Today's debate at the legislative assembly - Oral Question on #BCED

You can also watch the QP here: Question Period


DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(HANSARD)

---

HOUSE BLUES

MONDAY, MAY 26, 2014

Afternoon Sitting

Oral Questions

LOCKOUT IN TEACHERS' LABOUR DISPUTE

J. Horgan: Well, we've had 12 years of B.C. Liberal meddling in negotiations with teachers, with trustees, with support workers. We've had 12 years of confusion. You could call it a generational confusion, because the kids that were in grade 1 in 2002, when the then minister or the current Premier capriciously ripped out class size and class competition language from a collective bargaining agreement and then was told by the courts to renegotiate that position…. A whole generation of kids has gone from grade 1 to graduation this coming month with uncertainty and unease as a result of the actions of this government — not one Supreme Court ruling, but two.

My question is to the Minister of Education. He has said: "The class-size issue is an oxymoron as far as I'm concerned" — we can debate the grammar of that — "because all the research in the world says class size does not determine outcomes."

I would disagree with that and so would thousands of other scholars. But instead of trying to explain when he had time to read all the research in the world, my question is: did he have time to read the convoluted explanation as to why we're locking people out this week when we should be at the bargaining table negotiating a fair collective agreement?

Hon. P. Fassbender: I appreciate the question from the Leader of the Opposition. I will say this. I think if his facts weren't on an Etch a Sketch, when he flips it over and it disappears, then maybe he could stay on track. I'm going to try and help the Leader of the Opposition and the members opposite. I'm going to try and help you understand the reality of what we have done and what we are doing.

This government is committed to negotiated settlements. If you look at our track record, we have been working very hard with the public sector to find negotiated settlements — to work together with trade unions — that respect their rights and also respect the rights of taxpayers in an economic climate that requires some tough decisions.

But it is not this government that initiated this current round of dispute. It is the BCTF that started limited strike action. It is the BCTF that ramped it up this week to rotating walkouts throughout the province. This government, since June, since we were elected, was prepared to sit at the negotiating table every single day to find a negotiated settlement. We are still committed to doing that. We are prepared to meet around the clock, through the summer, to find a negotiated settlement that respects the rights of teachers, of students, of parents, of other labour unions in this province. That is our commitment. That is our goal, because long-term stability is what is important in our education system.

Madame Speaker: Recognizing the Leader of the Opposition on a supplemental.

J. Horgan: As tempting as it is to talk about mechanical bulls and by-products, I think I'll just try and focus in on the minister's comment about the track record of the B.C. Liberals — not one but two examples that went to the Supreme Court and found that the government had contravened the chartered rights of a group of citizens in British Columbia. Not once; twice.

What did they learn from that? They learned more provocation, more disruption, more confusion. Let's be clear. I love to do that. This is what we hear from the Vancouver District Parent Advisory Council: "Everybody is confused." That strikes me as not a transparent approach. It's a confusing approach.

Will there be graduation ceremonies? Will we be marking exams? It took five pages in a letter from the chief negotiator, and I'm still not clear. I wasn't reading all of the information in the world, but maybe I could ask the minister…. This is a comment from the Vancouver District PAC association. This is all the PACs in Vancouver.

Interjections.

J. Horgan: Oh, I know that the minister is really concerned about this, so keep your mechanical bull to yourself for a moment, and we'll focus on this: "Parents are more willing to adapt to a one-day schedule change than they are to accept the long-term damage the provincial government is inflicting on the public education system in this province." Long-term damage.

My question is, to the minister: could he try and interpret for the people of British Columbia just what Peter Cameron is doing with the people of this province, and most importantly, the kids that are not in classrooms because of your provocation?

Hon. P. Fassbender: I am more than prepared to ride the wave of misinformation that is coming from the members opposite about what our intent was and what it has been. It is very clear. Mr. Cameron last week clarified exactly why we had to take the steps we did in response to the decisions that were made by the teachers union moving forward. But I would ask the members opposite: where was your concern over a year ago when we had almost a year of limited strike action while we were trying to negotiate a settlement? Where was your concern then when that happened?

Where were the members across the way? Where was their concern a week ago when the BCTF was initiating strike action? Where was the concern then? All I can say, and I say this with all sincerity…. There are none of us that want to see disruption in students' lives, in the lives of their parents and their communities, in the lives of the teachers. We are clearly still at the table, willing to negotiate, asking for a response that is measured and appropriate for everyone in this province.

First and foremost, stability has been our goal. It'll continue to be our goal, and we'll continue to negotiate that.

J. Horgan: A 12-year record of destabilizing public education. A child who started in grade 1 in 2002 has had 12 years of confusion as the result of this government's policies.

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members. The Chair needs to hear the answer and the question.

J. Horgan: Thank you very much, hon. Chair.

My question is to the "Let's be clear" Minister of Education. You've been provoking disruptions in the education system for 12 years. The court has found twice — not once; twice — that you deliberately provoked action so that you could take more pieces of a collective agreement off the table.

What steps will the minister take to ensure that this last month of public education for those kids who were disrupted in 2002 by the then minister, the current Premier…? What steps are you going to do to make those next 30 days an enjoyable experience rather than a chaotic one that rests right at your feet?

Hon. P. Fassbender: I think the Leader of the Opposition, as I said, has selective memory when it comes to the facts.

The facts are Madame Speaker…. We've had a decade of unprecedented labour peace in this province. Another fact for the Leader of the Opposition: just last week or the week before last, we signed another tentative agreement with the HEU that was within the framework. That was a five-year agreement.

I do not believe that even the members of the opposition, who have children and grandchildren, don't want what we want on this side of the House. That is stability, a focus on learning outcomes, a focus on moving forward in transforming our education system to meet the future of this country and this province.

We have learning outcomes. We have learning outcomes that lead the world, that show that we are delivering results. Yes, Madame Speaker, it's absolutely through the hard work of the teachers, who also deserve a fair and negotiated settlement, not labour disruption initiated by their own union.

GOVERNMENT APPROACH TO
TEACHERS' COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

R. Fleming: It's déjà vu all over again, Madame Speaker, with these guys. This government has a unique ability to insult the province's teachers.

Last week the Premier said she would resolve bargaining by locking everyone in a room until they'd get a deal. Good. But then she look to the airwaves mere hours later and said teachers are only motivated by greed. She told a radio station that for teachers: "It's all about money. It's never about the quality of education."

Wow. I thought it was this government that wouldn't let bargaining talk about class size and composition issues on the table in this dispute. Can the Education Minister describe how the Premier insulting teachers and then locking kids out from their lunchtime activities and extracurricular activities can in any way help create…?

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

R. Fleming: Can the minister describe how the Premier's sum total of her statements on teachers last week in any way helps this week in getting us closer to a settlement to achieve trust and respect at the bargaining table so that our schools in British Columbia are stable and secure?

Hon. P. Fassbender: I appreciate that the critic for the opposition is again taking facts and twisting them to their purpose.

SOURCE

B.C. Sexual Education: Updated Curriculum, but need more training to ensure inclusiveness

This article examines 'sex ed' in schools and changes coming:

Education advocates are calling on the incoming Minister of Education to ensure that all BC students, regardless of location, sexual orientation, or gender identity, receive comprehensive sex education under the revised curriculum that is slated for implementation in September.

Sex education is included in the curriculum for Health and Career Education K to 7, Health and Career Education 8 and 9 and Planning 10, which were last updated between 2005 and 2007. BC Teachers’ Federation vice president Glen Hansman says the sexual health component of these courses are being moved to what will be called Health and Physical Education.

“It is not known what the plan for implementation will be — what sorts of on-the-job training opportunities will be available for teachers, for instance, or what sort of updated learning resources will be available,” he says. “We’ve raised concerns that they are getting rid of Planning 10 where it’s housed and said to politicians that there needs to be plans to deal with this stuff. We’ll be raising it again with the new minister because we don’t have clear answers.”

A spokesperson for the Ministry of Education says that sex education will remain in the curriculum.

“Health and Career Education K to 7, Health and Career Education 8 and 9 and Planning 10 are still in place,” the spokesperson says. “A review of all curriculum is underway as part of the Ministry’s curriculum transformation. A team of BC teachers is currently reviewing the health curriculum component. Initial consultations have suggested that Health and PE curricula could be combined.”

Drafts of redesigned curricula are expected to be available for review this fall, the spokesperson says.

Hansman worries that the government does not have a plan to support the implementation of any new sexual education curriculum, especially if it’s housed under physical education.

 

He also notes that funding cuts have meant that there are few on-the-job training opportunities for teachers to get up to speed on the teaching of sexual health education.

Nor is there any systemic effort being made to ensure that sexual health education is queer-inclusive, with supports in place for both teachers and learners, he points out.

“Where are PE teachers supposed to go to teach this material responsibly and make sure that the teaching for sex ed is mindful of kids who may not self-identify as gay or lesbian but who may engage in same-sex sexual behaviour, or kids that are transitioning from one gender to another?” Hansman asks.

“Either people are relying on things they find on Google or experience in their own life, and that’s not good enough,” he says.

“I think you would be reasonable to say the large majority of young queer men do not get that education through the school system, and I think you could say the same goes for young queer women.”

Kristen Gilbert, senior health educator at Options for Sexual Health, Canada's largest non-profit provider of sexual health services, says BC teachers need more support and training in order to deliver sexual education that is inclusive of queer and trans students.

“I would say that it is entirely up to the teacher teaching how inclusive or not inclusive their lessons are,” she says. “There actually isn’t anything in the kindergarten through Planning 10 learning outcomes about ensuring that queer kids are represented in the curriculum.“

“The BC Ministry of Education needs to be specific about addressing the needs of queer students,” Gilbert says, “and teachers should learn in their pre-service training how to include all students in their lessons.”

READ MORE: http://www.xtra.ca/public/Vancouver/Are_phys_ed_teachers_the_best_people_to_teach_sex_ed_in_BC-13742.aspx

LBR: What happens when one side refuses to bargain in good faith?

What can be done if one side refuses to meet or negotiate in good faith?

For the Record:

Labour Relations Board - British Columbia
Guide to Labour Relations Code
Chapter 5 - Collective Bargaining
Section 3 - What can be done if one side refuses to meet or negotiate in good faith?

The requirement for good faith bargaining generally means both parties must be sincere in their attempts to reach an agreement. This includes meeting with the other side and making every reasonable effort to conclude an agreement. The bargaining process calls for a certain amount of give and take. Failure to agree with the other side's bargaining demands does not, in itself, mean that a party is not bargaining in good faith. However, a deliberate strategy by either party to prevent reaching an agreement is considered to be bad faith bargaining. If one party engages in that kind of conduct, the other party can lodge an unfair labour practice complaint with the Labour relations Board.

Two years later, teachers are still seeking redress for rights’ violations

Today marks two years since the BC Supreme Court’s landmark decision ruling that legislation the BC Liberals enacted in 2002 violated teachers’ Charter rights, and therefore is unconstitutional and invalid.

On April 13, 2011 the BC Teachers’ Federation won a major victory in its decade-long court battle to overturn legislation which stripped teachers’ collective agreements of protections for class sizes, as well as guarantees of support for students with special needs. The bills had disastrous consequences for teaching and learning conditions across the province because they enabled government to make severe cuts to the public education budget. Government documents introduced as evidence in court calculated those cuts to be more than $275 million per year in 2001 dollars, an estimated $330 million annually in current dollars.
The Supreme Court gave government one year to deal with the repercussions of its ruling but now—two years later—the BC Liberals have still done nothing to redress the breach. As a result, the BCTF has been compelled to go back to court seeking a fair remedy.
“The Supreme Court affirmed our collective bargaining rights and gave us hope that a decade of struggling to meet our students’ needs might be coming to an end,” said BCTF President Susan Lambert. “Two years later, we are still urging the government to act on this important ruling and restore the services our students need and deserve.”
Then-Education Minister Christy Clark brought in the unconstitutional bills in 2002. During her tenure as premier, the BCTF has repeatedly appealed to her not to make students wait yet another year in underfunded schools and overcrowded classes.

Read more at: http://www.bctf.ca/NewsReleases.aspx

Before McRae was Minister of Education, he was a concerned teacher....

I find this incredibly entertaining. The current Minister of Education was once a teacher who wrote a letter to the Minister of Education. The letter has been made public.

McRae was a teacher at Georges P. Vanier secondary school in Courtenay on Vancouver Island in September 2008 when he wrote the letter, which has since been used as the basis for a YouTube video produced by the B.C. Teachers Federation. In the video, featuring an actor and voiced over by a B.C. drama teacher, the letter writer - McRae - explains to Bond the difficulties of teaching four social studies classes in one semester with 128 students, 18 of whom have learning difficulties that require individualized education plans.

 Once a concerned teacher facing the same struggles teachers across the province face, he is now in a position to make change and advocate for students with first hand experience of what the learning conditions are.... but... doesn't.

"This is a veteran educator, not somebody new who doesn't know how to manage a classroom. This teacher has so many hair-trigger kids who come into the classroom with needs that are not being met and are expressed through behaviour," said Pearce. "The teachers have done everything they can at the school level to get them addressed and they haven't changed, so that's why we brought it here to the board level."

The BCTF is taking the government to B.C. Supreme Court in September to grieve the government's actions in stripping the teachers 2002 collective agreement of language that protected the ability of teachers to bargain on class size and class composition. Pearce said because the court already ruled in 2011 the government action was unconstitutional, this time the BCTF will be seeking damages.
"We gave up salary to get those clauses into our collective agreement because teachers felt strongly about protecting our learning environment," said Pearce. "If you take those away, and do it illegally without compensation, then the argument becomes, 'what was the loss created by your actions.' That loss could certainly be in the hundreds of millions."

Here is the youtube video:

Clark government cuts Science World program for kids

Christy Clark and the Liberals putting Families First... right?

Wrong!

Again!

Though this cut is to an important education program, so it makes sense they cut funding - that is what they do best!

Vancouver Sun writes:

VICTORIA - The B.C. government has cut funding to a Science World program that brought innovative education to hundreds of thousands of children across the province. In an interview Thursday, the chair of Science World's board of directors said his organization will no longer be able to run the Program for the Awareness and Learning of Science, which included free fieldtrips and touring educational science programs to communities around the province. "Why it's so important is we're of the view that graduates in science, technology, engineering and math are the natural resources of the future," said Andrew Harries, chair of Science World's board of directors, adding the BC PALS program helped inspire kids to follow careers in these areas. "Any government that doesn't recognize that is short changing its society." Harries said provincial funding of the program began in 2005, adding the province has contributed between $1 million and $2 million each year since. He said the program allowed Science World to extend its reach into communities across the province, including many First Nations communities. "Science World will roll up in a truck and it will take its hands on, highly visual and entertaining form of science learning to kids that just don't get to experience that," he said. "There are very few communities, in fact very few schools in the regions, that the PALS program hasn't reached in the past few years." Education Minister George Abbott has not yet commented on the issue. Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/Clark+government+cuts+Science+World+program+kids/6856207/story.html#ixzz1z8K2rLKa

Are teachers more valuable to the government than previously advertised?

Are teachers more valuable to the government than previously advertised?

Union Book
Ian Weniger
June 4, 2012

Last weekend, I suggested that the BC government would use the event of the BCTF representative assembly to further force teachers into submission regarding the extracurricular ban accepted formally by three-quarters of voting union members. I suspected that the Labour Relations Board would announce that the employers' petition to declare the "bell-to-bell" actions of teachers to be a form of strike action and therefore illegal by the terms of the cooling-off period mandated to the end of the summer by Bill 22. And I thought that, since the minister used the confluence of the BCTF annual general meeting and the spring break period to introduce Bill 22, forcing teachers' delegates to consider incurring massive fines against individual teachers, union officials and the union itself, that the government would do it again.

Why didn't this happen at the RA? I think there are two main reasons. The first is the general political failure of the government as it faces the final year of its mandate before the provincial election next May. Not only are the BC Liberals halfway behind the popularity of the opposition NDP, but they are also neck-and-neck with the newly reborn, tiny BC Conservative Party. The premier's major responses were to lead a trade delegation to China and preside over a couple of dozen investment deals in BC oil and gas development, and to formally propose a competition to change her party's name to reflect the commitment to "free enterprise." While I thought such a dismal situation would be solved by kicking the BCTF while they were down, the government saw that Bill 22 didn't help them before, and more teacher-bashing was unlikely to help them now.

Besides, if Christy Clark's priority in breaking the teachers' union was financial, then a balanced budget at the expense of defunding public education is probably a better re-election asset than scapegoating the most defiant labour organization in the province.

To view the rest of the article, click here

B.C. teachers warn threat of legislated contract amounts to fighting words

Vancouver Sun
Canadian Press
May 28, 2012


VANCOUVER — The BC Teachers' Federation says it won't back down despite threats of back-to-work legislation if a bitter contract dispute is not resolved by the end of June.


BCTF president Susan Lambert warns her members will be ready to fight if Education Minister George Abbott makes good on suggestions that a new contract could be imposed over the summer.


Abbott says he would be ready to act if a government-appointed mediator can't reach a deal with teachers before June 30.


Lambert responds by saying the union has a court-mandated order for the right to free collective bargaining, something she says the B.C. Liberal government is continuing to ignore.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/teachers+warn+threat+legislated+contract+amounts+fighting+words/6690521/story.html#ixzz1wCtTpWfG

Province will not allow another year of teacher job act

News 1130
Dave White
May 25, 2012

SURREY (NEWS1130) - Your kids may not have to worry about another year with job action by teachers.

Education Minister George Abbottsays he will bring the teachers' job action to an end in time for the 2012/2013 school year, if a resolution has not been found by the end of the cooling-off period.

"We'll need to have some kind of an agreement in the absence of a mediator agreement, of course we have to look at legislating a solution, it's been done many times over the past 30 years, but it's not something I want to do at all. If it's absolutely necessary to do it, then we would of course do it."

Abbott hopes both sides can reach an agreement, and notes they are still talking, but the minister admits there has not been much softening nearly one year after the dispute started.

Teachers staged a three-day walkout in March and are currently refusing to perform extracurricular duties.     

To view the article, click here

More on Bill 36

Last night I wrote about the elimination of standard school calendars and briefly mentioned some other problems with Bill 36.

Last night I had a tough time digesting this and tried to imagine what these proposals may mean for education, not only as a teacher, but as a parent and how this will impact my daughter as a student!

Today I ready Parents Take Note - Bill 36 is an attack on you! which summarizes how Bill 36 can impact parents and students if passed:

Friday, April 27, 2012

Parents take note - Bill 36 is an attack on you

Having successfully removed teachers as an "obstacle" to the BC Education Plan, yesterday George Abbott introduced enabling legislation to change the school year, day, and total instructional time provided to students.

Bill 36 removes the requirement for School Boards to follow the standard school calendar, and most importantly allows the Minister to change, through regulation, the minimum number of instructional hours in the year. It also enables more online and blended learning for all grade levels and the introduction of fees for International Baccalaureate programs.

Although the media has focused on the school year, the scariest part of this legislation is the change to the minimum number of instructional hours through regulation. Here is the actual section of the Bill, which allows the Minister to:

prescribing the minimum number of hours of instruction that a board must offer to students enrolled in the schools in its school district, including prescribing that there is no minimum number of hours of instruction for prescribed classes of students, schools or educational programs;

If parents are wondering what this might look like, then look no further than the changes that have taken place in the delivery of Planning 10. In some schools in BC, every grade 10 student goes to the gymnasium once a week for a lecture (this can be in excess of 100 students). There is no or little further instructional time for these students. The remainder of the course is taught through a "blended" model with online components or simply assignments that are done on the student's own time and handed in. The instructional time goes from 240 minutes per week in a class with 30 students, to 80 minutes per week in a class with 100 or more students. Typically this can reduce the teacher hours needed by half.

<Continue Reading Here>

I worry for the students who slip through the cracks, I worry for how diverse learning needs will not be met, I worry about what this will look like and how this will change education for the worse.

I have taught Planning 10 online (though only for a month) and I had dozens of students coming in confused, behind, struggling. As part of that contract I worked 2 blocks Planning 10 in class and Planning 10 online and the difference was night and day. Planning 10 in -class involved far more engaging activities and group work and interactive options, while online was individual, self-paced work.

While I agree that there are students who may prefer one method or another and having choice is important, I fear the government's implementation of this is not to provide "choice" but to save money and that this is just the first step in a future that eliminates the actual classroom and overlooks the importance of that structure, in favour of a cheaper alternative that sounds fancy on paper but is more about making students a commodity and privatizing education than actually improving it.

Elimination of Standard School Calendar means what for education?

Sometimes I wonder what life would be like if educators ruled education. Or, even if the education Minister listened to educators, or visited classrooms for more than just a photo-opportunity.

The things that have been coming from this Liberal government surrounding the future of public education frightens me at times.

CBC reports:

The B.C. government has introduced amendments to the School Act that will eliminate the standard school calendar, the government has announced.
The move allows school boards to more freely schedule classes, opening the way for the possibility of year-round schooling.
The Ministry of Education will continue to set a minimum number of instructional hours, starting in the 2013-2014 school year, a release Thursday said.
The amendments also extend the ability to take a mix of online and traditional school courses to students in kindergarten through Grade 9. Currently, only students in grades 10 to 12 have this option, the announcement said.
“These amendments to the School Act will provide school districts with additional tools to support personalized learning,” said Education Minister George Abbott.

While I don't oppose year-round schooling, in fact I was just talking about this with someone the other day, and how the long summer breaks often leads to September refreshers and that year round schooling could address that issue, this amendment to the School Act does worry me.

Year - round schooling does not worry me, but the fact that local districts can now decide their own schedule means there could be massive changes from one district to the other and the ability to use online education from K-9 now could drastically change education, and not for the better!
What would online grade 3 class look like?

How would this impact class size and composition?

The fact is, it would be cheaper to have 50-100+ students in an online, distant ed course than to have then on site with a teacher and a room that forces safety rules of aprox 30 kids and oh ya, electricity and school supplies... distant ed course could save distrcits money and then why bother even having kids in face-to-face education anymore?

Is this the direction we are heading?

Why?

I can't imagine the social skills of students who do online courses exclusively, imagine starting in Kindergarten? What might this would look like?

I feel like some of my own friends lack social skills from over exposure to twitter, facebook, online chats, and so on.... how could this new plan change things?

So this news worries me.

Also, this bill suggests charging for the IB Program and allows ProD to be specified for a specific topic (or determined for teachers) among other things that basically sound like bad news for teachers and public education.

I do not oppose the possibility of change, but I question what this plan's intention is and where it may lead....

Read the bill here: http://www.leg.bc.ca/39th4th/1st_read/gov36-1.htm

Read Press Release here: http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_releases_2009-2013/2012EDUC0044-000548.htm

Discuss?!

Why this fight is important

I wanted to share this post as I found it to be very interesting and well written....

First published on BCTF Portal March 11, 2012
Bruce McCloy - Teacher in New Westminster

Here is why I see this current fight as very important. This is not about class size, class composition, a wage increase or extra help for special needs students. While these are all very important they are dwarfed by a greater threat; the changing of our current educational system to one that caters less to equity and developing a good person to one that is squarely focused on market based principles and catering to an ever greedy corporate elite. Teachers and government are on a crash course, fighting over, as Wendy Poole outlines http://www.ucalgary.ca/iejll/vol11/poole, the vision and purpose of K-12 public education and the meaning of professionalism.

Government is focused on a neo-liberal view of education, “conceptualiz[ing] education as a commodity to be bought by customers (students and parents) and sold by suppliers (schools and others). From a market perspective, schools are training grounds for future workers and consumers, as well a multi-billion dollar industry offering opportunities for profit. Efficiency, accountability for student outcomes (usually measured by standardized test scores and other measures like graduation rates), choice for parents (e.g., charter schools, vouchers, within-district school choice), privatization (e.g., public funding for private schools, user-pay fees, contracting with private firms to operate public schools, private-public partnerships for school construction, school-business partnerships), and attacks on teachers unions are hallmarks of neo-liberalism in education”. (see attached paper if you would like to read more). This fight is about breaking the union in order to bring in a system that caters to only a few, and leaves the many others simply to be good workers. If we truly cared about students, and creating a better society, we would be modelling our system after Finland, rather than chasing the USA, UK and Australia downwards. The end result of this current action by the BC government is to cut costs, break the union and make a statement to the voters that the current ruling Liberals deserve their vote in May 2013. It has nothing to do with students. For the differences in focus of the Finland system in comparison with the USA, UK and Australian systems review the attached paper, Neo-Liberalism in British Columbia Education and Teachers’ Union Resistance and the video found at http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3441913.htm
Current OECD rankings have Canada slipping slightly behind Australia in reading (#8 compared to #7), still behind Finland at #4 but well ahead of the USA at #11 and the UK at #18. Rankings in Math and Science have Canada far ahead of the USA, Australia and UK systems that the government are focused on reaching down to and still behind the ranking of Finland, a country that teachers are working to catch. Finland is ranked #2 in math, Canada #8, with Australia at #15, the UK at #21 and the USA being far behind at #32. There are similar findings in Science with Finland at #2, Canada at #6, Australia at #12, the UK at #21 and the USA at #30. The quality of our education does not matter to the current Liberal government; containing costs, and creating preferable market conditions do.
Some sobering thoughts when contemplating this possible scenario.

• While increasing funding for schools from a 2002-2003 total of $3.782 billion to a projected 2012-2013 total of $4.725 billion (making true governments claim that per-student funding has increased) the actual costs to districts have far outstripped this increase. Most telling is the decrease in priority of education as a part of the provincial budget falling from 26% in 2002 – 2003 to a 15% in 2011 – 2012. In 2002 – 2003 the total allocation envelope for education was $3.7 billion. This accounted for 26% of the total provincial budget. In 2012 – 2013 the projected total allocation envelope for education is $4.7 billion accounting for 15% of the total provincial budget. If the 2002 – 2003 % of total provincial budget allocation held true today the total allocation of funds to education from the provincial budget for 2012 – 2013 would be $8.1 billion providing for a further allocation of $3.1 billion on top of the $4.7 billion currently being provided. The amount due to school districts for next year over and above what is being given is almost equal to the total amount provided to school districts in the 2002 – 2003 year. It is not a situation of lack of funds, rather a change in priority for the government
• Board funds have long been frozen, all but 6 districts are currently in Funding Protection (meaning that they are working in a bankrupt state). Board funds have been frozen for a further 3 years, leaving them with an accumulated $100 million shortfall this year alone. The “easy cuts” to budgets have long been done leaving an impossible situation. The overwhelming major cost to districts is teacher salaries, something that districts have been unable to change due to strict rules in the collective agreements. Until now. Changes in post and fill rules, class composition and numbers, evaluations and discipline procedures will make it easier for boards to lower their salary costs by making life difficult for more expensive teachers to the point they will quit, removing more expensive teachers and filling their positions with cheaper less experienced teachers or with even cheaper non teachers. The boards will sell the public on these changes b y offering perks that will have most forget the importance of teacher quality.
• The current government advertising focused on teacher salary and benefits (the BCTF is demanding a 15 per cent wage hike and other benefits that would cost $2 billion and raise taxes for BC families...) is allowing the government to keep attention away from the main changes they wish to see through the BC Education Plan. This education plan provides the government with the route to the neo-liberal result that they wish to see, a result that will have us emulating the OECD rankings of the USA, UK and Australia in a very short time, leaving far behind the rankings we currently have and our hopes for reaching those of Finland. This is because the government is not focused on providing an equitable education system. Or even focused on educating at a high level. Rather, it is focused on creating a system that follows their neo-liberal beliefs. The BC Education Plan is a guise (as is the current troubles on the labour front) to instituting these ideals:
  
  • While requests for feedback to the BC Education Plan is currently seen as a priority for government, the plan is all but written awaiting an appropriate time to roll out. Current feedback will never be considered but provides the perception that it has been
  • BC Education Plan calls for personalized learning that will amount to students staying at home to work on their computers learning from an on-line master teacher. Cheaper non-teachers will be available for students to submit assignments and pick up others, while tutoring (on-line and in person) will be available if necessary. This change over has already begun. The government is admitting that 700 special needs teachers that have been lost to the system have been replaced with 2100 new teaching assistants ... but no more teachers. The $165 million Learning Improvement Fund will hire more teacher assistants ... but no more teachers.
  • Contract changes are necessary to enable this change to occur in our current system – changing hours of work, working conditions (class sizes can reach the hundreds) and making it easier to deal with teachers that disagree with the direction
  • Money will be saved on school buildings as only a few will be needed as regional meeting places – while the others can be sold as they are no longer required to service children
  • Standardized assessment will become easier as the teaching from the on-line Master teachers will be the same.
  • Large corporations will find a ready market for technology. A quick look at those involved in developing the new BC Education Program indicate past and present members of the guiding committee including 20 members who belong to the corporate business community or with strong ties to this community and zero involved in public education in BC.
  • Creating a system dependent on technology will provide a ready market for both hardware and software manufacturers as well as internet providers. On line needs will increase, allowing a market for sellers of data plans
  • Control of teacher Professional Development and new evaluation and “one-strike you are out” dismissal procedures will allow government to control what teachers learn and what they will teach in the classroom. Government and corporate propaganda will be required to be taught, even if ethically unsettling, or a teacher will face dismissal.
  • Control of curriculum and standardization of what is taught will allow government to lessen the time many students stay in school, providing an opportunity for students to leave at the end of grade 10 (where 3 of our government exit exams currently are placed). Students will be able to leave early for the workforce providing cheap (and undereducated) labour to be available during the week – something that is currently not readily available for most companies. Seeing that these workers were encouraged to leave school at grade 10 they will later find that they do not have the required education to change occupations, therefore making them more likely to stay in lower paying jobs within the company that they currently work for.
  • With the education of children left in the hands of busy parents, and at home often with little guidance (especially in the secondary school years) it is more likely that they lag behind and have less motivation to finish beyond grade 10. As well, earning money at an early age could be a great benefit to the family income as well as provide a greater source of disposable income at an earlier age – resulting in more purchasing power at a younger age.
  • Only those being educated in private schools (still in a traditional mode of providing education) or those with incredible self-discipline will have the skills to enter university – predominately leaving the rich to claim the higher level jobs and the less rich or less motivated to take up a new lower class working class.
  • With a larger number of workers available and a dismantling of trade union power, the minimum wage can once again be lowered, rights eroded allowing for more flexibility and higher profits for business owners. As well, the numbers of the consumer class will increase, also allowing for further profits for corporations.

While we are busy fighting the current contract negotiations, which in themselves are important, the Liberal government has a far greater goal. We find ourselves so busy with fighting the little things I fear we may miss the bigger picture and feel the pain of the onslaught (BC Education Plan) far before we see it coming and far later than we can do much about it. I am reminded of a simple yet effective strategy we use to use in PE class when playing the game British Bulldog (in one of its many configurations). If one was lucky enough to get two balls they often incorporated the following strategy – throw one ball high in the air. As members of the other team watch the ball float slowly towards them the original thrower would throw the second ball hard , directly at the opponent, hitting them and getting them out.

We see a similar strategy with the government – lob up the whole confrontation of contract negotiations, and, while teachers are busy looking at these, hit them hard with the educational changes you as a government actually want to implement. While current contract negotiations are very important and need to be dealt with quickly by teachers throughout the province, we need to be talking about and informing the public of the far greater threat that looms and is poised to hit in the very near future. It is one that will find us sadly leaving any possibility of reaching the equitable system found in Finland (and along with it the high OECD rankings), leaving any possibility of maintaining our current standing in the world (as stated in the OECD rankings), and fervently chasing the lower scores of the USA, UK and Australia. All in the name of creating a new culture of uneducated workers and consumers for a quickly growing corporate elite.

Minister Abbott's thank-you letter to retired teachers