RSS Feed

‘Opinions in media’ Category

  1. Education — parent choice or totalitarian coercion?

    July 23, 2016 by Tunya

    Should Parents Be Able To Choose Their Children’s Schools ?

    In traditional school format let’s look at these two items and COMPARE AND CONTRAST, then express your OPINION in 250 words or less:

    √ #1 Donald Trump Jr speech to Republican National Convention 22 July 2016
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlpPH1ZQ1eo

    “The other party gave us public schools that far too often fail our students, especially those who have no options. Growing up, my siblings and I we were truly fortunate to have choices and options that others don’t have. We want all Americans to have those same opportunities.

    Our schools used to be an elevator to the middle class, now they’re stalled on the ground floor. They’re like Soviet-era department stores that are run for the benefit of the clerks and not the customers, for the teachers and the administrators and not the students.

    You know why other countries do better on K through 12? They let parents choose where to send their own children to school. That’s called competition. It’s called the free market. And it’s what the other party fears. They fear it because they’re more concerned about protecting the jobs of tenured teachers than serving the students in desperate need of a good education. They want to run everything top-down from Washington. They tell us they’re the experts and they know what’s best.”

    √ #2 Fraser Institute’s Report Card on Alberta’s High Schools 2016, July 23, 2016

    The Report Card on Alberta’s High Schools 2016 rates 307 public, private, separate and charter schools based on five academic indicators generated from grade 12 provincewide testing, grade-to-grade transition and graduation rates. “Alberta parents want the best for their families and having the ability to compare school performance helps them make a more informed decision about the school their children attend,” said Peter Cowley, Fraser Institute director of school performance studies.

    Taking into account the last five years, Alberta’s two charter high schools achieved the highest average rating of 8.3 (out of 10), followed by private schools (8.1), separate schools (6.3) and public schools (6.0). In addition to the rankings, the Report Card illustrates which specific schools are improving or falling behind in academics. The data suggests that every school is capable of improvement . . .

    “When parents see the Report Card’s objective evidence that a school’s results are consistently low or declining, they often become very effective advocates for improvement,” Cowley said. “Every year, every school in the province should find ways to improve student results—it’s as simple as that.”
    https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/alberta-high-school-rankings-2016-newsrelease.pdf

    [posted to SQE — http://www.societyforqualityeducation.org/index.php/blog/read/saturday-at-the-movies-trump-this ]

    Making An Informed Choice On High Schools In Alberta ?

    See the latest Report on ACADEMIC results on AB HSs

    https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/report-card-on-albertas-high-schools-2016

    Read the news release https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/alberta-high-school-rankings-2016-newsrelease.pdf

    Read full FI reports on AB, BC, ON Elementary and High Schools, QC HS http://www.compareschoolrankings.org/

    NOTE: FI Reports deal with the ACADEMIC side of schools, generally SKILLS of reading, writing, arithmetic and reasoning — what parents generally expect, and which can be measured by standardized testing. In contrast, educators are seen to be shifting to the AFFECTIVE domain, the COMPETENCIES, (creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, communication, character, culture and computer technology) and which are hard to measure (and compare) against understood and acceptable standards. These differences need to be appreciated to see how the issues in education are stacking up regarding accountability, choice, parental vs establishment authority, international comparisons, etc.

    [posted as part of my FB 20160723 on above SQE content and with additional comment.]


  2. Education & Accountability at all levels!

    June 29, 2016 by Tunya

    Tunya Audain says:
    June 29, 2016 at 11:23 pm
    Well, What Are The Avenues to Correct Journalist Errors?

    Jay Greene’s report of the “hatchet job” by the New York Times on Detroit charter schools clearly asserts that it’s “journalistic malpractice”.

    Now it’s Matthew Ladner and George Mitchell who elaborate on the misrepresentation and errors.

    Are there not any steps to challenge this front-page story, which casts such a dark and untruthful picture on Detroit charter schools? Any codes that govern journalistic ethics? Any NYT Editorial Board to review complaints?

    Since this author (Kate Zernike) aims to be educational on this subject, and the subject itself is about education, I would propose that even the Biblical enjoinder against misteaching could be invoked: “Taming the Tongue — Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers and sisters, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. James 3:1”

    I am reminded of the UK story where a father took the teaching of Al Gore’s film, An Inconvenient Truth”, to court and received a favorable ruling.

    The Judge (2007) did not forbid the showing of the film, but provided legal guidelines for continued showings:
    – It is understood the film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument
    – If teachers do not make this clear they are in breach of Section 406 of the School Act and guilty of political indoctrination
    – Nine inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of students when the film is shown.
    See “Anti-indoctrination guidelines for schools” http://www.parentsteachingparents.net/2013/12/anti-indoctrination-laws-for-schools/

     

    Published in Jay P Greene's blog, https://jaypgreene.com/2016/06/29/nyt-piece-on-detroit-charter-school-missed/#comments


  3. Parents squeezed out in Alberta Schools policy

    March 23, 2016 by Tunya

    THE ALBERTA STANDOFF ILLUSTRATES VERY SERIOUS PROBLEMS

    The problem with sarcasm is that a percentage of readers just might actually agree! It could even be parents or teachers or public in general who would endorse whole-heartedly this cynical, acid, sneering post entitled — “Don’t Tell Father”. The way things stand in public education today I would guess that a good number might actually agree that “it would be better if schools didn't tell parents anything.”

    I like the post but would have added a disclaimer at the end — eg: ‘Of course, folks, you do realize this is sarcasm! “

    Anyway, I think what is being played out here is serious and requires urgent attention. My 3 comments to the story so far:

    PARENTAL VETO & PARENTAL SOVEREIGNTY ARE AT STAKE

    The Parent Veto is an awesome thing and is constantly under attack by usurpers of parental primacy in education. In 2011 when a surge of votes propelled Alison Redford to instant Premiership of Alberta it was claimed that three promises to the teacher establishment were the key to her electoral success. It was easy for her to quickly find $107Million in extra education funding and to scrap Gr 3 & 6 standardized tests. The third demand — abolish the parent veto — was never accomplished due to parent backlash.

    These expanded conditions in the new LGBTQ initiatives seem to undermine parental authority and sovereignty over their minor-aged children. There should be more thought and attention paid to the legal implications, especially since the line of responsibility for a child’s education rests first with the parents and then with the state as a backup service to parents

    THE MAIN ISSUE — STATE VS FAMILY

    These state initiatives to exclude or diminish families usually come from the Point-of-View of those on the left of the political spectrum. What is happening in Alberta concerning LGBTQ issues illustrates how creeping statism makes its gains at the expense of individuals.

    This issue reminded me of Hillary Clinton and her statements last year about how education is a “non-family enterprise” — http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4534543/hillary-says-education-non-family-enterprise

    Further related stories about Hillary’s worldview about education and the raising of the next generation are found in these topics as listed — Hillary Clinton against homeschooling, HC – it takes a village quote, “I believe the primary role of the state is to teach, train and raise children”, HC – parents have a secondary role, etc.

    Look this up on the Internet (Hillary Clinton – education a non-family enterprise). There was a lot of commentary crystallizing the two sides — state vs family — and this priceless comment stands out: “The education of our children is best served when the family enterprise is fully engaged.”

    DEMOCRACY IS NOT JUST SIMPLY RULE BY THE MAJORITY

    At least one comment raises the principled point that it’s not only WHAT government does but HOW that’s an issue. There seems to be a “confrontational approach” at play, says the commentator.

    In his book — Parental Involvement and the Political Principle: Why the Existing Governance Structure of Schools Should Be Abolished — Seymour B Sarason says that schooling should engage the minds, hearts and voices of parents, students and teachers together. The political principle he discusses is the obvious one of consulting those affected before policies are enacted. It doesn’t appear that the political principle was engaged in this Alberta scenario. But “politics” certainly was!


  4. Parent Veto — Alberta

    March 22, 2016 by Tunya

    Parental Veto & Parental Sovereignty Are At Stake

    Alberta is again faced with a squeeze-play on parental rights and duties.

    The Parent Veto is an awesome thing and is constantly under attack by usurpers of parental primacy in education. In 2011 when a surge of votes propelled Alison Redford to instant Premiership of Alberta it was claimed that three promises to the teacher establishment were the key to her electoral success. It was easy for her to quickly find $107Million in extra education funding and to scrap Gr 3 & 6 standardized tests. The third demand — abolish the parent veto — was never accomplished due to parent backlash.

    These expanded conditions in the new LGBTQ initiatives seem to undermine parental authority and sovereignty over their minor-aged children. There should be more thought and attention paid to the legal implications, especially since the line of responsibility for a child’s education rests first with the parents and then with the state as a backup service to parents.

    http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/calgary/calgary-meeting-lgbtq-cbe-1.3502884#commentwrapper


  5. Amish in PEI – helping widen education choice in canada

    March 4, 2016 by Tunya

    Home Education — Lessons To Be Learned

    As a “movement” home education was “jump-started” by John Holt in the 70s.
    John Holt’s Conversion to Home Education https://gaither.wordpress.com/2011/02/17/john-holts-conversion-to-home-education/

    I’ve been involved from that time. But, I learned early on in my half-century of parent involvement to stay under the radar. WHY? Because the moment any breakthrough appears for the parent (CONSUMER) side the system (PRODUCER) side immediately goes into containment-mode. Parents as consumers are seen, and treated, as a hostile enemy. Producer-capture of the industry continues. To this day, the control is overwhelming. Parents have been nearly totally seduced and coerced into compliance and complicity into a one-size-fits-all monopoly model of schooling.

    Long story. With the link above you will see how I wrote about the movement for Canadian educators and about the predatory state and how Holt expressed fear of creeping fascism (see comments).

    Thus, when I saw how a government (in PEI) actually responded to parents’ interests in educating their children and removed a restrictive obstacle, I rejoiced. Please see form mandating a teacher advisor: http://www.hslda.ca/assets/images/member/provincial_pics_and_forms/PEI-Intent_to_Homeschool_Notice.pdf

    NOTE: That provision is now lifted not only for the Amish but also for any other parents undertaking home education. Please consider what such an advisor entails — 1) difficulty in obtaining such educator who is unfettered from union or other constraints; 2) an advisor whose mindset is undoubtedly influenced by 120 semester hours in a government teacher training program.

    Seeing that educators are even now raising the alarm that PEI’s responsiveness to its constituency is a sell-out to privatization simply illustrates how the producer side raises fears when it sees any leakage from its self-serving domain. Their radar has now sounded the alarm !

    BTW: That “Homeschooling in Canada” Report Paul Bennett references is worth reading. But without having to go into all 68 pages here are some choice “signals” that will be noted by those threatened by consumer voices.

    – “The four western provinces and Quebec have the most extensive, recent, and detailed provision for home schooling. British Columbia should be noted for its newer policy in Distributed Learning and Saskatchewan for its especially extensive proactive consideration of home schooling.” pg 32

    – “Although Prince Edward Island has updated its regulation, arguably it has done so because it is routine to do so, and not because of a proactive shift towards home schooling.” (Strange. This, 2015 Report seems unaware that proactive activity was involved on behalf of the Amish community intending to settle in PEI.) pg 32

    – In Saskatchewan, parents’ voices and communal action combined with a new ethos of responsiveness in the province and focus on student achievement have resulted in district boards offering increasing amounts for homeschooled students within their jurisdictions. Parents, for example, who register their children in the largest school board in the province are eligible to receive up to $1,000 per home-schooled student. pg 22

    A question was asked: Does the PEI concession to Amish education open the door for greater freedom of choice in education for others? YES, it does. The restrictive clause was not only removed but the discussion engendered has been educational and enlightening. We now know that that particular clause was designed as a deliberate disincentive to home educate. We know that proactive lobbying helps sway progress, as in PEI and Sask, for example. . And we know that there is such a thing as “a new ethos of responsiveness” in government (as in Sask). Let’s hope that this discussion launches more efforts to loosen the producer-side’s suffocating stranglehold on prevention of widening education choices in Canada.

    Thanks for bringing this matter forward, Paul There’s lessons to be learned if we pay attention.

    [published as a comment in SQE    http://www.societyforqualityeducation.org/index.php/blog/

     and Educhatter :   https://educhatter.wordpress.com/2016/03/01/school-choice-in-pei-will-the-amish-school-open-the-door/#comment-19666 ]