I was recently part of a delegation from Canada that looked at United States education systems for Native American students. One of our goals was to see if lessons learned from the US could be useful in a Canadian setting. As in Canada, Native American students in the US are considered disadvantaged and many attend ineffective or failing schools.
There are many lessons to be learned from a look at the US government response to ineffective and failing schools. The most valuable lessons may be found in learning from their mistakes.
The first thing Canadian teachers think about when discussing US schooling is the No Child Left Behind Act. NCLB (2002) had noble beginnings, but was fought from the beginning by many educators. 7 years after its inception, the debate rages on, (the rumours of the demise of NCLB have been exaggerated - NCLB is here to stay).
There are many lessons to be learned from a look at the US government response to ineffective and failing schools. The most valuable lessons may be found in learning from their mistakes.
The first thing Canadian teachers think about when discussing US schooling is the No Child Left Behind Act. NCLB (2002) had noble beginnings, but was fought from the beginning by many educators. 7 years after its inception, the debate rages on, (the rumours of the demise of NCLB have been exaggerated - NCLB is here to stay).
Educators across the U.S. have been debating the merits of NCLB since even before its implementation. The original act, brought in by well-meaning Republicans, and receiving all party support, sought to identify those school divisions, schools, and states that were most successful in educating America’s most disadvantaged students. It also sought to indentify those that were ineffective at meeting the needs of disadvantaged minority students. It forced schools to report if they were failing minority students at different rates than other students. It set minimum benchmarks for achievement state by state. The act was enforced through standardized assessments. Each state developed its own State Assessments, which are approved by the federal department of education.
As in the US, many disadvantaged Canadian students are being failed by the system. Indigenous Canadians are achieving significantly lower outcomes than mainstream Canadians in our school systems. With on-reserve graduation rate of 29% - 32%, First Nations students, who are also members of the fastest growing segment of the population, are Canada’s critical element determining success … or failure in education. While Canada’s educational system on the whole is moving forward, the gap between our successful; and less successful students remains unchanged.
On the ground level in the U.S. there are varied responses to NCLB. Educators on the front lines both love and despise the act. One principal I spoke with in a southern state said that ‘NCLB set a bar for us to aspire to. It forced us to get better.’ Another educator said that the establishment of standards, and repercussions attached to those standards, allow schools to constantly seek improvement.
Yet underlying all of this are structural changes in instruction that would be uncomfortable to most Canadians. Many US elementary schools have discarded ‘non-essential’ instructional time in order to focus on core subjects – math and reading. This means students in many schools get physical education once per week. It also means music, arts, and creative development is relegated to after thoughts in the quest to stay ahead in core academics. Desks have moved from groups, to rows.
As in the US, many disadvantaged Canadian students are being failed by the system. Indigenous Canadians are achieving significantly lower outcomes than mainstream Canadians in our school systems. With on-reserve graduation rate of 29% - 32%, First Nations students, who are also members of the fastest growing segment of the population, are Canada’s critical element determining success … or failure in education. While Canada’s educational system on the whole is moving forward, the gap between our successful; and less successful students remains unchanged.
On the ground level in the U.S. there are varied responses to NCLB. Educators on the front lines both love and despise the act. One principal I spoke with in a southern state said that ‘NCLB set a bar for us to aspire to. It forced us to get better.’ Another educator said that the establishment of standards, and repercussions attached to those standards, allow schools to constantly seek improvement.
Yet underlying all of this are structural changes in instruction that would be uncomfortable to most Canadians. Many US elementary schools have discarded ‘non-essential’ instructional time in order to focus on core subjects – math and reading. This means students in many schools get physical education once per week. It also means music, arts, and creative development is relegated to after thoughts in the quest to stay ahead in core academics. Desks have moved from groups, to rows.
A member of the National Indian Educations Association summed up criticism of NCLB succinctly by saying, ‘We need to move from not only measuring academic outcomes but to measuring healthy living outcomes”
While there is a need for assessment and standardization, we cannot forget that education is most effective and successful when there is a spirit of creativity, laughter and growth involved. The US Department of Education seems to be moving in the direction of allowing states to set local assessment templates that could include culture and language outcomes – both critically important to First Nations educators in Canada.
It will be a hard job for us educators to find the balance between demonstrating effectiveness through standardized assessments, and holistic learning. Either way, the current state of education in Canada needs fixing for our disadvantaged students. Whether or not a Canadian First Nations equivalent to NCLB would be beneficial or detrimental needs some serious debate.
While there is a need for assessment and standardization, we cannot forget that education is most effective and successful when there is a spirit of creativity, laughter and growth involved. The US Department of Education seems to be moving in the direction of allowing states to set local assessment templates that could include culture and language outcomes – both critically important to First Nations educators in Canada.
It will be a hard job for us educators to find the balance between demonstrating effectiveness through standardized assessments, and holistic learning. Either way, the current state of education in Canada needs fixing for our disadvantaged students. Whether or not a Canadian First Nations equivalent to NCLB would be beneficial or detrimental needs some serious debate.
* Picture is from a survival class run by some staff from the Canadian Forces School of Survival and Aeromedical Training with a group of our Land Based Education students. How we measure success will determine if programs like this flourish or die.
3 comments:
Ultimately, education is a provincial matter. That being said, I believe the current structure of funding, one that rewards poor school performance, should be reformed.
Students should not be restricted by postal or area code to where they can attend school. The public funding of education should be student oriented, allowing students to choose educational institutions they excel in.
Finally, this can only be done through a competitive model. The non-competitive, near-monopoly public school system must change. I believe that Canadian provinces should implement either a tax-credit or student voucher funding program and privatize all public schools.
Thanks for posting this.
Have a look at a new 2009 report from the Canadian Council on Learning that provides a new framework for measuring success in learning, based on First Nations, Inuit and Metis perspectives on lifelong learning.
http://www.ccl-cca.ca/CCL/Reports/StateofAboriginalLearning/StateAboriginalLearning2009.htm
Post a Comment