CBC News (follow the link for data on each province & territory) reports that:
- The teacher student ratio is going down, with a current average of about 1:16
- Expenditures on public education have increased by almost 25% in the past six years
Outwardly, these are positive signs, as there are more teachers per student and we are spending more. Add the fact of falling school drop-out rates and things look fairly positive.
However, literacy rates are down; homeschooling is on this rise in NB; and many parents are dissatisfied with what they see in school. Have we become too critical or are there systemic issues with public education that cannot be solved with better teacher-student ratios and more money? If the status quo is desirable, isn’t there enough money in the system already?
Given the CBC figures, I would say that we are probably spending adequately on public education, and that the teacher ratio, on average, is reasonable. With declining school-age demographics, we will probably see these ratios get lower and per capita expenditures increase. Any perceived woes of public education in our country don’t seem to be a result of insufficient money. The cash is there and the teachers are available. How money is spent and how teachers are employed may be more pertinent questions to ask.
But, are the teachers available, really?
Certainly, there is enough money to pay them well and to offer good working conditions, but do we foster the right kind of behaviors from teachers?
It seems that the world teachers live in is filled with useless ideological fights, and schools are organized just like they were in two centuries ago.
More money, fine… but is it getting better deep down?
As I said, Daniel, “How money is spent and how teachers are employed may be more pertinent questions to ask.” I guess we’re asking the same question.
Or rather, how students are learning (and how the role of teachers needs to be revisited in light of this…).
The availability of teachers, and small classes, do not necessarily translate into sustainable learning.
It is often frightening to see how many teachers know the science of good education but actually just do high-control talk-and-chalk work in their classrooms.
The science is in about what creates reading skills, thinking skills (complex, effective thinking skills) and how to maintain both the love of learning and the confidence of children to believe that they can learn easily and well.
The problem is that the logical results of the science are often not apparent in the actual classroom.
The actions which are needed in homes to support effective learning are also researched, documented, and easily implemented with a wide range of variations by parents across a wide range of personal circumstances. But it is seldom happening.
Any ideas on the reasons?
Glynis, I think that systemic change is difficult because there are many vested interests, from bus drivers to text book publishers to teachers’ unions, that might lose power or money. These reactionary forces maintain the status quo, even if it’s not best for the students.