I am sad to hear Graeme that you find a lack of teacher comradery and support.  If I had to deal with cranky kids, unreasonable parents and stupid tests all week i would love to be able to sit over coffee and rant.

Maybe it's that everyone rants but no one gets anywhere and so they give up??

i believe that you are correct, graeme... my belief is that the teachers are teaching to the tests, not to the strengths or weaknesses of the kids.  thankfully, the teacher my kids had in grade 3 (a testing year in ontario) was AMAZING.  she was able to teach the kids all they needed to know for the test, AND a lot of other stuff that the kids loved, so my kids always enjoyed learning.  i will never forget the christmas pageant she put together every year... it was great. 

as far as social contact between teachers goes, i think that it has to do with just basic human social skills... i've worked with quite a few schools, and i see the same phenomenon there that i see when i worked as a nurse and as a telephone operator.  as a woman, it saddens me to say this, but its true... when a team has an overwhelming majority of women in it, the dynamic is mistrustful and backstabbing.  however, when you throw in a few men, it softens that dynamic considerably.  also, when you throw in a leader who knows a thing or two about dealing with teams, that also goes a long way.

from my experience, the staff with a great leader and a good mix of men and women makes for a very warm and friendly group of teachers.  when the leadership is crappy, coupled with a majority of women on staff, the atmosphere tightens up to the point where it becomes uncomfortable to work or even be in the building.

I've taught high school for 12 years, Graeme, and this is the way I see it:

1) I believe you're correct that many administrators and school boards are obsessed with statistics, and this push comes from the government and the ranking of schools. At my school, there are graphs posted in the staff room every month. Graphs of statistics of how students are doing. How many failures, how many performing at level 4 (80-100%), how many performing at level 3 (70-79%), etc. At staff meetings, we get a lot of statistical information thrown at us: "You teachers should be getting your level 2's up to level 3's, and you should strive for a 10% increase in the number of level 4's in your classes." I'm afraid that I still see my students as Patty, Nigel, and Lisa. They're not level 3's and level 4's to me. They are real teens with names and personalities, they are not points on a stats graph to me.

2) You said education is not a business. Unfortunately, many people see it that way. Education must eat up 23% of the provincial budget, and it generates no income of its own. Taxpayers want some kind of return on their investment. Something tangible that they can read, like stats graphs. So along come standardized tests and rankings, which are easy to put in stats graphs. I believe that we educators are helping to mold future adults: we teach academics, character, responsibilty, etc. We try to make independent thinkers who are responsible members of their community.That continues on a continuum from junior kindergarten to grade 12. And independent thinking over 12 years is not a graphable statistic. So good education doesn't look like good business.

3) As teachers, our workloads increase regularly. One reason why staffrooms are deserted is because many teachers spend lunch marking assignments or filling out paperwork while wolfing down a sandwich. Especially if the teacher has young children at home. If we work through the lunch hour, then there will be less school work to do at home, and more time to spend with our children.

4) Sighs, I agree that backstabbing in the workplace happens, but I've seen it in both men and women teachers. A lot of younger adults grew up with a cell phone, a laptop, and a discman (now replaced with an I-pod.) In other words, they grew up "plugged in" to technology. They're not so interested in socializing. They spend the lunch hour chatting on their cell phones, or working on the computer and listening to music at the same time. And some of these adults are teachers. The art of conversation is becoming a lost art. I suspect, Graeme, that the deserted staffroom isn't just a school thing. I suspect that lunchrooms everywhere are quieter as younger adults spend their lunch hour 'plugged in" to their personal technologies.

it's a poisonous and destructive system.  Last night, I bumped into an elementary schhol principal, and decided to try out my theory on him. I expected a polite smile and a change of subject. What I got was a polite smile, all right. Then he said he agreed completely, and that was why he had just resigned.

I wonder how many teachers want to get out, how many are breaking down.

graeme

There's lots that want out. I'm lucky that I have experience working for me, so that I know lots of things to try. My classes are good classes, because I can make them that way most of the time.

But I still believe in what I'm doing. I still want to go into work every day to work with my students. I figure that's a good thing.

What worries me is the lack of interest kids have in their education. How can teachers enjoy what they're doing when their students don't care? Nobody likes to be boring, and nobody likes being bored - but that's what's happened in our schools today. Kids are bored and teachers are boring; this doesn't make for a very positive day-to-day experience and everyone's self-esteem is affected.

The education system went wrong when it created an office setting for children. Kids learn best while they play - they should be doing more fun stuff and less boring in-class reading and lectures. Unfortunately the way society is doesn't allow for the necessary resources and permission slips to let kids learn the way they should, but i think over time, if the proper discussions began taking place, our education system, our teachers and our students would eventually be having the daily experiences they should. 

Let's try something different. Instead of school bashing let's go with "What's right with our schools?"

The purpose of all this data is to help us reach every child. As an educator for 30 years, I am excited that we now have access to strategies to help us reach each child.

GO_3838 - I am sorry that only the stats are being presented in your staff meetings instead of the success of the children. For example - just yesterday an excited grade 1 teacher came to my ofice to say, "I finished the DRA testing and every student has moved up. Only two are not reading at grade level"  After some rejoicing (this was a group that has struggled all year) we talked about the two that are still struggling starting with the fact that for two little guys who did not know any letter sounds in September, they have made great gains. As educators, it is our responsibility now to find better ways to reach them.

 Ontario is entering EQAO week (grade 3 and 6 testing). In the beginning this was not well done and I hated it as much as everyone. Now we receive itemized reports that help us see where we need to focus to help our students. Last year at our school we found out that our students did well in basic grammar and sentence conventions but that as a group their writing lacked depth. As a result our staff has embarked on a "pathway" to help improve Critical Literacy. We are encouraging our students to read between the lines, to read beyond the words and to ask questions like "whose voice is missing"  when they read their history texts. 

We are encouraging them to write with a purpose. This year I have received many letters written to persuade me to change things at the school - the grade 3s want more recycling bins, the grade 8s want more freedom at recess ... and just saying I want is not enough - they are learning to think and communicate their thoughts.  

Last week, the grade 4s wrote a strongly worded announcement to persuade the other students to help clean up the playground.

I walked  into a grade 7 class the other day and I heard "math talk" from the group that from the door just seemed to be chatting.

The schools are not perfect but many great things are happening. Are stress levels high for teachers and principals? Yes -we are being pushed and pulled in many directions. The same grade 1 teacher I mentioned above was in tears at the beginning of the year when she saw how her group was struggling.  I come home many nights and count the years until retirement. BUT I go back to school and I see the grade 6s doing hands-on Science and talking and writing and learning. I watch the grade 3 group writing plays and acting them out. I read the responses from the grade 8s to a story on homelessness and I  see some depth of understanding. 

Thank you  for your suggestion we should talk about something else. Perhaps your might start a thread on it so that people who want to talk about it can talk about something else.

I am happy to hear of a couple of students who now read at at appropriate level - whatever that means. However, as a person who has been in education for rather more than thirty years, I have learned not to be crazy about some bureaucrats definition of appropriate level. And I would be far more interested in knowing how much students are learning to WANT to read - because that's where the real development is going to come in.

Interesting to hear your observation that teachers are being pushed an pulled in many directions. Do you have any figures on alienation in the schools? On the rate of absence and leaving the profession due to stress? Is this worth discussing as a factor - or is it just yukkie poo when we should be discussing happy things?

If we have all these exciting new techniqyes, then we must be producing graduates superior to those of a generation ago. Have you any information on that? Frankly, on my many visits to the schools I don't see much evidence of superior learning. Nor did I see sucy evidence in many years of university intake.

However, if the schools are not producing better graduates, let's look on the happy side. They are certainly producing better statistics.

graeme

I hope we can agree to disagree. I only wanted to point out that there are some things that are right.

It of course is your perogative to disagree with me.

God Bye Wonder Cafe

I have not disagreed that some things are right. Of course they are. There are also things that are wrong. I pointed out specifically what they are and why they are are wrong. That is the topic.

It's as if I were to begin a thread saying there are some dangerous road crossings town where several people have been killed. And your response is - let's talk about the safe crossings instead.

I have suggested two serious problems.

1. Standardized tests which are then publicly displayed to compare schools do not test teaching so much as they test income levels. Middle class schools, for example, have normally done better than that working class schools. That has nothing to do with the quality of teaching - but those tests are u sed as though it is quality of teaching.

2/. the pressure on teachers to teach to statistics is causing serious alienation in the schools, and high stress levels leading to burnout.

That is what the discussion about. It is, of course, quite legitimate to discuss something else. The normal way to do that is to start another thread.

graeme

I am wondering why I feel it necessary to answer when it is clear my comments have been dismissed.

I thought I was disagreeing with your premise that all testing is bad and is only used to collect meaningless statistics. I will agree that the provincial standardized tests need improvement . But I disagreed with your comment "The end result is that we produce wonderful statistics - but pretty desperate kids." I tried to say that the test results can help kids,  if the schools use the tests to refine  the way we teach. I used the grade 1 example to show exactly that.

And yes - I am  now seeing students who want to read and we are actively searching for more interesting reading material - the old basal readers are gone.

We are trying to make school less boring - a need that Footprints pointed out

The CD Howe institute is out there but personally I do not read the online comparisons that attempt to show how our school compares with others - I know that that is meaningless as it does not take into account our unique social factors. The publishing of these results is not done by the schools.  If everyone refused to read them then maybe they would disappear.

I agree that some teachers are alienated and stressed but headings like "What's gone wrong with our schools?" don't help.  Perhaps I did not read correctly but it almost seemed as if you were blaming principals who are "quite alienated from their teachers ... who rule by intimidation and cronyism ... with the behaviour patterns of the mid level opportunists one finds in business."  It may be that there are some principals like this (every profession has 'bad apples') - but yours was a fairly sweeping - and damning - statement. You cast a very wide net.

But, again I apologize. When  you asked if anyone had thoughts I assumed that disagreement was allowed. I now know that if I disagree I must start a new thread.

don't worry, sadiesoo... graeme is a prickly dude on the best of days.  mixing it up with graeme is pretty much standard on any thread in politics, too.  hopefully you'll stick around long enough to get used to it!!!

anyways, i have seen what graeme sees quite frequently in the school boards here in ottawa, but i have worked one-on-one with the teachers quite a bit, and i know that they all LOVE IT when a parent shows even a wee bit of interest in their childs education, and will continually rise to the challenge when a parent gets involved and puts together a plan of what they want their child to learn.

right now, its enough for me that my kids are FINALLY just reading a book for the sheer enjoyment of it... that has been a long time coming for my oldest, especially.  you know how she got there??  FACEBOOK.  yep, once i got her a facebook account, she learned to read and spell pretty quickly. 

sadiesoo - I objected to  you changing the topic. I don't care if  you disagree - that's fine. It was the suggestion we should talk about what is good with the schools.

Now - you suggest that if people did not look at the ratings, there would be no problem. Well, yes. But they do look at them. And there is a problem in many schools as a result. I have seen the behaviour of more than a few principals and teachers. I can see schools driven by a race to compare with others. It sounds good. But it's destructive. I have seen the damage.

It's even worse in unversities which are driven by standards set up by MacLean's magazine - standards that are both ignorant and destructive of any principal of education.

Once you establish univeral criteria, I'm not sure how you escape that sort of problem.

I also have trouble with the idea of aiming at universal standards in the first place. It seems to me the starting point in education is the child - the needs, the interests, the potential, the circumstances of the child.

Public education very early abandoned that focus on the child for a focus on producing a standard and measurable product - thus the straight rows (six of them), the bells marking standard times, the focus on the teacher... I am uneasy that standardized tests become simply an extension of that very old principle. Schools are in the business of producing thinking and doing people - many of them in quite different environments and q uite different lives to be lived. I'm not sure that is best achieved by turning out standard products with a reading level that somebody has defined as 10,1

Nor am I crazy about the assumption that the problems that do crop up are caused by the schools or are fixable by changing teaching methods. Children coming out of poverty have enormous problems that have nothing to do with the schools and on which schools can have only a limited effect. I live in a rural region in which reading skills are terrible, and intellectual interests weak. But that's not because of the schools, and putting pressure on the schools to fix the problem won't work.

Again. I certainly have no objection to anybody disagreeing. It was changing the subject that bothered me.

BTW, note sighsnootles solution to her daughter's reading problem. I had nothing to do with school. I became a heavy reader. Other kids in my class could not, even in grade seven, read the baloons in comic books. The difference was in our homes, not in the school.

graeme

look. A major reason I  write to wondercafe is that encountering other opinions is a very important way for me to understand how others see an issue - and helps me to understand my own concerns. So let me try to put this issue as i now see it as a result of reading responses.

1. Standardized tests are tests of where children stand in relation to criteria established by the examiners.

It is a test of the children. It is NOT a test of the quality of education that child has received. To do that, you would have to establish a very complex and probably impossible test of teaching in each classroom.

That is why the test commonly show weaker results in working class and rural schools, and higher results in middle class schools and in those dominated by some cultural groups.

Each test is the test of a child, not the test of a whole school or even of a whole class. If it has any validity, it is useful in determining the situation and possibly the needs of each child.

It is utterly worthless as a test of any school or of quality of teaching.

If you want to defend the tests, defend them on that basis. I'm not convinced even that is a great idea - but it's possible there is some value in the tests as tests of individual children.

But that is not how they are used.

2, Once the results are public posted by school as a comparison of schools, they are being used iimproperly and inaccurately.

3. Nonetheless, the public posting encourages schools (and it intended to) to compete against each other on the basis of these false comparisons. And it is not a good idea to build remedial programmes on a false and misleading use of tests.

4. This use of testing, and the public nature of it, make doing well in the schools seem to be the result of oustanding administration and teaching - and this can and will become a powerful factor for promotion.

5. In other words, promotion goes to people who play the system well, not necessarily to those who are good teachers and administrators.

6. Those who seek promotion by hopping on this bandwagon will commonly be administrators and younger teachers. With this common interest, you will see cronyism developing in the schools. You will also see administrators putting pressure on teachers to so something educationally unsound - to improve statistics that are not shaped only by the school but by external influences.

7. Within the school, t his will create severe alienation, suspicion, conspiracies, cheating - and very high levels of stress and illness.

Is testing a good idea? Maybe. If it used to test that which can be tested - what level the child has reached. When it goes way beyond that as a test of school quality and is made public, it becomes both incompetent and destructive.

If there is to be a discussion, it seems to me those are the points that have to be addressed -either pro or con.

graeme

Testing is a contentious issue.  

I have heard that there are those who use the results as you have described. I can only say that this has not been my experience - in my school or in my board.

I'm glad to hear it. In New Brunswick, they are published in the papers and publicly used to rate the quality of schools - rather like the Maclean's rating of universities.

There may be two reasons for that:

1. It enables the politicians to look as though they are doing something.

2. It pleases the right wing think tanks that the NB provincial parties are quite slavishly devoted to. For the think tanks, it is attractive because it promotes their wave a magic wand thinking that competition and the free play of the market will solve all problems.

This is also the province that just fired large numbers of its librarians and classroom interventionists on the grounds that ----for real-----this will encourage teachers to become more resourceful.

graeme

 I should add that my opening sentence in the post above was not at all scarcastic. I glad to hear your board doesn't do it. There is something to be said for testing - so long as it is used to correct those things it actually tests.

graeme

This comparison, based on standardized testing, happens all over the place. I'd be very surprised if it wasn't happening in every province and territory in the country. It is used to shame and blame those schools who score in the bottom range as opposed to finding out where children, teachers and administrators need help and giving that help where it's needed. We can thank organizations like the Fraser Institute for that.

I'm sorry to hear of the "survival of the fittest" mentality taking over. It's detrimental to our children and to those who are trying to educate them in the formal school setting.

It's a mentality that has taken over in a big way. The success of the MacLean's survey proves that. It is so important that is is probably the single greatest factor shaping university development today.

But it is utterly worthless and incompetent. For operners, there is no such thing as a best university. Fundamentally, all operate on much the same principles, with basic programmes that are identical, and with professors who all have the same training in education (none at all).

Much of the rest is up to individual needs and preferences, and will vary from school to school. If you like a religious atmosphere and don't want to see a gay teacher, go to Atlantic Baptist in Moncton. If you prefer a big city with lots of social variety, go to a big city school. If you like vapid snobbery, McGill is the place.

But the influence of those silly ratings is so great, the universities trip over themselves to waste money and time on all the half wit MacLean's definitions of what makes a good university.

graeme

I agree with the main point of graeme's concerns, but I'm not sure we should be so dismissive of standardized tests.  I went through the IB Programme and had to pass a standardized test in order to get the diploma.  Yes, that test wasn't necessarily suited perfectly to my needs, but when I got a high final score, I knew I could walk into any university and no one would be able to argue with it.  It didn't matter how good a reputation my school had; the number spoke for itself.  In that regard, a standardized test could level the playing field.  My mom was born and raised in rural Bulgaria, and she got a full scholarship to study medicine in the USSR because she did so well on the national exams.  The admissions office at the Medical Academy would never think twice about her middle-a-nowhere, one-room schoolhouse but when they saw her score, the number spoke for itself. 

Furthermore, it's not like these kids wont encounter standardized tests later on in life.  Graduate schools require standardized tests, as do most professional accreditation bodies, such as the Bar and the College of Physicians and Surgeons.  Your GPA, which you spent 4 years trying to nudge up, is worth as much as your score on a 5-hour exam when applying for law school.  It would be nice if they could evaluate each and every applicant based on their own criteria - and make no mistake, the good graduate schools do, hence the horrendously long applications - but sometimes, you need to be able to condense that knowledge into a 4-hour exam. 

As for the rat-race to up the numbers, the reality is quite dismal.  This is one of the reasons why I stuck with the IB Programme, because I knew I would be getting a reliable standard - not that the talent of individual teachers wasn't essential.  The A used to be something students had to earn, and now it's a given.  Since everyone is doing it, it's become a race to the bottom.  When teachers give out high grades for free, a teacher who is a bit tougher is accused of putting students at a disadvantage when they apply to university.  I've known several teachers who got in trouble with the Admin because they were giving out too many F's, which meant that they were asked to compromise the integrity of their lessons by passing students who hadn't done any work at all. 

Then there's also the rush to go to university, as if that's something everyone is entitled to.  The kinds of people who would not be allowed past the gates of a campus two decades ago now get in with 60% averages, and then spend God knows how many years either discovering themselves before they finally pass enough courses to get a BA - the new high school diploma - or decide to drop out after 2 years of paying tuition.  A movement which started in the middle-schools is now making its way to the universities, especially the undergraduate departments, which are constantly dropping standards to attract more students.  Professors have less of an incentive to teach, and they're more than happy to cut corners in order to make more room for research - which is quantifiable and therefore something that, unlike teaching, matters on the rankings.  Students are getting the credential they pay for, regardless of whether or not they're being challenged.  Everyone is happy.  As one Prof explained it to me, there is not a single academic out there who is not a victim to these pressures at some point.  

The consequence of all this is that those who want a real credential have to spend even more money, and even more time, making their way through graduate school. 

Canada still has a relatively good public education system, mainly because of the variety of programmes that exists - Academic, Applied, IB, AP - at least in Toronto.  The TDSB is well funded, has a solid pension plan, and has done a very good job of making sure that good teachers are spread out.  They've also been very active in making schools more diverse and accomodating.  They were the ones who first started doing surveys on homophobic bullying, and have done a lot to integrate GBLT themes into the curriculum.  In the rest of the country, however, the picture is a lot different, especially here in Nova Scotia. 

My complaint is not about standardized tests. It's about using them as though they were tests of schools rather than as the tests of students that they really are.

Nor am I so sure about the absolute value of testing. They have a hidden factor of being tests of how well you fit into the system. So the products who come out of that system may be intellectually the best, but only the most conformist.

One of the most surprising experiences for me was to learn just how conformist the academic world is. I remember a professor, furious with me, telling me the trouble with me was I didn't fit in with the academic world. I was never more flattered.

By your standard of minimum 60% for university entry, I would never have made it. At the time I was kicked out of high school, I was struggling to maintain 30%. I still got a BA - though with an average so low they would not give me a major. Again, by your standardized standards, that should have been the end. But I also got an MA with over 90% average. And then  a PhD.

As a result, I was able to have a career than included education, broadcasting and writing. But if I had had to meet the standards you prescribe, I would have had to spend my life sorting the office mail at Bell Tel in Montreal.

 There are uses for standardization. But not all people are standard.

graeme

I feel that our schools are as good if not better than what we are willing to pay for.

Life is inexorable - it doesn't adapt to individuals. Children need to learn to handle the bad with the good.

I had ADD long before it was a recognized learning disability. I HATED school.

Life goes on anyway.

I remember in grade ten counting the seconds until class would end. Do you know there are 900 seconds in fifteen minutes?

graeme

I want to clarify something:

The results and rankings are published in Ontario for those who want to read them. Last year when the local paper called me to ask if I had a comment, I honestly told the reporter that I had not read the rankings. She did not end up printing them in our local paper. 

well, that's certainly a good side to the news in Ontario - that some papers do ignore the use of them as school rankings. Down here, it's a big news item.Not surprisingly, the big winners every time are also those schools which have an economically higher class of student.

Imagine what it's like to be a teacher in a working class school with low results - coming under tremendous pressure from an ambitious principle to get those stats up to those of the middle class schools. Among other things, what often happens is the pressing needs of these kids get ignored in a hopeless attempt to fit them to the standard.

graeme

I struggle with the issue of standardized tests and the fact that teachers have to teach to them.

but i struggle with how else to see if a school is educating their kids.

It is such a subjective area and the different rates of child maturation doesn't help.

Taking the example of the grade 1 boy who doesn't read at grade level.

Perhaps he has a December 15th birthday and is actually 11 months younger than that really bright grade 1 January 15 th little girl.

How can they be compared.

how does the teacher rank the two.

We want that teacher to take that little boy and give him practice into reading.  At the end of grade 1 we expect him to read.

If he doesn't he is substandard.

suddenly in November of grade 2 it clicks and he has learned to read.  The parents talk about what a great grade 2 teacher he had who finally got him to read.

But is that it or did he just mature enough to finally be at the right stage for reading.

Skip forward to the same boy in grade 11 English.  He has had a succession of female teachers.  He has read a succesion of girl oriented books , at least by his opinion.  He doesn't like them.  They don't interest him.  He doesn't read them till the night before when he skims them and takes a look at face book to see what others think of them.

He does poorly in english and when picking his university or college course wouldn't consider English if it was his only choice.

The system lost English as a subject for him.

How do you compensate for that.  I have no idea.

How do you test for good teachers as opposed to good students.

Is a teacher good if she takes a grade 6 class, that did poorly on the grade 3 tests and now does well?  Why is she the good teacher?  Maybe the kids just got beter at tests.

How do you judge a teacher.  I know that in the past the prinicpal would sit in and monitor a class to watch teaching style.

but what makes a good teacher? 

When i think of the teachers i thought were my kids best, i think of the ones that they loved and inspired them to love the subject.  but does that mean, because my som really had limited interest in biology that his teacher wasn't good or just that he wasn't keen on biology.  If he had a different teacher would he now be doing his masters in biology instead of English.

I have no idea

damn,damn, damn. last pointe makes good points - no pun intended.

I have taught over40 years. I don't know what makes a good teacher. I can tell you qualities I like to see - but they won't work for every teacher or every student. The university used to rate us as teachers - and it was quite clear that nobody at the university had the faintest idea what a good teacher was.

I had teachers who were conscientious and methodical - and who just bored us to death. I had a teacher who had no special knowledge, and taught us nothing in particular in the subject matter - but who had a tremendous and lifelong impact on us because we found him the sort of person we wanted to be.

I had students in my first y ear teaching grade seven who have since told me I had a profound effect on t hem though, in fact, I was greenhorn who knew nothing much about teaching - and was the despair of the inspector.

It's an important point. If they are going to claim to test teaching quality,they first need a clear definition of what a good teacher is.

graeme

Graeme - add to the mix of what makes a good teacher - some teachers are right for a particular child and wrong for another.  My two kids had very different personalities and needs at school.  My son was the interested, questioning, enthusiastic type that easily got bored with routine work.  He needed a teacher who could challenge him and give him direction (his enthusiasm sometimes petered out half way through a project).  He worked well for teachers he liked and who liked him.  He needed a teacher who challanged him, expected him to read above grade level, and who insisted upon him working up to his abilities and completing assignments.

My daughter could easily get lost in class.  She was quiet and shy - she seldom raised her hand or contributed to discussions and (I found out later) considered herself just average compared to her brother.  She needed a teacher who noticed her, asked for her contributions, encouraged her, and noticed that her work was good. 

So which would be considered the good teacher - the one who met the challange of my son and forgot my daughter?  Or the one who appreciated the quiet obedient students and considered my son a disruption?

Just so. And we can play forever with the variations - with yet another complications.

I visited my children's school today where the average class size is 18. I was teasing them a bit with the story of my grade seven teaching days. In one year, my class was 42.

"Yeah," said one of the teachers. "But in those days, they listened."  It was a sobering thought, because she was quite right.

graeme

I do think kids will listen even today but in our age of media they are more easily bored.

They want flash and so don't read as much.  and yet we all know that reading is probably the most important skill to success.

they want colour and quick and entertaining and the teacher who doesn't do that had better have something else.

it's funny though, one of my son's favourite english teachers was to my mind quite a dry old sod.  He had love English in grade 7 and 8 and when i met his grade 9 teacher at parent night i was disappointed. 

He just seemed so dull.

The next morning of course the big conversation was how did i like this particular guy.  Luckily i was sort of vague and it turned out that he adored him.  Go figure.  what was interesting was by luck that class were all boys who loved English ( what are the odds of that) and they had an amazing year.

If I had a magic wand it would give all parents free kids books and all kids ,parents who would read to them every night.

Reading is what saved me. I shall always be grateful to my father for buying me  used books every weekend (there were no libraries in my part of town). I shall always be grateful for being born just before the age of TV. I shall always be grateful for being an unpopular little wretch so I had lots of time alone to read.

graeme

very interesting look at what the world is like now.

Also about the techers matching some students and not others we hada teacher in our school who for every multi-child class had these siblings on oposite ends of the spectrum they either thought he was the greatest teadcher or hated his class and to a lesser extent him.

Peace

Joel

I have to agree with you 100 percent. Another change which happened was the mandate by the ontario government. It shifted from educating children, to socializing children. This means that holding kids back a grade is almost never done and many children are being pushed through even though they cant do the basics, which is done to improve those rankings and test scores. I am 20 yrs older than my child and have seen school go from being taught reading,writing and arithmetic, to sex education, world poverty, cancer awareness and endless social studies. I spend more time teaching academics while the school is preaching values. The system is flawed and it truly isnt a place for children to learn anything useful for the future. Our children have become numbers in a system.