Schooling and Democratic Citizenship

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

Many Canadians are appalled by the overt attacks on democratic citizenship that are occurring just across the ‘world’s longest undefended border.’ Book banning, historical revisionism, ad hominem attacks, overt racism and homophobia are tactics that seem to be designed to erode the rights, duties, and privileges that come with democratic citizenship. The porousness of the boarder separating Canada from the United States has me wondering whether we need a wall.  

Not a physical wall. A wall of concepts and dispositions that schools should teach about and cultivate to ensure the sustained health of a democratic society. I am talking about preparing students for active participation in society and helping them understand their rights and responsibilities.  

I think Canadian schools need to incorporate civic education into the curriculum. Students should learn about their country's democratic institutions, the constitution, and the functioning of the government. Understanding how elections and governments work. In an increasingly polarized society, students should understand how the rights of minorities are respected in a political system that gives the majority the greatest weight in decision-making.  

Schools should encourage students to be aware of and engage in current affairs and important social issues through class discussions, debates, or assignments related to contemporary issues. Students should see the connection between their lives, the community around them, and the larger political environment. We must educate students to analyze different viewpoints, discern reliable sources of information, and make informed decisions. We should be encouraging them to question, reason, and to doubt.  

Students should have opportunities to participate in democratic processes within the school environment. They need direct experience with democratic decision-making and its messiness. Schools should also provide opportunities for students to engage with their local communities through community service, local projects, or partnerships with local organizations. The purpose of such participation is to develop their understanding of active citizenship and the rights and responsibilities of citizens in a democratic society.  

We should be teaching students about human rights to help them understand the values underpinning democratic societies. This includes concepts such as equality, freedom, justice, and dignity.  

Schools should be microcosms of the larger society by welcoming diversity. Teaching about and demonstrating respect for diversity helps students understand the importance of pluralism in a democratic society. The school environment should reflect democratic principles. This means respecting the rights and voices of students, promoting equality, and practicing fairness. Schools should set an example by making decisions transparently, considering the views of students, and addressing conflicts fairly.  

Many readers will recall their school days when the concept of citizenship predominantly focused on the nuts and bolts of democracy, focusing on the procedural aspects of democratic governance (e.g., the election process, the roles of the Parliament, the Prime Minister, opposition parties, and the judiciary). However, I am suggesting a different approach. This approach should focus on the challenges inherent to democratic systems such as the dangers of misinformation in the digital age, the influence of money in politics, or the erosion of trust in public institutions. Incorporating these contemporary challenges into the curriculum should prompt students to critically analyze and contend with these obstacles, equipping them to become proactive contributors in their communities. This approach would offer a comprehensive understanding of democracy and equip succeeding generations to actively champion and safeguard the rights that previous generations have helped to establish.  

If schools do not deliberately teach about and cultivate democratic citizenship, who will?

Hunger, poverty, and teen pregnancy

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

Throughout my career I’ve heard many say that you cannot increase student achievement without addressing child poverty, hunger, and related factors such as teen pregnancy. I think addressing hunger, poverty, and teen pregnancy are essential, but I do not think addressing them is a precondition for increasing student achievement.  

It appears that substantial improvement in student achievement and outcomes is possible on a system-wide basis. Nicholas Kristof, in his May, New York Times opinion piece, discussed the transformation of Mississippi's education system, which has significantly improved from being at the lowest level to reaching the middle and then the top position when adjusted for demographics. The achievement was realized through a strong emphasis on reading proficiency by the third grade, using research-based methods and metrics to improve outcomes.  

Despite being ranked last in child poverty and hunger and second in teen births, Mississippi has successfully improved reading and math scores, and high school graduation rates. The improvements have been achieved in collaboration with teachers and their unions.  

The achievement is linked to several key factors, including a $100 million donation from former Netscape CEO Jim Barksdale and his wife to establish a reading institute in Jackson. The institute helped implement a focus on measurable outcomes and cost-effective strategies. Other strategies involved an emphasis on phonics and literacy, teacher professional development, investment in pre-K programs, and a "third-grade gate" policy that requires students to pass a reading test at the end of third grade or repeat the year. To keep students in school, officials visited students who had dropped out due to economic hardships and helped them to arrange flexible work schedules with their employers.  

Mississippi's public school system has made noticeable improvements despite substantial socio-economic challenges and a history of school segregation. If Mississippi can make such remarkable system-wide improvement, systems elsewhere should also be able to do so. The central elements in Mississippi are ones that can be implemented in other state and provincial systems: measurable goals and metrics; cost-effective, research-based methods such as phonics instruction; productive collaboration with teacher unions; and focused professional learning for teachers.  

Careful readers will note that I did not mention the "third-grade gate" policy that requires students to pass a reading test at the end of third grade or repeat the year. My reason for omitting it as a central element is that grade repetition is not supported by evidence.[1] I am, nevertheless, open to changing my perspective based on an examination of the evidence from Mississippi.  

Mississippi’s success shows that it is possible to increase student achievement without addressing child poverty, hunger, and teen pregnancy. Of course, that doesn’t mean we should not also be making efforts to reduce – if not eliminate them. 

---

[1] Jimerson, S. R. (2001). Meta-analysis of grade retention research: Implications for practice in the 21st century. School Psychology Review, 30, 420–437.

The Educated Citizen – 2023

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]

The policy order setting out British Columbia’s conception of the educated citizen dates from September 1, 1989 and reflects British Columbia as it was perceived at that time.

A quality education system assists in the development of human potential and improves the well being of each individual person in British Columbia society.

Continued progress toward our social and economic goals as a province depends upon well-educated people who have the ability to think clearly and critically, and to adapt to change.

Progress toward these goals also depends on educated citizens who accept the tolerant and multifaceted nature of Canadian society and who are motivated to participate actively in our democratic institutions.

Government is responsible for ensuring that all of our youth have the opportunity to obtain high quality schooling that will assist in the development of an educated society. To this end, schools in the province assist in the development of citizens who are:

thoughtful, able to learn and to think critically, and who can communicate information from a broad knowledge base;

creative, flexible, self-motivated and who have a positive self image;

capable of making independent decisions;

skilled and who can contribute to society generally, including the world of work;

productive, who gain satisfaction through achievement and who strive for physical well being;

cooperative, principled and respectful of others regardless of differences;

aware of the rights and prepared to exercise the responsibilities of an individual within the family, the community, Canada, and the world.  

Since the late 1980s, society in general and British Columbia (BC) have seen significant changes across multiple areas. The rise of digital technologies is among the most profound changes. The widespread use of the internet, smartphones, and social media has transformed how we communicate, work, learn, and entertain ourselves. This digital revolution has significant implications for education, job markets, privacy, mental health, social dynamics, and politics.  

Climate change, deforestation, overfishing, pollution, and species extinction have created greater awareness of environmental issues. With its diverse ecosystems, BC has often been at the forefront of many environmental debates. Its policies and public sentiments towards environmental preservation, renewable energy, and sustainable practices have evolved significantly since 1989.  

BC has become more ethnically diverse due to immigration. The multicultural fabric of BC has been enriched, but it has also led to challenges related to integration and social cohesion. Since the late 1980s, there's been a growing recognition of the rights of Indigenous peoples in Canada, including in BC. This includes steps towards reconciliation, land rights issues, and efforts to preserve Indigenous languages and cultures.  

BC's economy has shifted over the past few decades. While natural resources like forestry and mining remain important, there's been growth in sectors like technology, real estate, tourism, film, and wine production. Education and lifelong learning are more important than ever. There's been a growing focus on health and wellness, including mental health, since 1989.  

BC has seen a trend toward urbanization, with more people living in cities like Vancouver and Victoria. This shift has brought issues like housing affordability, urban planning, and transportation into focus.  

Society has seen shifts in social attitudes towards issues like gender equality, LGBTQ+ rights, and drug use. BC has often been at the forefront of these changes in Canada, with progressive policies in areas like cannabis legalization and LGBTQ+ rights.  

BC, like the rest of the world, has become more interconnected and interdependent. This has implications for the economy, culture, and politics, and has brought global issues like climate change, refugee crises, and global health threats closer to home.  

These changes have affected all aspects of life in BC, from the economy and the environment to culture and social norms, and have significant implications for education and the concept of an educated citizen. I think it is time to reconceptualize and redefine the educated citizen. Here is my first draft attempt at what such a statement should address to better reflect society today.  

The education system in British Columbia seeks to achieve our collective social, economic, and environmental goals by developing well-educated individuals who can think clearly and critically, adapt to change, and understand the complexities of our interconnected world.

British Columbia needs educated citizens who appreciate the rich and diverse nature of Canadian society, understand the global implications of climate change, acknowledge the challenges of mass migration, are dedicated to promoting social cohesion, and are eager and able to actively participate in our democratic institutions.

Government is committed to ensuring that all youth obtain high-quality education that supports the development of a just and sustainable society. To this end, schools in the province are tasked with educating citizens who are:

Thoughtful and analytical, capable of learning from a broad knowledge base, thinking critically, and communicating effectively on a range of complex topics including environment, culture, and society;

Creative, innovative, and culturally aware, appreciating the value of arts and culture in enriching the social fabric;

Capable of making independent decisions, informed by a global perspective, and responsive to the challenges of mass migration and social cohesion;

Equipped with knowledge that contributes constructively to society, including an understanding of environmental sustainability, and the impact of climate change;

Productive, who gain satisfaction through achievement, strive for physical well-being, and acknowledge the importance of mental health;

Cooperative, principled, and respectful of differences, promoting social cohesion and working towards an equitable society;

Fully aware of their democratic rights and prepared to exercise the responsibilities of an individual within the family, the community, Canada, and the world.

Aware of the Canada’s colonial past and its legacy and committed to truth and reconciliation with Indigenous peoples. 

Technologically proficient and media-literate, deriving satisfaction from effectively utilizing digital tools for personal and societal growth, recognizing the ethical considerations in a digital landscape, and appreciating the power and influence of media.

Aware and respectful of the underpinnings of Canadian democracy, including the Charter of Rights, representative democracy, and the rule of law.

This revised statement with its emphasis on climate change, mass migration, social cohesion, truth and reconciliation, democratic citizenship, and arts and culture better reflects a more comprehensive understanding of the challenges that will be faced by high school graduates. What do you think?

Making sense of British Columbia’s proficiency scales

Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]

Traditional letter grading systems have been ingrained in our thinking about education. But when subjected to closer examination, their limitations become glaringly apparent. For example, an A in Social Studies might give an impression of overall mastery, but it may mask specific areas of struggle, like the interpretation of primary sources. The focus on letter grades has led us to assign tremendous value to a system that falls short in providing comprehensive insights about students’ academic performance or about the curriculum they are trying to master. 

Letter grading systems are appealing. Their simplicity, familiarity, and directness have made the “A” a universally accepted symbol of achievement. There's a certain comfort in being able to categorize performance into neat compartments from A to F. However, the core of performance assessment lies in the interpretation of the letter grades.  

A significant portion of our society tends to view these grades as an indicator of a student's standing relative to their peers. We've invested so much meaning into the symbol of an A, for instance, that it's taken as a benchmark for excellence, even outside of academia; corporations strive for AAA bond ratings and consumers purchase Grade A beef. Yet, what these grades fail to communicate is the extent of a student's learning and areas that require further improvement.  

The transition to proficiency scales has been met with skepticism, often born from the fear that the scales might dilute academic competitiveness and the standards we are accustomed to. Yet, these scales present a nuanced picture of a student's abilities, growth, and areas for improvement. By breaking down performance into categories of 'emerging,' 'developing,' 'proficient,' and 'extending,' teachers can communicate more information about student progress.  

In this system, 'emerging' isn't synonymous with failure but signifies the early stages of understanding. 'Developing' means the student is applying their learning more consistently. The aim is for every student is to be 'proficient,' where they can reliably demonstrate their learned skills. 'Extending' students go beyond, showing a deeper understanding than is typically expected.  

This framework differentiates between a student who is "just starting to demonstrate learning" and one who is "showing an initial understanding". These phrases might seem similar, but they capture crucial differences in a learner's progress. Proficiency scales that are properly aligned with well-defined competencies enable parents, educators, and students to identify specific areas requiring further focus, a feature traditional letter grades do not offer.  

Proficiency scales are a departure from the punitive notions of 'passing' or 'failing,' signaling that learning is a continuum. The purpose of the proficiency scale is to facilitate progression, to help students navigate from 'emerging' to 'developing,' and eventually to 'proficient' or 'extending.'  

Skepticism and resistance are inevitable results of systemic changes. But I would counsel those who are skeptical to approach proficiency scales with an open mind. It's crucial to look beyond the symbol of a grade and focus more on the depth of learning and areas for growth. Proficiency scales promise a broader, more comprehensive understanding of a student's educational progress that letter grades cannot convey.

 

Teacher Shortages

Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]

Students in Quebec – like the rest of Canada - will return for a new school term soon, but a poll by the Fédération québécoise des directions d’établissement d’enseignement (FQDE) reveals that there are still 5,000 vacant full, part time, and specialist teacher positions in Quebec, not including vacancies in Montreal schools.

Quebec Education Minister Bernard Drainville hoped to have at least one adult per class for the upcoming school year, but there is no assurance that those adults will have bachelor's degrees, much less formal teacher preparation. The president of the Quebec Provincial Association of Teachers believes that shortages have occurred because teaching is less appealing than it once was because of increased workloads, lack of support for addressing special needs, and non-competitive remuneration.

The factors enumerated by the president of the Quebec Provincial Association of Teachers may account for teacher shortages, but these may be manifestations of more fundamental changes. Over the course of the last 100 years, teaching has evolved from a vocation to a recognized profession because of changes in both the practice of teaching and the expectations we have for teachers.

In the past, people often referred to teaching as a "calling" that reflected strong intrinsic motivation and a sense of societal duty. Today, teaching is professional work that requires specialized knowledge, rigorous training, standards of practice, and accountability.

At one time, a modest level of formal education qualified someone as a teacher. However, as expectations evolved, attaining a four- or five-year university degree became standard. Today, many educators pursue advanced degrees. This shift was prompted by the establishment of standards to ensure professional competence and consistency in the preparation of teachers.

The complexity of teaching increased significantly. In addition to their responsibilities for instruction, teachers are now counselors, mentors, mediators, and specialists who address diverse student needs. This change correlates with the emergence of specialized teaching fields such as special education or English as a Second Language instruction, each of which demands additional preparation. The emphasis on inclusive education – a positive change - has made teaching more complex. Teachers today are expected to be able to teach a broader spectrum of students than attended school prior to the Second World War.

Few people today refer to teaching as a calling but as a demanding profession. This sentiment has been reinforced by teacher associations and unions that advocate for teachers' rights and emphasize the complex work teachers perform, the ethical and legal frameworks that affect the work that teachers do, and their professional responsibilities toward students, parents, and the broader community.

Ensuring that there is at least one adult per class of students may satisfy the custodial requirements associated with schooling, but it does not fulfill the expectations that students, parents or the broader community hold about the meaning and purpose of education.

Schools will soon welcome the return of students. They, their parents, and the broader community should express gratitude to the professionals who help fulfill the purpose of education.

Are we still failing our kids?

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]

 After completing my term as British Columbia’s Deputy Minister of Education in 2001, I reflected upon what at that time was 30 years of experience in Canadian education. Those reflections were published in Failing Our Kids: How we are ruining our public schools, a lament about the state of education at the time. Twenty years later, I contend that we have made scant progress because we hold misconceptions about the purpose/mission of public schools.  

Although Canada’s publicly funded elementary and secondary schools are among the best in the world, there are many students under-served and unserved by those schools. These students are ones who society has marginalized, including Indigenous and Black students, students with special needs, and students who are refugees or who come from families that sought refuge in Canada.  

There have been improvements for such students, but those improvements have been far from impressive. The small improvements and the rate of change has persuaded me that there are systemic factors that impede the progress of students in these categories, including the racism of low expectations and resistance to assuming responsibility for the success of all students.  

Confusion about the purpose of education is at the heart of the problem. Schooling is perceived as a private, individual benefit rather than a public good. Consider these two mission/purpose statements from school boards:

Each student, in keeping with their individual abilities and gifts, will complete high school with a foundation of learning necessary to thrive in life, work and continued learning.

The [school district] provides a learning environment that fosters the growth of each student’s potential and provides equitable opportunity to develop the knowledge, skills, and values necessary for meaningful participation in a global and diverse society.

The statements focus on the individual student and contain what, in a contract, would be an escape clause. “Individual abilities and gifts” and “each student’s potential” are weasel words that limit the responsibility of the school districts. Now, I doubt very much that the boards that adopted these statements said, “How can we limit our responsibility?” My point is that, from the outset, the statements see limitations over which the schools believe they have little control. Consider these alternatives:

Students will complete high school with a foundation of learning necessary to thrive in life, work and continued learning regardless of the individual abilities, gifts, and limitations they had when they entered the school system,

The [school district] will develop students’ knowledge, skills, and values necessary for meaningful participation in a global and diverse society regardless of the potential or limitations they possessed at the point of entry to the school system.

My point is that our conception of schooling is flawed and pessimistic from the beginning by, among other things, its focus on the individual rather than the society. The conception of schooling as primarily focused on the individual puts school and program choice ahead of social equity as priorities. Prioritizing choice over equity makes it difficult, if not impossible, to create a common educational and social experience.

Schooling results in positive outcomes for most students much as the health care system generates positive outcomes for most Canadians. The problem is that the outcomes are determined more by their socio-economic and marginalized circumstances than by the benefits of the schooling they receive. The measure of a school system is the degree to which it helps those whose circumstances pose barriers to their success to succeed.   

The fragmented experiences of individual learners do little to counter the forces that divide us, putting the lie to developing “the knowledge, skills, and values necessary for meaningful participation in a global and diverse society.”

 Our system of schooling needs to be re-conceptualized using as its starting point a vision of the society we want.

This will be my last blog for this school year, but I invite you to think about the society you want and how schooling can help to achieve that vision. If your time permits, please share your thoughts with me at oneducationcanada@gmail.com.

Advocacy – Part 3

Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]

 

In last week’s blog, I wrote that an effective advocacy campaign is not simply determining the “ask.” It is designing a plan to overcome the formidable challenges that the board will face in advancing its case. To overcome these challenges, school boards can take several concrete steps.

Focus on board priorities that align with government’s priorities: School boards should identify their top advocacy priority and focus their efforts on the one that aligns with the goals and priorities of government.

Issues are not equally important. What issues merit the effort that advocacy requires? What is the probability that one’s advocacy will be successful? What are the risks and consequences if it is not?

Calculate costs and benefits: Boards that wish to advocate should ask themselves what use they might make of the political capital the board must draw upon in advancing its case? Is the expenditure of that capital justified by the outcome being sought?

Collaborate with other stakeholders: School boards should collaborate with other education stakeholders, including parents, teachers, and education organizations, to build a broader coalition in support of their advocacy efforts. Government may be more disposed if it perceives a larger constituency than a single board. Effective advocacy is more likely if it is conducted though organizations such as those that represent a collection of boards or trustees to ensure that the “ask” is for the system and will provide system-wide benefits.

Build relationships: Developing strong relationships with elected officials and government agencies can help school boards advocate more effectively. Meet with officials, attend events, and plan how the board will reach its public and the groups that can support its efforts.

Building relationships with elected officials and government agencies should be done carefully through the provincial trustees’ association to avoid conflict between the superintendent, who works closely with Ministry officials, and trustees whose relationships are typically with Ministers

Developing and maintaining back channels is important. Governments do not like surprises. Having a back channel helps keep government informed and can provide useful intelligence about how requests might be framed.  Influence is often more powerful when exercised out of sight of the public and media. This gives government room to understand, negotiate, and counter instead of reflexively going on the defensive against what it perceives as criticism.

Communicate effectively: Identify key stakeholders and allies. Express clearly what the board hopes to achieve and how what the board hopes to achieve aligns with the values of the allies and stakeholders.

Be respectful: It is important to distinguish people from issues or positions – especially when there are differences in values or opinions. It is probably obvious but demonizing the person whom you hope to influence does not work. 

Be persistent: Advocacy is a long-term process. A short-term orientation is the enemy of effective advocacy. School boards typically lack persistence if they meet with opposition or indifference. Effort must be ongoing and tactical. School boards must anticipate the obstacles they are likely to face and be willing to change their plans when they meet with opposition.

Although advocacy efforts are often unsuccessful and sometime worse, they can succeed with careful planning and execution. But planning and execution rarely receive the attention the successful advocacy requires.

Advocacy – Part 2

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]

 

In last week’s blog, I wrote that advocacy with provincial governments is typically handled poorly by most school boards in part because school boards fail to appreciate that they are in an asymmetrical relationship to provincial governments. A second reason that efforts at advocacy are often unsuccessful is that those efforts are often poorly planned. To succeed, advocacy must be part of a carefully conceived and executed plan.

Careful consideration must be given to the desired outcome. Asking whether it is possible to achieve the outcome is an important and often unasked question. Does the body one is trying to persuade possess the authority and capacity to produce the outcome? Asking a body for something that it lacks the authority to produce cannot succeed. For example, a body that is a party to a contract cannot provide or produce an outcome that will require it to change the contract to which it is committed without the agreement of the other parties to the contract. Asking government for additional funding after it has passed its budget is unlikely to succeed because it requires altering a decision to which the government has committed itself. 

Asking for something of which other school boards also believe they are deserving puts the government in an awkward position. It cannot give to one board something that all or most boards believe they need. And asking a government to do something that is contrary to their political commitments is also unrealistic.

The challenges that school boards face in advocating with senior governments are formidable and numerous. All school boards have limited resources (time, money, and personnel) they can dedicate to advocacy efforts. Resources are even more limited in smaller boards.  Governments have many competing priorities. Health care, housing affordability, poverty reduction, homelessness, and climate change are more likely to be ahead of education on government’s agenda.

Education – like most public issues – occurs in a complex policy landscape that most school boards do not consider when they decide to advocate for their interests. How does the issue about which the school board wishes to advocate align with government’s beliefs and commitments? Can addressing the issue that the school board wishes to have addressed help government achieve its priorities and commitments? Supply the evidence.

Advocacy efforts are inherently political. They are about whose values will be approved and supported, and whose will not. It is important to understand the interests and agendas at play. The campaign is not simply the “ask.” The campaign must include consideration of how, to whom, and by whom the request will be made. I’ll address these issues in my next blog.

Advocacy – Part 1

Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]

The 2022-2026 Good Governance Guide, produced by the not-for-profit Ontario Education Services Corporation, is a practical, if lengthy, guide to the work of governing and managing Ontario’s four publicly funded education systems: English Public, English Catholic, French Public and French Catholic.

The guide speaks to the many responsibilities of boards of education. Although focused on Ontario, there is much of value for publicly funded education systems across Canada. However, there is one topic that I wish the Guide had addressed more thoroughly: advocacy. Advocacy is something too often misunderstood and poorly executed by school boards – especially advocacy with senior levels of government.

Advocacy with provincial governments is typically handled poorly by most school boards. Many – I am tempted to say most – advocacy efforts that school boards make with provincial governments are unsuccessful or worse because the school boards fail to appreciate that they are in an asymmetrical relationship to provincial governments. Provincial governments have the power to create school boards, make legislation or regulation affecting school boards, and fund school boards.

Although it should be obvious, it is worth pointing out that it is imprudent and unlikely to be successful for school boards to threaten provincial governments. Some school boards believe that they can or are put in a position where they feel it is necessary for them to “take on the government” to satisfy some constituency. Boards that have tried to threaten provincial governments are simply ignored or sometimes dissolved.

School boards that have been dismissed because they threatened provincial governments believing that “standing up” to the government was making an important point for the citizens/students fail to consider two things. First, most citizens do not know what school boards do (or should do and often do not) or care about school boards. Very few citizens can name the trustees on the school boards that serve them. Second, “standing up to government” is a pyrrhic victory because, having been removed from office, the board no longer exercises its powers.

School board trustees are typically elected by the smallest voter turnouts of any elected officials.  In the 1950s and 1960s public education ranked among the highest priorities of the electorate because of the post-war baby boom. Most families had children in schools and the population could be mobilized to support increases in school funding. Social conditions are different today. Today, parents with school aged children are a relatively small percentage of the electorate; many of the most affluent and influential citizens enroll their children in private schools.

If threatening senior government doesn’t work, what does? Clear, logical, and well evidenced arguments have the greatest potential, but constructing the argument is only part of an effective advocacy campaign. Effective advocacy depends upon a series of coordinated actions designed to achieve the intended outcome. In next week’s blog, I explore the components of such campaigns.

Race and anti-racism, socialization, indoctrination, and education

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]

 I recently talked with racialized high school students about how schools should respond to racism, an issue that affects them deeply, personally, and frequently. To a person, each student said educate students about racism and the corrosive and hurtful consequences of racism for those immediately involved and for the community. When I inquired about punishment, they acknowledged that punishment might come into play if the individual repeatedly perpetrated acts motivated by racial animus, but they saw education as the primary response.  

The students’ appreciation for the power of education prompted me to wonder if the educations system was sufficiently sophisticated to distinguish among three easily confused processes - socialization, indoctrination, and education. All three processes can affect how people acquire knowledge, beliefs, and values, but only socialization and education have a legitimate place in schools.  

It is through the process of socialization that we learn the norms, values, and customs of our society. We acquire an understanding of society’s expectations by observing the behaviour of those around us and making inferences about how we should behave to function within that society. Socialization begins in childhood and continues throughout an individual's life. Children learn how to behave and follow social norms by observing and imitating the behavior of their parents, peers, and other members of their community. Socialization is generally a gradual process that occurs naturally.  

Indoctrination is the process of inculcating beliefs or ideologies without questioning or critically examining them, often with the intention of shaping the person’s attitudes, values, and behaviors according to a particular political or social agenda. Indoctrination occurs among adherents of religious organizations, political parties, and during military training.  Indoctrination is often intentional and may involve coercion or manipulation by someone in a position of authority who seeks to promote specific beliefs or values.  

Education is an intentional process of equipping people with the knowledge they need to function in specific contexts. It differs from indoctrination because when done appropriately, education encourages a critical examination of the knowledge one is being asked to acquire.  

The issues of race and racism provide an excellent example of how socialization, indoctrination, and education can impact individuals' beliefs and attitudes.  

Socialization, the process by which one learns the norms, values, and customs of their culture or society, can include learning about racial and ethnic identities, and the beliefs and attitudes associated with those identities. Children often learn about race through their interactions with their parents, peers, and other members of their community. Through this informal process, they may learn to assign individuals to groups based on skin colour and to attribute certain characteristics and values to those groups.  

Indoctrination is the conscious promotion of a specific set of beliefs or values. When racist ideologies are actively promoted and people are encouraged to accept these beliefs without questioning or critically examining them, they are being indoctrinated. A conscious effort to inculcate an unquestioning and uncritical anti-racist perspective is indoctrination even though the intention may be to promote a society in which bias, prejudice, and hatred have no place.  

Education encourages critical thinking and provides individuals with the tools to evaluate and analyze what they are being asked to acquire from multiple perspectives. That includes thinking critically about the norms to which they have been socialized.  

Effective education on race and racism provides individuals with an understanding of the history and cultural context of race relations, as well as the scientific evidence that supports the idea of human genetic diversity. Education should encourage individuals to critically evaluate what they are being asked to learn in order to develop an understanding of the complexities of the issue.  

Socialization, indoctrination, and education all affect an individuals' beliefs and attitudes related to race and racism. While socialization involves the natural process of learning about racial and ethnic identities, indoctrination involves promoting a specific set of beliefs without encouraging critical thinking. Education, on the other hand, provides individuals with the knowledge they need to understand race and racism and encourages them to think critically and analytically about race and racism.  

The racialized students with whom I discussed responses to racism placed great trust in schools to educate students about the perniciousness and impact of racism. They placed little or no value on coercion or punishment as a response to racism, recognizing that coercion and punishment might have a fleeting impact on behaviour, but would not equip students to understand the reasons why racism is corrosive and harmful.

Help students to ask chatbots good questions

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]

The development of large language models like ChatGPT and their use in education and other fields are occurring so rapidly that it is difficult to keep track. Teachers play an important role in showing students how to use them well.

Teaching students to formulate prompts to obtain useful and accurate responses will serve the students well in using large language models or making inquiries of other sources. My advice to students would be to:

• use simple language that is phrased clearly to avoid ambiguities or irrelevances. 
• include relevant background information to contextualize the question.
• be specific, narrow the question or prompt.
• phrase the prompt as a direct question.
• break complex topics into smaller, manageable parts.
• determine the desired format or structure of the response.
• limit the length of the response.
• avoid biasing the response.
• use examples or scenarios to focus the response.

I’d want them to know that prompts or questions can be designed to gather specific types of information or insights:

Descriptive questions seek detailed information or descriptions of situations, events, or concepts. Example: "Describe the main features and functions of a smartphone?"

Classification questions seek to categorize, sort, or classify things based on their attributes, properties, or relationships. Example: "What are the main categories of programming languages, and what are their distinguishing characteristics?"

Inferential questions require drawing conclusions, making inferences, or deducing information based on available data or premises. Example: "Given increasing global temperature trends, what can we infer about the potential impacts of climate change on sea levels?"

Comparative questions focus on comparing different entities, situations, or ideas to highlight similarities and differences. Example: "What are the similarities and differences between solar and wind energy in terms of efficiency, cost, and environmental impact?"

Evaluative questions seek opinions, judgments, or assessments about a subject, often involving criteria or standards. Example: "In your opinion, what are the most desirable attributes of a student body president, and why?"  

Hypothetical questions explore potential scenarios, situations, or outcomes to encourage creative thinking and problem-solving. Example: "If you could develop a new technology to address a major global issue, what would it be, and how would it work?"

Causal questions seek to identify causes, effects, or relationships between different factors or events. Example: "What are the primary causes of deforestation, and how does it impact biodiversity?"

Problem-solving questions seek solutions, strategies, or advice for addressing specific issues or challenges. Example: "Are there steps that this school could take to reduce online bullying?"

Reflective questions encourage introspection, self-awareness, and personal growth by examining one's thoughts, feelings, or experiences. Example: "What have you learned from a past failure, and how has it influenced your approach to similar situations in the future?"

By teaching students how to form good prompts, understand the different purposes of questions, and craft well-formed prompts or queries, teachers can help students sharpen their inquiry skills and use sources such as large language models like ChatGPT productively and meaningfully.

All about the money

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

Springtime brings sunshine, flowers, and complaints about the allocation models used to disburse money to school boards. The common and inevitable complaint is that there is never enough money to do everything that a school board wants to do for its students. But once provincial and territorial governments have allocated the funds, there will be no additional funds forthcoming (at least until the next budget cycle).  

Knowing that, some will complain that the formulas used to calculate the amounts apportioned to various functions need adjusting. But, when the total allocation is static, a change to a formula to the benefit of some boards will in this zero-sum case disadvantage other boards. Inevitably someone will call for a review of the current funding model.  

The latitude for revision of the models used to allocate funds to school boards is limited to four basic methods. Per-pupil funding is perhaps the most common method of allocating funds to school boards. In this model, each school board receives a set amount of funding for each student enrolled in the district. Needs-based funding allocates funds based on the needs of their students. Foundation funding allocates a set amount to cover the basic costs of education, including such things as salaries for teachers and administrators, textbooks, and supplies. Categorical grants allocate funding for specific programs or initiatives such as language and cultural programming.  

The combination of funding methods provides a balance of stable base funding and focused support for specific needs and priorities, allowing for adjustments to reflect the differences in student populations among school districts. The methods determine the allocation of funding to districts, but, barring restrictions imposed by government, school boards can spend the funds as they choose. The principal factor limiting board discretion is the fact that in public education most of the costs are labour related, leaving comparatively little room for discretionary funding.   

The number of needs-based and categorical funding categories tends to increase over time, engendering increasingly complex formulas and reporting requirements. There comes a point at which it is prudent to review the funding allocation system to see if it can be simplified. Simplification can reduce administrative burden and increase understanding, but it won’t increase funding. So, when someone calls for a review of the funding allocation model currently in use, it is naïve to expect that it will result in increased funding.  

To justify a funding increase, it is necessary to demonstrate that existing resources are not sufficient to meet real costs or to demonstrate how improvements in student achievement and well-being can be achieved by providing additional funding. Demonstrating that costs have increased relative to revenues is relatively easy to do. Demonstrating that additional funding will materially improve student achievement and well-being is more challenging because school boards are not accustomed to evaluating program effectiveness. Program evaluations rarely emanate from the desire of a school board to know what is working and what is not.

Why teachers resist planned educational changes

Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

In earlier blogs I talked about the risks that threaten planned educational changes and how they might be anticipated and mitigated. In this blog I want to talk about teachers and educational change.  

Teachers seem to oscillate between a barnacle-like attachment to some educational changes and an impenetrable, clam-like resistance. I think there are many reasons for this tendency to fluctuate.  

The first reason is that teaching is difficult work. There are many things to consider, including curricular expectations, the range of student abilities, the allocation of scarce instructional time, etc. The complexity of teaching makes most teachers risk averse. Once they have developed confidence in their ability to manage and have experienced success, they are reluctant to change. They are disinclined to adopt new pedagogy or curriculum if they think doing so would have an adverse impact on students or because they are worried that they may not be able to execute them well.  

There is a smaller group of teachers who are risk takers. This group appears to have developed sufficient mastery and acquired sufficient self-confidence that they are eager to adopt new practices. Eager to explore new practices, these teachers are easy to recruit to pilot-tests. They are what, today, are called influencers. If they think the new practice or resource is worthwhile, they will advocate on its behalf.  

The enthusiasm of teachers involved in or inspired by change is infectious. Once imbued with the spirit of change, they can inspire even mildly resistant teachers to adopt the practice. A teacher once described such an influencer to me in terms that have always stayed with me. “You know,” she said, “every teacher wants to touch her garment. If she likes something, it gives everyone else confidence.” The influencers are often the teachers who, if a pilot is successful, become the evangelists and coaches for the broader implementation.  

There is some danger in relying on influencers whose garments others want to touch. They don’t inspire confidence in everyone. There are resistant teachers who will say, “Maybe she can do it, but I’m not her.”  

Unsuccessful implementation of planned changes produces cynicism that undermines future change efforts. Teachers have a long memory for implementation failures that bolster their resistance to future changes. Teachers whose experience has made them cynical will wait out subsequent changes because their confidence in the system has been diminished by failures. Introducing system-wide changes takes a long time. Adopting new practices or curricula is hard. Some teachers will “opt out” of the change, confident that they will be retired before they will be “required” to change.  

Change fatigue is a factor contributing to resistance to change. New governments often come to office with plans to fix some educational problem. They are often branded, or as one teacher put it, “things with names.” When too many “things with names” are introduced in too short a period, often without sufficient support for their adoption, teachers become clam-like, shutting their doors to whatever the change may be. “This, too, will pass,” they say.  

Changes imposed from above are typically resisted. Even when perceived to have value for students, the adoption of the changes can take a very long time even when provision is made for building capacity and support – which they often are not. Making educational change is like repairing a car while you are driving. You cannot shut down the education system to ‘retool’ as you can with a factory.  

Changes that teachers perceive as negatively affecting their relationships with students will also be resisted. Relationships with student are almost synonymous with success in teaching. Few teachers are willing to make a change they perceive as threatening established relationships.  

Teacher resistance to change can be overcome with careful planning. Although it is tempting to rely on influencers to encourage change. I think it preferable to engage what a well-known BC teacher used to call “OCTs” – ordinary classroom teachers. Reluctant or resistant classroom teachers are more likely to entertain a change if it is one that OCT’s can implement.   

Politicians who avoid fostering change just for the sake of being seen to be doing something help to reduce the cynicism engendered by “things with names.”  

Well planned pilots, carried out by OCTs, with strong documentation of the factors contributing to success will go a long way to overcoming resistance to change. Involving teachers centrally in the change planning process will likely improve implementation and contribute to the adoption of successful changes.  

Another factor that will help overcome resistance to change is declaring that teachers have the “freedom to fail.” Teacher willingness to try something new is likely to increase if they know that there is a possibility that things won’t work as planned and that they will be supported for having tried something new. The “freedom to fail” coupled with monitoring and feedback will increase teacher receptivity to change and help them to make the adjustments that are necessary during any educational change.

Why most planned educational changes fail – part 2

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

In an earlier blog, I said that planned educational changes are not doomed to failure if risks are anticipated and mitigated. Among the risks I addressed in that blog were: failure to recognize and plan to overcome resistance to change, asking people to make changes that are a leap too far, managing changes when political regimes change, allowing seemingly urgent issues divert attention from the change agenda, lack of signal continuity, and poor implementation.  

I will try to address here the risks I did not address in the earlier blog: pilot-testing slight of hand, failing to calculate the challenges of implementing changes on a system-wide basis, lack of fidelity of implementation, and failure to monitor progress and evaluate.  

Let me explain what I mean when I say pilot-testing slight of hand. There is great value in small-scale implementation of changes for the purpose of seeing if they work. Showing the ‘proof of concept’ and learning from the small-scale pilot-tests can prevent the implementation of something that does not work as intended. I am not talking about such pilot-tests.  

When I say ‘slight of hand’ I mean conducting pilot-tests to be able to say that one is doing something when there is no real intention of implementing the changes even if they are successful. Though this occurs infrequently, there are instances in which pilot-testing is merely authorized to “look like we are doing something.”  

An example of pilot-testing sleight of hand occurs when politicians are unable or unwilling to stand up to a powerful advocacy group. “Let’s give them a pilot test” is the resort of a weak politician to a powerful advocacy group’s request. A variation on that cynical theme is “Let’s give them money for a pilot.” It occurs infrequently, but it does occur.  

Genuine pilot tests can be very useful, especially if attention is paid to what it will cost to implement the piloted change on a system-wide basis. You’d be surprised how often this is overlooked. It is obvious to me that the problem can be avoided if someone asks, “what will it cost to implement this change on a system-wide basis, if the pilot is successful?” If it is not fiscally manageable, there is no point in undertaking the pilot.  

In addition to costs, real pilot tests can provide very useful information about the challenges of implementing a planned change. Knowing the challenges is only useful if one plans how the challenges can be avoided when the pilot is brought to scale. Failure to recognize the challenges, and failure to mitigate them, typically leads to the failure of planned change because of implementation.  

Educational change is like baking. Change requires specific ingredients that are combined in a specific order. If you leave out an ingredient, the outcome will not be what you intended. Combine the ingredients in the wrong order and you might as well not put it in the oven. It won’t turn out as you expected. Most change is like that. You must use the correct ingredients and proper procedure. When that doesn’t happen, we refer to that as lack of implementation fidelity.  

If you aren’t a baker, think of it as planning a route to a destination. If you don’t take the right route, you won’t get where you want to go.  

Sticking with the travel metaphor, one of the failures of planned change is not monitoring your progress along the route planned. Recognizing when you are headed in the wrong direction is essential. Knowing the progress markers is important too. “We should be passing point X about now.” Using GPS for route planning helps to avoid drastic mistakes, but dependence on the GPS sometimes leads to dead-ends.  

A relative of failure to monitor progress is the failure to evaluate results. Even faithfully implemented planned changes that have been carefully pilot-tested must be carefully evaluated. And not just once!  

Avoiding the risks associated with educational changes can be achieved by anticipating them and making plans to manage them. It is unfortunate that doesn’t happen more often. If it did, planned educational changes might be more successful. 

I'm taking a Spring Break. I will resume this blog the week of March 27th with the third part in this series about the failure of planned educational changes. 

Why most planned educational changes fail – part 1

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]  

In previous blogs I have written how artificial intelligence, an external event, will (has already changed) education. That prompted me to reflect upon the failure of planned educational changes during my more than 50 years in education. There are many reasons why planned educational changes fail that I will address in this blog and the two that follow.  

In a blog titled “You can't change what you don't understand” I argued that a distressingly common and costly tendency in education is to jump to a solution without knowing exactly where the problem lies. But even in those rare instances where problems have been carefully analyzed and planned changes implemented, there is often little change.  

Systems try to maintain a steady state for their own survival. For true change to occur, that condition must be overcome (disrupted), a new state established and maintained. Most planned changes in education are not maintained for enough time to establish a new set of conditions.  

System-level planned changes seem doomed to fail because of risks that can be anticipated and mitigated but rarely are. One of the risks is the failure to recognized that education systems are among the most resistant to change. Education systems are the stabilizing force in a society subjected to increasingly powerful centrifugal forces. As agencies of cultural transmission education systems help to anchor societies to their core values, beliefs, traditions, norms, and practices.  

One of the many factors that can interfere with the maintenance of the planned changes is the election cycle. Provincial and school board elections that result in new education ministers and school boards (system governors) can disrupt planned changes. Skilled administrators can mitigate the potential damage that regime changes might bring by linking the planned changes to the agenda of the incoming governors, showing how the changes underway can help the governors meet their commitments.  

System governors and administrators allow seemingly urgent issues to distract from important, planned changes. A return to steady state is almost certain when system leaders fail to maintain ‘signal continuity’ - a clear, consistent, and constant message about what the changes are intended to accomplish. A return to steady state is almost inevitable when new policies, programs, and practices are introduced without regard to their connection to the changes underway.  

Another of the risks that portend failure if not mitigated is poor implementation. In human systems, new capacities must be developed and nurtured if the planned change is to occur. Planned changes in education typically require changes in practice, behavioural changes. For these to occur, people must learn the new practice, have time to apply it, and be coached. Most planned changes falter because insufficient provision has been made for learning the new behaviour and receiving feedback and support until the changes become internalized.  

In education there are several obstacles to learning new behaviours. Many planned educational changes ask teachers to make too great a change in their behaviour. Rather than conceive and plan for incremental modification in behaviour, many planned educational changes ask teachers to make a leap too far, engendering a fear of failure that keeps them rooted in whatever current practice they believe is satisfactory.  

Even when the behaviour changes are small, incremental adjustments, teachers rarely teach in the company of their peers who can provide support and advice. But successful learning depends upon clear and supportive feedback as all teachers know.  

The risks outlined above do not exhaust the risks to planned educational changes that typically lead to their failure. In a blog or blogs to come, I will address the risks of lack of fidelity of implementation, failure to monitor progress and evaluate, pilot-testing, and the costs of bringing changes to scale.  

Planned educational changes are not doomed to failure. The risks to change are formidable, but I believe they are manageable if anticipated and mitigated.