Hard Truths

Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

Scarcity drives the need for policy, and policy requires careful thought and evaluation. Like everything that people value, public schools and the school boards responsible for them do not have enough resources. Leaving aside what 'enough' might mean, school districts do not have evidence that they are using their limited resources advantageously. And, for the most part, they are resistant to gathering the information that would provide that evidence.  

Even though it would be beneficial to systematically assess instructional programs and practices, school districts are unwilling to confront the obstacles to evaluation. Evaluations require time, collection of information, money, and expertise—resources that are scarce. Districts are often reluctant to allocate resources to evaluation from other areas even when doing so might enable them to operate more effectively, efficiently, and economically in the long run.  

Designing and conducting proper evaluations that produce evidence upon which school districts can act requires specialized knowledge of research design, data analysis, and statistical methods. Many – I am tempted to say most – school districts do not employ personnel with the necessary background.  

It is inevitable that evaluations will expose program weaknesses or failures that will attract attention. School boards and senior officials are reluctant to evaluate because of the potential for criticism and negative publicity.  

Evaluation means looking at and comparing the value of all uses of resources. Many school boards assume a “fixed cost” state of mind that we are offering this program already, we should keep it and not evaluate it against other possible uses of resources.  

School districts face pressure from multiple stakeholders (parents, teachers, unions, government bodies) whose priorities often conflict. Pressure from these disparate groups prompts school boards to focus on short-term goals rather than long-term evaluation. The desire to implement programs that are politically favorable, regardless of their effectiveness, typically outweighs the need for evaluation.  

Teachers and the organizations that represent them resist systematic evaluation because they fear evaluations will be used punitively, are disinclined to employ practices that are not aligned with their personal beliefs, are resistant to practices that they believe are being imposed because of district or provincial mandates, and place greater priority on personal experience than they do on empirical evidence.  

Educational outcomes can take a long time to mature or be manifest and it is difficult to isolate the effects of a single program or practice from broader social, economic, or demographic factors. But these challenges, common to most complex public endeavors, are not adequate reasons to avoid evaluations that may allow resources to be used more effectively, efficiently, and economically to the betterment of students.  

There will always be shortages of things that people value and surpluses of things people do not want. Arguments for additional resources are more likely to be persuasive if there is evidence that the resources at hand are being employed effectively, efficiently, and economically. 

World Teachers’ Day: An occasion for celebration and appraisal

Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

October 5^th is World Teachers' Day commemorating the signing of the 1966 UNESCO/International Labour Organization (ILO) Recommendation concerning the Status of Teachers. I’ve long argued that teaching is among the most socially useful professions because teachers help to recreate society by preparing the next generation of citizens. October 5^th acknowledges the contribution that teachers make: shaping the future of those whom they teach and, through them, society.  

The 1966 UNESCO/ILO Recommendation outlines the rights and responsibilities of teachers and sets international standards for their employment conditions and professional preparation. The Recommendation addresses various dimensions of the profession. It emphasizes professional standards and responsibilities: Teachers should aim to foster the physical, mental, and moral development of students, preparing them for active participation in society. Teachers should be able to exercise their judgment while they adhere to high ethical and professional standards and demonstrate integrity, fairness, and dedication.  

Teacher preparation and continuous professional education are key components in the Recommendation. Teachers must receive thorough and effective initial training that includes both theoretical and practical knowledge. To ensure teachers stay current with educational advancements and methodologies the Recommendation regards currency of professional knowledge through ongoing professional development as essential.  

Employment and working conditions are also addressed in the Recommendation. Merit-based recruitment, job security, fair remuneration, and the benefits of social insurance benefits are key considerations. Schools must provide safe and healthy working conditions, with adequate resources and facilities to support effective teaching and learning.  

The Recommendation also draws attention to the importance of teachers' participation in educational decision-making and their right to hold membership in professional organizations that represent their interests. Teachers should be involved in the development and implementation of educational policies that affect their work and the quality of education.  

The 1966 Recommendation is intended to be a global framework for ensuring that teachers are respected, well-prepared, and supported throughout their careers. The standards it articulates are intended to improve the quality of education, promote the well-being of teachers, and benefit students and society.  

Almost sixty years have passed since the Recommendation was advanced. It would be interesting to see whether and how well the aspirations expressed by the standards have been realized. October 5^th should be both a celebration of the profession and appraisal of its progress toward the standards recommended.

Evaluation of School Superintendents

 

Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The university of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

School superintendents in British Columbia (directors of education or chief superintendents in other jurisdictions) are the chief executive officers employed by boards of education to ensure smooth, efficient, and effective operation of school districts. Evaluating their performance is a challenging task for many school boards. They often lack the basic information needed for such evaluations: data about student performance and the superintendent’s compliance with board policies.  

In jurisdictions like British Columbia, where mandated data collection and reporting exist, the task is somewhat easier. BC’s Framework for Enhancing Student Learning (FESL) requires school boards to report on the intellectual, social, and career development of students. While improvements in data sources are necessary, the framework provides essential data for evaluating superintendent performance. The central evaluative question is whether the school district is making reasonable progress toward the goals established in the FESL framework.  

Superintendents are responsible for both student performance improvement and compliance with board policies. However, the multiplicity of policies many school boards have complicates this task. Effective monitoring of policy compliance requires established evaluation and feedback mechanisms, robust data systems, and clear communication strategies.  

School boards operate with limited resources, making it challenging to track and manage compliance metrics for numerous policies. Miscommunication can lead to discrepancies in policy implementation and monitoring. The principal reason for the numerous policies is often the board’s desire to constrain the superintendent’s actions, which at times can lead to an unmanageable policy framework.  

It is likely obvious that I favor a lean policy framework. Having one is advantageous because it enhances compliance and reduces employee confusion. A lean policy framework makes for a more agile and resilient organization, one that is focused on performance and its priorities.  

Boards should focus on setting clear objectives and performance metrics, involving stakeholders in the evaluation process, and providing professional development based on evaluation outcomes. Regular review and adaptation of policies, leveraging technology and data analytics, and maintaining effective communication can enhance the evaluation process.  

Boards that take their responsibility to evaluate the superintendent seriously should operate with a lean policy framework. Without it, evaluating the superintendent is challenging, leading some boards to either avoid evaluation altogether or use irrelevant and indefensible standards.

Are schools or programs of choice contrary to the spirit of equity and inclusion?

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

Over the course of the last 50 years, Canadian public school boards have increasingly offered schools or programs of choice. Yet, over the same period – and especially in the last decade or so - Canadian schools boards have pursued policies of equity and inclusion. The prominence of the two ideas prompts me to wonder, Are schools or programs of choice contrary to the spirit of equity and inclusion?  

The first question that comes to mind is: Do schools or programs of choice cost more than non-selective programs or public schools? If they do, what is the magnitude of the difference between the resources they enjoy and the resources that non-selective programs or schools enjoy? Schools and programs of choice can lead to resource disparities, where the children in these schools or programs have more resources (lower pupil teacher ratios, more field trips, better supplies, etc.) than their counterparts in nonselective programs or schools.  

A second question comes to mind: Is there a risk that some programs or schools of choice are predominantly attended by students from specific racial, socioeconomic, or academic backgrounds? Though it may be unintentional, socioeconomic, academic, or racial segregation seems antithetical to equity and inclusion.  

A related question is: Have programs or schools of choice implemented selective admission processes that in effect exclude students with lower academic performance, disabilities, or behavioral issues? If they have, does this not undermine the principle of inclusive education?  

To ensure that programs and schools of choice align with the spirit of equity and inclusion, policymakers and educators should develop admission policies that prioritize inclusivity, ensuring that students with diverse backgrounds and needs are represented. It takes no small effort to change course when such schools or programs have persisted without regard to inclusivity for a long period of time. Nonetheless, policy makers and educators should regularly assess and address any disparities in enrollment, resources, and outcomes between different student groups.  

The impact of schools of choice on equity and inclusion depends significantly on the specifics of their implementation. With thoughtful design and proactive measures, it may be possible to create a system that enhances educational opportunities for all students while maintaining the principles of equity and inclusion. But doing so requires intentionality and vigilance. 

Things may be worse than we thought

Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

In our August 28 commentary in the Times Colonist (“Balancing graduation rates and educational quality”) Jerry Mussio and I observed a paradox in British Columbia about student learning outcomes. We said that rising graduation rates are accompanied by declining performance in key areas like reading and mathematics, prompting our concern about the effectiveness of the education system. While Canadian 15-year-olds, including students in British Columbia, generally perform above the PISA average, a closer examination reveals that these averages might obscure more troubling trends. We pointed to the decline in PISA scores in British Columbia before and during the pandemic.  

A colleague who read our article suggested that we read the appendix in Measuring Up: Canadian Results of the OECD PISA 2022 Study. Following our colleague’s advice, we discovered that exclusion rates and potential non-response bias suggest that the overall performance of Canadian students may be worse than we thought.  

Just as British Columbia’s increasing graduation rates are overshadowed by a growing number of students failing to meet international and provincial standards, the PISA data may be presenting an overly optimistic view of student achievement across Canada. The underrepresentation of students with disabilities or limited language proficiency in the PISA assessments could mean that the national averages are artificially inflated, much like how British Columbia’s graduation rates may be masking deeper issues in educational quality.  

If lower-performing students are underrepresented, as appears to be the case, the data might falsely suggest that Canadian students, including those in British Columbia, are performing better than they are. This disconnect between reported outcomes and the underlying realities is evident in British Columbia’s declining PISA scores and the increasing number of students struggling to meet basic literacy and numeracy standards.  

The increasing graduation rates in British Columbia, like the seemingly positive PISA scores for Canada, may be misleading indicators of educational success. The true test of an education system’s effectiveness lies not in its ability to graduate students, but in its capacity to ensure that all students, regardless of background, achieve mastery of essential knowledge and skills. The disconnect between graduation rates and educational quality in British Columbia, and the potential biases in the PISA data, both point to the need for a more nuanced and critical analysis of educational performance and outcomes. Policymakers and educators in British Columbia and across Canada must take these warning signs seriously and take steps to address them. 

Classroom Management: It doesn’t attract much attention until things get out of hand

Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

Section 43 of the Canadian Criminal Code is often referred to as the "corporal punishment" law. It states that schoolteachers, parents, and persons standing in the place of a parent are justified in using force by way of correction toward a pupil or child, if the force does not exceed what is reasonable under the circumstances. This section has been the subject of considerable debate and legal interpretation, particularly regarding what constitutes "reasonable" force in disciplining children.  

The Canadian Teachers’ Federation is concerned that, if Section 43 of the Canadian Criminal Code is removed without adding new rules to protect teachers, teachers may struggle to maintain safety in schools. CTF argues that teachers sometimes need to physically intervene, such as when breaking up fights or preventing students from harming themselves or others. CTF’s concern is that, without specific protections in the law, these actions might be seen as assault.  

I do not doubt that teachers are struggling with managing the behaviour of students. I cannot find reliable data about changes in student behaviour over time to determine whether managing student behaviour is more challenging today than in the past. What I do know is that the amount of time and attention devoted to classroom management in teacher education programs has diminished over time. This makes me wonder if student behaviour is the source of the problem or whether inadequate preparation makes it difficult for teachers to prevent misbehavior and respond to it.  

Effective classroom management is crucial for teachers because it creates an environment in which they can teach and students can learn. There are many things that teachers must know how to do to create and maintain such an environment.  

Establishing a welcoming and supportive classroom atmosphere is essential for making students feel valued and reducing stress-related misbehavior. This can be achieved by arranging the classroom to promote collaboration, using positive language, and celebrating student achievements. A well-organized and inviting classroom fosters a sense of belonging and encourages students to engage more fully in their learning, thereby minimizing disruptive behaviors.  

Teachers must know how to develop strong, positive relationships with students because trust and respect deters misbehavior. Teachers can accomplish this by showing genuine interest in students' lives, using positive reinforcement, and establishing a rapport through regular, positive interactions. Care and respect help to build connections that encourage students to follow classroom rules and participate actively in their education.  

Teachers must be able to effectively communicate their expectations and provide feedback. Being able to do so is necessary for ensuring clarity about what is expected and maintaining open communication with students and parents. This involves using clear and concise language, providing regular feedback about behavior, and involving parents in behavior management plans when such plans are necessary. Clear communication helps prevent misunderstandings and fosters a collaborative approach to managing student behavior. It also helps to build parental confidence in the teacher.  

Students should have a voice in classroom management. Having a voice increases their acceptance of and reduces resistance to the rules they help to establish. This can be done by involving students in setting class norms, allowing them to suggest improvements to classroom procedures, and listening to their feedback on what works best for them. Students involved in decision-making are more likely to adhere to established guidelines and contribute positively to the classroom environment.  

Classroom rules and expectations must be clear and clearly communicated. This is fundamental to preventing misunderstandings and promoting a respectful learning environment. Rules should be posted visibly in the classroom and reviewed regularly.  

Teachers must also monitor student behaviour proactively. Observing student behavior and intervening early is essential for addressing potential issues before they arise and have a chance to escalate. Teachers should circulate in the classroom, use non-verbal cues, and provide gentle reminders or redirections when the need for them is evident. Proactive monitoring helps maintain a positive classroom environment and prevents minor issues from becoming major disruptions.  

Sanctions must be administered consistently and fairly. Students must understand in advance the consequences for misbehavior and the consequences must be administered fairly. Teachers should follow through with predetermined consequences for rule violations, communicate these consequences clearly, and apply them uniformly. Consistent enforcement of rules helps students understand that expectations are serious and that there are predictable outcomes for their behavior. Teacher unpredictability is unfair, leads to fearfulness on the part of students, rarely engenders compliance, and lowers respect for the teacher.  

Encouraging students to take responsibility for their behavior fosters a sense of ownership and self-discipline. This can be done using strategies like class meetings, self-assessment checklists, and opportunities for students to reflect on their behavior and make amends. Teachers who promote self-management help students develop the skills needed to regulate their own behavior.  

Using restorative practices to address misbehavior helps resolve conflicts and restore positive relationships. Teachers can use restorative circles or conversations where students express their feelings, discuss the impact of their behavior, and agree on steps to repair the harm they have caused. Restorative practices encourage empathy and accountability. They help students learn from their mistakes and rebuild trust within the classroom community.  

It is easy to say that teachers should do all these things. But in the absence of adequate preparation, it is unlikely that teachers will be able to do them. In that case, managing student behaviour, a responsibility that all teachers have, will be difficult, unpredictable, and likely to lead to the kind of misbehavior that will require the kinds of interventions the CTF seeks to address in its advocacy for the retention of Section 43 of the Criminal Code. 

Strong Starts

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

There are many things to which a strong start is essential.  Personal relationships, conferences, sporting events, and the first day of the school year. It is at the start that a positive tone and momentum are established that provides the foundation for what follows.  

At the beginning of the school year, students need to reset their focus and apply their energy in ways that differ from the way they applied them during the summer. Establishing an environment in which students can learn and the teacher can teach is essential for a strong start to the school year. Involving students in the creation of the rules of decorum and behaviour helps students to establish a respectful, cooperative and productive classroom environment. Students who have agency are more likely to abide by the rules and behave in ways that help reestablish order when the rules are violated.  

Students benefit from knowing what to expect. At the beginning of the school year, teachers spend significant effort to make clear what is expected regarding classroom decorum, what students will learn, and how student performance will be evaluated. An important part of a teacher’s instructional program is communicating these same expectations to parents so that they, too, know what to expect. Building parental confidence in, and support for, the teacher often makes the difference when teachers need to communicate with parents to enlist their help.  

I know many astute principals who dedicate much of their time at the beginning of the school year  actively seeking evidence of these key practices in classrooms. I describe them as astute because they understand that when teachers implement these practices early on, it sets a positive tone in their classrooms and throughout the entire school. They recognize that teachers who adopt these strategies will face fewer challenges compared to those who do not. By ensuring that these practices are in place, principals help both students and teachers start the year with strong, positive momentum, laying a solid foundation for ongoing academic achievement. This proactive approach also makes the principal's own jobs more manageable.  

Most experienced teachers know that a strong start to the school year is critical. Resetting students’ focus and establishing clear expectations help create a respectful and productive classroom environment from the outset. Principals who support teachers in prioritizing these practices and actively ensuring their implementation contribute significantly to a positive and more enjoyable school culture and greater teacher well-being. This foundation facilitates smoother classroom management and enhances academic achievement.

Overcoming resistance to change

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

Regular readers of my blog know that I lament the stagnation of assessment results in literacy and numeracy and the lack of improvement in achievement among Indigenous students and students with special needs designations. For the several months I have been reading the strategic plans developed by school boards in British Columbia that are designed to align with the goals of intellectual, social, and career development as expressed in the Statement of Education Policy Order. I am wondering how school districts are going to produce the changes that are required to fulfill the goals in their plans.  

Teachers are, of course, the key agents of change. Without their support, change cannot occur. There are other factors at play, but it is essential that teachers be willing to change their practice to improve student performance and outcomes.  

In my quest to understand change, I recently read an article that so resonated with my experience that it has me thinking along new lines. That the article resonates with my experience doesn’t prove anything, but it is worth considering the implications of what the scholar-practitioners—the authors of the article--learned from their experience.  

Two university researchers, McKenzie and Scheurich, both with teaching and research experience in urban educational settings, conducted a collaborative action research project at a diverse urban elementary school. Their objective was to work alongside the school's administration and staff to boost the academic success of all students across various racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds. While the school's accountability data showed some progress, particularly for the lowest-performing students, the project revealed four main obstacles to change: the tendency to blame external factors for low achievement, the perception that accountability systems undermine teaching, the belief that proposing change implies criticism, and a general reluctance to embrace leadership roles.[1]  

McKenzie and Scheurich found that the teachers with whom they worked and with whom they had positive relationships frequently blamed factors outside the school, such as parenting, student behavior, and poverty for students' academic struggles. They inferred that pointing to external reasons suggested that the teachers were hesitant to consider how their own methods might contribute to student performance. They also found that biases against students' diverse backgrounds also played a part, leading teachers to view some background differences negatively.  

The authors also found that, across various educational settings, teachers voiced concerns that accountability measures, such as standardized testing, hindered their teaching. The teachers argued that these systems limit their creativity, fail to address the needs of all students, and create a stressful environment. McKenzie and Scheurich found that the resistance went beyond pedagogical objections to the teachers' sense of autonomy within their classrooms. Accountability was often viewed as an intrusion, challenging the traditional power teachers hold in the classrooms and leading to a defensive stance against perceived external scrutiny.  

Teachers with whom the authors worked frequently viewed suggestions for improvement as personal criticism, regardless of how they were presented. McKenzie and Scheurich believe that this issue was linked to the power dynamic between school administrators and teachers. Despite efforts to work together on changes, teachers often felt that improvement suggestions were a critique of their work. That situation made it hard to change teaching methods and revealed the challenging tension between leadership and teacher resistance to change.  

McKenzie and Scheurich wrote that, although the idea of shared leadership assumes that teachers will welcome the chance to take on leadership roles, the reality was that teachers were hesitant to accept these roles. They tended to avoid actions that might set them apart from colleagues or disrupt established norms. Even teachers who were formally acknowledged as leaders frequently resisted using their authority to guide teaching practices. The authors opined that such behavior indicates a widespread reluctance within the teaching profession to embrace leadership responsibilities.  

The McKenzie and Scheurich article has me thinking about four related questions:  

• How can we design professional development programs that encourage teachers to reflect on their teaching methods and view challenges as opportunities for increasing their effectiveness?
• How can we involve teachers in creating assessment systems that recognize their creativity and the diverse needs of students so that teachers see accountability as a professional responsibility and opportunity rather than a punitive measure?
• How can we redefine educational leadership to emphasize collaboration?
• What mentorship programs can we establish to support teachers transitioning into leadership roles?  

These are difficult questions to which I do not have ready answers, but I believe that it is crucial to involve teachers in answering them. Without their participation it will be difficult, if not impossible, to shift the perception of change from something that is done to teachers to something that is done by them.

I am going to think about these four questions between now and the Fall when my blog will resume. 

---

[1] McKenzie, K.B.  & J.J.  Scheurich (2008) Teacher resistance to improvement of schools with diverse students, International Journal of Leadership in Education, 11:2, 117-133, DOI: 10.1080/13603120801950122  

Teaching: Making A Future

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

The central job board for teacher recruitment in British Columbia is a website called Make a Future. Although the catch phrase is close to becoming a cliché, there is much truth in the claim that teachers can make the future.  

Teaching is one of the most influential professions. It shapes the future of the students taught and in doing so helps shape the future of society. Research, coupled with real-world economic considerations, makes the case that competent, effective teachers help promote student success and social improvement.  

John Hattie's Visible Learning summarizes much of the research about the immense impact teachers that have on student learning. That research summary and subsequent research shows that teachers exert a greater influence on student learning outcomes than any other single factor. The pedagogical strategies, content knowledge, and rapport-building skills that teachers possess are pivotal to student achievement.  

Teacher influence extends well beyond the boundaries of the classroom and academic achievement. Economists have found that teachers also contribute substantially to students' long-term life outcomes. Studies show that the quality of the teaching students receive can significantly affect their future employment opportunities and health outcomes. These findings confirm the value to society of effective teachers.  

Well-prepared teachers represent a significant investment. Considering salary, benefits, including pension costs, the amount exceeds $3 million per person over a thirty-year career without factoring in the costs of recruitment, professional development, and the cost of supply or substitute teachers during periods of absence. This is a substantial financial investment for any educational organization. Given the educational benefits that skilled, effective teachers bring, the expense is necessary and justifiable.  

The hiring of teachers extends beyond simple economic calculations. The educational and economic repercussions of employing ineffective teachers or those who leave the profession prior to retirement are considerable. Effective pre-employment assessment strategies are pivotal to hiring competent teachers.  

Although they are too infrequently used, teaching demonstrations provide real-time insights into an applicant’s teaching. Applicants may be asked to teach a lesson to a class while evaluators observe. This allows schools to directly assess an applicant's teaching skills, classroom management strategies, and ability to engage students.  

If the situation is like the one for which the applicant has applied, the students and curricula should be familiar. If the situation is too disparate with the position, the curriculum and students may be unfamiliar to the applicant and may violate the expectations of the observers.  

While it is inadvisable to make a strong judgment based on a single observation, even a single observation is preferable to no observations at all.  

Applicants may be asked to submit sample lesson plans. Reviewing these can provide insight into a teacher's planning skills, their understanding of curriculum standards, and their ability to structure lessons effectively. Like demonstration lessons, this method requires expert evaluators who can recognize effective lesson planning.  

Interviewing applicants for teaching positions is a near universal practice. During interviews, applicants may be asked to describe how they have handled (or would handle) specific situations in the classroom (often called behavioural or situational interviewing). Their responses can provide insight into their problem-solving skills, understanding of student development, and classroom management strategies. The quality of these interviews largely depends on the questions asked and the interviewer's skills. The validity of interviews depends upon using a robust question set and skilled interviewers.  

It is fashionable among some recruiters to ask applicants to submit a professional portfolio. The portfolio may include prior lesson plans, samples of student work, teaching philosophy statement, and performance evaluations from previous positions. Portfolios are intended to provide a holistic view of a teacher's abilities and achievements through representative objects and documents. The effectiveness of portfolios relies heavily on their design and the evaluators' ability to interpret them accurately.  

Reference checks, like interviews, are nearly universal. They are intended to provide additional insights about a candidate. Their value is limited by the referees' willingness to provide candid and unbiased feedback. This is difficult to achieve because applicants understandably select referees who will provide positive appraisals.  

I do not think it is an overstatement to say that teachers make a future for students and the wider society. They drive student achievement, influence long-term life outcomes, and create social value. For those reasons I also think it is of great importance that the education sector prioritizes the hiring of highly competent teachers. Each pre-employment assessment method I have enumerated adds information about as applicant’s potential, but each has its own strengths and weaknesses. Given the magnitude of a school district’s investment in teachers, an approach that combines these methods is likely to yield a more comprehensive understanding of an applicant’s suitability for a teaching position than one that is more limited in scope. 

Fostering Evidence-informed Teaching Practice

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia 

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

I have long been an advocate for the application of research evidence in teaching practices. Over the past century, an abundance of education research has been accumulated, much of it with practical implications for the classroom. Teachers are not as receptive to integrating this research into their daily practice as I hope they would be. From time to time, I have suggested that teachers should follow the example of their counterparts in the field of medicine, who seem to more readily apply research findings to guide their practices. There are some intriguing differences in the part that research plays in each field and in the dispositions practitioners in both fields have toward such research.  

Medicine and education are multifaceted disciplines with a shared objective—to improve human well-being. For medicine it is physical health and for education it is intellectual growth.  

The role of research in these two fields has notable differences. Medical research often delivers results in the form of tangible treatments or protocols, such as a new medication or surgical procedure. The benefits of these treatments can be directly observed, and their use is often mandated by regulatory bodies. A clear example is the widespread application of cholesterol-lowering drugs (statins) that were quickly adopted after research demonstrated their effectiveness in reducing the risk of heart disease.  

Educational research often yields findings that are more interpretive and less prescriptive. Research findings in education provide insights into teaching strategies or learning theories but are challenging to apply. For instance, research highlighting the benefits of formative assessment might not specify the best ways to administer or use formative assessment to inform decisions about instruction in classrooms with varied student populations.  

Physicians and teachers have different dispositions toward research. Physicians, by nature of their profession and continuous learning requirements, tend to be more accepting of research findings. They often work in an environment that supports and encourages the integration of the latest research into practice. A stark example can be found in the rapid implementation of COVID-19 treatments and protocols based on emergent research.  

Teachers often enjoy more flexibility and autonomy in their methods. They may adopt evidence-based practices, but the implementation is frequently dependent on individual judgement, administrative support, and available resources. For example, a teacher might choose a project-based learning approach over a more traditional teaching method, despite the lack of consensus in research on its superiority, because they believe it suits their specific classroom context.  

The differences in the uptake of research between medicine and education are not intended to disparage the teaching profession. Calling attention to them points to the need to understand the factors affecting the decisions that teachers make and their use of evidence in arriving at those decisions.  

It is essential to increase the accessibility of research for teachers, communicate findings in a practical, applicable manner, and foster a system that supports and encourages the application of research in the classroom. These changes could propel education towards a more evidence-informed future, much like what we observe in the field of medicine today.  

Ministries of education are in a uniquely powerful position to influence educational practices on a large scale. They can set priorities, shape policies, and allocate resources in ways that can significantly impact the application of research in schools and classrooms. It is imperative that ministries take an active role in enhancing the utilization of educational research by teachers.  

Ministries can increase the accessibility of research for teachers by investing in platforms that collate and distribute educational research. These platforms should be user-friendly and easily searchable, catering to the busy schedules of teachers, and provide a range of research from promising studies to multiple studies conducted over time. By making research readily available, teachers can stay informed about the latest findings and best practices.  

Ministries can facilitate the translation of research into practical, actionable strategies for teachers. Educational research can often be opaque in its presentation. By developing resources that present research findings in a clear and digestible manner, ministries can help teachers apply research to their teaching methods. This could be in the form of summarized research briefs, practical guides, or webinars that discuss research implications for classroom practices.  

Ministries can foster a system that supports and encourages the application of research in the classroom by implementing policies that value and incentivize evidence-based teaching practices. This could include providing professional development programs that focus on the practical application of research, creating opportunities for teacher collaboration and discussion of research findings, and incorporating the demonstrable use of evidence-based strategies into teacher evaluations.  

Ministries can work with universities and teacher preparation programs to ensure that pre-service teachers are equipped with the skills to understand and apply educational research. This can foster a culture of evidence-informed teaching from the beginning of a teacher's career.  

Ministries can fund further research into educational practices, particularly those that explore the implementation of research in diverse classroom contexts. This supports the generation of more relevant and applicable research and demonstrates a commitment to the continual improvement of teaching practices based on evidence.  

By leveraging their resources, influence, and strategic capabilities, ministries of education can promote the use of research in education, leading to improved teaching practices and better educational outcomes. The ripple effect of this could extend far beyond the individual classroom, influencing the entire educational system.

Parental Rights and Education

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

Public school is where we sent our children to overcome the limitations of their parents. My wife and I are well-educated, but there are limits to what we know and the values we hold. We wanted our daughters to be exposed to ideas and values different from our own so that they could make their way in the world unencumbered by our limitations.  

We believed that it was our responsibility to ensure our children were led out from the confines of the knowledge we could impart or the experiences we could provide. When I stop to consider it, I think things worked out. They are intellectually independent and, although we share many, if not most values, they came to their value positions on their own. We recognize that the family context and the friendship network in which they were raised were no doubt influential in shaping their values and beliefs, but the beliefs and values they hold were not imposed upon them.  

It is this disposition on my part that makes it disquieting to read about the attempts of school trustees to restrict access to books and ideas in the name of parental rights. A school trustee in British Columbia introduced a motion that “consideration be given to the creation of a policy statement that sets parameters around communications with parents about events scheduled in schools.” The trustee’s rationale was:  

The creation of a new policy statement will ensure that parents are adequately informed about upcoming presentations to be held at District schools. The key components of this consideration should include providing parents with sufficient notice for all school presentations to allow families time to determine whether attending the presentation is in the best interest of their child’s education. This will promote transparency, parental involvement, and a more collaborative educational environment.

 Notwithstanding the ambiguity of the rationale, the motion seems to imply that parents should be able to limit the school presentations to which their children might be exposed.  

Parents are not without certain rights. The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that mandatory religious practices in public schools violate Charter rights to freedom of religion (Zylberberg v. Sudbury Board of Education, 1988). However, when parents in Quebec objected to a mandatory Ethics and Religious Culture course, the Supreme Court of Canada held that merely exposing a child to different religious facts in a public school did not interfere with the parents' ability to transmit their faith (S.L. v. Commission scolaire des Chênes, 2012).  

The parents alleged that the Ethics and Religious Culture course was liable to cause harm in several ways. Among them:            

·     Losing the right to choose an education consistent with one’s own moral and religious principles; interfering with the fundamental freedom of religion, conscience, opinion and expression of children and their parents by forcing children to take a course that does not reflect the religious and philosophical beliefs with which their parents have the right and duty to bring them up.

·     Upsetting children by exposing them at too young an age to convictions and beliefs that differ from the ones favoured by their parents.

In seeking a favorable ruling from the Court, the parents appeared to want to shield their children from ideas that were dissonant or inharmonious with their own. In its decision, the Court observed:

Parents are free to pass their personal beliefs on to their children if they so wish.  However, the early exposure of children to realities that differ from those in their immediate family environment is a fact of life in society.  

I would go further. I would argue that it is incumbent upon parents to ensure that their children are exposed to realities, ideas, values, and beliefs that differ from those of their families. They should count on schools to assist in this. It is in such exposure that children develop the intellectual and moral capacities that adulthood requires.

The Cobra Effect

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

Reading school district strategic plans gets me thinking about the cobra effect, the unintended consequences that can result from an action or decision, particularly policy decisions. Two well-known examples come to mind.  

The first example is the prohibition against the production, sale, and transportation of alcoholic beverages in the United States between 1920 and 1933. Prohibition was intended to eliminate consumption of alcohol which was considered immoral and a cause of social instability.  

Prohibition didn’t produce the desired outcome. In fact, it led to the illicit production of alcohol in unsanitary conditions using dangerous methods that led to poisoning and death for some. The U.S. lost revenue from taxation of alcohol and incurred increased costs for law enforcement to counter the illegal production of alcohol by criminal organizations.  

The second is, during British colonial rule in India, the government, concerned about the number of venomous cobras in Delhi, offered a bounty for every dead cobra to decrease the cobra population. When the government discovered that some entrepreneurial individuals began to breed cobras to claim bounties, it terminated the bounty program. The entrepreneurial cobra breeders released their now-worthless snakes. The wild cobra population increased rather than decreased.  

A decision that produces the opposite of the intended outcome is sometimes called a "Cobra Effect." I use both examples to make the point that it is important to think carefully about making changes in complex systems and to try to avoid making changes on inadequate evidence.  

Each year schools and school boards make plans based upon what appear to be differences in performance from one year to the next. There are problems associated with strategic planning based on the perception of difference when no true differences have occurred. Chief among the problems is the potential for wasting resources.  

Continuously responding to perceived differences without evidence of true differences can lead to a cycle of planning and re-planning without genuine evidence of progress. Decision-makers who consistently act on perceived differences that aren't substantiated may lose credibility with employees, parents, and the public.  

If the perceived differences aren’t real, then resources (time, money, effort) spent addressing the matter might have been better allocated elsewhere. Moreover, implementing change often engenders resistance among employees. Changes made without evidence of a need for change can produce ‘change fatigue’ where employees become resistant to all changes, even ones that may be properly supported with evidence. Employees can be demotivated if they come to believe that decisions are being made based on inaccurate perceptions or vacuous findings rather than evidence. Worse yet, the employees could go through the motions of implementing changes in which they are little invested leaving the change leader to believe in their own effectiveness.  

The cobra effect can be avoided by carefully considering the evidence upon which one’s plans are made and how those plans might produce unanticipated and unwanted outcomes.  

Improve a class average from a C to a B

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

For many years I conducted a school-based teacher education program in a school district in British Columbia’s lower mainland. Students in one of the district’s schools were eager to enroll in the classroom of a teacher whom I will call Peggy. Peggy worked hard to make her class an inviting and successful environment for all students. But, on that score, she was no different than any of the other teachers in that school, one in which the parents and students held high expectations.  

Students in Peggy’s classes performed better than the students in the classrooms of her peers. But, before I reveal the not-so-secret sauce that Peggy employed, let me put in context the impact of what Peggy did that the other teachers did not do.  

The performance of students the classes taught by Peggy’s peers averaged about 75% (C) with almost 70% of the students achieving between 55% and 95%.  The remaining students scored better or worse. The class average of students that Peggy taught was ten percentage points higher, a B.  

Teachers eager to find ways to produce a genuine improvement in student performance can do what Peggy consistently did, and it is supported by a vast body of evidence. When I say vast, the evidence comes from 222 research reports with data from approximately 50,000 students.[1]  

I first learned about Peggy’s technique from observing students in the hallway. Most of the school’s students were engaged in the typical pattern of student behaviour and misbehaviour as they moved from on class to another. Peggy’s students were atypical. Most of them passed from their previous class to Peggy’s with their notebooks open.  

I found that the students were preparing for the brief quiz with which each of Peggy’s classes began. As soon as the students crossed the threshold of the classroom, they were expected to complete a brief quiz about the previous day’s lesson. Peggy collected the quizzes (they were paper based at the time) and, then, briefly reviewed the results.  

The effectiveness of Peggy’s practice of regular quizzes was confirmed by the 2021 study refenced below. The findings from that meta-analysis have several implications for teaching practice: ​

1. Class quizzes boost student achievement to a noticeable extent.
2. Quizzes are more effective in enhancing learning compared to other strategies such as restudying, concept mapping, and other elaborative strategies. ​
3. The format of the quiz does not significantly impact the effectiveness of test-enhanced learning. ​ Different test formats, such as fill-in-the-blank, multiple choice, short answer, etc., all contribute to enhancing student learning. ​
4. Quizzing reinforces the retention of tested knowledge and enhances the learning of untested knowledge, though the effect size for untested knowledge is slightly smaller.
5. Providing feedback following quizzes like Peggy did significantly increases learning gains because feedback helps students understand their mistakes and learn from them.
6. The number of quiz/test repetitions positively correlates with the effectiveness of test-enhanced learning. ​ The more times class content is quizzed (Peggy did it every day), the larger the learning gains.
7. Test-enhanced learning works across different levels of education, including elementary school, middle school, high school, and post secondary, and it consistently facilitates achievement across different subjects. ​

There is no doubt that the students Peggy taught (and their parents who sought Peggy as teacher of their children) recognized what has been confirmed by the meta-analysis: Incorporating regular quizzes or tests in the classroom is an effective strategy that enhances student learning and academic achievement. ​ 

 

---

[1] Yang, Chunliang, et al. "Testing (quizzing) boosts classroom learning: A systematic and meta-analytic review." Psychological bulletin, vol. 147, no. 4, 04/2021, pp. 399-435, , doi:10.1037/bul0000309.

The Ottawa Carleton District School Board thinks “eighty percent of success is showing up.”

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged] 

"Eighty percent of success is showing up," is an often-repeated quip. In February of this year the Ottawa Carleton District School Board received a recommendation from its senior staff to enshrine the sentiment in policy. The recommendation would alter the Board’s Graduation and Commencement Ceremonies and Awards policy to move from holding graduation ceremonies to organizing commencement ceremonies. 

If approved, the FAQs about the proposed change say that the policy would celebrate all students who have concluded their “secondary school journey.”  The proposed format would “ensure the inclusion of all students who are celebrating their achievements when they are eligible to leave high school at the age of eighteen.” This would include students who for a variety of reasons have not fulfilled Ontario’s graduation requirements. 

As I have written in other blogs, good intentions (for example, the desire to “to ensure welcoming, inclusive communities in our schools and system”) can have unintended consequences. A friend’s experience illustrates the point. The friend’s daughter did not complete the requirements for graduation but was encouraged to take part in graduation ceremonies by donning a cap and gown and being recognized as she crossed the stage. 

When her mother suggested that she might return to school to complete the requirements necessary for graduation, she said, “No way, not after everyone saw me walk across the stage. There’s no way I can go back there.” 

The proposed shift, from graduation ceremonies to commencement ceremonies strikes me as a misnomer. Commencement refers to a beginning, typically one in which degrees or diplomas have been awarded. Leaving secondary school without a diploma is not much of a beginning. It sounds more like a ‘send off’ than a commencement. “We wish you well on your journey, even if we didn’t prepare you very well.” 

The quip about success and showing up makes the point that an important step in achieving a goal is making the effort. But just showing up isn’t good enough. Reaching the goal or not reaching the goal has consequences. Except for a very small number of students with cognitive impairments, all students should earn graduation. When they do not, it is a failure of the education system. 

I doubt that students who have failed to achieve graduation feel better (more included) simply because they have celebrated coming to the end of a less than successful experience. Celebrating that failure is not a foundation for commencement.

What it means for a school board to be strategic

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

A strategic school board is one that effectively plans and deploys long-term policies to achieve its vision and mission. This approach requires the board to prioritize its resources and actions in a way that aligns with its overarching goals and objectives over several years.  

Being strategic means considering the broader picture of the school district's needs and potential for improvement. It involves conducting assessments of the current state of education within the district, setting goals, establishing precise objectives, developing detailed strategies, and defining relevant measures and metrics to ensure progress and success.  

For example, if a school board's mission is to improve literacy among students, a strategic approach might include setting a long-term goal of increasing the average reading level across all grades. This could involve developing a five-year plan that includes objectives like integrating more comprehensive literacy programs, promoting a reading culture among students, specifying how progress will be measured, and establishing a district plan to improve language arts instruction.  

A strategic school board considers factors like changing demographics, shifts in provincial educational policy, technological advancements, and societal changes and takes them into account in its strategic plan.  

The primary difference between being strategic and tactical lies in the scope, timeframe, and level of detail. Strategic decisions are long-term, encompassing, and focused on the bigger picture. Tactical decisions are short-term, more detailed, and focused on the specific activities that help implement the strategic plan; they are operational in nature and the responsibility of the superintendent. Both strategic and tactical approaches are crucial. Strategic planning provides the direction.  Tactical, operational actions drive the implementation. 

I hope you have a restful spring break. This blog will resume on April 3rd. 

Four things all students must know

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

Teaching students to think critically about the information they encounter is among the professed goals of education. In British Columbia, where I live, the idea is enshrined in the provincial regulation that defines intellectual development as the prime goal of education. The regulation says that the goal of education is “to develop the ability of students to analyze critically, reason and think independently....”  

While critical and reflective thinking figure prominently in British Columbia’s curriculum, it does not explicitly address the four concepts students must understand and be able to apply to think critically: the difference between factual claims and value claims, and the differences between a concept and a conception.  

Factual claims and value claims play a pivotal role in arguments, discussions, and decision-making. There are two types of factual claims: empirical and analytical. Empirical claims are statements that can be proven true or false through observation, measurement, or other empirical methods. For example, "the Earth orbits the sun" is a factual claim because it can be supported by astronomical evidence. Empirical claims are the foundation of empirical research and are crucial for building knowledge about the world.  

A second type of factual claim is analytical. Analytical claims are ones whose truth is determined by getting clear about the meanings of the words in the statements. “There are no four-sided triangles” is an analytical claim that is true because the term triangle means “three-sided figure.” “Some brothers have no siblings is false because the term brother means “a male who has the same parents as another person.”  

Value claims are positive or negative judgments about worth, desirability, morality, or faith. They express judgments based on ethics, aesthetics, or personal beliefs. These claims are not empirically verifiable in the same way as factual claims because they are based on individual or cultural values. For example, "Democracy is the best form of government" is a value claim because it expresses a judgment based on certain values about governance.  

Analytical claims are assertions that involve the analysis, interpretation, or evaluation of information. They often involve examining relationships between concepts, exploring causes and effects, or providing explanations. Analytical claims go beyond mere observation to provide deeper insight into a subject. For example, "The rise of social media has transformed communication practices" is an analytical claim because it analyzes the impact of social media on communication.  

It isn’t possible to think critically without understanding these distinctions. For example, in debates on climate change, distinguishing between the factual claim that "carbon dioxide levels have risen significantly in the industrial era," the value claim that "we are morally obligated to reduce carbon emissions," and the analytical claim that "implementing renewable energy sources can reduce carbon emissions" is crucial for clear, effective argumentation and communication.  

Confusion ensues when students fail to recognize the distinction between the types of claims. Conflating facts and values makes it impossible to think critically about issues. For example, in discussions about vaccination, conflating factual claims about vaccine safety with value claims about community responsibility can lead to misunderstandings and resistance based on misinterpretation rather than informed judgment.  

Fostering critical thinking is essential for informed citizenship, personal development, and meaningful engagement with the world. If teachers do not help students understand and make those distinctions, students will not be able to think critically.  

The same can be said about teaching the distinction between concepts and conceptions. Concepts are mental building blocks representing a general idea or category (for example, democracy). A conception is an individual’s interpretation or understanding of that concept based upon the individual’s beliefs, experiences, and knowledge. Failing to differentiate between these can lead to miscommunication, misunderstanding, and impaired critical thinking. Individuals may use the same words but mean different things. For example, conflating the concept of evolution with one’s personal conceptions impedes acceptance of empirical evidence. Similarly, a narrow or skewed understanding of democracy, based on limited conceptions, can impede civic engagement and appreciation of democratic principles and practices. Understanding the nature of claims and concepts is key to debate, decision-making, and a more informed, empathetic, and cohesive society.

Wait, consider the entire blog before you draw a conclusion.

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

The professional regulation of teachers is anomalous compared with most other professions because the entry-level examinations commonplace in other professions are not required for licensure as a teacher.  Unlike their counterparts in medicine, law, or engineering, teachers face no gateway examination to secure their licensure. This departure from the norm is more than an administrative difference; it highlights a unique stance on assessing competence and readiness. Where other professions use these exams as a keystone for maintaining high standards and public confidence, teaching leans solely on educational attainment and practical experience.  

The case for introducing a competency examination for teacher certification depends upon identifying the essential knowledge every teacher requires. There are, at a minimum, four groups of competencies: pedagogical knowledge; classroom and student management; subject-matter knowledge; and emotional intelligence.  

Given the variability in teacher education programs, it is optimistic to assume they prepare beginning teachers uniformly in these areas. An independent examination would set a universal benchmark that every applicant for certification would need to meet to begin teaching.  

The absence of an entry-level examination within the teaching profession calls for a deeper examination of our standards and expectations. The notion of introducing such a test, especially in times of teacher shortages, might initially seem counter-productive and counter-intuitive. But, wait, consider my argument for its potential as a strategic enhancement to the profession's integrity and public esteem.  

The practice of lowering entry barriers as a quick fix to fill vacancies is a precarious long-term solution to teacher shortages. Lowering standards might temporarily put an adult in front of students, but there are long-term consequences for educational quality. A hastily expanded teaching force is ill-equipped to address the challenges of today’s classrooms and increases the risk of diminishing the quality of education and eroding public trust in the system.  

Conversely, the proposal to integrate an entry-level examination, complemented by a system of conditional licensure, is a nuanced alternative. This model does not just impose an additional hurdle; rather, it aims to elevate the entire profession. Conditional licensure would be a bridge for those on the cusp of professional competence if the rigor of standardized testing was paired with supportive measures like systematic professional learning and mentorship. This approach would ensure that all new teachers meet a baseline of competency while requiring them to maintain currency through mandated and ongoing professional learning.  

To create a more effective and personalized approach to conditional licensure in teaching, the integration of mandatory professional learning would be based on the specific competency gaps identified on the entry-level examination. Upon completion of the examination, applicants would receive a report detailing their performance across various competencies, identifying both strengths and areas where mastery had not been demonstrated.  

The report would become the foundation for a personalized professional learning plan (PLP) developed in consultation among the teacher, the teacher’s mentor, and a professional learning coordinator. The plan would outline learning objectives tailored to address the competency gaps identified by the entry-level examination as well as professional learning activities designed to meet the objectives. These activities might range from workshops and online courses to specific teaching experiences that would be chosen for their relevance to areas in which the teacher needs to demonstrate improvement.  

As the conditionally licensed teachers engage in these targeted learning activities, they would be expected to document their experiences. This documentation would be compiled into a professional learning portfolio. The portfolio would both document the teacher’s progress and provide the basis for regularly scheduled reviews with mentors and coordinators.  

The probationary conditional licensure period would culminate in a final assessment. Conditionally licensed teachers who demonstrate mastery of the competencies initially identified as lacking would earn full licensure. The assessment would involve a comprehensive review of the professional learning portfolio and classroom observations documenting how the teacher addressed gaps in their competencies.  Successful demonstration of competency supported by a record of personalized professional development and application in teaching would lead to the awarding of full licensure.  

This approach would ensure that new teachers meet baseline competency standards and engage in continuous, reflective practice aimed at addressing their specific needs. It would enhance teacher effectiveness in the classroom and contribute to the overall quality of education.  

This approach addresses not just the symptom of teacher shortages but also the underlying need for a highly competent, well-prepared educational workforce. By setting a high entry standard and providing avenues for all aspiring teachers to reach it, we reinforce the profession's prestige and ensure a consistent quality of education. In addition, this strategy draws attention to the importance of adaptability and lifelong learning.  

Implementing an entry-level exam with conditional licensure balances the immediate need to address teacher shortages with the long-term vision of cultivating a robust, respected teaching force. This carefully calibrated approach would meet today's labour force challenges while safeguarding the integrity and effectiveness of the teaching profession.