Bill 11 - Education Amendment Act

[flamingfingers]

Another part that does NOTHING to give me confidence that the ChristyLiberal government will work to make public education better for us and emphasizes the influence of the FRASER INSTITUTE:

A blunt reading of the B.C. government’s plan for public education is this: Impoverish it, neuter critics (including teachers and elected school trustees) and centralize control.

Once control is centralized, the blueprint seems to be to move to the American model where public school funding and teachers’ pay are linked more closely to students’ test scores.

[Logitack]

anyone with a brain knows exactly what the liberals, under christy cupcake, are doing.

they want to destroy public education. why else would they INCREASE funding to private education and STARVE public education.

and of course the liberal sheeple are supporting it.

[Urbane]

It wouldn't matter what was in Bill 11. Whatever it was the same people would be saying precisely the same thing about the "ChristyLiberals" trying to "destroy public education" yada yada yada. Just to add a little balance here . . . perish the thought:

Bill 11 to strengthen K-12 accountability, efficiency and professional development
Education, Government Operations Thursday, March 26, 2015 10:20 AM

VICTORIA - Bill 11, the Education Statutes Amendment Act (2015) will help school districts reduce overhead costs, establish a modern framework for teacher professional development and put a stronger focus on accountability for student outcomes, Education Minister Peter Fassbender announced today.

Proposed amendments to the School Act, the Independent School Act and the Teachers Act are focussed on four objectives:

building a framework for continuing professional development;
facilitating delivery of shared services among school districts;
improving the accountability framework for student learning; and
aligning the provisions on the disclosure of student data with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

It is common practice in many professions to set standards for ongoing professional development. Currently, there are no detailed requirements for certified teachers to maintain currency of practice. The proposed amendments to the Teachers Act will provide the minister with the authority to establish a more robust framework. Working with the profession, the goal is to enhance public confidence that certified teachers have access to, and are regularly participating in, high-quality professional development aimed at improving student achievement.

Boards of education have been tasked with finding administrative savings and efficiencies, similar to what has occurred in the health and post-secondary sectors. Amendments to the School Act will provide boards with clear authority to enter into shared service or alternative service delivery agreements with other boards or public sector entities. To maximize the opportunities and benefits, the changes also provide the Minister with the authority to require boards to participate in specific service delivery arrangements.

School districts are currently required to produce a series of annual reports to ensure they are accountable for local student achievement. In recent years it has become clear the K-12 system would benefit from more meaningful and flexible approaches. Amendments to the School Act will remove inflexible language and processes and replace them with more targeted, co-constructed approaches to enhance the system-wide focus on student learning.

The use and analysis of high-quality data is essential to improving K-12 programs and operations and monitoring the impact of new curriculum and other learning innovations. Amendments will align the School Act with more current provisions and safeguards found in the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. This will allow the ministry to disclose and use student data to improve the K-12 system while protecting personal privacy consistent with standards across the B.C. public sector, including health and social services.

Quotes:

Peter Fassbender, Minister of Education -

“British Columbians expect our K-12 system to be run efficiently, that teachers and students have the supports they need, and that everyone is focussed on what matters most - student learning. That’s what these amendments are all about.

“British Columbia has one of the best education systems in the world, but we can’t just sit back. We need to pursue new, innovative approaches that promise better results for students.

“The research is very clear that one of the most important ways to support students is to focus on quality teaching. That’s why these amendments set a foundation on which the Province will work co-operatively with the teaching profession to build a truly modern framework for professional development.

“Most professions - such as lawyers, accountants, or nurses - set detailed standards for ongoing learning. Early childhood educators have clear requirements. It’s time to put teaching on a similar footing.

“Taxpayers also expect their dollars to be used wisely and that every available dollar is going to help children in the classroom. With 60 school districts, there are many opportunities for shared services. These amendments will give districts and the ministry additional tools to turn these opportunities into ongoing savings.

“The legislation sets the foundation and the starting point. We look forward to working with our education partners on approaches and solutions that better meet the needs of students.”

Learn More:

To view the bill please visit: http://www.leg.bc.ca/40th4th/1st_read/index.htm
https://www.newsroom.gov.bc.ca/2015/03/ ... pment.html

[flamingfingers]

^And you simply accept this on face value URBANE. Without a thought to the ramifications that I brought up in a couple of previous posts.

But then I guess I shouldn't be surprised. A lot of people like you bought into the 'LNG! LNG!' and 'JOBS, JOBS, JOBS!" and 'DEBT FREE BC!' How's THAT working out so far, eh?

'Don't question government decisions' seems to be your fallback. That is sheer ignorance and I expect more from you than simply going along with the lines the government wants you to believe. There is more to think about than mere pap from government spinmeisters.

[Urbane]

^And you simply accept this on face value URBANE. Without a thought to the ramifications that I brought up in a couple of previous posts.

But then I guess I shouldn't be surprised. A lot of people like you bought into the 'LNG! LNG!' and 'JOBS, JOBS, JOBS!" and 'DEBT FREE BC!' How's THAT working out so far, eh?

'Don't question government decisions' seems to be your fallback. That is sheer ignorance and I expect more from you than simply going along with the lines the government wants you to believe. There is more to think about than mere pap from government spinmeisters.

Please show me where I said that I simply accept what the government is saying? Where?? Nowhere, that's where. I take what this government, and in fact any government, says with a huge grain of salt. The column that you posted to start this thread is one person's opinion. On the other side is what's being put out by the government. I suggest the truth lies somewhere in between. And where did I say that LNG would make BC debt free? Nowhere! And what does LNG have to do with Bill 11? Now here's a crazy idea: Try to control your obsession with CC and discuss Bill 11.

[flamingfingers]

I have already posted some of my concerns, which obviously URBANE you have chosen not to respond to.

[KGT]

See my comments on this subject in the Bickering Room. I share your concerns. However, CBC News quoted Jim Iker as saying he wasn't "too concerned" about the Pro-D announcement because the government has promised consultation on the issue over the next two years.

That's not what he said in his latest email to teachers.

[Urbane]

I have already posted some of my concerns, which obviously URBANE you have chosen not to respond to.

What about facilitating delivery of shared services among school districts? Are you sure that's a bad thing? I'm not. What about improving the accountability framework for student learning? I have a POTENTIAL concern if there is sole reliance or too much reliance on standardized test scores. How about aligning the provisions on the disclosure of student data with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act? Is that bad? And what about the Pro-D? There is certainly a POTENTIAL concern that I've mentioned previously but apparently Jim Iker isn't concerned about it because of the consultation that will be occurring. I realize that anyone who doesn't jump up and scream about the "Christy-Liberals" trying to "destroy public education" is called nasty names but some of us want to do what rustled is doing, i.e. look at the actual issues (in this case the contents of Bill 11) and discuss it. Yes, there are potential concerns. For sure. There are some potential positives in there as well. As I said earlier, the truth likely lies somewhere in between the two extremes.

[KGT]

^^^Changes to Pro-D in bill 11 is only a small part of the bill. Read the original post and follow the links...Any changes the government may make to Pro-D is the least of anyone needs to be concerned about regarding bill11..

I agree there are other things I don't like about Bill 11, but the changes to Pro-D will have the most negative impact to me.

[KGT]

There is certainly a POTENTIAL concern that I've mentioned previously but apparently Jim Iker isn't concerned about it because of the consultation that will be occurring.

Why is it that I begin to giggle hysterically every time Fassbender says he will "consult" with teachers?

[Urbane]

That's not what he said in his latest email to teachers.

Iker said he wasn't too concerned about the professional development announcement because government has committed to work with teachers on the issue over the next two years.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c ... -1.3010787

[Urbane]

Why is it that I begin to giggle hysterically every time Fassbender says he will "consult" with teachers?

In his reply to Keith Baldrey on budget day, when Keith asked Jim Iker if the budget would poison relations between the government and the union, Iker replied no and that the government and the BCTF were working together on various initiatives. Also, see the quote that he provided in his news conference about Pro-D. So there is consultation going on and that's a good thing.

[rustled]

Media reports will always include a certain amount of bias. Flamingfingers, I have to admit I found the story you posted a bit fearmongery, and that always sets off my bs alarms. But I'm not willing to accept the government's description of Bill 11's contents either.

Fortunately for us, Bill 11 can be viewed online. It does take some time to work through it, because you have to compare the amendments to the act (Bill 11) to what the act originally said.

Why not spend some time on an honest evaluation of the bill's contents, before entrenching your conclusions?

If our goal is to understand what's going on, and to take a position that will strengthen and support public education, shouldn't we be prepared to understand what this bill truly entails?

[flamingfingers]

^ All well and good rust'; however, I have a real problem in trusting this ChristyLiberal government to actually spell out what they MEAN in passing bills like this. There are far too many nebulous statements, like "if the minister BELIEVES' and what the 'minister perceives is in the best interests of the public' to allow me to trust a 'minister's' beliefs and perceptions' with regard to this particular government!

[rustled]

^ All well and good rust'; however, I have a real problem in trusting this ChristyLiberal government to actually spell out what they MEAN in passing bills like this. There are far too many nebulous statements, like "if the minister BELIEVES' and what the 'minister perceives is in the best interests of the public' to allow me to trust a 'minister's' beliefs and perceptions' with regard to this particular government!

I'm still working my way through the document, and as I do I am keeping in mind that if the bill is passed, these statements will apply to all forthcoming governments as well (until such time as they apply their own amendments).

I realize you and Hurtlander really distrust the current government, and you find their motives suspect. However, I cannot believe the current batch of elected officials are all out to destroy public education, any more than I believe the BCTF is out to destroy public education. I don't see the point in heaping scorn on (or promoting fear of) Clark and her cabinet any more than I see the point in heaping scorn on (or promoting fear of) Iker and his executive.

I've posted before about my disillusionment with how difficult it is, under our current model, to effectively target resources to students. The people we once put our trust in, our locally elected school boards, have struggled over the past two decades to fulfill their responsibilities, caught between a rising tide of public indifference, powerful board administrators, and decisions duked out between the provincial government and a very powerful political/social activist organization and a second very powerful union, CUPE.

What's to be done? Change is coming. It must come. When we're facing these changes, surely it's not good enough to pick sides based simply on fear and loathing and leave it at that.

Surely we want to support initiatives which will strengthen and improve our public education system. Bill 11 may be a step in the right direction or a step in the wrong one. I suspect I'll agree with some of the amendments and disagree with others, but I cannot imagine coming to the conclusion that it is good or bad in its entirety, or that it is anyone's "personal vendetta".