(Aired on September 7, 2010)
Teachers have not always been my favorite group of people. I sometimes have argued vociferously against some of the contract provisions they have. I have taken issue with the fact you can't seem to get rid of a bad teacher. I don't like the arrogant attitude of some teachers.
But now that I've said all that, I would like to add that I have many close friends who are teachers or retired teachers, and I spend hours talking education with them. There is no better person than a good teacher. As kids start back to school today, I have to say I admire someone who will try to impart knowledge to a group of kids who are paying attention with only half a mind, spend half their time texting, doodling, whatever and generally not focused on learning at all. Thank goodness that's only a small portion of the class, but it's enough to be a huge challenge.
I wouldn't be a teacher for anything. I don't have the attitude to bear through the idiots to reach out to those who really are there to learn. I admire their tenacity, their compassion and their diligence. For the few teachers I would just as soon not know, there are ten times as many who spend countless hours trying to make a difference. It's a terribly difficult job, particularly in these times when parental control of kids is probably the worst its ever been, and as soon as teachers try to discipline a student in any way, suddenly those righteous parents become totally obnoxious and indignant.
I don't want to say teachers are perfect. I do have some concerns about the militant attitude of some of them. But when push comes to shove, they have a job that is hugely rewarding, but at the same time hugely challenging. It's not a job I'd take on. I'll just stay behind the camera, and make my comments without having to try and deal with a group of kids who really don't care.
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
BC Regs on School Properties Vexing
(Aired on August 25, 2010)
A report released today says BC's public school districts could have more money at their disposal, but accounting practices and government rules are preventing it. According to the Auditor General, school districts collectively have about $1-billion they can't reasonably access - much of it tied up in low-interest bank accounts. If they did use the money, they would have to show it on the books as an expense. That wouldn't be a problem, but the provincial government has mandated that all school districts must run a balanced budget. Thus, if you have a new expense, you have to show the revenue to offset it. With government funding cuts and a flawed funding formula, that revenue is not forthcoming.
Even more vexing to me are government rules restricting what school districts can do with surplus property. For example, District 73 has four new surplus school properties within Kamloops this year; those being John Tod, Ralph Bell, George Hilliard, and the former Beattie Pineridge campus. The district is obligated to maintain those properties and keep them from falling into disrepair.
It would make far more sense to sell those schools and schoolyards, with the government investing the revenue right back into education. But the province has extremely tight rules that make it almost impossible for a district to do that. If you ask the education minister about those rules, she says that it's prudent policy. A selloff of property now - when student numbers are in decline - would hamstring districts in the future, when student numbers are bound to rise again.
It seems to make sense, but the question is, what is happening to students in the meantime? With the way school districts are being eviscerated of funds now, what will the public school system look like in 10 or 20 years' time? It would be better policy to fix what is badly broken now, and let tomorrow think about tomorrow.
A report released today says BC's public school districts could have more money at their disposal, but accounting practices and government rules are preventing it. According to the Auditor General, school districts collectively have about $1-billion they can't reasonably access - much of it tied up in low-interest bank accounts. If they did use the money, they would have to show it on the books as an expense. That wouldn't be a problem, but the provincial government has mandated that all school districts must run a balanced budget. Thus, if you have a new expense, you have to show the revenue to offset it. With government funding cuts and a flawed funding formula, that revenue is not forthcoming.
Even more vexing to me are government rules restricting what school districts can do with surplus property. For example, District 73 has four new surplus school properties within Kamloops this year; those being John Tod, Ralph Bell, George Hilliard, and the former Beattie Pineridge campus. The district is obligated to maintain those properties and keep them from falling into disrepair.
It would make far more sense to sell those schools and schoolyards, with the government investing the revenue right back into education. But the province has extremely tight rules that make it almost impossible for a district to do that. If you ask the education minister about those rules, she says that it's prudent policy. A selloff of property now - when student numbers are in decline - would hamstring districts in the future, when student numbers are bound to rise again.
It seems to make sense, but the question is, what is happening to students in the meantime? With the way school districts are being eviscerated of funds now, what will the public school system look like in 10 or 20 years' time? It would be better policy to fix what is badly broken now, and let tomorrow think about tomorrow.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
When is an Announcement not an Announcement?
(Aired on June 25, 2010)
It must be really challenging to write press releases for the provincial government - especially if you're boss is Education Minister Margaret MacDiarmid. This week, for example, we received a release touting over $600,000 was spent to buy our local school district five new state-of-the-art cleaner burning diesel school buses. But talking to district officials gives you a little bit of a different story.
You see, every year the district evaluates its buses to see if they are too old and too used. For example, if a bus meets a certain mileage criteria, it has to go. This year, five buses expired. So in essence, the government did exactly what it had to do. The government was obligated to replace the old buses. Hardly something worth crowing over. Not only that, the buses are in no way cleaner running than any other new buses out there. They are diesel buses that simply comply with current emissions standards.
It's nothing new, of course. The provincial government regularly trumps up mundane obligations as if it is saving the world. It also routinely re-announces funding that has previously been committed, trying to fool those of us in the media who don't pay attention. Sometimes it works.
And the tricks worked for some in the media this time, too. The first dead giveaway that there was something fishy here should have been the mere fact that it's funding for education. We should all be skeptical when that's announced.
It must be really challenging to write press releases for the provincial government - especially if you're boss is Education Minister Margaret MacDiarmid. This week, for example, we received a release touting over $600,000 was spent to buy our local school district five new state-of-the-art cleaner burning diesel school buses. But talking to district officials gives you a little bit of a different story.
You see, every year the district evaluates its buses to see if they are too old and too used. For example, if a bus meets a certain mileage criteria, it has to go. This year, five buses expired. So in essence, the government did exactly what it had to do. The government was obligated to replace the old buses. Hardly something worth crowing over. Not only that, the buses are in no way cleaner running than any other new buses out there. They are diesel buses that simply comply with current emissions standards.
It's nothing new, of course. The provincial government regularly trumps up mundane obligations as if it is saving the world. It also routinely re-announces funding that has previously been committed, trying to fool those of us in the media who don't pay attention. Sometimes it works.
And the tricks worked for some in the media this time, too. The first dead giveaway that there was something fishy here should have been the mere fact that it's funding for education. We should all be skeptical when that's announced.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Don't Cut Too Many School District Managers
(Aired on May 20, 2010)
Kamloops School District is finalizing its staff cuts for the fall, and so far, seem to have a pretty good handle on what needs to be done to make ends meet without hurting the product in the classroom. There will be some teacher cuts, but that's not unexpected in the face of declining enrollment. Some support staff will also be axed. Seven principals' jobs will go, again because some schools won't be operating and others face reduced levels of staffing. And in an effort to ensure that the critics are silenced, there's also a restructuring at the top. Some senior administrative positions will be going, and job functions will change.
Perception is important, I suppose, and it must appear that the District is cutting top management as well as teachers in the classroom. All well and good, but I would caution that senior cuts need to be limited, or the long term result will be even more chaos and disruption than we have now. It's fine to keep teachers in the classroom, and provide the best service to students. That's what education is about. But without the planners and the senior people to look ahead and make decisions for the future, you have to have the senior administrators too. And to cut one or two positions at a senior level, where you only have a handful of people in total is a much more significant cut than cutting 30 teaching positions out of hundreds within the district.
If you have no managers, you have anarchy and chaos. Teachers can't and won't do the planning for the future. Neither will support staff or Parents Advisory Groups. You need the administrators to keep things running. No principals, no direction. No senior administrators, no future.
I'm impressed with how the District has handled a pretty dismal situation. But let's remember that if you take the Superintendent, give him more direct responsibility for individual areas of the administration, as Terry Sullivan is taking on, you take away some of his ability to function. And to curtail the ability of the top administer to administrate is a recipe for disaster.
Kamloops School District is finalizing its staff cuts for the fall, and so far, seem to have a pretty good handle on what needs to be done to make ends meet without hurting the product in the classroom. There will be some teacher cuts, but that's not unexpected in the face of declining enrollment. Some support staff will also be axed. Seven principals' jobs will go, again because some schools won't be operating and others face reduced levels of staffing. And in an effort to ensure that the critics are silenced, there's also a restructuring at the top. Some senior administrative positions will be going, and job functions will change.
Perception is important, I suppose, and it must appear that the District is cutting top management as well as teachers in the classroom. All well and good, but I would caution that senior cuts need to be limited, or the long term result will be even more chaos and disruption than we have now. It's fine to keep teachers in the classroom, and provide the best service to students. That's what education is about. But without the planners and the senior people to look ahead and make decisions for the future, you have to have the senior administrators too. And to cut one or two positions at a senior level, where you only have a handful of people in total is a much more significant cut than cutting 30 teaching positions out of hundreds within the district.
If you have no managers, you have anarchy and chaos. Teachers can't and won't do the planning for the future. Neither will support staff or Parents Advisory Groups. You need the administrators to keep things running. No principals, no direction. No senior administrators, no future.
I'm impressed with how the District has handled a pretty dismal situation. But let's remember that if you take the Superintendent, give him more direct responsibility for individual areas of the administration, as Terry Sullivan is taking on, you take away some of his ability to function. And to curtail the ability of the top administer to administrate is a recipe for disaster.
Friday, April 9, 2010
No One Working on an Education Fix
(Aired on April 8, 2010)
MLA Terry Lake says it's fundamentally wrong to say the Liberal government doesn't have education as a priority. He, and his colleagues, continue to cite the increasing amount of money they're putting into education. They talk about their funding of full day kindergarten. They talk about putting money into a variety of special programs.
All these things may be well and good, but the government is not putting the education money where it's needed most-into basic education. All day kindergarten is an absolute frill. It's unnecessary and is really only a convenience to parents who don't want to hassle with daycare. Sorry, but that's a fact. No one will argue that it can't contribute positively to a child's education, but so can daycare. So can parents spending more quality time with their kids.
The government absolutely refuses to try to come to grips with the real problem in education - how to fund it in a time of declining enrollment. School Boards across the province are facing financial ruin, and here in this district, we've laid over hundreds of teaching positions the past few years simply because we can't find a new model. It's the same with health care, but don't get me started on that.
I find it absolutely reprehensible that our two MLAs can sit their and spout the party line, and can't go into Victoria and demand some change.
But it's not just the Liberals. The NDP has no solution either. Their solution is simply to put more money into the pot. That's not going to help. We've already done that.
We need to sit down and find a better way. It's not going to be an easy solution, and the longer we wait to come to grips with it, the bigger the problem will become.
Where are the people with vision for this province? Where are the leaders who will lead us out of the educational wasteland? Both the Liberals and NDP should be ashamed. So should senior bureaucrats in the Education Ministry who should be helping to lead this fight. Where are the visionaries who led this province to greatness? Obviously not living in B.C. any more.
MLA Terry Lake says it's fundamentally wrong to say the Liberal government doesn't have education as a priority. He, and his colleagues, continue to cite the increasing amount of money they're putting into education. They talk about their funding of full day kindergarten. They talk about putting money into a variety of special programs.
All these things may be well and good, but the government is not putting the education money where it's needed most-into basic education. All day kindergarten is an absolute frill. It's unnecessary and is really only a convenience to parents who don't want to hassle with daycare. Sorry, but that's a fact. No one will argue that it can't contribute positively to a child's education, but so can daycare. So can parents spending more quality time with their kids.
The government absolutely refuses to try to come to grips with the real problem in education - how to fund it in a time of declining enrollment. School Boards across the province are facing financial ruin, and here in this district, we've laid over hundreds of teaching positions the past few years simply because we can't find a new model. It's the same with health care, but don't get me started on that.
I find it absolutely reprehensible that our two MLAs can sit their and spout the party line, and can't go into Victoria and demand some change.
But it's not just the Liberals. The NDP has no solution either. Their solution is simply to put more money into the pot. That's not going to help. We've already done that.
We need to sit down and find a better way. It's not going to be an easy solution, and the longer we wait to come to grips with it, the bigger the problem will become.
Where are the people with vision for this province? Where are the leaders who will lead us out of the educational wasteland? Both the Liberals and NDP should be ashamed. So should senior bureaucrats in the Education Ministry who should be helping to lead this fight. Where are the visionaries who led this province to greatness? Obviously not living in B.C. any more.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Provincial Completion Rate Numbers Skewed
(Aired on April 6, 2010)
The completion rate for students is kind of like the Holy Grail of education. How many kids make it through to graduation? It’s a benchmark, and a fundamental building block that is a measure used by the government, by those like the Fraser Institute who like to rank schools, and by the schools, students and parents themselves.
Why then, would the province be so lax in how they determine this rate? Our school district wanted to find out why their own statistics showed an 82% completions rate, when the government’s stats were 6% lower. When the district looked, they found deceased students on the province’s role (I guess they didn’t complete school), students who were in non-graduation programs, special First Nations programs, international students who may only stay a year or two in our country and never intended to be here until graduation, and so on.
In other words, the province’s figures were poorly researched, and the results are unfair. That certainly hurts the reputation of the district, and it could mean changes in funding based on those results.
Isn’t it ironic that those like the province, who live and die by statistics, don’t seem to care if those statistics are accurate or not. Why should I be surprised?
The completion rate for students is kind of like the Holy Grail of education. How many kids make it through to graduation? It’s a benchmark, and a fundamental building block that is a measure used by the government, by those like the Fraser Institute who like to rank schools, and by the schools, students and parents themselves.
Why then, would the province be so lax in how they determine this rate? Our school district wanted to find out why their own statistics showed an 82% completions rate, when the government’s stats were 6% lower. When the district looked, they found deceased students on the province’s role (I guess they didn’t complete school), students who were in non-graduation programs, special First Nations programs, international students who may only stay a year or two in our country and never intended to be here until graduation, and so on.
In other words, the province’s figures were poorly researched, and the results are unfair. That certainly hurts the reputation of the district, and it could mean changes in funding based on those results.
Isn’t it ironic that those like the province, who live and die by statistics, don’t seem to care if those statistics are accurate or not. Why should I be surprised?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
