Ranking & Sorting - An Essential Service

What is schooling for? In the midst of a teacher strike that is now entering its second week, the BC Labour Relations Board provided an answer - to rank and sort students. Upon application from the BC government, they declared that providing Grade 12 student marks was an essential service, and on Friday afternoon, that reviewing Grade 10 and 11 marks provided by school administrators was an essential service. Also essential is the provision of provincial exams, which students wrote last week behind teacher picket lines.

I guess we already knew that time in the classroom learning was not paramount. Many Districts across BC have shortened the school year by a week or longer to address chronic budget shortfalls. Some have even adopted a four day week. So it was already evident that time involved in learning activities with teachers can be jettisoned - if it saves money. No surprise then that the government appears to have very little interest in ending the strike and re-opening schools before the end of June.

We also knew that somehow the BC government thinks that limiting the constitutional right to strike should expand far beyond genuinely life threatening situations. It was all the way back in 2001 that the Essential Services legislation made the provision of education "essential". But what is increasingly clear is that was is  "essential" for government has nothing to do with educating. What is "essential" is that lists of marks are available to rank and sort students - no matter what they had the opportunity to learn and no matter how inaccurate those rankings might be. And what is also essential to government is that essential services legislation continue to erode the right to strike.

The government lockout prevented teachers from planning and marking. For the last several weeks of school, assignments were abridged, trips were cancelled, and learning activities cut short. Teachers simply could not continue to teach in the manner they do under the terms of the lockout and the severe restrictions on the working day. In my district, six out of the seven secondary schools also cancelled final course tests. In my daughter's school, the decision was made by the school administration and announced on the PA system before teachers even knew. In other words, the final month of school, which is about 20% of second semester courses, was shortened. And grading and assessment was altered - in many cases without the teacher even having any control over it.

Many teachers forced to submit Grade 12 marks on Friday did the only thing they think is ethical and honest in the circumstances - they assigned an "In Progress" mark. They acknowledged that the assessment of student work is not in relation to all the learning required in the course. They did what is a fair and accurate representation of student outcomes given the lockout's impact. One teacher I know even went further, providing a range of potential outcomes each student might achieve if they had the opportunity to actually complete the course, including final assessments.

Next week teachers will be asked to "review" a mark provided by an administrator. I don't know where these marks are going to come from. Perhaps they will be term marks from term one and will not reflect any student work completed since April. Perhaps they will come from some other magical place. What I do know is that administrators have not taught these students and have no mechanism to provide a genuine professional opinion about the level of student achievement in relation to the learning outcomes of the course. So why are they putting marks into the system? I guess because they have been ordered to do so.

At the end of the day, administrators will place a grade on every grade 10, 11 and 12 student's transcript. That grade will in many cases not reflect the student's abilities relative to the full course curriculum. But it will provide some data for someone else to make a judgement about that student. And this is ultimately what these grades are for - to rank and sort students. And apparently this is essential.

Will School Board budget woes lead to more inequity and privatization?

The news from the province for School Boards in BC was another disappointment. A "no increase" budget combined with inflation, rising pension costs, PST conversions costs and ten years of chronic under-funding means another round of cuts, layoffs, school closures and reduced services.

Not surprisingly, amid these budget woes, some turn to the private or "choice" options. Parents turn to private schools who can offer class sizes of 10 - 20 while public schools are double this number. Or if they can't afford it, but they can drive across town and pay student fees, they look for the "programs of choice" that segregate the more affluent public school families into particular schools and particular programs. This week's Fraser Institute rankings showed pretty clearly the growing socio-economic divisions in BC schools. Unsurprisingly, private schools topped the lists, where classes are small and resources are high. Next came the schools of choice and schools in wealthier Districts and neighborhoods. Last on the list are the "inner city schools" - where poverty is often at crisis levels. Rather than being the great equalizer, schools in a world of parent "choice" serve to further stratify and segregate students. Growing inequality just keeps growing.

Just as disturbing is the trend towards privatization by some in the education community. More and more school districts are looking towards fees, fundraising, fee-based international student programs and even public/private partnerships as a way to make up for woefully inadequate public funds.

One example is found in a public survey put together by the Maple Ridge school District (https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/201314BudgetSurvey). In it they ask if there is community support for the following:

• Increase or introduce fees for optional programs (e.g. academies, band, bussing)
• Promote public private partnerships 
• Should the school district pursue public - private partnership opportunities in any of the following areas? Advertising, playgrounds, sponsorships, naming of facilities 

Or, they ask, should they increase class sizes, reduce special education teachers/assistants, or close schools.

What a false dichotomy! It is unfortunate that Maple Ridge has even posed these questions. The clear answer is to re-invest in public education through adequate public funding. The way there is through advocacy and communities and elected officials working together to pressure the provincial government to do so. If Maple Ridge and every other District facing funding shortfalls had joined with Cowichan to submit a deficit budget based on the genuine needs of the school district, perhaps the education budget today would look different.

Chronic under-funding is not just about money. The current Liberal government has pursued this manufactured "crisis" to lend legitimacy to private options. But this path has only one end - quality schooling for the few, and ghetto-ized schools for the many. Rather than follow this dead end, I hope Trustees and others in the education world will take the opportunity of the coming provincial election and the coming District budget cycle to stand up and speak up for public education.