Something to be bothered about with #BCed

I apologize if my outcry against the deterioration of public education bothers you but I think there are much larger issues to be bothered by with the way this Provincial government is treating public education!

I shared this as a facebook status, and I wanted to share it here as well:

Teachers fight for students everyday. Fight for smaller classes, more support, specialist teachers and a safe place to learn and grow. My union fights for me. Fights for improved salary, benefits and better working conditions. Don't get it confused... Teachers always 'do more with less' so just because we ask for a fair wage to catch up with teachers across Canada (many with lower cost of living) doesn't mean we are greedy. We care about your kids, but have families of our own too. Funding needs to go into education, for better working conditions for teachers, which is better learning conditions for kids. Thank-you to everyone who supports public education. We will keep fighting until this government makes it a priority!

As the struggle continues in British Columbia for public education to become a priority for the BC Liberal government, I find myself constantly having to defend my job, my union, and my students. For some reason, there is this divide... just because teachers want better working conditions including salary, benefits, prep time and smaller classes, they are somehow greedy and not passionate about teaching. Many somehow believe that improving things for teachers doesn't positively impact students.

I can't even count the number of times, in the past two weeks, I have been asked, "Why don't you choose a different career?" or "Well, why do you keep teaching then?" or "Have you thought about moving somewhere else to try teaching or moving to the private sector?" Like that is the answer?

I am a teacher because I care about education and kids... but that doesn't mean I don't also care about my own well being and my family's security. Like any person, in any job, there is a balance of wanting what is best for your clients, colleagues, business, whatever the case may be... as well as your own family and personal life too. I am passionate about education and that means I stick with it, through thick and thin, always trying to improve it for my students as learners and for myself and my colleagues as teachers.

About me...It has been a roller coaster ride... I graduated from university and was hired that summer to start in September as a Teacher-Teaching-On-Call [TTOC] in the district I still call home. After three years of slow work and struggling to make ends meet as a TTOC, I obtained my first part time temporary contract. It was outside my subject area, but I took it because contracts were hard to come by. After that, I had a temporary contract, of some sort, for a few months each year until, in year seven, I finally "rolled over" into a continuing part-time contract. This meant, although 'owed a job' I would be laid off each year until I obtained enough seniority to find a secure position, a classroom and school to call home.

Last year I was laid off and out of 480 or so teachers, I was right in the middle. I was recalled to a part-time job, outside my subject area, the day before school started, and on-call the rest of the days. This year, of our 632 teachers laid off, I am in the bottom 100. Because I am part time, many full time teachers have jumped ahead of me on the lay off and recall list. With a cut off point of 8 years and 4 months, many teachers who have not been laid of fin several years are laid off this year. I have only 2 years and 6 months seniority because much of my on-call teaching time is not included in calculation so I knew I would be laid off this year, however,  I didn't expect to be so low down the list. I don't expect to be recalled in September, if at all next year. This is one of many difficult cuts my district has had to make because of lack of funding from the Provincial government!

I don't mean to sound greedy, or selfish, [why do teachers always apologize when speaking out against injustices?] but as I enter my ninth year teaching, I wonder when I will escape this tumultuous procedure? Where else does nearly a decade of service lead to facing this much uncertainty? If I continued to work just my part-time, 2 day a week contract and the lay-off level stayed as it is this year forever, it would take me almost 15 MORE years to get above lay-off line.

Depressing as that is for me personally, it is not as depressing as losing all our teacher-librarians next year, among other major cuts. My district is not alone in facing these difficult decisions, across B.C. school boards are struggling to balance budgets as the provincial government continues to download costs. B.C. invests $1000 less per student compared to the national average which, if corrected, would resolve most of the cuts school districts are being forced to make. These cuts are devastating and will change public education forever. I fear, once cut, these positions, services and programs will never return and my daughter and her future children, will not be given the opportunities they deserve in school.

It isn't just about me and my family, although that is very important to me, it is about everyone's family and future. Although cliche, it is true, these kids are our future... the government talks about a 'strong economy' but is squashing our young future decision makers' opportunities. Our future nurses, teachers, plumbers, tradespeople, parents, bankers, doctors, cooks, lawyers.... losing important support in school.

It frustrates me that there is no money for classrooms, but our premiere can spend frivolously. It isn't about there being no money, it is about the allocation of money and the priorities this government has. Clearly education is not one of them.

It upsets me that we are bullied and bribed in the public instead of respected at the bargaining table. There is a fair deal to be made, but the media parade won't help us get there.

Teachers elsewhere in this country are negotiating and being recognized as important figures in children's lives. Why can't B.C. see the same? An investment in education now, will pay off in the future.

This isn't about being adversarial, this is about coming to the table... the government and the BCTF... and discussing, proposing, negotiating. Teachers working conditions are students learning conditions and both need to be protected.

Education is worth the investment. Quality education should not be reserved for the rich and elite. Everyone deserves the opportunity to learn and grow in a safe and nurturing environment.

So, I apologize if my outcry against the deterioration of public education bothers you, but I think it should bother you more that this government is treating teachers and students this way. Everyone has a right to quality education and as a teacher and a parent, I will keep fighting for public education and the educators who work hard every day to teach our children. I won't give up on their future and neither should you!

Sharing a great bog post: Within and without the union: prejudices about the BCTF

I recently came across a great blog post, Within and without the union: prejudices about the BCTF, from a teacher who previously worked in a Catholic school and was not a fan of unions. He starts his post with a goal to figure out why the BCTF is so disliked:

I guess that I belong to the most despised union in the province. I’m not whimpering. It’s just a fact. The BC Teachers Federation gets a lot of nasty press. And I try to understand why that might be. To do so, I have to cast my memory back to my pre-union days.

I taught in a Catholic independent school for 11 years. And there was no union. As you can probably guess, a couple of decades ago, some of the BCTF proclivities didn’t play well with Catholics. For one thing, there was the issue of support for LGBTQ realities that the Church would have preferred to deny, but there was more. The Church was terrified of unions.

He then shares his story about when his Catholic school staff tried to create a union after the firing of a teacher because she was divorced and planning to remarry. Next he lists some reasons he believes BCTF is disliked...and Finally he wraps up with this gem....

The tax argument, however, is spurious. The same level of vitriol is never issued when people buy gasoline or groceries. People don’t curse the multimillionaire bank CEO’s when they get ding’d a-buck-fifty at the ATM just for taking out their own money. (By the way, when bank machines first came out, they were free to use, and still people were reluctant, as we knew that the banks were saving huge money laying off tellers). But for some reason, they don’t want to pay tax dollars for a system of universal education that is run and delivered by professionals. They say that in today’s economy we can’t afford it, which is funny, because our modern economy generates more wealth than ever before in history, yet as a percentage of GDP we funded schools much better in the past.

I’ve come to look at the issue as one that I just have to live with. I have worked a few different jobs in my life, finally coming to teaching, and I can say that teaching is most definitely the hardest job I’ve ever done. It can be very rewarding at times – not lately though, considering how hard the government has been working to discredit us. (It really doesn’t feel good when your boss tries to goad you into a fight). But that ‘s a story for my previous blog post.

Please go enjoy the entire blog post. It is very well written and touches on a lot of important topics.

Read entire post here

The Tyee: To Grow BC's Economy, First Grow Schools

Educators must have listened to Christy Clark during the May election campaign with mixed emotions. She couldn't get through a 30-second sound bite without chirping "Grow the economy!" at least twice. Sure, it's a good idea to grow the economy. In fact, educators do it well, and could do it even better.  

But despite being a teacher's daughter, Clark has never shown much appreciation for that fact, starting with her long-ago stint as education minister presiding over Gordon Campbell's first assault on B.C. teachers. With September approaching, the premier would do well to heed this reminder: underfunding schools only short-changes the economy. 

The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development has plenty of evidence to prove it. For example, last June, its education blog compared employment statistics for a number of OECD countries, including Canada. 

It showed young Canadians with less than high school graduation had only a 59 per cent employment rate in 2011. The same age group, with tertiary (or post-secondary) education, had 84 per cent. 

When it came to tertiary education spending, the OECD average in 2010 was 20 per cent above that of 2005, and such spending took up an average of 1.6 per cent of GDP. 

The OECD's Country Notes for Canada throw some encouraging light on how we're doing: 51 per cent of Canadian adults held a tertiary qualification in 2011, up 11 per cent over 2000. That makes us the best-educated nation in the OECD, where the average in 2011 was 32 per cent.

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2013/08/17/Grow-BC-Economy-With-Schools/?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=170813

Vancouver Sun: Support for Public Education, but higher taxes?

This post was interesting to me. I agree if government was more fiscally responsible there could be more done with less, however, to make any real changes, there needs to be more money.... higher taxes is the way to achieve that, but not all are willing to fork over more gmoney, and especially not to a government who mismanages it.

I wish they would explore the corporate taxes further before hiking taxes for the public. I am not opposed to a tax increase if it would help with public services, however, I feel the corporations are let off easy when it comes to taxes and I really think there is something to explore there that could improve public services such as education - for all.

British Columbians indicated strong support in a recent poll for increased spending on public education, but they were sharply divided when asked if they were willing to pay more taxes to accomplish that. In the poll, commissioned by the B.C. Teachers’ Federation, 43.6 per cent of respondents said they would accept a small tax hike to improve education and hire more teachers, but 41.8 per cent said they do not want to pay more. The remainder were uncertain. Leslie Turnbull, a partner with Viewpoints Research of Winnipeg, the firm that conducted the poll, said it’s not uncommon for Canadians to indicate a preference for more government spending but also an unwillingness to cover those costs through taxation. “Most people feel that if government streamlined its spending, better managed it and focused on the key things that are important … then the public could get the services it needs,” she said in an interview. “That’s probably not realistic.” Nevertheless, BCTF president Susan Lambert said she was heartened by the results because they contradict suggestions from the Fraser Institute, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) and the Liberal government that there’s no appetite for a tax lift. “What this is saying to us is that parents and the public are open to a conversation around tax increases, especially if it goes to priorities that they’ve identified … (such as) public education.”

Read More here

Not Only in Wisconsin....

Sadly,' this is not only in Wisconsin' as a colleague pointed out when I re-posted this on facebook.

I recall last year when Scott Walker was governor and tried to destroy unions, strip bargaining rights and eventually was recalled after a major march of public workers to the legislature.  Sounds oddly familiar doesn't it?

It seems a trend lately that governments do not wish to fund puclic sectors and prioritize tax money to other areas, claiming 'net zero' for anything else they do not deem important. It is an obvious move to privatize public sectors to make more money and to have more control over the monies.

I still do not understand how the rich can get richer and the rest of us suffer. Change needs to happen. We have allowed little by little the erosion of our rights, and now government threatens to take them all away in one massive scoop.

Here in B.C. we are in a "cooling off period" which has allowed the government to introduce more bills and laws while forcing us to sit back and "just cool off"

This summer, bargaining will re-open and while we are in mediation currently with the (not so qualified or experienced) Mr. Jago, one wonders what September will look like for our students?

So no, not only in Wisconsin can these things happen... and that worries me. I love my job, I am passionate about education, but the looming unpredictability of public education scares me and I believe in speaking out and taking action to ensure our students are protected and don't lose out in the future because of major losses today.

Staffroom Confidential writes:

We do not need to become partners in backwards reform movements, we need to be principled critics to attacks on union rights and public services. Rather than stating, for example, that yes, perhaps union members should pay some of their health insurance benefits but not too much, we should be arguing that these benefits are part of an overall compensation package that was negotiated and to claw back is equivalent to a pay cut. We need to point out that pensions are simply deferred salary that has been earned, and to claw back pension benefits is to steal that deferred income. We need to remind the public that seniority rights are to protect against discrimination, nepotism and favoritism.

We also need a principled public defense of public services in the public interest. "Reform" has become a euphemism for privatization and it is important to call a spade a spade. Every so-called reform of public services being pushed right now really aims to reduce public spending, curtain service delivery and quality, and to increase the private delivery and control of public services. Think charter schools, for example.

The lesson from Wisconsin is that we need to reform our organizations to ensure that we speak out for what is truly in the public interest, not simply try to lesson the damage. The slogans should not be "These cuts are too deep" but rather "Tax the rich".

Read more here

Adult Education Program Changes

BC's adult education program victim of "choice"

The BC government has announced that it will no longer fund many of the adult education courses that were previously available at no cost, unless they are taken online. Among those courses on the chopping block are Grade 12 courses in physics, calculus, financial accounting, law, social justice, comparative civilizations, marketing, tourism and geography. (See the Vancouver Sun article here: http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/adult+education+with+funding+cuts/6589057/story.html)

Under the guise of "choice" and "flexibility", this government is in fact reducing choice for the purposes of cost cutting. They do not want to fund classrooms and teachers to provide adult education, but they are willing to pay the much smaller cost of an online course, despite the evidence that for many learners, this is not effective.

Adult education programs provide excellent opportunities for adult learners to complete or improve their secondary level coursework. Often this enables further post-secondary educational opportunities. It is one of the pathways to improved education, employment and a higher standard of living. Creating a cost for these programs creates a barrier for those needing the upgrade and will result in fewer adults making this decision. This decision is short sighted and irrational.

Read More Here from Staffroom Confidential - Education Blog

Globe & Mail: Fraser Institute flunks on grading high schools

Globe and Mail
Gary Mason
May 1, 2012

The teachers at Hazelton Secondary quit worrying about the Fraser Institute’s rankings of B.C. high schools a long time ago.

When the conservative think tank started publishing its report card on B.C. schools years ago, teachers there used to do a slow burn. The schools at the top were always private institutions or public ones on the west side of Vancouver that had a wealth of resources most other schools could only dream of having.

The schools at the bottom of the rankings were always ones like theirs, in mostly aboriginal communities.

Years later and little has changed with the ratings.

It’s easy to understand why the Fraser Institute’s grading system infuriates so many people. Comparing schools like Hazelton to a private college or a high school from any of the dozens and dozens of affluent neighbourhoods in the province that has none of their problems is absurd.

The top-ranked high school in B.C. for the second year in a row is York House, an all-girls academy on Vancouver’s west side. The Fraser Institute’s ratings are based on a range of indicators. For instance, according to the report, the percentage of students at York House who failed a provincial exam in 2010-11 was zero. The graduation rate at the school for the year measured was 100 per cent.

In recent years, the report added a new rating, one based on the average parental-employment income in each student’s family. A positive number, according to the report, suggests that the school is effective in enabling its students to succeed regardless of their family’s characteristics.

York House got a positive score of 2.0, based on an average family income of $118,000.

Let’s compare that to Hazelton Secondary, located in northwestern B.C.

Hazelton finished 278th out of 280 high schools ranked. But then, it’s always near the bottom. About 35 per cent of its students failed provincial exams. According to the Fraser Institute, even when you factor in the family background of the students at the school, it still does poorly. It received a mark of minus 4.1 based on an average parental income of $33,400.

What that suggests to me is that even when the impoverished backgrounds of the Hazelton students are factored in, the school is still underperforming.

What an insult that is to the teachers there, who have among the hardest jobs in the province.

Read More here

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.

What Bill 22 does to Class Size & Composition

Staff Room Confidential broke down the numbers and the possible risks:

The formula for additional compensation basically calculates a "cost per student" by taking the average teacher salary and dividing by thirty. So, if the average teacher salary is $60,000, then the cost per student is $2000. Thus, a teacher who has 32 students enrolled in a class all year full time would be paid an additional $2000 per student, which in this example would be $4000. The formula also only pays nine of the ten months of the school year (so the actual amount paid would be $1800), and does not take into account additional costs such as benefits and overhead costs.


What does this mean?


It means that for any given grade or subject area, it is cheaper for a District to overload classes than to hire additional teachers. If an extra 29 students can be spread around into oversize classes, that will be $2000 less than the salary of an additional teacher. Not until a whole additional class of 30 is reached does it become economically equivalent to hire another teacher. Anything less, and the cheaper option is to overload.


Consider, for example, a school with 105 Grade 6 students. The cost of having three classes of 35 would be $210,000 (based on the $60,000 average salary). The cost of having four classes - three of 26 and one of 27 - would be $240,000.


Not only is Bill 22 likely to lead to increased class size, up to as much as in the 50's potentially, but it will also lead to fewer teachers. Consider the example above where the school creates 3 classes of 35 instead of the 4 smaller classes. This also means for the existing 4 teachers, now only 3 are needed. If you spread this across the District, a worst case scenario would see up to 25% of teachers lose their jobs. Now this is not likely to happen immediately, but remember that in the first year after Bill 28 came into effect, approximately 2500 teachers province wide lost their jobs - close to 10% of the contract teachers currently employed. Given that the budget for school Districts next year does not include an increase to even cover inflation, it is reasonable to expect at least 3-5% job losses, if not more.

This frustrates me, not only because my daughter is in Grade 3 and has over crowded classes to look forward to, but because as a "new teacher" (wrapping up my 6th year as a TTOC now) I fear even longer waits to get my own classroom.

My daughter required extra help last year with her reading. This year she didn't get that help because there was only enough room for 3 students from her class and she wasn't "the most needy"

What will happen when her class size increases? What if you child needs extra help... how will they get it when they have to "compete" for attention?

I hate Bill 22. I don't get how anyone can see any value in this Bill?

I have heard some say "well there is some money coming back into public education" but that "money" is not even CLOSE to what has been taken away....

It is so upsetting that THIS is the future for my children and for my colleagues and for my career!

Value Public Speaking - Find your Voice

As a child I was shy.

No really, there was a phase when I wasn't so... 'not shy.'

I was a bit of a 'tom-boy' until Grade 3, and then I was teased a lot because of my birthmark that covered most of the left side of my face. Add to that the fact that our family moved a lot and it isn't shocking that overall, I just didn't bother to not be shy, it was just easier.

By about grade 5 we finally stopped moving every year and I decided it appropriate to come out of my shell. My new school was half way through the 'Public Speaking' unit when I arrived, and though I had very little interest in speaking in front of these new classmates, I wrote a speech and was shocked to be chosen to represent our class at the school wide assembly.

From there, further shock came when I won for my grade level and was selected to move on and present at the district level. I placed second there, lost to a clever speech on toilet paper, but my confidence grew and looking back it was the kick-start to my continued habit of speaking to groups.

As a teenager, I became an advocate of for youth chairing the local Teen Committee and hosting the first ever 'Youth Week' in the lower mainland. I was chosen to speak with, then Premier, Glen Clark, at the Provincial opening ceremonies for the event.

Friends were never shocked to hear me speaking in front of groups, though I never thought of myself as a 'public speaker' I still get nervous, I still wonder if anyone even wants to listen and if what I have to say is important to anyone but me, but nevertheless, I speak up.

Last year as I taught grade 6/7s public speaking, I saw mixed reactions and abilities as they prepared and presented. I shared with them my experiences starting from grade 5 and outlined why I felt public speaking was important.

As a teacher we speak to a group of students every day. I think those skills developed years ago are still used daily in our classes. But we have a voice and we need to feel empowered to use it.

Next week I am presenting with a colleague to the local board as I have in the past at the budget meeting.

Earlier this year I presented at the Provincial Bargaining table.

At the AGM I have braved the mic

I have put on workshops and spoken to colleagues numerous times and still use (or try to use) those skills I learned in grade 5... stand tall, speak slowly, don't fidget, articulate, breathe, make eye contact....

I have a voice, and I have learned its power.

Public Speaking IS an important skill and I am so glad it continues to be practiced and celebrated in schools. I only hope more teachers recognize their voice and use it during this important time.

Shaping the future of education in B.C.
Vancouver Sun, Mon Jan 9 2012
Page: A8
Section: Letters
Byline: D.A. Harrison
Source: Vancouver Sun

I am a teacher. I am passionate about my profession and I am in it for the love, not for the money (though I would like to be fairly compensated for what I do). So why am I in job action? Because I am tired.

I am tired of a government that unilaterally stripped our contracts 10 years ago, was found guilty in the Supreme Court of B.C., yet continues to ignore that ruling.

I am tired of a government that creates a "law" to mandate class sizes, yet ignores that law and declares over-sized classes as "suitable for classroom learning."

I am tired of a government that downloads so many costs onto the school system that schools are reliant on charities (Adopt-a-School, etc.) to provide basic educational supplies, yet can find $600 million for a new roof on BC Place.

I am tired of having so many of my colleagues (special education assistants, clerical, etc.) and resources stripped from the system just to keep the classroom doors open, even as the class sizes get larger and larger.

Yet, each day, I go to school desiring to give my very best to my ever-growing classes.

I do it because I am passionate about helping each and every one of my 150 students become the very best they can be.

And I remember how things used to be and how they should be. That is why. Yet I am tired.

D.A. Harrison, Langley

Shaping the future of education in B.C.
Vancouver Sun, Mon Jan 9 2012
Page: A8
Section: Letters
Byline: Betty Flichel And Alison Peyman
Source: Vancouver Sun

A lot of parents and caregivers are frustrated about the local teacher's strike, but as always, the special needs children lose out more than the able youngsters because of funding and teacher's aid support cuts. When there is a strike, the children lose an opportunity for lessons in life skills and social interaction.

How are the teachers expected to cope with 30 children at once -including special needs children - without teacher's aids?

Three special needs children per class is the law, but often there are more than that. A lot of times, teachers are not trained to interact with special needs children.

We know that teachers are doing their best, but most parents expect a report on how the child is doing in their course work. We've read that the reports are likely to be more general, as they are done by the principals of the schools rather than by the teachers.

All children lose out when sports teams, band and choir are not avail-able during the strike and when classes are too large. We need to put the special needs assistants back to work so that as many as possible of B.C.'s special needs children can have success in school.

Betty Flichel and Alison Peyman, Vancouver

Shaping the future of education in B.C.
Vancouver Sun, Mon Jan 9 2012
Page: A8
Section: Letters
Byline: Patti Bacchus
Source: Vancouver Sun

Re: Keen students can benefit from 'selective' schools, Column, Jan. 2

I always enjoy retired School Superintendent Geoff Johnson's opinion pieces in The Sun, but it seems he didn't do his homework. His column implied there aren't "differentiated opportunities within B.C.'s public sys-tem" or even full-time International Baccalaureate Programs. Wrong!

I invite Mr. Johnson to visit the Vancouver school district to sample the rich array of "personalized" learning options. He could start with the VSB/UBC Transition program, which supports academic excellence while promoting social and emotional development of academically gifted adolescents who are committed to the goal of early entrance to university. Graduates of the two-year pro-gram achieve early entrance to UBC by writing the four provincial examinations required by the faculty of their choice.

Or perhaps he'd be interested in one of the Vancouver school board's 20 mini school programs that offer enriched and unique programming, or even Hamber secondary's accelerated/enriched humanities program or its new Challenge Academy. Contrary to Johnson's comments, there are even International Baccalaureate programs that are a school option versus after-school add-ons.

The VSB provides many more learning options that can be further explored at vsb.bc.ca/programs

Personalized, 21st century learning is well underway in Vancouver schools and there's no shortage of teaching expertise, innovation and excitement. The biggest challenge is securing the funding to sustain these valuable pro-grams. Many have additional costs and work best with small classes and are under persistent financial pressure and threat of program cuts.

Patti Bacchus Chairperson, Vancouver Board of Education

Shaping the future of education in B.C.
Vancouver Sun, Mon Jan 9 2012
Page: A8
Section: Letters
Byline: Frederick Rathje
Source: Vancouver Sun

Re: Group kids by ability not age at school, public says, Dec. 29

Janet Steffenhagen's article is an invitation to each of us to participate in the education change being considered by the B.C. ministry of education. Most helpful was the link to the government forum and the thoughtful commentary found there.

Interestingly, the site links to education resources in other provinces and countries, including Finland.

Our polar neighbour not only excels at our favourite sport, hockey, they also lead internationally in educational outcomes in the rankings by OECD PISA (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Program for International Stu-dent Assessment).

The recent publication, Finnish Les-sons, by Dr. Pasi Sahlberg, gives excel-lent insight into Finland's education transformation and the reasons for its success. I hope politicians and educators in B.C. are paying attention.

It's time we, as parents, get re-educated about what is sensible educational transformation so we create one we can afford to fund and one that serves students and teachers alike. The Finnish approach is one we cannot afford to ignore. If education were like the NHL, we would put Finnish educators on our transformation team!

Frederick Rathje, North Vancouver

Shaping the future of education in B.C.
Vancouver Sun, Mon Jan 9 2012
Page: A8
Section: Letters
Byline: Jim McMurtry
Source: Vancouver Sun

The provincial government is having a hard time cooking up an original educational plan because it knows that all the ingredients have been used before. The idea of grouping children by age was common in the past in one-room school buildings. I don't think teachers were thrilled with kids of all maturity levels in the same room, and I don't believe that older students felt very happy about being schooled with younger students.

The Clark government appears increasingly desperate to come up with a new educational plan called Personalized Learning, but every one of its tenets has been in place in schools since Maria Montessori ran the educational system in antebellum fascist Italy.

If the government wants technological change, it is already with us, for I remember desks with places for ink jars.

Schools are embracing computers and Internet projectors to make learning more enjoyable and relevant to each child. Nothing the Clark government is proposing is new.

Jim McMurtry, Surrey