Learning

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.

Michael Feldstein has been examining Desire2Learn’s competency model that is supposed to make e-learning that much more aligned with education. The D2L model is one that starts with a Competency, from which there are certain Learning Outcomes and from these, Assessments can be developed. Michael shows some of the inherent difficulties with such an approach:

This is the root of one of the most intractable problems in the outcomes debate: What should we be assessing? Which of the questions listed in the previous paragraph is the most important to answer? What is the most important possible outcome of an education? These are cultural, political, philosophical, practical, and ideological questions all tangled up into one big hairball. There isn’t one universally best answer. Some of where you come down depends on why you’re asking the question in the first place. Are concerned with training the next generation of literary scholars? Are you looking to maximize students’ likely economic benefit from their education, regardless of career path? Are you trying to create better citizens? Or do you care most about helping the student cultivate a rich and fulfilling life of the mind? The answers to these questions have a strong impact on whether it makes more sense to look at test scores or portfolios, whether assessment instruments should be the same across courses or even across states, and lots of other critical implementation questions. Without widespread agreement on goals and priorities, there will be no widespread agreement about what to assess or how to assess it.

Given all of these questions, I would say – stop. You cannot create a neat and clean system of competence, outcomes and assessment unless you place everything in a specific context. When you add that context, it is called TRAINING. Within a given context, training works. The military Systems Approach to Training (SAT) which I implemented for many years, includes a competence tool, called a Performance Objective (PO):

• Performance Statement (that which must be done to show competence)
• Conditions (how, when and where a person would be required to do this)
• Standard (to what measurable and observable level of performance must this be done)

Each PO includes Enabling Objectives (EO’s) which describe the Skills, Knowledge & Attitudes that should be learned in order to achieve the PO. Again, all of this is about doing something of value to the organisation in a specific context. It is not about education, self-actualisation or learning how to learn.

Training methods work when you have clear performance objectives, like driving a car or repairing an aircraft. Training methods do not work for education. I previously noted in Training vs Education:

I think that one of the problems with our education system is that there is too much of a focus on getting quantitative data, like testing. These functions are more suited to a “training” system, where the performance requirements are clear, measurable and observable. In education, the performance requirements are fuzzy. There is nothing wrong with either a training focus or an education focus; each one has its merits. The problem is when you try to mix the two. The arguments that I hear over testing or the adoption of blogs in the classroom seem to be the result of mixing a training systems design approach with a general educational approach. Water and oil.

If your organisation, be it a school or a company, has clear performance expectations, then you should use proven performance technologies, such as drill & feedback, performance support, or a wide variety of other interventions. On the other hand, if your objectives are educational in the broad sense, then forget about testing and controlling, and allow learners to explore and construct their own knowledge.

Learning Management Systems purport to manage learning. By definition, they cannot. An LMS can manage administration and perhaps some functions of training, that’s it. Using training tools to manage learning is like using a spreadsheet to grow your garden. A waste of time and energy.

When you have a state-run education system it seems that all education is political, n’est-ce pas? The French Immersion debate has once again reared its head in the Province of New Brunswick, the same place that gave birth to the COR party. The Confederation of Regions party’s main platform was to reverse official bilingualism in the province.

The Minister has commissioned another review of the system which has opened up the debate, especially from Canadian Parents for French. I have not had time to examine, once again, all factors at play, but here are some of my personal observations. Both of our sons are in the French Immersion program (Grades 8 & 10) and my wife and I, both bilingual, have been fairly active in their education.

The Early Immersion program starts in Grade 1 and all of the research that I have read on the subject shows that earlier is better. Given that information, it would be better if French Immersion began in kindergarten. Actually, I would prefer that it was the ONLY program, with no opting out. Second language skills are one of the few long-term cognitive skills taught in the system which are useful in a broad sense and easily transported beyond school.

The critical factor in second-language immersion is the teacher’s ability in that language. With only one person to emulate, the students need an excellent example. The Berlitz method is based on this understanding. Our experience has included several teachers with very poor French language skills.

The Immersion program in our schools also lacks adequate resources, so that students with any special needs must transfer out of the program in order to get the attention they require. This results in fewer children with behavioural challenges in French Immersion, and of course more with challenges in what’s known as the Core program. Over the years, a self-selection process has developed, with the many of the more actively involved parents opting for French Immersion, as this seems to be a “better” program for their children. Add to this the “my kids don’t need no French” factor plus real advantages for government employment as a bilingual individual and French Immersion becomes highly politicized.

This separation of French and English not only occurs at school, where the immersion students are known as “French kids”. It also happens at the Departmental level with two separate educational systems (Organization Chart, PDF) and curricula. For example, we have French-speaking schools within a 30 minute drive, yet not once have I heard of an exchange program in the past decade. The kids don’t get a chance to talk with each other. Indeed, two solitudes.

Donald Clark’s view of the Damien Hirst’s “School: The Archaeology Of Lost Desires, Comprehending Infinity And The Search For Knowledge”, is summed up as:

I think he’s got this nailed. The loss of identity, uniformity, submergence and deadening of life the classroom. The sheer tedium of it all – an 11, soon to be 13, year minimum sentence. The religious imagery of the caged dove as the teacher caught in a pseudo-religious preaching role. The shark is the lurking bully and the ever-present air of frightening violence that is typical of the school experience. Like the students the teacher is merely a larger trapped, farmed animal. The classroom is the mortuary of lost desires. The search for knowledge only emerging after you recover from its leaden effect.

A rather damning indictment of our industrial school system from the perspective of a renowned artist. I think that this installation is great for encouraging conversation. A little digging and I came across Hirst’s statue of Virgin Mother; also disturbing and intriguing at the same time.

In the long run, what subjects you covered in school are not that important. Neither is the fact that all your students got over 80% on the final exam. Pete Reilly reminds of this with Tim’s Story:

I had a long relationship with Tim. He was stubborn about not following the rules. If there was homework, he ignored it. If there was reading or studying to be done, he usually left it undone. Grades didn’t motivate Tim. Punishment didn’t deter him. School held no interest. Most of us, including myself, I am ashamed to say, treated Tim like a lost cause.

It’s no wonder that Pete was given the Best Newcomer Edublog Award last year.

Our son is an ecoholic, or so he says in the video, “Ecoholics Anonymous“, one of three finalists in the Aliant Get Green Student Video Contest. The students at Tantramar Regional High School have already won $500 for their school and the grand prize winners will be attending the International Symposium on Business and the Environment in Moncton on 27 November.

Check out these 5-minute videos and you can vote for your favourite on the site. You know which one I voted for ;-)

According to UNICEF, the Convention on the Rights of the Child (to which Canada is a signatory):

… is the first legally binding international instrument to incorporate the full range of human rights: civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights. In 1989, world leaders decided that children needed a special convention just for them because people under 18 years old often need special care and protection that adults do not.

Notice that this Convention does not just address legal rights but a much broader spectrum of rights, which our government has agreed to in writing.

Here is Article 13 of the Convention:

1. The child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child’s choice.
2. The exercise of this right may be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:
(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others; or
(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.

Let’s look at how the New Brunswick Department of Education uses curriculum and enforced homework in contravention of international law:

• Students are told what to write about, when to do it and to what external standards over which they have no input or influence. Failure to comply results in punishment of imposed loss of time, the threat of poor marks or other more subtle coercion.
• Students only receive information that has been approved by and screened by external authorities.
• Children are only given the option of either attending public school or receiving no support from public funds in order to seek knowledge themselves.

Article 16:

1. No child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his or her honour and reputation.
2. The child has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

In our family, the school, under the direction of the Minister of Education, imposes significant interference with our children’s privacy, family and home as every evening is spent doing anywhere from 2 to 5 hours of imposed homework. This is completely arbitrary as the Province has never been able to prove that homework serves any purpose that is clearly deemed useful to society.

Article 28:

1. States Parties recognize the right of the child to education, and with a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity, they shall, in particular:
(a) Make primary education compulsory and available free to all;
(b) Encourage the development of different forms of secondary education, including general and vocational education, make them available and accessible to every child, and take appropriate measures such as the introduction of free education and offering financial assistance in case of need;
(c) Make higher education accessible to all on the basis of capacity by every appropriate means;
(d) Make educational and vocational information and guidance available and accessible to all children;
(e) Take measures to encourage regular attendance at schools and the reduction of drop-out rates.
2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that school discipline is administered in a manner consistent with the child’s human dignity and in conformity with the present Convention.
3. States Parties shall promote and encourage international cooperation in matters relating to education, in particular with a view to contributing to the elimination of ignorance and illiteracy throughout the world and facilitating access to scientific and technical knowledge and modern teaching methods. In this regard, particular account shall be taken of the needs of developing countries.

First of all, there is little choice, even in high school, meaning that one size fits no one, except the system. Attendance is encouraged only through coercion, as most students (let’s take a poll) would opt out of our school system as it currently exists.

Article 29:

1. States Parties agree that the education of the child shall be directed to:
(a) The development of the child’s personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential;
(b) The development of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and for the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations;
(c) The development of respect for the child’s parents, his or her own cultural identity, language and values, for the national values of the country in which the child is living, the country from which he or she may originate, and for civilizations different from his or her own;
(d) The preparation of the child for responsible life in a free society, in the spirit of understanding, peace, tolerance, equality of sexes, and friendship among all peoples, ethnic, national and religious groups and persons of indigenous origin;
(e) The development of respect for the natural environment.
2. No part of the present article or article 28 shall be construed so as to interfere with the liberty of individuals and bodies to establish and direct educational institutions, subject always to the observance of the principle set forth in paragraph 1 of the present article and to the requirements that the education given in such institutions shall conform to such minimum standards as may be laid down by the State.

Once again, the curriculum is imposed from above, with no input from individual students and not taking into consideration individual needs. Even the natural environment is not respected as students are daily bused to consolidated schools in diesel-fueled vehicles because the Department has arbitrarily closed smaller schools over the years and emphasized factory-style education farms.

These are only some examples of how our government agencies are letting down the people of New Brunswick (the only example I can speak about with first-hand knowledge) and not allowing each young generation to realize its true potential. This convention covers fundamental rights and it is obvious that those in charge of our education system are ignoring their obligations. Children have the right to choose and be involved in seeking knowledge and expressing themselves (Article 13). This is a legal right.