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. 

Navigating Truth: The Role of Schools in Countering Conspiracy Rhetoric

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

In a democratic system, trust in institutions is essential. Conspiracy theories introduce doubt in these systems, leading to reduced faith in institutions. This lack of trust can lead to social divisions creating an "us vs. them" mentality. Conspiracy theories divert attention from issues that deserve attention, impeding government operations.  

Trust in democratic institutions, such as the courts, elections, and independent media are foundational elements of democracy and are checks against abuses of power and authoritarian governments. Those whose goal it is to weaken democracy must first work to undermine public trust in those institutions which serve to defend democracy.  

As someone who began his career as a social studies teacher, I think it is crucial for schools to equip students with skills that enable them to discern credible information from conspiracy theories. Schools should prioritize the development of students' ability and disposition to question the credibility and reliability of sources. Learners should learn to differentiate fact from fiction, factual statements from statements of opinion, and to understand the inherent assumptions and biases in any given argument.  

Part of their preparation should include acquainting students with common logical fallacies. Using real-world examples, teachers can effectively point out and illustrate fallacies such as ad hominem attacks or circular reasoning. Students should be encouraged to identify fallacies in daily situations, public pronouncements and media. Media literacy should be a central component of every student’s education. They should be taught to evaluate sources and understand the pitfalls of online echo chambers and algorithmically driven content.  

Students must learn the difference between fact and opinion because it helps them navigate the information they encounter every day. By distinguishing between what’s accurate and what’s inaccurate, they are better able to make informed decisions, form their own beliefs, construct sound arguments, and avoid being swayed by misleading information. Knowing something about a topic also helps them recognize when someone is trying to manipulate or deceive them.  

Students should become familiar with enduring stereotypes and tropes. Such knowledge fosters critical thinking and promotes cultural awareness and sensitivity. Recognizing the origin, evolution, and impact of these narratives helps students challenge and deconstruct prejudiced beliefs.  

Students should learn about the social psychology of conspiracy theories and the influence of cognitive biases like the desire for pattern recognition or the need to find explanations for significant events. Teachers can use historical examples and contemporary case studies.  

Open discussion is key to the approach I am suggesting. Schools must be safe environments where students can critically analyze popular conspiracy theories. Respectful debate using logic and evidence is essential.  

Schools can and should create informed citizens capable of navigating the complex terrains of truth and misinformation. 

Man Bites Dog in Penticton

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

The phrase "man bites dog" is an example of a journalistic aphorism that means unusual events are newsworthy. One rarely finds a ‘man bites dog’ story in education, but just such a story jumped out at me from one of the education newsfeeds that I read.  

The headline “Superintendent applauded for school closure plan” caught my attention for two reasons. One, I do not recall many instances in which attendees at a school board meeting applauded the superintendent. Two, the audience was applauding the superintendent’s presentation of a long-range facilities strategy . . . wait for it . . . that included a proposal to close three schools in the Okanagan Skaha School District (#67).  

As I understand it, the plan presented by the superintendent proposed to reallocate funds to educational programming by reducing the inefficiency of building use. The superintendent's presentation of the plan to trustees and the public was met with unexpected applause, signaling broad support for a plan that would normally arouse anxieties about or significant opposition to school closures.  

There are several reasons I am writing about this apart from the ‘man bites dog’ dimension. First, to earn the support of an audience and board for a plan that would typically engender hostility implies to me that the superintendent and his senior team had communicated clearly and transparently with the board and the audience. Second, the support the plan received implied that the board and the audience recognized the benefits that reallocated funding from closing under-utilized facilities would bring students outweighed the immediate anxieties that school closures typically arouse.  

When I read the story, I, too, applauded both the superintendent and the board. I applauded the Superintendent and senior team for their willingness to expend the effort to present a plan that nine times out of ten generates hostility. I applauded the Board for its recognition that underutilized facilities require resources (about $1.5 million in this case) that are better spent on programming for students. Too often boards in a similar position would be unwilling to make such a decision.  

My guess is that the audience likely had people in it who had attended the schools affected by the closures or who have children in those schools. If my hunch is correct, the audience reaction likely means that the trustees who made what I think was the right decision are unlikely to be punished at the ballot box. But, even if they are, they made the right decision to put students before their own political interests or ambitions. Bravo!

How comparative education data are used

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

To avoid making egregious mistakes and embarrassing myself, I have several respected colleagues who read my blogs before I post them. A reader of last week’s blog suggested that I devote an entire blog to the reasons why comparative analyses are helpful and to whom.  

Comparative analysis involves examining and interpreting data from different schools, districts, or educational systems to identify patterns, trends, and areas in need of improvement. Such analyses are valuable for many stakeholders, including parents, educators, policymakers, advocacy groups, researchers, and others.  

Benchmarking and performance evaluation are the primary reasons why Canadian provinces and territories cooperate under the ambit of the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) in the Pan-Canadian Assessment Program (PCAP) and in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). PCAP and PISA data are useful starting places for answering the question how are we doing in comparison with other jurisdictions now and over time.  

Benchmarking performance is the first step in the process of performance evaluation which, if done well, will help inform policy and decision making. Governments and policymakers use comparative data to evaluate the effectiveness of educational policies and programs. By comparing data across different jurisdictions, they can identify best practices and areas needing improvement. This information can guide the development of more effective educational strategies and policies.  

Comparative analyses are also essential in educational research. Researchers use data to study various aspects of the education system. Comparative data contribute to understanding the effectiveness of education changes and the relationship between education and socio-economic outcomes.  

From my perspective, among the most important contributions of comparative analyses is understanding educational inequities. Comparative data analysis can reveal disparities in educational outcomes across different regions, socio-economic groups, or ethnic backgrounds, indicating where policy interventions to promote equity in education are needed. Without comparing data overtime, it would be impossible to know if efforts to reduce inequalities and produce more equitable outcomes were successful.  

Comparative data can inform us about where resources are most needed, and they can help in allocating efficiently to where they are most needed. Comparative data analysis helps reveal disparities and needs across different regions or demographics and is helpful to decision-makers in evaluating their budgetary allocations, leading, one hopes, to allocations that are economical, efficient, and effective. Regular comparative analysis fosters accountability. Monitoring and reporting on performance metrics is a key responsibility of boards and ministries of education.  

Comparative analysis is a tool for strategic planning. It helps the governors of systems to set long-term goals and administrators to establish objectives based on empirical evidence. Comparative data analysis is essential for advocacy organizations that wish changes. Organizations focused on education use comparative data to highlight disparities in access to programs or outcomes.  

Comparative data analysis in elementary and secondary education is a powerful tool for improving educational outcomes. It helps us understand how distinct factors contribute to student success and helps decision-makers make informed decisions to enhance the quality of education.  

For all these reasons it is important and valuable for Canada and its provinces and territories to further their efforts to produce consistent, reliable and comparable education statistics

Data comparability in elementary and secondary education is hard to achieve in Canada

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

I received an email from colleagues complaining about how difficult it is to obtain comparable data about elementary and secondary schooling in Canada. “That’s the truth,” was my frustrated and, I am sure, frustrating reply.  

The decentralized nature of Canada's education system makes gathering comparable data from each of the Canadian provinces and territories in the context of elementary, secondary, and, for that matter, post-secondary education challenging. Each province and territory in Canada has jurisdiction for its education systems. That autonomy leads to subtle, but important, differences that make inter-provincial comparisons difficult. Differences among provincial systems, policies, and curricula lead to variations, albeit often minor, in what is taught, how it is taught, standards for student achievement, and almost everything else. As a result, data collected from one region may not be directly comparable to another.  

Further complicating the matter is the fact that methods, standards, and timing of data collection vary across provinces and territories. This includes differences in the types of data collected, the tools, and technologies used for data gathering, and the metrics for measuring educational processes, performance, and outcomes.  

Those seeking to make comparisons will no doubt notice that the academic year, the age at which children enter, and the number of hours of instruction differ from province to province. These variations affect the comparability of data related to enrollment, progression, and attainment.  

For those who seek to make comparisons and are cognizant of the need to control the variations affected by system differences and the demographic differences among provinces, obtaining data is a challenge. The willingness of provincial and territorial governments to participate in national data collection initiatives varies, influenced by political, fiscal, and administrative priorities.  

Canada lacks a centralized data repository.  Without a centralized national database for educational data, collecting, standardizing, and comparing data from different regions is complex and resource intensive. Canada needs a coordinated approach and standardized guidelines for data collection and sharing across Canada's educational jurisdictions to facilitate meaningful comparative analysis. The Councils of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) tries to address the need for comparable data.  

The Pan-Canadian Education Indicators Program (PCEIP) is a partnership between CMEC and the Canadian Education Statistics Council, a body jointly chaired Statistics Canada and CMEC. It tries to provide a set of statistical measures on education systems in Canada using in accordance with common data standards and definitions. When I served as deputy minister of education for BC, I co-chaired the Canadian Education Statistics Council with the Chief Statistician of Canada. I saw first hand how challenging it was to produce data that would enable comparisons across jurisdictions.  

Despite considerable effort, the available data about elementary and secondary schooling are meagre. In fact, as far as achievement data are concerned, PCEIP depends greatly upon the Pan-Canadian Assessment Program (PCAP). PCAP, conducted by the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC), assesses the abilities of 13- and 16-year-old students in reading, mathematics, and science. PCEIP also depends on the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) that examines the performance of 15-year-olds in mathematics, reading, and science.  

Those of us interested in cross-jurisdictional comparisons look to PCEIP, the Canadian National Household Survey, the Census, and the Labour Force Survey and try to assemble data that would enable meaningful interpretation. It isn’t easy.  

We also seek data from the provinces and territories, but transparency and availability of educational data vary significantly among Canadian provinces and territories. Some regions are known for being more open and forthcoming with their educational data. I wish all provinces were as open about data as British Columbia. More than a decade ago, BC became the first province to ‘publish’ its data under an open license.  

BC makes a data catalogue available to the public. I often seek data about student performance, enrollment statistics, and graduation rates from the data warehouse. There are data that I want that I cannot find there. Attendance data are something I am looking forward to seeing. But getting there means the province will need to establish common definitions and data collection procedures to ensure that the data provided by one school or district is comparable with another.  

Ensuring comparability in data is crucial for accurately understanding trends and their broader implications. This requires standardized methods for collecting data, uniform definitions across studies, consistent measurement units, and synchronized timeframes for data collection. These goals are not overly complex but achieving them demands significant political commitment and administrative effort. British Columbia has exemplified such commitment and effort. However, the relative consistency in the PCEIP reports over time suggests a limited commitment from provincial politicians, regardless of their party, to understanding educational trends and their implications.  

Reflections on online learning

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

Readers of my blog will know that I believe quality instruction makes a tangible difference in learning, and that well-educated and well-prepared teachers are essential. I have been thinking quite a bit about on-line learning, something that occupies much of my time.   

In the 1960s, around the time I was preparing as a teacher, John Carroll, an educational psychologist, proposed that the amount of time learners spend on learning a task, relative to the time required, is a critical factor in determining their success in learning.[1] One of the constraints of face-to-face schooling is that it imposes constraints on the amount of time learners have to achieve mastery.  

The advantage of online education aligns with Carroll's emphasis on learning time and individual differences in learning needs. In Carroll's model, the aptitude of a student, including their prior knowledge and learning abilities, significantly influences how they learn. Online learning facilitates this by allowing learners to tailor their learning to their individual aptitudes. For example, a student who finds calculus challenging can allocate more time to this subject, revisiting complex problems through videos and online forums until they grasp the concepts.  

Online learning provides learners with the flexibility to access educational resources at any time. Someone interested in history, for example, can spend more time investigating a topic of interest.  

Online learning requires perseverance. Self-motivated students can spend additional time mastering subjects of interest or difficulty. This is evident when a learner studying programming online spends extra hours developing an application. That learner is achieving mastery and exhibiting the willingness to invest time in learning.  

Quality of instruction is also a critical factor. Online learning offers access to varied instructional methods, materials, and instructional models (teachers). A learner who prefers demonstrations might explore YouTube while one who prefers print can look for articles and e-books.  

Carroll's model points to the importance of student understanding. Learners who find one video difficult to comprehend can look for another that is clearer or better aligned with the learner’s prior understanding. Self-discipline and motivation are two critical characteristics of successful online learners. The learner's willingness to engage with the material is crucial. Online learning offers flexibility and some level of individuation, but it demands a high level of self-regulation from students.  

Internet-based learning offers a flexible, somewhat individualized educational experience that can align with the needs, aptitudes, and time that different learners need to achieve mastery. However, it also requires enormous self-discipline and motivation. 

---

[1] Carroll, John B. (1963) "A Model of School Learning." Teachers College record (1970), vol. 64, pp. 1-9.

Should cell phones be banned in school?

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

Quebec’s new policy banning cellphones in classrooms has taken effect after the holiday break. The ban applies to all public elementary and secondary schools in Quebec but allows teachers to determine whether the students with whom they work may use phones for educational purposes. Enforcement of the ban falls to individual school boards. Some boards already have restrictions on cellphone use. Ontario's 2019 cellphone ban has been criticized for ineffective enforcement. Restrictions on cell phone use is consistent with what is occurring in countries like France, China, and the UK. Anecdotal evidence indicates there have been positive outcomes like reduced distractions and improved academic performance.  

Debate about student cell phone use in schools involves various claims about their impact on educational environments, student behavior, and teaching practices. Proponents of restrictions on cell phones argue that they are major distractions in classrooms. They argue that restricting their use can help students concentrate better on their studies.  

Limiting phone use, proponents of restrictions say, can help reduce instances of cyberbullying during school hours by reducing the opportunity that students have for engaging in harmful online behaviors. Some proponents say a ban can encourage more face-to-face interactions among students. This, they argue, will improve social skills, and reduce dependence on digital communication.  

A ban on cell phone use may reduce the risk of cheating on exams or assignments. And limiting cell phone use in schools may also contribute to healthier lifestyle habits among students.  

Those opposing restrictions say that cell phones are a crucial communication tool. A ban might hinder students' ability to communicate with parents or guardians in case of emergencies or changes in plans. Opponents of restrictions say that smartphones can be effective educational tools. Eliminating them from schools removes a resource that can enhance learning. Opponents also say that enforcing a ban consistently across all schools in a province can be difficult and determining and applying appropriate consequences for violations of the ban may be almost impossible.  

I asked myself what questions I would ask If I were contemplating a proposal to ban cell phone use in schools. Here are some that occur to me:

How does cell phone use or its absence affect student learning, attention in class, and overall academic performance?

What is the impact of cell phone use on student behavior, including instances of cyberbullying, social interactions, and development of social skills?

How would a ban on cell phone use affect students’ ability to communicate with family, especially in emergencies?

What does the evidence say about the effect of cell phone use on students’ mental health?

Would a ban on cell phones exacerbate or mitigate the digital divide among students?

What time is lost to instruction because of monitoring and disciplinary actions?

Would a ban on cell phone use have a material impact on students’ readiness for a technology-driven world?

Answers to such questions would provide useful information about whether a ban on cell phone use should be pursued.

The Devil is in the Details

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

We are wired to be resistant – and even blind – to ideas and policies advanced by people whose values and beliefs differ from our own. Our desire to maintain connection to those who share our values disposes us to resist the ideas of those whose values differ. We have strong attachments to our own ideas and values that make it difficult to evaluate policies and claims that others make – especially if their values are different.  

We resist change. Confirmation bias, selective perception, and cognitive dissonance are among the mechanisms at work. It takes effort to overcome these mechanisms and biases. I think it is worth making the effort.  

What brings this to mind is the recent passage of The Better Schools and Student Outcomes Act, 2023 (Bill 98) in Ontario. The proclaimed legislation has provisions that purport to enhance education in that province.  

The bill encompasses five key areas that would be supported by future regulatory and education policy reforms. The bill aims to increase accountability and transparency in Ontario's education sector by aligning provincial priorities and expectations with district and classroom-level implementation. Boards of education throughout Ontario will be required to fulfill government-established goals for student achievement and improve transparency and accountability regarding board performance and funding. It sounds like the provincial regulation in British Columbia under the banner of the Framework for Enhanced Student Learning.  

The second key element in the bill attempts to address effective governance by introducing standardized processes and expectations for trustees, Directors (Superintendents) of Education, and supervisory officers in school districts. This element seems designed to ensure equitable and unbiased trustee conduct across all boards and to equip trustees and Directors of Education with the necessary competencies to effectively address the government's student achievement objectives.   

In a third section, the Act seeks to optimize the use of the capital assets of school boards to expedite the construction of schools and enhance school capacity. This entails leveraging surplus property for public education and other provincial priorities, addressing accommodation needs in areas experiencing high growth, streamlining school planning and design processes, and promoting more efficient approvals procedures.  

A fourth dimension of the bill is aimed at fortifying teacher preparation and oversight by ensuring that preparation addresses the current demands of classrooms. This dimension also addresses student safety by establishing fair and effective disciplinary processes for teachers and registered early childhood educators.  

The aims of the fifth major element in the bill is less evident to me. It appears to want to foster greater uniformity in approaches to student learning and provide resources for parents to engage with their child's education.  

Like most jurisdictions the Education Act in Ontario empowers the Minister to make such regulations as are necessary for the administration of schools and school boards. While new legislation was probably not necessary, it seems that the Ontario Minister of Education is using the Bill to signal increased accountability. According to the Minister:

These new measures will focus on getting back to the basics of education: strengthening reading, writing and math, and other STEM disciplines.

We are following through on our commitment to parents through new measures that will better refocus school boards on academic achievement and the development of life and job skills.

These reforms include the new authority for our government to set binding priorities on school boards that focus on boosting student achievement focused on reading, writing and math.   

Given evidence of a steady decline in reading and mathematics performance in most provincial and national jurisdictions, I suspect that few would argue that increasing achievement in foundational areas is unnecessary. The devil, as the saying goes, is in the details. What, at first, seems promising in the Ontario Better Schools and Student Outcomes Act can wind up producing undesirable outcomes or unforeseen problems. The regulations that the bill enables will deserve scrutiny and the implementation careful evaluation.