I have read with interest and not a little disappointment the comments bashing teachers. It is simple bashing because that is what it is. It is bereft of fact and logic and based on bits and pieces of second hand information or individual experiences generalized to the entire profession. So let’s get the facts on just a few of the key issues. To that end I am reposting comments I have made on another thread.
Not once in this entire discussion has it been mentioned though that contributions to education are not only made by teachers. Some of the most influential contributions come from principals, and school boards who set their own brand of policy at their respective levels. Some of the most dramatic influences have their authorship with the Ministry of Education. The most devastating negative influences on the education of our children have their authorship from within this venerable albeit Ivory Tower organization. Consider the Whole Language initiative as a case in point. If memory serves me correctly some of the whining which came from teachers was against this harebrained piece of idiocy. A volume could be written about the wonderful job many teachers have done trying to teach in spite of this. Yet the agents I mentioned above seem to get away scot free.
The pension issue is another matter. At one time the pension was almost entirely controlled by the Ontario government. The entire fund was invested in Ontario government bonds. The returns were less than spectacular. With the advent of the Rae government the union approached with a request that the fund be made into a separate entity and professionals hired to manage it. There were advantages for both sides. The amazing subsequent growth of the fund caught the notice of the public. Certainly it is now a benefit to be envied by all. But in the end analysis the teachers should be congratulated on their success not denigrated. But their success in no way abrogates the original relationship the Ontario government has with the fund.
In terms of job action it is unfortunate for them that teachers perform a service which so completely touches the lives of almost all the people of a province. The optics are not as innocuous as for the employees of say, Xerox. It certainly amplifies any action in the eyes of the public.
A second issue involves initiatives by the Harris government to target major public groups in the service sector to achieve promised budgetary cutbacks. Doctors, with an excellent bargaining position, were ultimately able to prevail. Nurses chose a more subdued approach. Their profession subsequently suffered to the point of a pronounced job dissatisfaction and decline. They are still trying to recover. Teachers chose to fight in the public forum. Again such a path makes for poor optics. The fight got ugly, not guaranteed to arouse sympathy among a public whose tax dollar pays the tune. Harris was no fool. He just couldn’’t lose public backing on this one.
Notwithstanding the fact that like in all professions there are those who do not belong it is my belief that all of the above are largely responsible for the negative public image of teachers. In addition to this there are other factors. At one time there were excesses in terms of discipline still fresh in the memories of the older members of our society. Yet the schools were seen as one of the major influences in the socialization of our children. In the more litigious atmosphere of our society the influence of teachers in the socialization of children has been greatly reduced. Society by and large, I feel, has a sense of betrayal in that respect. In light of the fact that many parents have abrogated the responsibility for raising their children, some parents may feel that the system is failing them. Others, buying into the pop psych crap about the kinder gentler way don’’t understand that the relationship between one on one is different than that between one on thirty. Such parents often fail to discriminate between being a friend to their child and being a pal. They invariably insist on the same approach on the part of the teacher. The policy of integration is another issue. Children or teenagers who have (to cite one of many examples) been identified as ““extreme behaviour”” cases are now kept in the classroom and fail to receive the ‘‘necessary’’ intervention they require. Having an EA, if one is available does not begin to address the issue adequately. I will leave it to your imagination as to how that may change the dynamic within the class. And the stories children bring home can’’t help but influence public perception.
I have not covered all of the issues but a more comprehensive treatment is beyond the scope of this forum. Burnout rate, attrition rate among new teachers and many other relevant issues need to be brought to the fore. So if you wonder why I feel many here are ““shooting from the lip””, that is why. The whole discussion up to now has suffered from an appalling lack of first, fact, second, objectivity and third, logical premise. Without these, it does teachers a great disservice and, second, definitely fails to rise above the level of ““bashing.”” IMHO educated people should refrain from being a part of any of the threads here related to this topic unless they are able to contribute in a more enlightened fashion. I don't feel this is an unreasonable expectation on my part.
Not once in this entire discussion has it been mentioned though that contributions to education are not only made by teachers. Some of the most influential contributions come from principals, and school boards who set their own brand of policy at their respective levels. Some of the most dramatic influences have their authorship with the Ministry of Education. The most devastating negative influences on the education of our children have their authorship from within this venerable albeit Ivory Tower organization. Consider the Whole Language initiative as a case in point. If memory serves me correctly some of the whining which came from teachers was against this harebrained piece of idiocy. A volume could be written about the wonderful job many teachers have done trying to teach in spite of this. Yet the agents I mentioned above seem to get away scot free.
The pension issue is another matter. At one time the pension was almost entirely controlled by the Ontario government. The entire fund was invested in Ontario government bonds. The returns were less than spectacular. With the advent of the Rae government the union approached with a request that the fund be made into a separate entity and professionals hired to manage it. There were advantages for both sides. The amazing subsequent growth of the fund caught the notice of the public. Certainly it is now a benefit to be envied by all. But in the end analysis the teachers should be congratulated on their success not denigrated. But their success in no way abrogates the original relationship the Ontario government has with the fund.
In terms of job action it is unfortunate for them that teachers perform a service which so completely touches the lives of almost all the people of a province. The optics are not as innocuous as for the employees of say, Xerox. It certainly amplifies any action in the eyes of the public.
A second issue involves initiatives by the Harris government to target major public groups in the service sector to achieve promised budgetary cutbacks. Doctors, with an excellent bargaining position, were ultimately able to prevail. Nurses chose a more subdued approach. Their profession subsequently suffered to the point of a pronounced job dissatisfaction and decline. They are still trying to recover. Teachers chose to fight in the public forum. Again such a path makes for poor optics. The fight got ugly, not guaranteed to arouse sympathy among a public whose tax dollar pays the tune. Harris was no fool. He just couldn’’t lose public backing on this one.
Notwithstanding the fact that like in all professions there are those who do not belong it is my belief that all of the above are largely responsible for the negative public image of teachers. In addition to this there are other factors. At one time there were excesses in terms of discipline still fresh in the memories of the older members of our society. Yet the schools were seen as one of the major influences in the socialization of our children. In the more litigious atmosphere of our society the influence of teachers in the socialization of children has been greatly reduced. Society by and large, I feel, has a sense of betrayal in that respect. In light of the fact that many parents have abrogated the responsibility for raising their children, some parents may feel that the system is failing them. Others, buying into the pop psych crap about the kinder gentler way don’’t understand that the relationship between one on one is different than that between one on thirty. Such parents often fail to discriminate between being a friend to their child and being a pal. They invariably insist on the same approach on the part of the teacher. The policy of integration is another issue. Children or teenagers who have (to cite one of many examples) been identified as ““extreme behaviour”” cases are now kept in the classroom and fail to receive the ‘‘necessary’’ intervention they require. Having an EA, if one is available does not begin to address the issue adequately. I will leave it to your imagination as to how that may change the dynamic within the class. And the stories children bring home can’’t help but influence public perception.
I have not covered all of the issues but a more comprehensive treatment is beyond the scope of this forum. Burnout rate, attrition rate among new teachers and many other relevant issues need to be brought to the fore. So if you wonder why I feel many here are ““shooting from the lip””, that is why. The whole discussion up to now has suffered from an appalling lack of first, fact, second, objectivity and third, logical premise. Without these, it does teachers a great disservice and, second, definitely fails to rise above the level of ““bashing.”” IMHO educated people should refrain from being a part of any of the threads here related to this topic unless they are able to contribute in a more enlightened fashion. I don't feel this is an unreasonable expectation on my part.
