This has been such a WTF day. BCPSEA has imposed a partial lockout on British Columbia teachers effective Monday the 26th. They have instructed us, in a letter sent to the BCTF yesterday, to refrain from working with students at recess and lunch (which are our break times) and to not be physically present at our work-site 45 minutes before and after the commencement of our day. To clarify what is happening in phase 1, teachers refused to do supervision, accept emails from administration and hold formal meetings. Teachers continued to provide supervision when there were safety concerns and meet with administration to discuss all aspects of their job, students, field trips, etc. IN PERSON. That certainly doesn’t come close to a 10% reduction in work, so let’s just think about this.
BCPSEA explains their strategy thusly:
9. Why were teachers instructed not to report to work more than 45 minutes in advance
of the start of the instructional day or to stay more than 45 minutes past the end of
the instructional day?
By restricting the length of time teachers are to spend at the work site, we are emphasizing
the reduction of their usual work day and duties. The accepted teacher work day is just over
nine (9) hours per day, which is now reduced in both length and required duties. The
resulting 10% loss of pay is directly related to this lockout from usual required work and time
at the work site.
A couple of hmms in here for me - First, the admittance that a teacher’s work day does in fact extend over a nine hour period on average (finally) and that because we are not doing that usual workday - we get a 10% reduction in wages. The second is how can we be docked pay for not working through our breaks? That doesn't make sense. It could be that teachers are now responsible for 10% less duties and responsibilities Or are they?
5. Are teachers locked out from any part of the student instructional day?
No. Teachers are still required to complete all usual instructional duties and school day
services
to students. Refusal to complete any such duties may constitute an
expansion of their strike and result in a further loss of pay.
OKAY - we have to carry out all our duties or risk a further wage loss - thought we are already losing 10%. But extracurricular and voluntary activities are impacted by that 45 minutes restriction and that accounts for the reduced work day, right? WRONG.
3. Are teachers locked out or “banned” from participating in extracurricular activities
such as graduation ceremonies, awards ceremonies, sports events, and year-end
celebrations?
No. Teachers are free to participate in all extracurricular activities, including on school
property. There is nothing in the lockout that prevents BCTF members from continuing to
participate in such activities as graduation, sports, and awards events. If teachers choose
not to participate in such activities, they do so as a result of their own decision.
This is where it gets beyond confusing - If we can’t stay past 45 minutes, how do we participate? If we don’t participate, that is because we decided not to. If we don’t honour BCPSEA’s direction to not attend our workplace outside of the 45 minutes before and after the commencement of our work, what happens? Fines, discipline, termination? Our fearless leaders in action…….This has confirmed for me without a doubt that they have NO IDEA what our job is.
Showing posts with label 2014 Job Action. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2014 Job Action. Show all posts
Thursday, May 22, 2014
Tuesday, May 20, 2014
The Day the Learning Died
A terrible thing happened a few weeks ago and it has taken me awhile to sort out how I feel. As part of cost-cutting measures made necessary by budgetary constraints to the school district, ten helping teachers lost their positions, five of them from the IML (Information Media Literacy) department. This means the complete elimination of this department, and a move away from supporting teachers and teacher-librarians as they attempt to update their practice, embrace inquiry learning and use technology effectively and purposefully in their classrooms. I don't get it.
In the past year alone, our school district has invested hundreds of thousands of dollars providing technology, resources, professional development and support to teachers, students and schools working towards innovative and effective learning. More money has gone towards the creation of learning commons in many of our school. At the heart of this movement are +Kevin Amboe, +Shelagh Lim, +Orwell Kowalyshyn, +Lisa Domeier and Sarah Guilmant-Smith. They are the public face of educational reform......and they walk the walk. Surrey is the proud owner of a Twitter hashtag and iTunes U account that is widely respected throughout North America. Surrey teachers publish and share and innovate and collaborate and on and on and on. This team of educators are our cheerleaders, mentors and the ones that push us onto the public stage. They make us better than we are. We cannot afford to lose the good ones.
It has taken over ten years for us early adapters to see shifts in the educational landscape to the point that 21st century learning is becoming widespread and necessary. Even the new BC Ed curriculum stresses the obvious:
One of the core tenets of the BC Education Plan is that there will be increased emphasis on the teaching of 21st century competencies like creativity, critical thinking, problem solving, digital literacy, emotional literacy, interpersonal skills, and collaboration. Many people want assurance though, that this doesn’t come at the expense of foundational skills.
And now, what? There is evidence that professional development makes an incredible difference to the effectiveness of teachers. The loss of these helping teachers is going to mean, at best, a significant slowdown in the acquisition of essential skills by students and teachers alike. One of my biggest fears hinges on knowing that without significant changes in teacher pedagogy, tech integration is ineffective. I fear that three years from now, someone in charge will look at the expensive technology deployed in 2013 - 2014, realize it had little impact on student achievement and decide tech integration wasn't worth it after all. They will embrace instead the standardized test. They will ignore what I know is true - that tech integration needs creative teaching, risk-taking and courage to work. That students can be engaged and connected and achieve and create and learn. That all students can be included. That knowledge is at every students' fingertips. That... as Albert Einstein reminds us......creativity is intelligence having fun. That hurts my spirit.
In the past year alone, our school district has invested hundreds of thousands of dollars providing technology, resources, professional development and support to teachers, students and schools working towards innovative and effective learning. More money has gone towards the creation of learning commons in many of our school. At the heart of this movement are +Kevin Amboe, +Shelagh Lim, +Orwell Kowalyshyn, +Lisa Domeier and Sarah Guilmant-Smith. They are the public face of educational reform......and they walk the walk. Surrey is the proud owner of a Twitter hashtag and iTunes U account that is widely respected throughout North America. Surrey teachers publish and share and innovate and collaborate and on and on and on. This team of educators are our cheerleaders, mentors and the ones that push us onto the public stage. They make us better than we are. We cannot afford to lose the good ones.
It has taken over ten years for us early adapters to see shifts in the educational landscape to the point that 21st century learning is becoming widespread and necessary. Even the new BC Ed curriculum stresses the obvious:
One of the core tenets of the BC Education Plan is that there will be increased emphasis on the teaching of 21st century competencies like creativity, critical thinking, problem solving, digital literacy, emotional literacy, interpersonal skills, and collaboration. Many people want assurance though, that this doesn’t come at the expense of foundational skills.
And now, what? There is evidence that professional development makes an incredible difference to the effectiveness of teachers. The loss of these helping teachers is going to mean, at best, a significant slowdown in the acquisition of essential skills by students and teachers alike. One of my biggest fears hinges on knowing that without significant changes in teacher pedagogy, tech integration is ineffective. I fear that three years from now, someone in charge will look at the expensive technology deployed in 2013 - 2014, realize it had little impact on student achievement and decide tech integration wasn't worth it after all. They will embrace instead the standardized test. They will ignore what I know is true - that tech integration needs creative teaching, risk-taking and courage to work. That students can be engaged and connected and achieve and create and learn. That all students can be included. That knowledge is at every students' fingertips. That... as Albert Einstein reminds us......creativity is intelligence having fun. That hurts my spirit.
Sunday, April 27, 2014
Around and Around We Go
I am so dismayed by the events taking place in the education sector in British Columbia. For those people who haven't noticed, once again the BCTF and the provincial government are poised to agree to disagree and the result is walkouts and lockouts. It is a no-win situation for everyone affected - teachers, parents, students.
There are a lot of issues worth discussing - class size and composition, the recent court win by the BCTF that is once more under appeal, the downloading of capital costs and seismic upgradings to the districts, the loss of librarian and counselling positions, new curriculum changes, questions around assessment, how to meet the needs of the increasing number of special needs students, how to fund field trips and presenters when we can't ask parents for money...............and more.
I have heard parents commenting on how dirty the schools have become and how overwhelmed the teachers seem to be. And I have had parents tell me how lazy teachers are. There is a chasm between the stakeholders that I don't believe can be breached. Instead of focusing on what really matters, there is finger-pointing and name-calling. It is bewildering to me.
One thing I do not understand is where is the press? Where are the journalists and where is the "respected" media willing to sift through the rhetoric and actually report the facts. I recently saw a news item on the cancellation of Vancouver School Board's string program - a video of children with their instruments trying hard to convince the public they should still support funding their program. The fact is that many, many programs have already been cut. Library programs, learning support programs, counselling programs, early literacy programs - the list goes on and on. Where is the public discussion? If we, as a society, are fine with these cuts, why would we care about a strings program?
Immigration and refugee policy is set by government, but it is teachers who deal with the lack of prior schooling and the trauma. It is teachers who teach the children English and social skills. Who funds this support because there is very little of it? And the impact on our most at-risk students is significant. (To learn more, read this article about the impact of privatization on low-income students.)
The truth is that the only programs that have not been cut are ones guaranteed in the teacher contract... AND that is why teachers continue to fight for reduced class sizes and library, counselling and learning support. These guarantees became part of the teacher's contract in the 1990s when teachers agreed to zero wage increases in exchange for better student support.
I heard about people circulating an email about the BCTF in which they mock the practice of thanking our First Nations for the use of their traditional lands. Why is this the most important part of the conversation? Why ridicule anyone for being polite and respectful, irregardless of your own beliefs. This is the crux of the problem. We focus on the superficial issues and miss out on what really matters - the educational experience of our children.
I think that the government needs to be honest with the public and admit that they can't or won't continue to fund public education at the level to which we expect. Their proposal of a two-tier wage for new hires, no significant raise, a threatened sanction for not doing recess supervision and their avowal that they cannot afford classroom compositions that are manageable, all suggest the government is looking to pinch their pennies to limit the education costs. That is a no-brainer. They have their position and they are committed to it, but I suspect they know there would be limited public support if they had a frank and honest dialogue with the public over their endgame (I suspect privatization and teachers replaced by untrained staff).
I believe in sustainability and I think that if we can no longer afford public education in its' present form, then we should start to have public discourse on what needs to change. (Read the about the government's position on the affordability of teacher's demands.) Do we need to change our funding priorities, change our curriculum, charge a fee to parents, change the way we deliver education? (To learn more about how educational funding is siphoned off read this article by +David Truss) These discussions need to be help publicly not behind closed doors in Victoria.
I think they need to acknowledge the teachers are doing the best they can with the resources available and admit that they are still entitled to be respected. There is a lack of support for the needs of the teaching profession that need to be addressed. Why send your child to school all day to a teacher you rage against and disparage at home? Teachers are a pivotal part of any child's journey. Recent studies carried out in the United States show that there is a significant disparity between the salaries of teachers from the U.S. and teachers from countries where students are ranked by PISA as high-performing. Canada and British Columbia possess one of these high-performing educational systems. Higher wages ensure that candidates for teacher training and positions are plentiful and that only the "best" candidates are chosen. Countries with lower wages, such as the United States, have difficulty attracting effective candidates. In many places, if ineffective and incompetent teachers were fired there would be no possibility of replacing them due to the low wages and difficult working conditions. Strong candidates can find other work. The morale of the story.......you get what you pay for.
I think the public feels free to criticize teachers because they believe the school system is the same as it was when they were working their way through it. It isn't. It really, really isn't. Teachers work in an environment where their only audience is children. I think parents should actively volunteer in their child's class. Maybe Premiers and Education Ministers should too.
I think that the stress of doing the job, fundraising, defending, planning and fighting over resources is driving teachers away from the classroom.
I think that is sad.
There are a lot of issues worth discussing - class size and composition, the recent court win by the BCTF that is once more under appeal, the downloading of capital costs and seismic upgradings to the districts, the loss of librarian and counselling positions, new curriculum changes, questions around assessment, how to meet the needs of the increasing number of special needs students, how to fund field trips and presenters when we can't ask parents for money...............and more.
I have heard parents commenting on how dirty the schools have become and how overwhelmed the teachers seem to be. And I have had parents tell me how lazy teachers are. There is a chasm between the stakeholders that I don't believe can be breached. Instead of focusing on what really matters, there is finger-pointing and name-calling. It is bewildering to me.
One thing I do not understand is where is the press? Where are the journalists and where is the "respected" media willing to sift through the rhetoric and actually report the facts. I recently saw a news item on the cancellation of Vancouver School Board's string program - a video of children with their instruments trying hard to convince the public they should still support funding their program. The fact is that many, many programs have already been cut. Library programs, learning support programs, counselling programs, early literacy programs - the list goes on and on. Where is the public discussion? If we, as a society, are fine with these cuts, why would we care about a strings program?
Immigration and refugee policy is set by government, but it is teachers who deal with the lack of prior schooling and the trauma. It is teachers who teach the children English and social skills. Who funds this support because there is very little of it? And the impact on our most at-risk students is significant. (To learn more, read this article about the impact of privatization on low-income students.)
The truth is that the only programs that have not been cut are ones guaranteed in the teacher contract... AND that is why teachers continue to fight for reduced class sizes and library, counselling and learning support. These guarantees became part of the teacher's contract in the 1990s when teachers agreed to zero wage increases in exchange for better student support.
I heard about people circulating an email about the BCTF in which they mock the practice of thanking our First Nations for the use of their traditional lands. Why is this the most important part of the conversation? Why ridicule anyone for being polite and respectful, irregardless of your own beliefs. This is the crux of the problem. We focus on the superficial issues and miss out on what really matters - the educational experience of our children.
I think that the government needs to be honest with the public and admit that they can't or won't continue to fund public education at the level to which we expect. Their proposal of a two-tier wage for new hires, no significant raise, a threatened sanction for not doing recess supervision and their avowal that they cannot afford classroom compositions that are manageable, all suggest the government is looking to pinch their pennies to limit the education costs. That is a no-brainer. They have their position and they are committed to it, but I suspect they know there would be limited public support if they had a frank and honest dialogue with the public over their endgame (I suspect privatization and teachers replaced by untrained staff).
I believe in sustainability and I think that if we can no longer afford public education in its' present form, then we should start to have public discourse on what needs to change. (Read the about the government's position on the affordability of teacher's demands.) Do we need to change our funding priorities, change our curriculum, charge a fee to parents, change the way we deliver education? (To learn more about how educational funding is siphoned off read this article by +David Truss) These discussions need to be help publicly not behind closed doors in Victoria.
I think they need to acknowledge the teachers are doing the best they can with the resources available and admit that they are still entitled to be respected. There is a lack of support for the needs of the teaching profession that need to be addressed. Why send your child to school all day to a teacher you rage against and disparage at home? Teachers are a pivotal part of any child's journey. Recent studies carried out in the United States show that there is a significant disparity between the salaries of teachers from the U.S. and teachers from countries where students are ranked by PISA as high-performing. Canada and British Columbia possess one of these high-performing educational systems. Higher wages ensure that candidates for teacher training and positions are plentiful and that only the "best" candidates are chosen. Countries with lower wages, such as the United States, have difficulty attracting effective candidates. In many places, if ineffective and incompetent teachers were fired there would be no possibility of replacing them due to the low wages and difficult working conditions. Strong candidates can find other work. The morale of the story.......you get what you pay for.
I think the public feels free to criticize teachers because they believe the school system is the same as it was when they were working their way through it. It isn't. It really, really isn't. Teachers work in an environment where their only audience is children. I think parents should actively volunteer in their child's class. Maybe Premiers and Education Ministers should too.
I think that the stress of doing the job, fundraising, defending, planning and fighting over resources is driving teachers away from the classroom.
I think that is sad.
Sunday, May 12, 2013
Do It For the Kids
Over the last few years I have heard teachers and stakeholders in the educational system state repeatedly state that despite criticism, despite opposing viewpoints, despite cutbacks, despite politics and despite evidence to the contrary, they are doing it for the kids.
What are we in fact doing for them? Are we updating our pedagogy? Are we acknowledging that students no longer need the same educational experiences that we ourselves had? Have we replaced out-of-date resources? Have we ensured that we are nurturing 21st century learners - learners who use technology to create content and develop their critical thinking skills?
The BCTF and the provincial government have gone back and forth over the need to reinstate the specialist teaching positions lost in the past decade. I would argue that simply refilling those positions is not enough. We need to look at what programs are working in what districts and direct resources to try and replicate those successes where there is need. It is not enough to declare that students should bring their own device to school, when infrastructure is not consistently in place that can support it. And we need tech facilitators (IML specialists) in schools.....educators who can support both teachers and students as the curriculum shifts to inquiry based learning and tech supported learning.
It concerns me that the decision makers are political creatures. They may have students' best interests at heart but they are also politically minded and ambitious. Teachers are the stake-holders who are most supported and most reviled in this process and part of the problem is that most of what we do is seen only by children.
Private schools such as York House and St. George's get this. They support teachers with equipment, facilitators and infrastructure. This is what makes private schools so desirable to parents and such an enriched experience for their students. Teachers at these schools blog, tweet and email. They communicate. They make their programs transparent and are supported in this process. Parents are involved. Alumni fundraise and mentor their successors. They are a learning community.
If we really are doing this for the kids, all the stakeholders in the education community need to do the same. Parents, politicians, teachers, alumni, district staff all need to take a good look at the system and shift it towards something that can work at least until the 23rd century.
What are we in fact doing for them? Are we updating our pedagogy? Are we acknowledging that students no longer need the same educational experiences that we ourselves had? Have we replaced out-of-date resources? Have we ensured that we are nurturing 21st century learners - learners who use technology to create content and develop their critical thinking skills?
The BCTF and the provincial government have gone back and forth over the need to reinstate the specialist teaching positions lost in the past decade. I would argue that simply refilling those positions is not enough. We need to look at what programs are working in what districts and direct resources to try and replicate those successes where there is need. It is not enough to declare that students should bring their own device to school, when infrastructure is not consistently in place that can support it. And we need tech facilitators (IML specialists) in schools.....educators who can support both teachers and students as the curriculum shifts to inquiry based learning and tech supported learning.
It concerns me that the decision makers are political creatures. They may have students' best interests at heart but they are also politically minded and ambitious. Teachers are the stake-holders who are most supported and most reviled in this process and part of the problem is that most of what we do is seen only by children.
Private schools such as York House and St. George's get this. They support teachers with equipment, facilitators and infrastructure. This is what makes private schools so desirable to parents and such an enriched experience for their students. Teachers at these schools blog, tweet and email. They communicate. They make their programs transparent and are supported in this process. Parents are involved. Alumni fundraise and mentor their successors. They are a learning community.
If we really are doing this for the kids, all the stakeholders in the education community need to do the same. Parents, politicians, teachers, alumni, district staff all need to take a good look at the system and shift it towards something that can work at least until the 23rd century.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)