieved the grade level.
Just this week I saw in the Manitoba Teacher a poll which asked Manitobans what they thought about the policy. 76% were opposed.
A few things come into mind when I think of “failing kids” (which I prefer to think of as “holding them back” because I’ve known too many kids that think of themselves as failures):
1. I have seen examples, especially at the time of school entrance, where holding a kid back a year makes sense. For example, I worked with a child with FASD who didn’t seem ready for Kindergarten. The school encouraged the parents to send her anyways, but the parents decided to wait a year. That year gave the girl some more time to develop and when she entered Kindergarten the following year she seemed ready to learn at that level.
2. There are kids who won’t catch up in a year. Do we fail them a second year, a third? There comes a point when the desks don’t fit.
3. Students are often scattered in their abilities. There may be a student who is 9 years old, in grade four, who has the math skills at the grade one level and reading ability at grade six. Placement is not a simple process for such kids.
I’m glad the Manitoba Teacher’s Society is examining the issue. They highlight the pressure that teachers may feel to promote students they don’t feel are ready or to adjust a final grade. This cuts to the heart of their professional autonomy. If student’s grades are adjusted, evaluations of students’ abilities that aren’t based in reality. We can’t make good decisions about helping students without accurate information of their true abilities.
I think it is important to hear out concerns of students, teachers and parents in these situations, and to try to work within consensus and understanding.
Beyond that, though, I think it’s important that we ask the right questions. When we ask whether or not a kid should be failed, it doesn’t tell us a whole lot more than what classroom she will be parked in come the next year. All we know is that she can’t do the work we expect of her at that age. The questions we need to ask are:
- What are the strategies that will help the student?
- What models of education have been proven through evaluation to help students that are stuggling?
- What does research show us about the benefits and drawbacks of holding students back?
- What can we do to maximize the potential of each student?
Asking the right questions moves us forward, gives us options and ideas. That is what students who struggle need – not a declaration that they failed, but a way to help them succeed.
January 30, 2010
