One of the side conversations that I had on my recent trip to Halifax had to do with the control of public education. Our discussion quickly focused on the reality that, with every newly-elected government, policy can suddenly shift, leaving educators at all levels of the system scrambling to implement the new procedures and protocols that are bound to follow.
So over the next couple of days, I would like to engage in some thinking about alternatives. I realize that governments are responsible for collecting and distributing most of the funding received for public education in Canada, but does that mean that elected officials should be the ones to control education policy? After all, the funding we’re talking about comes from the citizenry and, therefore, belongs to the citizenry.
Yet it seems that, more and more, the business of education has become the political “gameball” of whatever party happens to be in power.
Does this work? Are you satisfied with this model? Can you imagine alternatives?
I’ll be interested in your thoughts, Stephen. My first reaction was, yeah, set up an independent body and let them run with it. I thought a little more and have changed my mind.
The reason why we elect governments should be because we believe in their beliefs and goals. Certainly, education is a huge player in this. If education is allowed to stand outside a political party’s reach, I think it becomes even more resistant to change. Yes, a government can make sweeping changes as it did with the Common Curriculum and the Ontario Curriculum and EQAO and the rest. We educators complain about all of this. However, there is the other side – the taxpayer who foot the bill and want the best for their children. For your average parent, changing a political party because of an education platform may be their only alternative.
Great conversation starter, Stephen.
The question I would ask if not an elected government then who? My sense is that as much as policy directives and mandates do cause stress for all of us in the system, they are a byproduct of an electorate and politicians that are trying to exercise some degree over the system they fund and trust their children with; not a trifling matter.
There is a great tension that exists in a functioning democracy that makes it, as Churchill said, not perfect but the best we can do. I like the fact that we have disagreements and debates about our public education system and only wish they were flavoured with more classroom based facts and examples.
That’s the challenge I’m putting to educators; use social media and web 2.0 tools to tell your story, to show your community that great things are actually happening in our classrooms and schools. When I was a younger Ontario teacher during the Harris years, many teachers would demand that our federations hire spin doctors to help counter the spin that was coming from Queen’s Park. I remember one of our federation leaders responded with the statement that our teachers were were best for this role~ and this was before we had access to the powerful tools we do today.
It would be nice if we could run education (and healthcare, and infrastructure, and emergency services, and law, and government) in the most effective, rational, transparent and efficient manner possible. I don’t think that can happen with people in charge (especially people who don’t have to answer to the majority). The urge to game the system for their own ends makes people poor masters – especially with no oversight.
Getting a meaningful metric on education is very difficult. You can go with something like PISA, which tries to recognize nuance, but ultimately simplifies and staticizes a complex system into something abstract. The urge to manipulate that abstraction is too great, especially if appearances convince the unwashed masses that what you’ve done is effective and consolidates your own power.
Until we develop an artificial intelligence capable of recognizing nuance down to the finest level in an objective, insightful, and ultimately effective way, the messy business of democratically elected governments making life difficult and sometimes dangerously irrelevant to what is actually required in education is the only way to ensure there isn’t a consolidation of power in an elite beyond the reach of the majority. That’s already happened in finance, I’d hesitate to take democratic input out of the education equation until we have something better to replace it with.
So, I suppose I agree with Doug, at least until we build something complex enough to manage us better than we can manage ourselves.
IMHO: The Education Sector has historically prided itself in keeping “politics” out of Education; elected trustees/commissioners (whatever you chose to call them in your jurisdiction) are hesitant to call themselves “politicians” because they don’t see themselves as partisan folks. In this “history”, we haven’t beat the drums about the “good things” that happen in Canadian schools everyday. The voices we hear, are not positive overall….. so the general public begins to believe that things are in shambles — and governments respond with a “fix”. The irony is that folks want local control of schools , yet with every government imposed solution — control of the local school becomes more centralized; and more removed from local people.
Boards of Education are the local voice; governor. Education solutions must be defined locally — between Boards of Education; their Staff; the Public & Students. Sound education practise that responds to local need and challenges — so that EVERY student – regardless of where they live, their race or their personal circumstance has the opporunity to grow, succeed and achieve.
Personally, I believe the largest challenge facing many boards of education … and even more so for tribal councils/bands ….. are the funding challenges …. a topic for another day, but definately a driver that pushes the education discussion centrally.
I think education policy should be controlled by the public as it always has been. I think as educators we have a responsibility to inform the public and state what we think is best, but ultimately it’s citizens who pay for public education and who have to live with the consequences of education policy, so they should make those decisions. Politicians are just the instrument of the public making those decisions and if the public don’t like the way the politicians are running education they can and should replace with someone they like better.
I think what the question is really hinting at is the increasing politicization of public education policy. This is just a reflection of the way that control over education policy is being centralized. Not very long ago decisions about funding were made locally by “small p” politicians that had limited implications. Now many decisions are made thousands of miles away by people removed from the consequences. They become matters debated on on a provincial level. Education policy has become a critical matter in deciding who gets elected provincially. The politicization of education policy is not a good development. Political parties run on short term cycles and take positions based not on what’s right, but on what’s popular.
Personally I’d like to see control more decentralized. I think the more local control there is the better. If a community wants to make education a priority or try something that works best in their community I think they should be able to do so. Local trustees with no party affiliations are more in touch with what their community needs and more likely to do the right things than to toe the party lie. The experience of education is so varied that what’s needed here is more flexibility to customize, not more centralization. Let’s give control of ed policy back to the school boards and away from the politicos.
I am constantly back and forth over jurisdictional control of education. Admittedly I am something of a federalist and appreciate the benefits of an overarching, national education policy. However, we have all seen how well that works out in the states. Local control is crucial, but in the end you face the same fundamental problem which is that policy is rarely shaped by educators. Understandably it would’ve hard forms full time teacher to also be a trustee or board member, but why not retired teachers or even elect a panel of teachers on a rotating basis that would be allowed to give up some classroom time to act as school board members. I realize that there is more to running a board than just Ed policy, but I don’t know that any of my local trustees here in Hamilton have any teaching experience. And our local “small p” politicians have recently done a fabulous job of alienating vast swaths of the population due to a incredibly politicized and questionable process to review and close a number of schools….
Thanks for the comments, Chaim. I find myself oscillating between the ideas of national policy and local control of education. Certainly, the increased centralization in Ontario has spoken to the equity issues–it hasn’t solved them, but has acknowledged them and attempted to affect the natural imbalances that emerged as the result of past practice around education funding.
I would also love to generate more conversation about national education policy and a Canadian sense of purpose for schools. (There is room for debate on whether this is necessary or possible, given the regional differences between provinces and regions)
I do lament going to monthly board meetings and hearing local trustees engage in conversations and debates (often with the public present) about local policy, funding, taxation, etc. Having decisions that would have a direct effect on my work as a teacher debated before my very eyes was exciting, and gave me a better sense of the importance of citizen engagement. Much of that has been lost now and, although a ton of trustee meetings still happen, much of their authority has been removed.
Fascinating idea about involvement of teachers on school boards. I know that trustees and “staff” have always been separated by questions about representation, conflict of interest, etc. I’m not sure, but I sense that this may have historical roots, going back to a time when teachers were not even permitted to be married, let alone have kids. Now, with so many teachers also raising children within the districts that they work, it may be time to try to leverage both the experience (education) and the interest (teachers are parents too!) and look for a different way of doing things.
At the very least, perhaps some joint committees involving teachers, administrators and trustees might be a powerful option. Would love to talk to you more about this. It might be worth presenting to a few districts!
Thanks again for the comments…
Thank you Stephen for an inspiring insight! As with any financial avenue,money becomes a target of power. Political game-ball you say?? Absolutely! As long as money is involved there will be special interest — more like self interest! This is an issue that has exhausted itself with no evidence of change, why? Because.. thats right, we are just citizens, not major corporations that have the means to manipulate and bully. Do you think that a separate body although strictly regulated can do a better job? Or do you think that it too can become a self interested body being pulled by those much more powerful than them? Food for thought. A major example of this is the staggering numbers of children being drugged. Many questions are arising from the “sloppy science” involved and the frustrations by teachers unable to access resources to deliver to students who’s learning styles do not adhere to the present standard of educational delivery. This is but one example of the systematic failures of the public school system. It is really too bad that Canada is becoming so hyper-consumerist that we are losing humanitarian consciousness — more particularly our nations children. If the well thought alternatives are not financially lucrative for our lovely leaders, it will fall upon deaf ears. Pessimistic I know, but history speaks louder than a comment on a blog.
I didn’t forget about this post
I have been thinking about the points raised here. As I wondered about where to jump in and what to contribute, I recalled a post from last year that I made a few comments on…..so am adding it here in hopes that it resonates/helps (esp. with the idea of local control)…if you have time to read the comments/exchange:
http://thedisruptiondepartment.org/blog/?p=188