Shhhhh!! Ontario’s “Secret” Public Consultation into Education

4 Jun

Next Phase

June 30th 2013 marks the end of the most turbulent year in Ontario Education in over a decade. The imposition of Bill 115 has, for better or worse, politicized education in Ontario. Parents, students, educators and members of the general public are discussing education issues with passion and conviction.

Now would be a perfect time to tap into that engagement and open a dialogue about what Ontarians really want from their education system. What do we value? How should it be working? Coincidentally there WILL be a public consultation about Ontario education, but if the Ministry of Education really wants to hear from all Ontarians they have a funny way of showing it.

On May 30th Liz Sandals, The Minister of Education, “announced” that there will be a consultation into ‘building the next phase in Ontario’s education strategy’. Announced is an overstatement, because news of this ‘public consultation’ wasn’t widely shared. Whispered is more apt. There was no press conference and no press release. A search on the Ministry of Education’s website will not uncover any mention. However some Ontarians got personal invitations to participate (hint: not me).

On June 1st I got the digital equivalent of a brown manilla envelope stuffed into my e-mail box directing me to a dusty page on the Ministry of Education’s website that lists ministry policy memos. Posted there is a letter from the minister to ‘education stakeholders’ and a document titled “Building The Next Phase in Ontario’s Education Strategy” that explains what a great job the government is doing with the education system, how the public consultation process will take place and giving seven ‘key questions’ to guide the discussion. Stakeholders are encouraged to ponder these questions over the summer and be ready to discuss in the Fall.

I was confused. As an educator, a parent of three children in the education system and a writer about education don’t I count as a ‘stakeholder’? If not me, who does count and why?

After reading the document a few questions and reflections coalesced:

  • Why The Secrecy? If the ministry is truly interested in “…feedback from a broad range of individuals and groups…” why wasn’t the process publicly announced? I understand the document was sent to trustees and directors of education. Why? What about everybody else?

  • What is an “education stakeholder”? I see everyone as an education stakeholder. Our collective future depends on our public education system so isn’t it in everyone’s best interest to have the best possible system? Apparently the ministry sees education stakeholders as a few select people on their mailing list. If only there was some sort of mass information system they could use to inform everyone about the consultation process. Hmmm…

  • Why Do We Have EQAO? For anyone who asked me this question over the past month, you need wonder no more. The main function of EQAO is to allow the ministry to make statements like this:

“Ten years ago, only 68% of our students were graduating, and only 54% of children in grades 3 and 6 were achieving at the provincial standard in literacy and numeracy. Today, those numbers stand at 83% and 70% respectively, and they continue to climb.”

  • Any discussions about using EQAO to improve learning is merely window dressing. EQAO is a tool that allows the government to show how well (or in the case of the Mike Harris government how badly) public education is doing. EQAO scores are the primary evidence of how Ontario’s public education system has improved. And we know how accurate and reliable EQAO scores are.
  • The Process: The document discusses wanting to hear from “…education stakeholders, parents, students and members of the business, research and innovation, not-for-profit and Aboriginal communities…” and mentions “groups and individuals”. However later it mentions the minister will be holding consultations in Toronto for provincially focussed groups and regionally for regionally focussed groups. It also mentions that there will be some ‘digital only’ sessions and an opportunity to participate via e-mail. It seems as if the minister is really only interested in meeting with groups. That’s too bad. Groups homogenize opinion and reduce the breadth of possible input. There’s many individuals who want to make their voice heard and not have to funnel it through an organization to give it legitimacy.

The Seven Questions:

Here are the seven guiding questions for the public consultation with my initial reflections:

1) What are the skills, knowledge and characteristics students need to succeed after they have completed school, and how do we better support all learners in their development?

The first question in our education strategy is about preparing students to be workers. It could be reworded as “Are we producing good future employees?”. Is this really where we should be starting? Is this the first thing we should be considering about our education system? Not maximizing students’ potential or helping them to fulfill their dreams but will they meet the province’s economic needs. I’m disappointed.

2) What does student well-being mean to you, and what is the role of the school in supporting it?

I’m glad to see this as part of the discussion. We need to better address student’s mental and physical health needs and understand their impact on learning. We don’t educate children in isolation and an unhealthy child is not able to learn well.

 3) From your perspective, what further opportunities exist to close gaps and increase equity to support all children and students in reaching their full potential?

 Another critical discussion we need to be having. We must move away from a system of equality to one of equity. In an education system where resources are limited, why are we directing the same resources to all students regardless of need? Students aren’t equal so why do we fund them that way? A student from a middle or high income family doesn’t need the same level of support as one from a low-income family. We need to address this on a provincial, systemic basis. I’d like to see the introduction of a weighted funding formula for education in Ontario.

4) How does the education system need to evolve as a result of changes to child care and the implementation of full-day kindergarten?

This confuses me. I assumed that given the commitment and money spent on Full Day Kindergarten there was some sort of long-term plan in place. This suggests a sort of “Oh, we’ve got FDK, now what?” approach. That’s concerning.

5) What more can we all do to keep students engaged, foster their curiosity and creativity, and help them develop a love of life-long learning?

This should be the first question, not the fifth. This is the mission statement of a progressive education system. A foundational idea. If we can accomplish this, everything else will fall into place. Bravo!!

6) How can we use technology more effectively in teaching and learning?

This is the mandatory Ed Tech question. It is now illegal to discuss education unless you mention technology once. I suspect this is something The OPSBA pushed hard for at the round table seeing as they’d spent money on their new report. I support the vision presented but ask the same question as when the report was published. Who is going to pay for it? Digital technology should be an essential part of our education system but it requires an investment and nobody seems willing to make that investment. If you want to put tech in schools you’ve got to show me the money.

7) What are the various opportunities for partnership that can enhance the student experience, and how can they benefit parents, educators and our partners too?

Not sure what this really is but it feels like a discussion of how can we involve private enterprise more in public education. The reason we seek partnerships is that we want to do things but don’t have the necessary resources. We must remember that, as the old saying goes, “There’s no free lunch”. Enterprises we enter into partnership with aren’t primarily interested in students or their learning. They’re interested in making money. Effective partnerships result from an exchange of value. Let’s be clear and aware of what we’re giving up and what we’re getting in return and remember it’s our job to put students first.

What’s Missing?

Some questions I’m surprised not to see there:

  • What is the role of standardized testing in Ontario’s education system?
  • What is the role of school boards and trustees in Ontario’s education system?
  • What is a fair and effective system of collective bargaining in Ontario’s education system?
  • What role should faith play in Ontario’s public education system?

Those are my first, off the cuff, reactions and responses. I’ll keep discussing and pontificating and prepare myself to participate fully in the government’s “public consultation”. I urge all Ontarians to do likewise. It’s time for an “Education Spring” in Ontario. This may be our opening.

14 Responses to “Shhhhh!! Ontario’s “Secret” Public Consultation into Education”

  1. Jan Scheidt June 5, 2013 at 7:26 am #

    Great article, Andrew! Great food for thought! I really enjoyed your comment about equity…that says it all!

  2. SD June 5, 2013 at 7:26 pm #

    Thumbs up!

  3. Albert June 5, 2013 at 10:17 pm #

    I love that the article “Building The Next Phase in Ontario’s Education Strategy” does NOT have the word “Teacher” in it.

  4. tk1ng June 6, 2013 at 8:25 am #

    Great example of how we invent statistics to justify the system. EQAO: a system designed to make another system look like it’s doing good things – and the education system gets to game the statistics. It’s marketing! That’s just splendid.

  5. Greg June 7, 2013 at 1:29 pm #

    I only disagree with you on the idea that faith has any place in the education system. There are too many religions practiced in this world to be included in education, if we can’t include them all (or at least the “popular” ones, those being practiced in Ontario) we should not include any of them.

    • Andrew Campbell (@acampbell99) June 7, 2013 at 1:36 pm #

      I wasn’t suggesting that faith has any place in Ontario schools. I was just suggesting that we should have some public discussion about it.

      • Nathan June 10, 2013 at 5:42 pm #

        The Catholic system is moronic. It would be abolished by anyone the least bit principled.

  6. Jennifer Mathison June 9, 2013 at 10:11 am #

    Really interesting article. Thanks for sharing it.

  7. Sébastien November 27, 2013 at 3:57 pm #

    I noticed that there weren’t many communications to teachers or parents about this new “phase” – which itself suggests on of several transformations toward an end goal. I’ll venture to say that the end goal specifically involves “particular purposes” as the OECD policy 13 would say in its Feasibility of Adjustment (change) document. Sounds like this type of consultation is the soft kind Antoni Verger talked about in his work about liberalizing (privatizing) education. In the soft consultations, “key actors” are not necessarily “educationalists” yet the decision making is made centrally. Sorry about all the quotes but the language in these documents is quite something! Not sure I’m looking forward to the phasing from great to excellent. I always thought great was better than excellent.

  8. Sébastien November 27, 2013 at 4:01 pm #

    Oh! Let’s make sure not to forget the partnerships. We have to make sure to include the many partners too – you know, just to name a few! See the Great to Excellent document and you’ll understand that the partners are particularly important in this new education phase. That is, the “Made in Ontario” phase as the document feels necessary to clarify. This would be because Sandals is the minister of education in the Canadian jurisdiction o the province of Ontario!!!

  9. Sébastien November 27, 2013 at 4:17 pm #

    Stakeholder is a euphemism for corporation.
    – George Monbiot

    • Andrew Campbell (@acampbell99) November 27, 2013 at 4:47 pm #

      In Ontario we’re even corporatizing parent involvement. If you’re a parent who is part of a parent group you have a voice in education policy discussions, otherwise you have very little chance of being heard. Best chance to be involved with one of the officially recognized parent groups or a ministry supported Parent Involvement Committee. How objective can PICs be when they are ministry funded and supported by the boards?

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. From Great To Excellent: An #OntEd Online Consultation | Looking Up - September 22, 2013

    […] early June I wrote about Ontario’s ‘secret’ public consultation into education. Well, the summer flew by and now the ‘consultation season’ is well and […]

  2. Ontario Education Strategy: Consultations and Input | SheilaSpeaking - October 18, 2013

    […] plans ahead seemed somewhat hush-hush at first, but confirmation came to some groups by the end of summer that regional consultations […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: