in my humble opinion....after one quick read through....
I think introducing this during a labour dispute is pretty brave.
Their is absolutely nothing specific in this document, no details, it's a pie shell....nothing in it, meringue, air ball, empty set, hot air, window dressing, etc etc
It makes more assumptions than I've ever seen in a government warm-up policy roll out....and repeating the idea over and over using slightly different adjectives puts even my prosaic nonsense to shame...if that passes for policy writing, maybe I should start looking for a job back in gov't?
If you read between the lines, it reads a bit like a warning to teachers....get ready to start meeting american-like merit based assessments for teachers.
It assumes parents will want to be involved in education at a level that will be precedent setting.
It assumes technology is the answer to everything.
It is transferring the responsibility of education from the province to individual families ....my reading of this government's rationale for that is simple - cost savings....
It assumes every family has a computer and a high speed connection...
This plan will work great for your family if you are upper middle-class, educated, only one parent works, and you really have the time to get into this with your child.....
and of course there's more...but that's after a first quick reading.....I look forward to discussing this with everyone...I guess I've shown my hand already though...oops, never was that great at poker...lol
It sounds like a motivational speech that promises nothing.
What I mean is, have you ever listened to someone talk about some big event that is going to happen and you think "Golly, he/she is saying EVERYTHING I hoped would happen is going to.... but wait, he/she never said how".
It seems to me that a lot of these planned promises are points that we as student-teachers are already learning how to cover.
As for the technology, I agree with Blair. Not every family has access to a computer with internet, and, there is so much learning to do away from the computer.
This Plan makes me nervous. I feel that the ministry of Education wants the public to think that while we as teachers may be highly motivated and hard working, we really aren't meeting our students needs because we have become obsolete.
I keep thinking about Harry Potter and the order of the Phoenix, when Dolores Umbridge, the professor assigned by the magic ministry gives her speech "progress for the sake of progress must be discouraged" to the entire school at the beginning of the year. A whole bunch of jumbled words basically saying the government is interfering.
I'm really interested in the FLEXIBILITY portion of what wasn't said. They say that parents, teachers and students will get to choose what, when and where the children learn, but what does this mean for teachers? Coming in earlier, leaving later? How would students access this "when" or "where" learning? I assume that part of their assumption is via computers, but what about the students who are too poor to have access to a computer or internet at home? If you have to go to the school just to get on a computer, then wouldn't that be eliminating the "when and where" choice?
After finally reading this over in 787 I am left very confused. I just don't get their point. One of my biggest concerns is that parents are going to have to be more involved in a students learning. For a supportive caring family environment that does not seem like a problem, but there are so many students out there whose parents just don't care. Some parents are going to take the time/don't have the time/don't care enough to have an active role in the faciliation of the learning of their child. Along the same line is that students are going to more recognized for stuff they do outside of school, what if a student cannot afford to do extra curricular activities, does that leave them hung out to dry? My other really big question is that they are going to reduce the amount of PLO's that we as teachers have to get through in a year. How is that going to prepare them for post secondary if that is where they decide they are headed? If they increase the depth and reduce the broadness of the material universities are going to have to adjust all of their courses to accomodate these students that have yet to be introduced to certain topics. You all have pretty much talked about the points that I myself brought up reading through this as well. I am not sure how personalized learning is even possible in classes of 25 to 30 students. Is it possible to be committing to each one of these students giving them your best at all times? This plan makes it seem like teachers are no longer going to teach, and will now be just faciliating the class and making sure all of the students are there. Maybe I am wrong but that is what it sounds like. Also, getting evaluated? I am all for making sure my teaching is hitting everything I am supposed to, but as far as an official evaluation like the document is alluding to just makes it seem like if I get a poor review I am out on my keester. This plan just makes me nervous about what is to come, but I hope to face it and cope well.
The BC education plan is a gutless skeleton of a document that talks a lot without actually saying anything. While it mentions a radical revision of the system in place today, like most career politicians, it leaves a lot of blanks and gives no indication of timeframes or deadlines or even if this WILL actually be implemented.
This to me feels like an attempt to appease the general public and not much else. While this may win an agreeable nod over morning coffee by a fast-paced professional, by the end of their busy time-consumed day, this will result nothing more than a less than notable news article that is swept aside and forgotten with yesterdays old news. Other than teachers and people whose livelihood is directly associated with the Education industry, who in the general public is going to hold government accountable for this propaganda?
On the other hand, I actually embrace the ideas that this plan outlines and would very much like to see these new initiative implemented in the system. In today’s day and age, with the advent of modern technology, I think the time has come to remodel an outdated system. With that in mind we still have to pay particular attention on how to continually motive young minds to stay active and motivated so they feel like they WANT to take an active role in selecting a path of their choosing and not push them along through the system.
in my humble opinion....after one quick read through....
ReplyDeleteI think introducing this during a labour dispute is pretty brave.
Their is absolutely nothing specific in this document, no details, it's a pie shell....nothing in it, meringue, air ball, empty set, hot air, window dressing, etc etc
It makes more assumptions than I've ever seen in a government warm-up policy roll out....and repeating the idea over and over using slightly different adjectives puts even my prosaic nonsense to shame...if that passes for policy writing, maybe I should start looking for a job back in gov't?
If you read between the lines, it reads a bit like a warning to teachers....get ready to start meeting american-like merit based assessments for teachers.
It assumes parents will want to be involved in education at a level that will be precedent setting.
It assumes technology is the answer to everything.
It is transferring the responsibility of education from the province to individual families ....my reading of this government's rationale for that is simple - cost savings....
It assumes every family has a computer and a high speed connection...
This plan will work great for your family if you are upper middle-class, educated, only one parent works, and you really have the time to get into this with your child.....
and of course there's more...but that's after a first quick reading.....I look forward to discussing this with everyone...I guess I've shown my hand already though...oops, never was that great at poker...lol
Nice blog-bait Allyson!!!
ReplyDeleteI guess what I would say is....
ReplyDeleteIt sounds like a motivational speech that promises nothing.
What I mean is, have you ever listened to someone talk about some big event that is going to happen and you think "Golly, he/she is saying EVERYTHING I hoped would happen is going to.... but wait, he/she never said how".
It seems to me that a lot of these planned promises are points that we as student-teachers are already learning how to cover.
As for the technology, I agree with Blair. Not every family has access to a computer with internet, and, there is so much learning to do away from the computer.
This Plan makes me nervous. I feel that the ministry of Education wants the public to think that while we as teachers may be highly motivated and hard working, we really aren't meeting our students needs because we have become obsolete.
I keep thinking about Harry Potter and the order of the Phoenix, when Dolores Umbridge, the professor assigned by the magic ministry gives her speech "progress for the sake of progress must be discouraged" to the entire school at the beginning of the year. A whole bunch of jumbled words basically saying the government is interfering.
I'm really interested in the FLEXIBILITY portion of what wasn't said. They say that parents, teachers and students will get to choose what, when and where the children learn, but what does this mean for teachers? Coming in earlier, leaving later? How would students access this "when" or "where" learning? I assume that part of their assumption is via computers, but what about the students who are too poor to have access to a computer or internet at home? If you have to go to the school just to get on a computer, then wouldn't that be eliminating the "when and where" choice?
ReplyDeleteAfter finally reading this over in 787 I am left very confused. I just don't get their point.
ReplyDeleteOne of my biggest concerns is that parents are going to have to be more involved in a students learning. For a supportive caring family environment that does not seem like a problem, but there are so many students out there whose parents just don't care. Some parents are going to take the time/don't have the time/don't care enough to have an active role in the faciliation of the learning of their child.
Along the same line is that students are going to more recognized for stuff they do outside of school, what if a student cannot afford to do extra curricular activities, does that leave them hung out to dry?
My other really big question is that they are going to reduce the amount of PLO's that we as teachers have to get through in a year. How is that going to prepare them for post secondary if that is where they decide they are headed? If they increase the depth and reduce the broadness of the material universities are going to have to adjust all of their courses to accomodate these students that have yet to be introduced to certain topics.
You all have pretty much talked about the points that I myself brought up reading through this as well.
I am not sure how personalized learning is even possible in classes of 25 to 30 students. Is it possible to be committing to each one of these students giving them your best at all times?
This plan makes it seem like teachers are no longer going to teach, and will now be just faciliating the class and making sure all of the students are there. Maybe I am wrong but that is what it sounds like.
Also, getting evaluated? I am all for making sure my teaching is hitting everything I am supposed to, but as far as an official evaluation like the document is alluding to just makes it seem like if I get a poor review I am out on my keester.
This plan just makes me nervous about what is to come, but I hope to face it and cope well.
The BC education plan is a gutless skeleton of a document that talks a lot without actually saying anything. While it mentions a radical revision of the system in place today, like most career politicians, it leaves a lot of blanks and gives no indication of timeframes or deadlines or even if this WILL actually be implemented.
ReplyDeleteThis to me feels like an attempt to appease the general public and not much else. While this may win an agreeable nod over morning coffee by a fast-paced professional, by the end of their busy time-consumed day, this will result nothing more than a less than notable news article that is swept aside and forgotten with yesterdays old news. Other than teachers and people whose livelihood is directly associated with the Education industry, who in the general public is going to hold government accountable for this propaganda?
On the other hand, I actually embrace the ideas that this plan outlines and would very much like to see these new initiative implemented in the system. In today’s day and age, with the advent of modern technology, I think the time has come to remodel an outdated system. With that in mind we still have to pay particular attention on how to continually motive young minds to stay active and motivated so they feel like they WANT to take an active role in selecting a path of their choosing and not push them along through the system.