# Profs say students lack maturity, feel entitled



## ex-Sup (6 Apr 2009)

Thought this might be relevant, since many of the same issues pop up in college and the workplace ie. the CF. Actually there was a comment from a section commander in the feedback. I was pretty worked up over some of the comments that were posted, and I did post a few replies.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090406/student_study_090406/20090406?hub=TopStories

Any thoughts?
**Mods-if this is in the wrong spot, feel free to move it around.


----------



## jp86 (6 Apr 2009)

I wonder to what extent this reflects the fact that simply _more people are going to university_ than in the past.  Assuming aptitude is correlated with preparedness, if you bring more people in, your average level of preparedness is going to go down.


----------



## George Wallace (6 Apr 2009)

How often have we witnessed this phenomenon here on Army.ca:



> Survey respondents reported students had lower writing and numeric skills, lower maturity, and a belief that good grades are an entitlement.


----------



## Nauticus (6 Apr 2009)

Universities used to accept only the top, like, 5%-10% of their applicants annually. Now, they accept a higher amount than they used to. I imagine that would play a role.

I might sound like an old timer (I'm definitely not...) but I blame the text messaging and instant messaging. lol r u comin 2 tha prty  probably isn't positively helping a person's spelling and grammar.


----------



## PMedMoe (6 Apr 2009)

Nauticus said:
			
		

> I might sound like an old timer (I'm definitely not...) but I blame the text messaging and instant messaging. lol r u comin 2 tha prty  probably isn't positively helping a person's spelling and grammar.



That, and does anyone remember when they allowed kids in school to use phonetic spelling?


----------



## aesop081 (6 Apr 2009)

jp86 said:
			
		

> I wonder to what extent this reflects the fact that simply _more people are going to university_ than in the past.



No it does not. My daughter is in grade 6 and i see the same attitudes in her peers. I see the same attitudes in new recruits the CF gets........


----------



## Armymedic (6 Apr 2009)

In three years this attitude has arisen?

Nobody asks why in just 3 years there is such a shift in attitude and decrease in scholastic skills.

Society does not change like that so quickly. Perhaps a certain group of students from a certain area, or a certain school but not all 55% of all first year students across 22 Ontario universities.

This MSN report sensationalizes peoples opinion, without the facts to back it up.

edit: why print media is better than TV media:
from Toronto Star:


> "The question on student preparedness was part of a larger survey of professors completed in February and March that asked about all aspects of campus life. *More than 60 per cent of professors said they were teaching larger classes than three years ago,* and that not only has hiring slowed down, but so has the creation of full-time tenured positions – which was an issue in the recent strike by teaching assistants and contract faculty at York University.
> 
> As for first-year students, Brown said professors don't think they have the needed critical thinking or math skills, and they lack the ability to learn independently".



bold emphasis is mine.


----------



## ex-Sup (6 Apr 2009)

Nauticus said:
			
		

> Universities used to accept only the top, like, 5%-10% of their applicants annually. Now, they accept a higher amount than they used to. I imagine that would play a role.


The minimum averages are dropping too. In '92 in needed an 88% to get into Concurrent Ed at Queen's (I didn't even bother writing the 500 essay why I want to come to Queen's); I squeaked into the program at LU with 79%. Now I'm hearing they take students with grades as low as 65%. I've scratched me head at many a convocation thinking "they're going to be a teacher?"



			
				Nauticus said:
			
		

> I might sound like an old timer (I'm definitely not...) but I blame the text messaging and instant messaging. lol r u comin 2 tha prty  probably isn't positively helping a person's spelling and grammar.


Awe frick, don't even get me started


----------



## chris_log (6 Apr 2009)

Wow, really? I never would have guessed it, students with a sense of entitlement? You don't say.


----------



## ex-Sup (6 Apr 2009)

SFB said:
			
		

> In three years this attitude has arisen?
> Nobody asks why in just 3 years there is such a shift in attitude and decrease in scholastic skills.


Myself and my colleagues have been noticing for quite some time (11 years for me). However, no one has been listening.

Certainly things have been magnified in the last few years with the elimination of OAC in Ontario. Many of these 17 year olds (and many 18 year olds) are not ready, especially with regards to maturity. This is why, even though they got rid of the 5th year, many come back for the "victory lap."

IMHO (+ many years of experience in the field), most of the time the issue can be traced back home. The kids who have a  lot of parental involvement and support are generally not lazy or apathetic. Perfect example: parent teacher interviews/conferences. In the majority of cases, the parents who show up are the ones who have 80+%; the ones who just want to meet you and say "hi."
Anyway, as the saying goes, the apple doesn't fall far....


----------



## leroi (6 Apr 2009)

SFB said:
			
		

> In three years this attitude has arisen?
> 
> Nobody asks why in just 3 years there is such a shift in attitude and decrease in scholastic skills.
> 
> ...



SFB, It may be sensationalized somewhat. However, it's not completely unture.  I believe the problem started in the 1970s in reaction to the 1960s when a new "child-centered learner model" was introduced in Ontario: Build self-esteem in the student first and learning the 3 R's would follow. This is when the experts decided to do away with formal methods of teaching like memorization skills, phonetic learning, spelling tests, etc. This new model came out of Toronto; it omitted a basic human development tenet: i.e. confidence and self-esteem are realized in an indivdual only after skills and learning take place, not before.

It was in the 1970s that common curriculum, common testing and religion were banished from Ontario public schools.

More recently, the problem was exacerbated when Ontario decided to get rid of grade 13--the standard university prep year and an important biological maturation age. That one year makes a huge impact on the level of emotional readiness of the average entering year student. Many students in Ontario now opt to spend 2 years completing grade 12--"the victory lap" as ex-Sup says.


----------



## PMedMoe (6 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> Certainly things have been magnified in the last few years with the elimination of OAC in Ontario. Many of these 17 year olds (and many 18 year olds) are not ready, especially with regards to maturity. This is why, even though they got rid of the 5th year, many come back for the "victory lap."



When I read the comments to the original story, I was struck by how many people said "Bring back Grade 13."  Is Ontario's curriculum so poor that another year of school is required?  I know New Brunswick has one of the best in the country, maybe that's why we were better prepared.    IMHO, I don't think the extra year (in age or school) would change the sense of entitlement.*



			
				ex-Sup said:
			
		

> IMHO (+ many years of experience in the field), most of the time the issue can be traced back home. The kids who have a  lot of parental involvement and support are generally not lazy or apathetic. Perfect example: parent teacher interviews/conferences. In the majority of cases, the parents who show up are the ones who have 80+%; the ones who just want to meet you and say "hi."
> Anyway, as the saying goes, the apple doesn't fall far....



Totally agree with you there.

*Edit to add:  It would be interesting to know the demographics of the students as I'm sure they're probably not all from Ontario.


----------



## Lil_T (6 Apr 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> That, and does anyone remember when they allowed kids in school to use phonetic spelling?



YES!!  Phonetic spelling was awesome. -confused phonetic spelling with Phonics for reading, it's late...    I don't understand today's teaching methods - doesn't seem like kids learn anything.  And I found out through a teacher friend of mine that Upper Canada District School Board *not sure about other Ontario Boards* subscribe to the No Child Left Behind program.  It boggles my mind, but the sense of entitlement around good grades that kids have makes total sense in that regard.  They can't fail throughout elementary and secondary school.  Why would they feel otherwise in University or heck even the real world?


----------



## ex-Sup (6 Apr 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> When I read the comments to the original story, I was struck by how many people said "Bring back Grade 13."  Is Ontario's curriculum so poor that another year of school is required?


No, it's more of a maturity thing Moe. If you're born late in the year (like me 12/27), you're 17 and in university. I was 18 under the old system, but I think I was pretty mature. I think it's even worse if you're going out of town. I remember a story a former student told me. She spent a few years in town at LU, then went on to Guelph (she was 20). Her roomate was 17. She filled her side of the dorm fridge with juice and fruit; her roomie stocked her side with booze. Some of these kids aren't mature enough for high school, let alone post secondary.

One of the biggest problems is the enabling. Many parents go to extremes to defend their kids, and that has even spread to university. Parents calling profs to complain about marks, ask for assignment extensions, etc. My old man would have kicked me in the ass and then slapped me upside the head with the handset.


----------



## Nauticus (6 Apr 2009)

So now that we see how scholastic skills have dropped, where does the sense of entitlement come from?

Despite popular opinion, university students are not spoiled brats, so that is not where it comes from.


----------



## PuckChaser (6 Apr 2009)

Nauticus said:
			
		

> Despite popular opinion, university students are not spoiled brats, so that is not where it comes from.



Unless said university student is working themselves through school, I would say that the popular opinion is correct. Being around Queens and RMC since I was 17, you learn to tell who the spoiled brats are who use OSAP and mommy+daddy's money to coast through school, and those that have 2 jobs in order to afford tuition.


----------



## ex-Sup (6 Apr 2009)

Nauticus said:
			
		

> Despite popular opinion, university students are not spoiled brats, so that is not where it comes from.





			
				ex-Sup said:
			
		

> One of the biggest problems is the enabling. Many parents go to extremes to defend their kids, and that has even spread to university. Parents calling profs to complain about marks, ask for assignment extensions, etc. My old man would have kicked me in the *** and then slapped me upside the head with the handset.


Shall I elaborate?


----------



## Another Mom (6 Apr 2009)

Maybe the students who want to work hard and learn something aren't bothering to go to Universities where:  there are 250-750 in a class;  where they are taught by grad students,   lecturers or  video;  where they take multiple-choice exams, etc.  The undergrad students I know who are in small classes, who write papers that are critiqued, who discuss their readings in class, who take oral exams and learn to defend their statements very work hard.


----------



## ex-Sup (6 Apr 2009)

Well, how's this for a different spin...let's talk about those who are answering the question. No one has mentioned anything about the profs themselves (other than the comments by Another Mom).

Now I'm not assuming that teachers are perfect, because we're not, but universities and profs are not untouchable either. I can remember some good ones, but also some not so good ones. There were some that were completely out of touch with reality and what was going on around them.

This is one of the key issues out there, especially for us in the educational community. The world around us is changing, and at times changing more quickly than we can adapt to it. Balancing fundamentals and the new reality is tough, and only going to get tougher. I've shown the following video to both my students and some of my colleagues. This is what we're dealing with here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpEnFwiqdx8


----------



## Michael OLeary (7 Apr 2009)

Twenty years ago I ran an Infantry Phase IV course.  There were students on the course (not all, but some) who, when they were told they had failed an assessment, acted as if it was the first time in their lives they had heard that word applied directly to them.  The rewarding of youth for effort over performance, with its resulting expectations when they finally interact with the real world outside of their early parent controlled lives and the "whole language" learning environments, is not that new.


----------



## leroi (7 Apr 2009)

Nauticus said:
			
		

> So now that we see how scholastic skills have dropped, where does the sense of entitlement come from?
> 
> Despite popular opinion, university students are not spoiled brats, so that is not where it comes from.



Nauticus, of course there are many hard-working, mature, well-adjusted university students too. We are discussing general trends, only.  :nod:

A history professor might say the sense of entitlement is cultural and stems from "the cult of the individual" that began in the middle of the last century. It's still being debated.



			
				Another Mom said:
			
		

> Maybe the students who want to work hard and learn something aren't bothering to go to Universities where:  there are 250-750 in a class;  where they are taught by grad students,   lecturers or  video;  where they take multiple-choice exams, etc.  The undergrad students I know who are in small classes, who write papers that are critiqued, who discuss their readings in class, who take oral exams and learn to defend their statements very work hard.



Another Mom,

The decline of the university system is another hugely contended issue! I did my undergrad at a small university and rate it quite high. I didn't have one TA the entire time.  I'm still friends with some of my professors/mentors and have the fondest memories of my time at Nipissing University--and, I worked my @ss off. 

I remember sitting in a Philosophy class trying to read Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. The entire class was getting so frustrated the professor hauled us off to the student bar for beer where we discussed Kant's work until everyone had an understanding.


----------



## benny88 (7 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> One of the biggest problems is the enabling. Many parents go to extremes to defend their kids, and that has even spread to university. Parents calling profs to complain about marks, ask for assignment extensions, etc. My old man would have kicked me in the ass and then slapped me upside the head with the handset.



    My biggest pet peeve! An acquaintance told me just last week that his parents had called the Associate Dean on his behalf and half my milk came out my nose. I couldn't believe that a 20 year old still had his parents going to bat for him, and apart from the obvious cons, the questions and answers will probably get lost in translation anyways, it's much easier to get an answer without playing the game of telephone: student-parent-teacher/prof-parent-student. 
     Last time I tried to pull a stunt like that I was 14 and tried to get my mom to call in sick to work for me. She learned me real quick.
    On the issue of the 5th year, I think it's tremendous. A family member of mine is head of a high school guidance dept and says she sees more well-rounded people go off and have success at university after staying 5 years. I think higher marks are up for debate, and that that is a lot of genetics anyways, but there's more to life and university than academics, and it's these things that can make you a more productive and ultimately, happy, person. 
     Example: a young lady came to UWO having skipped a grade and *turned 17 in the fall of our first year*. She celebrated, and off she went to the hospital to get her stomach pumped. Now don't get me wrong, I'll knock back a few, especially on my birthday; but in this case, the lack of maturity on her part wasn't just detrimental, it was dangerous.
     Some of you who are further removed from that stage of your life may have forgotten just how much you can change in a single year (hormones are a wonderful thing), I definitely believe I was more successful in university and in training after a 5th year, and I would fully support bringing back OAC.



PS for those of you considering a 5th year before joining the military, it didn't hurt that I was a little bigger, faster, and stronger when I was 19 as opposed to 18.


----------



## ballz (7 Apr 2009)

I just wrote half a novel in this post talking about and trying to justify/explain what I'm about to say. Then I realized, I'm only preaching to the choir if I post on here, so I don't think I will need to draw a picture in crayon to explain myself and avoid being chastised for saying this.

It's (education, military, whatever the topic) because our society is becoming more and more left-wing.

I don't think it has anything to do with kids going to university too early or whatever. By the time you're 18, if you're parents died and left nothing behind, and you had to start at ground zero, you should be capable of keeping your head above water. You don't need your parents to deal with your problems anymore, they're YOUR problems.

EDIT to add: Also, this university students being spoiled brats thing, completely false. I would say 90% of my peers would describe themselves as dirt poor, and it is no exaggeration. I'm one of the few that's not in debt up to my ears.

As for lowering standards, that depends on schools. Most schools have minimums of 65% however, that does not mean a 65% will get you in. Some schools will take anybody, they need/want your money. Other schools, with more prestige, don't.


----------



## Michael OLeary (7 Apr 2009)

Re: the 5th year of high school.

In my opinion, many are taking this option to make up for not applying themselves in the preceding four years as much as they should have, or to have a virtual "gap year" before they have to work at university (assuming they intent to).  My son was in the very first 4-year cohort.  He had decided by the end of Grade 9 what his post-secondary plan was, he ensured he took the right prerequisites in each of Grades 10, 11 and 12, and walked into the highly sought after university co-op course he'd set his sights on four years earlier.  The 5th year was dropped because it was unnecessary for those who are actually trying to learn and have some focus for the future.


----------



## benny88 (7 Apr 2009)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> The 5th year was dropped because it was unnecessary for those who are actually trying to learn and have some focus for the future.



It's not fair to assume every person who takes the 5th year isn't driven or is a slacker. I will say that I'm sure there are people who do it for that reason though. You can't generalize either way.


----------



## leroi (7 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> Well, how's this for a different spin...let's talk about those who are answering the question. No one has mentioned anything about the profs themselves (other than the comments by Another Mom).
> 
> Now I'm not assuming that teachers are perfect, because we're not, but universities and profs are not untouchable either. I can remember some good ones, but also some not so good ones. There were some that were completely out of touch with reality and what was going on around them.
> 
> ...



ex-Sup, I don't think anyone here would blame teachers for any of these educational woes.  

You are absolutely right about professors; we have a few at Guelph that are right out to lunch. (A couple of them are the subject of topics here at Army.ca  ;D)

Excellent Youtube video--demonstrates just what an accelerated culture we live in.


----------



## JimMorrison19 (7 Apr 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> When I read the comments to the original story, I was struck by how many people said "Bring back Grade 13."  Is Ontario's curriculum so poor that another year of school is required?  I know New Brunswick has one of the best in the country, maybe that's why we were better prepared.    IMHO, I don't think the extra year (in age or school) would change the sense of entitlement.*
> 
> Totally agree with you there.
> 
> *Edit to add:  It would be interesting to know the demographics of the students as I'm sure they're probably not all from Ontario.



This is strange to me. For a long time I had thought that our system here was quite horrible, but my school may have been an exception, and it may not actually have been the curriculum. I can remember hearing about how the 120 Advanced Math and Calculus class supposedly didn't cover enough up-to-date info, so when most people went and applied to university they ended up taking Pre-Calculus courses there in order to know everything they needed. I think this was a load of crap - students were just making up nonsense about the teachers or the curriculum to cover the fact that they got wasted every weekend instead of studying (myself included, sometimes). 

Looking back on it though, we really did have some wicked teachers; my physics teacher was ultimately the person who turned me onto the path with the way he taught.


----------



## Signalman150 (7 Apr 2009)

Oh boy; where do I start?

No, it's not about grade 13; I was educated in a province where no such thing ever existed, and I teach in a another province where the same applies. No, it's not about lousy profs, and yes; I'm well aware there are many. It's about students who know they don't need to strain themselves to pass high school; it's about a generation of parents (my generation, by the way) who decided their children were the best and the brightest, and if the fool teachers didn't know that, they'd quickly set them to rights.

I instruct at an institute of technology. I've been doing it for two years and I love it.  I have some wonderful, talented and highly motivated students in my class; they make it fun to get up every day. In return I work hard to make sure I'm on top of my game every time I walk into a class. That has an affect on about one third of my students. Then there's the third who come in, sit down, cross their arms and defy me to teach them something. They haven't yet gotten past the high school mentality that the teacher is out to get them and ruin their lives.  I've had some success winning a few of them over, but it is--as they say--a tough slog.

Then there is the other third; now they're an interesting bunch.  They attend occasionally, often dropping off assignments in my mailbox to avoid having to come to class. The assignments they DO submit are amazing. Some of them are cribbed directly off the net, some are copied word-for-word from classmates, and some show the enthusiastic zeal of a somnambulistic slug. But, when they get their grade...oh my; do they ever come to life!

Cries of "my mother wants to talk to the program chair" ring through the halls. Then they discover the problem with no longer being a "student", but an "adult learner". If they are over 18 years of age, FOIP does not allow us to disclose anything of a personal nature to the parents, much less discuss it. For the first time in their lives these people realize that they have to be responsible for themselves, and it really doesn't matter how charming and talented and bright mom or dad thinks they are. It's a bitter blow.

And don't even think of laying this at the feet of the teachers in high school.  They have been given their marching orders from a provincial education ministry that will not allow them to discipline or fail a student. The government here has a program called the "Reluctant Zero". It's based on the idea that even if a student did NADA, they deserve a mark.  So, there is reason for these students feel entitled. (In case you missed it, I just removed the blame from the students; they are NOT lazy, they have merely adapted to the system). Most school teachers try as hard as they can, but if the student knows their are no consequences, why bother putting in all that effort? At their age, I would have felt precisely the same way.

One last observation, and I will cease ranting. I teach a particular subject that requires basic math skills.  At the beginning of the semester I gave my students a ten question quiz.  My intent was to have them do the quiz, then, after they all aced it, I would tell them they were ready for the final exam. It really wasn't an exaggeration;the course requires basic problem solving skills, and the ability to calculate perimeter, area, volume and averages. The marks I got back ranged from 0 to 7.

They were taught in junior high and high school, but were never required to LEARN. And--after all--if they didn't learn it, mom or dad would intervene, give the teacher a blast of crap, and they'd get a passing grade.

If anything is going to change, it will HAVE to be at the legislative level, and most certainly at the family level. My humble and profuse apologies for rambling on so.


----------



## leroi (7 Apr 2009)

Excellent post. 

Teachers and Professors and Instructors are hamstrung by the system.
I have friends who teach and have collapsed on my doorstep with the most ludicrous stories about their own school boards not standing up for them when they try to do the right thing for a student.

I'm taking a university course at the moment after many years being away and am surprised at the lack of respect for the Professor. At first class he asked students to respect a couple of rules: 1) Cell phones and electronic gadgets off; and 2) arrive on time for lecture. Neither of these were observed. 

Some students sautered in and out of class at leisure; it was very distracting for him and the class.

I have the utmost respect for teachers; it's not an easy job.


----------



## Another Mom (7 Apr 2009)

Just to clarify, I never commented about the quality of professors and I don't think anyone here said this was about "lousy" profs.  I was commenting on a "System" where there are too many students in impersonal classes. I am sure committed profs do not want to teach in that system as committed students do not want to learn that way. 

There is an undergraduate college in the US that does not give out grades at all; feedback is qualitative.  Students work to learn, not for grades. Interestingly, that college has the highest proportion of students that eventually go on to doctoral work. I think students who can't cut it, just  transfer.

Perhaps we need more alternatives for young people who really do not want to go the academic route and are wasting everyone's time.   But then, I guess the students that work only for grades in school,  turn out to be the same ones who work at a job only for the money.  Sad.

When I taught at our local Univ, I have to say I was shocked at the admin's apparent fear of getting sued by failed students. Those students didn't seem very bright, though  and I don't they could have learned the material by anyone requiring them to learn it.


----------



## ballz (7 Apr 2009)

Another Mom said:
			
		

> There is an undergraduate college in the US that does not give out grades at all; feedback is qualitative.  Students work to learn, not for grades.



That may work for artsy fartsy stuff, but I would never hire an engineer, mathematician, scientist (take your pick), or accountant that came out of that school. I certainly wouldn't let a doctor that came out of that system cut me open either.



			
				Another Mom said:
			
		

> Perhaps we need more alternatives for young people who really do not want to go the academic route and are wasting everyone's time.



Alternatives are already out there, just not in the form of a post-secondary institution, because they don't belong there. We all know plenty of people with little formal education that are doing just dandy. I think the education system changing to accommodate these said people is what's leading to complaints outlined in article.


----------



## hotei (7 Apr 2009)

[quote author=Another Mom]But then, I guess the students that work only for grades in school,  turn out to be the same ones who work at a job only for the money.  Sad.
[/quote]

While my opinions and experiences are merely anecdotal, I would like to point out that at least in my case, this statement does not hold true. grades are precisely what I worked for in school. I, quite literally, craved the 'A's and 90%+ marks. I did that through grade school, high school and university and eventually led me to graduate as one of the top students in the province.

What did I end up doing after I left university for many moons? 

Farm work. Not exactly your six-figure job (unless you count the zeroes after the decimal place), and it wasn't a family business. I would often work extra hours, not because it paid (because it didn't), but because it gave me skills and opportunities I mightn't have had otherwise. I had a drive to succeed, because there were no more 'A's or 90%+ marks to be had, and money is no indicator of happiness. At the end of the day, I was exhausted, paid only minimum wage, but had the time of my life and learned a tremendous amount.

On top of this, it has been my experience that those who are "after the money" are often those who are driven to do the least amount of work possible, both in work and school. I don't see too many people who work their butts off throughout school, and expect to coast after that.



> Perhaps we need more alternatives for young people who really do not want to go the academic route and are wasting everyone's time.



This quote really confused me. I don't think our society needs more strata of bureaucracy and red tape, especially when we already have established systems to deal with people who do not wish to pursue academic achievement. Trade schools (though I believe even they are drifting outside of their mandate with programs for such things as diplomas in food service that amount to little more than a SmartServe certification and a job posting at Tim Horton's), apprenticeships, or even my method: going off into the community and knocking on doors. The latter will often yield not only job opportunities, but a greater involvement in one's community (a priceless thing, to be sure).



> Just to clarify, I never commented about the quality of professors and I don't think anyone here said this was about "lousy" profs.  I was commenting on a "System" where there are too many students in impersonal classes. I am sure committed profs do not want to teach in that system as committed students do not want to learn that way.



I respectfully disagree. Not because all teachers or professors are bad, but they themselves are a product of the system they serve. 

I can't count the number of professors I have had that essentially goofed off while working. I had one professor who often didn't show up for class. I had another who gave a hundred plus pages of reading for a week for an exam that consisted of 10 multiple choice questions that were often about inconsequential material. I even recall one professor who was fired from one of my universities who offered a guaranteed 70% to anyone who promised not to show up to any more classes. This doesn't even begin to count the number of classes I hve had that have been nearly exclusively taught by a TA who knew less about the lesson of the day than the students.

It is my belief that education has become a commodity, to be researched, manufactured, marketed, packaged, bought, sold and it really wouldn't surprise me if, when one turned education over, there was a sticker that said "Made in China". I need only point to enrolment levels in criminology programs in universities and colleges when CSI was popular. Likewise after Jurassic Park came out, palaeontology majors sky rocketed. It was the same with archaeology and Indiana Jones, or to bring it closer to home, the USAF with Top Gun.

All of this, however revolves around my belief that much of the blame rests squarely on the shoulders of the face in the mirror. Too often people say that they are "too busy" for their family duties. These are people who show poor time management skills, and try to buy their way into familial success. 

Contrast this with my own anecdotal evidence: my mother, a single woman (by choice), who attended university (before I was born) and took correspondence courses after I was born (imagine that, not bringing your screaming child into classes -- it has happened). She worked fulltime as well, and yet still managed to write a note in my lunch, or take me to sports, or smack my butt raw if I stepped out of line (and I did, and she did ;D) 

I believe our undoing is not the schools, or the children, but the relationship that our culture seems to think is not only normal but healthy to maintain with your children. Fix that, and I believe we'd all see a big jump in normalcy.


----------



## PMedMoe (7 Apr 2009)

I don't think that anyone can convince me that having five years of high school will make a student "ready" for university.   There are people at 16 who can look after themselves and others (my daughter babysitting her younger sisters comes to mind) and people at 25 who can't do their own laundry or prepare a simple meal that doesn't come frozen in a box.  Everyone matures at different rates.  

Maybe not letting a child _start_ school at the age of five (or four) when they obviously aren't ready would make a difference.  I know I was one of those (birthday in March) that turned six before the kindergarten year ended.  In my class we had a girl who turned five just before the end of the year who still sucked her thumb.  Imagine my indignation to be in the same class as a "baby"!


----------



## ex-Sup (7 Apr 2009)

leroi said:
			
		

> Teachers and Professors and Instructors are hamstrung by the system.


This is the crux of the issue. Just like when I was in the reserves, I get orders and I have to follow them. Whether it be curriculum or assessment and evaluation, I do what the Ministry of Ed tells me. It doesn't matter what I think, or if I like it or not; the system is what it is. Probably the biggest issue out there (I see it discussed a lot as a dept head) is the gov't decision years back to get rid of late marks and frown on giving zeros. As an educator I can see the rationale, but it has created huge problems. Kids aren't dumb, they figure things out quite quickly. Some are brutal for handing things in, and especially with my applied class, if I don't hound them, some wouldn't hand anything in and they would all fail (the powers that be would be very unhappy). There is a revised document coming out in Sept and we are all hoping it addresses these concerns.


			
				leroi said:
			
		

> 1) Cell phones and electronic gadgets off; and 2) arrive on time for lecture.


Some are literally addicted; they cannot go a few minutes without texting. It has become a huge problem. With the lates, most of the problem stems from home. Some of these kids have really messed up home lives, which isn't an excuse, but must be taken into account.

Some of the posters have mentioned that the sense of entitlement comes from their parents; I have a colleague who told me the exact same thing month ago. He's close to retirement and flat out told me that his generation is partly to blame for the problem. I don't disagree with him; I'm convinced that parents who had issues in school tend to have kids with the same problem. As one parent told my wife (who's a math teacher), "I can be the ahole dad, or I can be the nice dad. I don't want to be the ahole." Well, there you go!



			
				leroi said:
			
		

> I have the utmost respect for teachers; it's not an easy job.


It is extremely rewarding, but also very frustrating at times. Wouldn't trade it for anything (well, maybe if I could be the guy that gets to test build the new Lego sets  ;D).


----------



## NL_engineer (7 Apr 2009)

All the focus is on the students, saying there not mature.  Well last time I checked, a child's development in not an internal thing, but an external one.  Society encourages immaturity, look at the things that raise most Canadian/American kids (TV and internet).  Yes their are a lot of good TV programs, but most kids/teens tune into something like what is on MTV.

Parents have a large role to play in it to, but when a child comes from a household were both parents work, they are being raised by things like the TV; wile the child with a stay at home parent is being raised by that parent.

As for University's well I have seen way toooooo (not a typo) many profs that have no real World experience in what they teach, or are on there own little planet.  Vice the college system were the instructors have real world experience, and skip the BS stuff that University's make you do.  I have seen way too many University Graduates that don't have a sweet clue about anything (maybe because there outside the box thinking method said that 2+2=5 65% of the time).

Just my 2 cents worth


----------



## BradCon (7 Apr 2009)

I have to agree with the profs on this one.  I was a 30 year old undergrad and just had the worst time at a big university. Many of the people I had class came across as overprivileged  brats, who had never had to do a day of labour ever.

In terms of development, the most often adhered to theory in psychology is that males do not actually finish developing their prefrontal cortex's until the age of 25, which could explain many of my stupid behaviors earlier in my life.  The prefrontal cortex is the region of the brain largely responsible for fore thought and decision making.

In the years prior to my big university days, I attended a few small colleges and found that there was a higher level of maturity among the population I was in contact with, also the environment was much different which may have been a contributing variable. The conspiracy theorist in me thinks it may also be a bunch of Ivory Tower academics trying to bring back grade 13 in Ontario in order to create more for there cohorts.


----------



## ex-Sup (7 Apr 2009)

BravoCharlie said:
			
		

> The conspiracy theorist in me thinks it may also be a bunch of Ivory Tower academics trying to bring back grade 13 in Ontario in order to create more for there cohorts.


Not sure where you're going with this, but it ain't going to happen. There is too much invested in changing the curriculum to fit a 4 year model. Also, the gov't saves a crap load of money by not funding an extra year and having less teacher salaries.


----------



## logairoff (7 Apr 2009)

Let's give this thread some balance because there is plenty of blame to go around. I think entrance average has nothing to do with any of these problems. A university with a low admission average gives a student a chance to prove themself in University. I assure you that a lot of students do in fact fail/drop out of University before completing a 4 year degree. I have respect for anyone that can complete a University degree anywhere in Canada so let's not belittle that.

I've had this debate many times with friends and have seen it live between teachers and parents. The best line I heard was that teachers have one year of experience 20 times and no one gets a say in whether this one year was a good one or a bad one. The teachers will exclaim well I've done the same thing for 20 years so it must be the students' fault. Well, maybe the problem is that you're doing the same thing every year and aren't adapting/responding to the students you get. We've all had or seen those teachers who are just waiting for their retirment and there is absolutely no passion left. Could the lack of preparedness be correlated with the baby boom generation, more bad teachers being in the system getting older therefore lack of passion? This is just a theory.

We've all had atleast one excellent teacher but we all know/had/heard of many bad teachers that should be fired. Unions are protecting way too many bad teachers. It is way too easy to blame students and society. Teachers and parents should stand up and take some of the blame instead of just throwing it at students.


----------



## ex-Sup (7 Apr 2009)

logairoff said:
			
		

> I've had this debate many times with friends and have seen it live between teachers and parents. The best line I heard was that teachers have one year of experience 20 times and no one gets a say in whether this one year was a good one or a bad one. The teachers will exclaim well I've done the same thing for 20 years so it must be the students' fault. Well, maybe the problem is that you're doing the same thing every year and aren't adapting/responding to the students you get. We've all had or seen those teachers who are just waiting for their retirment and there is absolutely no passion left. Could the lack of preparedness be correlated with the baby boom generation, more bad teachers being in the system getting older therefore lack of passion? This is just a theory.


While I appreciate your comments, what I am reading is a lot of theory and “I heard.” I don’t have 1 year of experience, I have 11 years of experience. Teachers need to be learners as well; I can say that I learn new things everyday. I teach history, and while the material doesn’t change, the way I teach it does. I am always looking for new ways to approach each topic, such as the use of technology. That is what we do, with zeal and passion.



			
				logairoff said:
			
		

> We've all had atleast one excellent teacher but we all know/had/heard of many bad teachers that should be fired. Unions are protecting way too many bad teachers. It is way too easy to blame students and society.


I’m assuming you must have had some bad experiences along the way, but I would argue that the opposite is true. Remember that we too were students at some point. There were a few that I can forget, but there were a lot of good ones that really left a lasting mark. Teaching is like any job or profession; we all have our good and bad. But speaking for myself, I work with a lot of hard working, dedicated and dynamic individuals that strive to make an impact on our youth. This is why I firmly believe that this job is a calling; not everyone is a teacher because not everyone can do this job. I bring passion and enthusiasm with me to work everyday, whether it’s in the classroom, on the football field or even just in the hallway. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t be doing this job.

Yes, everyone has their share of blame. But guess what, my conscience is clear; I haven’t created this lazy or entitled generation. I also know enough to say that all students are not like that. I’d venture to say that the majority work hard and are not like the article describes. I can state this because I have the credentials and experience to back it up. Until I see more than an empty profile and hearsay, I’ll treat opinions for what they are.


----------



## c_canuk (7 Apr 2009)

my thought son the matter...

blame belongs to everyone

The parents:

For not putting the time and effort into teaching their children proper respect for adults.

For well as coddling them and keeping them from any and all responsibility for the consequences of their actions

For changing the focus of our society onto teaching children that they are special little snowflakes and all of society revolves around their happyiness, rather than teach them to be responsible for their own happiness while participating in making society better for everyone.

The Government:

For cutting teacher's pay, resulting in teaching being considered a less desired position in society, which means a lot of the people who do teach, shouldn't. And those that should be end up assuming a lot more responsibility than they should have to and get burned out.

For allowing the PC crowd to take over the institutions and continue to perpetuate the myth that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

The Administrators:

they tend to be some of the most foggy minded immature people I've ever had the displeasure of dealing with, crippled initiative and lack of logical thought and foresight.

For example a friend of mine is a teacher, he was pulled in unpaid on his weekends to attend some guys new plan to retool the NB Education system, he wants to eliminate all classes not centered around University, he thinks that the future is all university... thats right, lets take away freedom of choice and force everyone down the path of university... mean while all white collar jobs are being outsourced to other countries, and our entire blue collar workforce is on the cusp of retirement. Never mind that some people aren't cut out for university and now won't have anything to fall back on. Never mind that it is perfectly honorable to want to work with your hands as an Electrician, Plumber, Mechanic, Wood Worker, Machinist and these skill can all be taught to an appretice level perfectly well within the time people will spend in high school

The teachers: Some of them are great, some of them are abysmal, and some just don't care anymore.

The universities: They've become service providers, not bastions of higher learning. Emphasis on quality education is gone, it's all about the bottom line these days.


----------



## The Bread Guy (7 Apr 2009)

Good discussion.  While there may be, as in any group, a few weiners out, good teachers/professors are worth their weight in GOLD!

How about these as other factors to consider?

1)  I'd like to hear from anyone on the teaching end (elementary/secondary/post-secondary) about how supportive higher up's are when the more assertive students or parents barge in and strongarm a bit (or threaten to).  I've only heard second hand, but some post-secondary environments would rather give someone extra marks on appeal than enforce the policy, even if the student admits not completing all his/her work.  

2)  For those who complain about the delivery of instruction in post-secondary:  how do post-secondary teachers/professors learn how to teach?  Having learned in both community college and university, and taught briefly in a community college, it appears educators in this sector generally teach how they were taught.  I know as a cocky young MCPL when I was in university, I witnessed in lectures where, if a soldier delivered theory the same way in a leadership course, s/he would have failed the lecture.  Am I the only one seeing it this way?


----------



## Infandone (7 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> While I appreciate your comments, what I am reading is a lot of theory and “I heard.” I don’t have 1 year of experience, I have 11 years of experience. Teachers need to be learners as well; I can say that I learn new things everyday. I teach history, and while the material doesn’t change, the way I teach it does. I am always looking for new ways to approach each topic, such as the use of technology. That is what we do, with zeal and passion.
> I’m assuming you must have had some bad experiences along the way, but I would argue that the opposite is true. Remember that we too were students at some point. There were a few that I can forget, but there were a lot of good ones that really left a lasting mark. Teaching is like any job or profession; we all have our good and bad. But speaking for myself, I work with a lot of hard working, dedicated and dynamic individuals that strive to make an impact on our youth. This is why I firmly believe that this job is a calling; not everyone is a teacher because not everyone can do this job. I bring passion and enthusiasm with me to work everyday, whether it’s in the classroom, on the football field or even just in the hallway. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t be doing this job.
> 
> Yes, everyone has their share of blame. But guess what, my conscience is clear; I haven’t created this lazy or entitled generation. I also know enough to say that all students are not like that. I’d venture to say that the majority work hard and are not like the article describes. I can state this because I have the credentials and experience to back it up. Until I see more than an empty profile and hearsay, I’ll treat opinions for what they are.



So first you generalize a whole generation as "lazy and entitled," then in the next sentence go on to say that the majority work hard. Which one is it?


----------



## NL_engineer (7 Apr 2009)

Infandone said:
			
		

> So first you generalize a whole generation as "lazy and entitled," then in the next sentence go on to say that the majority work hard. Which one is it?




Did you read the whole 3 pages?  Because I recall he has/someone else explained both off those in another post.


----------



## ex-Sup (7 Apr 2009)

Infandone said:
			
		

> So first you generalize a whole generation as "lazy and entitled," then in the next sentence go on to say that the majority work hard. Which one is it?


I was referring to the label they are given and that it is somewhat erroneous.


			
				NL_engineer said:
			
		

> Did you read the whole 3 pages?  Because I recall he has/someone else explained both off those in another post.


Hmmm, not reading everything....where have I seen that before?


----------



## Infandone (7 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> I was referring to the label they are given and that it is somewhat erroneous.



Maybe you could word it better next time.

"But guess what, my conscience is clear; I haven’t created this lazy or entitled generation," directly contradicts "I also know enough to say that all students are not like that. I’d venture to say that the majority work hard and are not like the article describes."


----------



## ex-Sup (7 Apr 2009)

Infandone said:
			
		

> Maybe you could word it better next time.
> 
> "But guess what, my conscience is clear; I haven’t created this lazy or entitled generation," directly contradicts "I also know enough to say that all students are not like that. I’d venture to say that the majority work hard and are not like the article describes."


But guess what, my conscience is clear; I haven't created any lazy or entitled indivduals (at least not knowingly...I set fairly high standards). I also know enough to say that all students are not lazy or entitled. I’d venture to say that the majority work hard and are not like the article describes.

Is this better? Once again however, I was referring to the title and how it generalizes. I didn't view it as contradictory, or I wouldn't have written it.


----------



## ex-Sup (7 Apr 2009)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> 1)  I'd like to hear from anyone on the teaching end (elementary/secondary/post-secondary) about how supportive higher up's are when the more assertive students or parents barge in and strongarm a bit (or threaten to).  I've only heard second hand, but some post-secondary environments would rather give someone extra marks on appeal than enforce the policy, even if the student admits not completing all his/her work.
> 
> 2)  For those who complain about the delivery of instruction in post-secondary:  how do post-secondary teachers/professors learn how to teach?  Having learned in both community college and university, and taught briefly in a community college, it appears educators in this sector generally teach how they were taught.  I know as a cocky young MCPL when I was in university, I witnessed in lectures where, if a soldier delivered theory the same way in a leadership course, s/he would have failed the lecture.  Am I the only one seeing it this way?


I'll get back to you in a bit Tony.


----------



## Infandone (7 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> But guess what, my conscience is clear; I haven't created any lazy or entitled indivduals (at least not knowingly...I set fairly high standards). I also know enough to say that all students are not lazy or entitled. I’d venture to say that the majority work hard and are not like the article describes.
> 
> Is this better? Once again however, I was referring to the title and how it generalizes. I didn't view it as contradictory, or I wouldn't have written it.



Yeah that's good, but "in my experience, the majority of students today are hard workers" would be better.  >


----------



## ex-Sup (7 Apr 2009)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> 1)  I'd like to hear from anyone on the teaching end (elementary/secondary/post-secondary) about how supportive higher up's are when the more assertive students or parents barge in and strongarm a bit (or threaten to).  I've only heard second hand, but some post-secondary environments would rather give someone extra marks on appeal than enforce the policy, even if the student admits not completing all his/her work.



I’ve been fairly lucky to work with some great admin, especially the current group. They shut down the BS pretty quickly (this is assuming you’ve done your job ie. calling home, etc.). I have witnessed/heard of some waffling at all levels (teacher, admin, board), which can be deflating. I’ve been lucky to only have a few scrapes with parents over the years, and I’ve rec’d awesome support. Ironically, the few that come to mind are from football….interesting. If you are doing your job properly, then most of these complaints don’t have a leg to stand on. As I mentioned in a previous post, most of the waves are caused by those who have some sort of previous issue with school, authority, etc.



			
				milnews.ca said:
			
		

> 2)  For those who complain about the delivery of instruction in post-secondary:  how do post-secondary teachers/professors learn how to teach?  Having learned in both community college and university, and taught briefly in a community college, it appears educators in this sector generally teach how they were taught.  I know as a cocky young MCPL when I was in university, I witnessed in lectures where, if a soldier delivered theory the same way in a leadership course, s/he would have failed the lecture.  Am I the only one seeing it this way?



Now I’m a bit out of my lane here, but most I would venture they receive little. I can only remember one prof I had at LU had a B.Ed. I’m not saying that a teaching degree automatically makes one better, but I would imagine that it has got to help. Most profs are there to do research and teaching is something that comes with the job; I think this why there are a lot of sessional lecturers out there. That being said, I did have some great profs, even if they are not trained teachers. However, there were some that limited their “instruction” to reading the text. There are good and bad everywhere; like I said before, some are not cut out to teach. The profs that do a better job are probably more comfortable and have a natural inclination to do the job.


----------



## ex-Sup (7 Apr 2009)

Infandone said:
			
		

> Yeah that's good, but "in my experience, the majority of students today are hard workers" would be better.  >


Everyone's a friggin' critic! I'm trying to mark tests while I do this


----------



## Lil_T (7 Apr 2009)

yeesh - this is going to be my oldest in another 5 years if he doesn't smarten the hell up.  I take my responsibility very seriously.  I go to every parent teacher, I try to work with his teachers to work out a plan to help him out.  I have sat down with him on numerous occasions trying desperately to get him to understand what he's learning.  This "new math" by the way is the stupidest thing I've ever seen. 

 I do blame the administrators. If my son is not grasping the subject matter and isn't meeting the outcomes he should, then he should fail the year.  Is there shame in failing a grade?  Sure - but sometimes it's the kick in the butt a kid needs to get it in gear.  I will admit, when I was in grade 10 I didn't take school all that seriously.  Skipped class, did very very little except in a couple of classes.  Guess what?  I failed the grade.  So when I had to repeat grade 10 the following year I worked twice as hard and didn't skip class at all.  Lesson learned.  Nothing quite like watching the majority of your friends - people you've known since you were 5 - leave you behind senior year.  Do I want that for my son?  Of course not.  But he is lazy and doesn't want to do the work that's required.  Because of that, I've got no qualms whatsoever about him failing a grade.  I've basically told his teachers to fail him if he's not getting it.  But they keep pushing him along.  I know he's screwed if he decides to go to university.  He has no study skills and there's little I can do short of duct taping him to a chair with the books in front of him.  Mind you, he'd actually have to bring the books home first.

It's an aggravating situation. The administrators carry out these hare-brained ideas.  The teachers' hands are tied to do anything in opposition to the boards.  The students (some of them) take advantage, and the parents are often left wondering WTF just happened? I fear for his post-secondary future.  I feel like I failed him, even though I've done everything I can, short of doing the work for him.  There are some places I will not go as a parent and that is one of them.  I will not be that crazy mother phoning the Dean because he's failing something.   

How to stop this sense of entitlement among post secondary students?  To quote the title of another post on army.ca       LET THEM FAIL!  It's not nice, but it gets the point across.


----------



## ex-Sup (7 Apr 2009)

Lil_T said:
			
		

> LET THEM FAIL!  It's not nice, but it gets the point across.


This has been my point all along. It's the system, and who influences the "system," us; society. It is the voters/taxpayers in ON (or wherever) that control what happens. Someone pointed the finger at teachers, and that it starts with us. I don't set policy, politicians do. I only follow the rules that are set out for me. 

As a side note, I failed Gr.11 math. Nothing special, I just sucked at math and didn't work as hard as I needed to. The only thing I ever failed


----------



## Lil_T (7 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> As a side note, I failed Gr.11 math. Nothing special, I just sucked at math and didn't work as hard as I needed to. The only thing I ever failed



I failed grade 10 Math, and it was one of the classes I actually went to and worked at.  Went to summer school and had no mark below 100.  Go figure.


----------



## ballz (7 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> Now I’m a bit out of my lane here, but most I would venture they receive little. I can only remember one prof I had at LU had a B.Ed. I’m not saying that a teaching degree automatically makes one better, but I would imagine that it has got to help. Most profs are there to do research and teaching is something that comes with the job; I think this why there are a lot of sessional lecturers out there. That being said, I did have some great profs, even if they are not trained teachers. However, there were some that limited their “instruction” to reading the text. There are good and bad everywhere; like I said before, some are not cut out to teach. The profs that do a better job are probably more comfortable and have a natural inclination to do the job.



I don't want to push the wrong buttons here, but I've found as the student and as a tutor to my friends sometimes, that the ability to teach is hardly something that can be taught. I'm not sure what material gets covered in an education degree, but I'll explain my lack of faith in it like this.

When I was in elementary and junior high (so 95% of these teachers had an education degree only), I couldn't stand most of my teachers, as teachers (not as people). And no, I didn't have to deal with their teaching ability, or lack thereof, a whole lot, because I've always gotten things pretty easily. But it's frustrating to sit there with your peers and they don't get something and the teacher is too incompetent for the most part to make it make sense for them. I've seen people struggle and fail, not because of their own lack of effort or involvement, but because of the teacher's lack of ability.

Now move to high school, it was a lot harder to find somebody that couldn't teach. They all have education degrees, AND another degree. Does this mean they are more competent individuals? Well, it's not the be all end all of it, but it certainly points in that direction. Why is it that they're ability to teach was so much better? They only had bachelor's in education, just like the elementary and junior high teachers, but yet they're ability to teach was way better (even if it wasn't the subject of their degree, aka the science teachers usually taught something at the grade 11 level that wasn't their major).

Anyway, what I'm getting at is, I don't think an education degree qualifies one to be a teacher.

So when it comes to prof's, most of them I've dealt with are very competent (I've only found one out of 15 now that I would question) and able to teach, even though they lack an education degree. They're definitely better than the elementary and junior high teachers I had to deal with who DID have an education degree.


----------



## mediocre1 (7 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> This has been my point all along. It's the system, and who influences the "system," us; society. It is the voters/taxpayers in ON (or wherever) that control what happens. Someone pointed the finger at teachers, and that it starts with us. I don't set policy, politicians do. I only follow the rules that are set out for me.
> 
> As a side note, I failed Gr.11 math. Nothing special, I just sucked at math and didn't work as hard as I needed to. The only thing I ever failed



With duee respect, super and this oone is not aimed at you. There are lots of factors  that takes one too long to mature. Sometimes, their parents are to blame. For me there are no bad parents. But if you spoil your children chances are it would be late for him/her to maature. 

There are people who attend Sunday school. A large percentage of them mature fast.

Sometimes peer groups are the cause of late maturity. I belong to this group. It tookk me 45 years to mature. Now I am very conscious of my behaviour especially in this Country Canada where everyonoe should be very-lawabiding or else your future becoomes bleak.


----------



## chris_log (7 Apr 2009)

mediocre1 said:
			
		

> With duee respect, super and this oone is not aimed at you. There are lots of factors  that takes one too long to mature. Sometimes, their parents are to blame. For me *there are no bad parents*. But if you spoil your children chances are it would be late for him/her to maature.



There are lots of bad parents out there. Lots. 



> There are people who attend Sunday school. A large percentage of them mature fast.
> 
> Sometimes peer groups are the cause of late maturity. I belong to this group. It tookk me 45 years to mature. Now I am very conscious of my behaviour especially in this Country Canada where everyonoe should be very-lawabiding or else your future becoomes bleak.



Huh?



> I don't want to push the wrong buttons here, but I've found as the student and as a tutor to my friends sometimes, that the ability to teach is hardly something that can be taught. I'm not sure what material gets covered in an education degree, but I'll explain my lack of faith in it like this.
> 
> When I was in elementary and junior high (so 95% of these teachers had an education degree only), I couldn't stand most of my teachers, as teachers (not as people). And no, I didn't have to deal with their teaching ability, or lack thereof, a whole lot, because I've always gotten things pretty easily. But it's frustrating to sit there with your peers and they don't get something and the teacher is too incompetent for the most part to make it make sense for them. I've seen people struggle and fail, not because of their own lack of effort or involvement, but because of the teacher's lack of ability.
> 
> ...



Tutoring a few friends does not make you qualified to discount education degrees. Teaching in the public school system is frustrating beyond all imagination, I'm sure ex-Sup can attest to that. As per what was mentioned earlier, the vaste majority of teachers are good educators but are hamstrung by the system they work for. An education degree teaches you the skills you need to be a teacher and educate people; if a teacher is not familiar with the material they are teaching then that's a different issue. If a history teachers does not know the history they are teaching, that's not the fault of their education degree. 



> I'm not sure what material gets covered in an education degree



You quite obviously don't, I'm afraid.


----------



## ballz (7 Apr 2009)

Piper said:
			
		

> An education degree teaches you the skills you need to be a teacher and educate people; if a teacher is not familiar with the material they are teaching then that's a different issue. If a history teachers does not know the history they are teaching, that's not the fault of their education degree.



First off, my personal experience and knowledge does qualify me to discount an education degree. I don't need any formal qualifications to form or voice an opinion. 

You quite obviously aren't understanding what I'm saying. Nothing I said had anything to do with knowing your material, it was solely about where the ability to teach stems from, and I don't think it's from post-secondary education. I don't say that because I've tutored people, I say it based on all my experience. Somebody preferring come to me after school, who's in the same grade as them, rather than go to the teacher's classroom and ask the teacher, isn't bad evidence though.

In Alberta, they keep track of how each teacher's students perform on their Diploma exams. The school administration gets to see it, schools get ranked based on them actually (and it's published every year). It's an entirely standardized exam with a standard curriculum, there's not a whole lot of curve balls that can be thrown.

I had a Social Studies teacher who had a history degree and an education degree teaching my grade 12 level social studies course, this was her second time teaching it. She was brutal. No doubt in my mind she knew the material, but she was a terrible teacher. She'd put up the slides at the start of class to the end of class, and we're lucky if she said 20 words. She never elaborated, never asked questions, never brought in any material that might encourage us to ask questions. There were no assignments, just to "do the questions at the end of the chapter" and she would take in every 2nd or 3rd set and mark them, hand them back, and never go over any of it. Basically, she didn't even bother to encourage anybody to think.

Low and behold, we were the 2nd class to have sub-par results on our diplomas, and proof of it is that she no longer teaches grade 12 level courses. 

She knew the material, it was simple stuff (fascism, communism, socialism, and free market), and she had an education degree, but she was still a bad teacher, despite her education degree.

Some people just aren't good teachers, and some people just are. Whether they have an education degree or not has seemed to have little effect on it from my personal experience. 

If my opinion doesn't hold enough weight with you to consider it, that's fine. Don't tell me I'm not qualified to have one.


----------



## chris_log (7 Apr 2009)

ballz said:
			
		

> First off, my personal experience and knowledge does qualify me to discount an education degree. I don't need any formal qualifications to form or voice an opinion.
> 
> You quite obviously aren't understanding what I'm saying. Nothing I said had anything to do with knowing your material, it was solely about where the ability to teach stems from, and I don't think it's from post-secondary education. I don't say that because I've tutored people, I say it based on all my experience. Somebody preferring come to me after school, who's in the same grade as them, rather than go to the teacher's classroom and ask the teacher, isn't bad evidence though.
> 
> ...



Your previous post completely discounted education degrees. Being a tutor or having been a student in a bad teacher's class does not give you any qualifications to discount this type of degree. 

An educational degree does, in fact, set you up with the skills needed to be a teacher. Like any degree, these are only skills that need to be honed through experience and continuing education for the teacher. There will always be bad teachers, but for the most part they do a good job within the VERY restrictive constraints of the public education system. 

People aren't 'born' teachers in the same way people aren't 'born' leaders.


----------



## Burrows (7 Apr 2009)

mediocre1 said:
			
		

> With duee respect, super and this oone is not aimed at you. There are lots of factors  that takes one too long to mature. Sometimes, their parents are to blame. For me there are no bad parents. But if you spoil your children chances are it would be late for him/her to maature.
> 
> There are people who attend Sunday school. A large percentage of them mature fast.
> 
> Sometimes peer groups are the cause of late maturity. I belong to this group. It tookk me 45 years to mature. Now I am very conscious of my behaviour especially in this Country Canada where everyonoe should be very-lawabiding or else your future becoomes bleak.



I'd really like for you to explain this.  As far as I and some others can tell, you're being anti-canadian.  Based on your previous posting history - this is a conclusion I am not hesitant to draw.

Consider this an official request.  Failure to clarify the true intent of your post will result in your future here becoming very bleak.

Regards,

milnet staff


----------



## ballz (7 Apr 2009)

Piper said:
			
		

> Your previous post completely discounted education degrees. Being a tutor or having been a student in a bad teacher's class does not give you any qualifications to discount this type of degree.
> 
> An educational degree does, in fact, set you up with the skills needed to be a teacher. Like any degree, these are only skills that need to be honed through experience and continuing education for the teacher. There will always be bad teachers, but for the most part they do a good job within the VERY restrictive constraints of the public education system.
> 
> People aren't 'born' teachers in the same way people aren't 'born' leaders.



No, it didn't "completely discount education degrees." I said it quite clearly that the point I was getting at was "I don't think an education degree qualifies someone to be a teacher." And I stand by that and don't see how that "completely discounts" an education degree. I just think we need to raise the standards to which we hire teachers. 

I'm not trying to say that teachers are born and that its just black and white like that. However, certain people will NEVER be able to be good teachers just like certain people will never learn to be good leaders. A large part of it is the hard-wiring you have, and that cannot be changed.

In sports and other areas of life, everybody seems to realize and accept that there are some people that can work as hard as they want all their life and they will never be good enough because they weren't born with the right skill sets. They accept that you need to be born with a certain level of talent to make it to the NHL.

For some reason, people aren't as ready to accept that it's the same with education. People suggest "if you work hard enough, you can learn it" and it's completely false. I can understand why a teacher would instill that attitude in a pupil, but to look back at it and believe it is just naive.

EDIT: Okay I'm gone completely off the topic now. Just to clear up, I don't think these problems we're complaining about are the teacher's faults, not in the least bit. More than happy to get back to the real topic.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (7 Apr 2009)

mediocre1 said:
			
		

> For me there are no bad parents.



Then you are a friggin' idiot. Full stop.

Apologies to the site for my bluntness.


----------



## Lil_T (7 Apr 2009)

mediocre1 said:
			
		

> With duee respect, super and this oone is not aimed at you. There are lots of factors  that takes one too long to mature. Sometimes, their parents are to blame. For me there are no bad parents. But if you spoil your children chances are it would be late for him/her to maature.



False.



> There are people who attend Sunday school. A large percentage of them mature fast.


  please elaborate!  



> Sometimes peer groups are the cause of late maturity. I belong to this group. *It tookk me 45 years to mature.* Now I am very conscious of my behaviour especially in this Country Canada where everyonoe should be very-lawabiding or else your future becoomes bleak.


  

I don't think you are done yet.  

I also don't understand the point of your post.  Are you implying a lack of spirituality is the root cause of this widespread selfishness?


----------



## George Wallace (7 Apr 2009)

Piper said:
			
		

> People aren't 'born' teachers in the same way people aren't 'born' leaders.



I was set off by a post that I just stopped reading because the person who posted it couldn't tell the difference between such words as "there", "their", "they're" and "they are" but thought I could make it through this topic without commenting.  Wrong!  This comment, above, does need commenting on.  Just as people aren't "born teachers", nor are others "born leaders", an education and a certificate on their wall does not necessarily make them "teachers" or "leaders".  Unfortunately, our society has progressed digressed to the point that one needs a piece of paper hanging on their "I love me wall" to justify their hiring, especially by Government.


----------



## George Wallace (7 Apr 2009)

If one were to look back on articles written on these subjects in the 1970's, we would be seeing nothing has changed in the past 40 years.  One would have figured that the Education Institutions, the governments, etc would have improved in some measure; but no.  Instead it is just a case of "SALY".


----------



## chris_log (7 Apr 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I was set off by a post that I just stopped reading because the person who posted it couldn't tell the difference between such words as "there", "their", "they're" and "they are" but thought I could make it through this topic without commenting.  Wrong!  This comment, above, does need commenting on.  Just as people aren't "born teachers", nor are others "born leaders", an education and a certificate on their wall does not necessarily make them "teachers" or "leaders".  Unfortunately, our society has progressed digressed to the point that one needs a piece of paper hanging on their "I love me wall" to justify their hiring, especially by Government.



I think previous posts I've made on this site indicate my distaste of credentialism. 

However, I stand by my view that teachers are not born and a degree in education does help give the foundation needed to teach young students. My understanding of the way these degrees are taught (from a number of friends of mine who are taking the program) is that it is, unlike many degrees, much more 'hands on' and the theories taught are grounded in reality more so then other degrees. You need a starting point, somewhere, and an education degree does give people the theoretical and practical (through student teaching placements) foundation to start their career. Of course, being a good teacher requires more then just a piece of paper. But I think you misunderstood what I was saying. 

Think of a teaching degree (or any degree I guess) as a QL3 course. Did you come off your 3's as a super-duper-armoured trooper? No. Did it give you the foundation needed to go on and gain experience and work in that environment? Yes. Same goes for a degree. 

I don't put a lot of stock in higher education and I dislike the belief that a degree somehow implies that one is ready for anything, but it does help give people the foundation to move on in life. Looking back on my 4 years at school I must say that many people (myself included) are often too quick to discount liberal arts education.


----------



## George Wallace (7 Apr 2009)

Piper

I agree with you.  An education can help greatly, but at the same time, it doesn't necessarily provide the ideal solution, all the time.  If you look a little deeper into "Government" and what pieces of paper are expected, and who is hired and who is not; it is often not the person with the real knowledge and experience, but the person who has that "piece of paper on the wall".  That other extreme is a problem, but we are wandering off topic if we go much further into other agencies hiring practices.


----------



## Gunnar (7 Apr 2009)

> Quote from: mediocre1 on Today at 16:11:33
> For me there are no bad parents.
> 
> 
> Then you are a friggin' idiot. Full stop.



He's probably just a mediocre thinker.   8)


----------



## ex-Sup (7 Apr 2009)

Oh so many responses, where to start?

First off, as I’ve said before on this site, I am not the end all and be all. I am not the most knowledgeable, nor the most experienced teacher around. Yoda I am not. However, I think my years in the profession and my experience do give me quite a bit of creditability.

Ballz, I appreciate your comments and you do raise some valid points. Yes, I will agree with you that having a B.Ed does not make one a “teacher.” Most teachers will tell you, whether they were in the 4/5 year concurrent program (like me) or the 1 year program, that teacher's college is a joke. I did have some good instructors, but some equally laughable. I remember one, nice enough guy, but he was older than dirt and hadn’t been in a classroom in 25+ years. What can you teach me about the realities of today’s schools? Another, again a great guy, but since he was on tenure, taught nothing close to what he was supposed to. He made us do seminars on the material he was supposed to teach; my favourite was when he wore his “a friend with weed is a friend indeed” t-shirt on the day a classmate brought her cousin the cop to class for the seminar. The only valuable things we learnt was when we did our placements (usually 2x5 weeks). I know from experience that even that was artificial; someone else’s classroom, rules and expectations for a short period of time. Even substitute teaching, which I did for a year and a half, lacks a lot of reality. Babysitting hooligans for the day with sometimes little to do is great (teaches you a lot about classroom management though!). I generally do not leave detailed lessons (a video if I can) as I want to teach it myself. The only real learning happens is when you get your own class, with your own rules and assigning/marking your own evaluations. 



			
				ballz said:
			
		

> First off, my personal experience and knowledge does qualify me to discount an education degree. I don't need any formal qualifications to form or voice an opinion.
> If my opinion doesn't hold enough weight with you to consider it, that's fine. Don't tell me I'm not qualified to have one.


Come again? No offence Ballz, but you have no qualifications! You may have experience as a student, but no knowledge. You are ENTITLED to an opinion, but not qualified. Let’s make that clear. As I’ve already mentioned, I’m not the authority, but I can back up what I have to say. I’ve gotten into many pissing matches on this site with members claiming to have “knowledge” on the subject. This may offend Piper, but I have some credentials and experience to back up what I say. I won’t list all my paperwork, but there’s a bunch (if you really care, I’ll send you to the College of Teachers to look at it). When you add that to 11+ years in the classrooms, 5+ years as a dept head (15+ teachers, nearly 70 sections), I think I might know a thing or two.
As far as I’m concerned, maybe the system is a bit flawed, but it gets sorted out in a hurry. New teachers realize quickly that they either perform or they won’t be getting hired (most teachers begin on contracts before they become permanent). I’ve seen it first hand; the majority tend to mend their ways. It is my firm belief that the educational system does give teachers some tools (see above), but you have to have the “knack.” A perfect example is the assumption that very smart people make great teachers. I’ve already mentioned that you to need to be fairly intelligent to become a teacher, but brains doesn’t necessarily translate into good pedagogy. My Gr.10 math teacher was a brilliant math and physics teacher; some of my peers thought he was great because he was so knowledgeable. I thought he was a mediocre teacher because he couldn’t understand why math dummies like me didn’t get the material. So what becomes the benchmark? How do we decide who gets in and who doesn’t? Maybe there should be an interview component, just like med school (I shudder to think what would happen if people became doctors simply based on their marks). I can’t see any changes coming down the pipe, so marks will continue to determine who becomes a teacher and those that can’t teach will find out soon enough.


----------



## chris_log (7 Apr 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Piper
> 
> I agree with you.  An education can help greatly, but at the same time, it doesn't necessarily provide the ideal solution, all the time.  If you look a little deeper into "Government" and what pieces of paper are expected, and who is hired and who is not; it is often not the person with the real knowledge and experience, but the person who has that "piece of paper on the wall".  That other extreme is a problem, but we are wandering off topic if we go much further into other agencies hiring practices.



Indeed. 



> This may offend Piper, but I have some credentials and experience to back up what I say.



How on earth would that offend me?


----------



## ex-Sup (7 Apr 2009)

Piper said:
			
		

> I think previous posts I've made on this site indicate my distaste of credentialism.


Unless I misunderstood you


----------



## Another Mom (7 Apr 2009)

To Ballz 
    "There is an undergraduate college in the US that does not give out grades at all; feedback is qualitative.  Students work to learn, not for grades."

Your answer:
That may work for artsy fartsy stuff, but I would never hire an engineer, mathematician, scientist (take your pick), or accountant that came out of that school. I certainly wouldn't let a doctor that came out of that system cut me open either."
My reply: 
The school I was talking about is not an "artsy fartsy" school but one  in which each undergrad (Including chemistry and physics students) does an independent research project  of which their oral defence is their final.  Many fine research projects and  inventions have come from that school and you would be darn lucky to have a doctor or acct that came from there.   One of their  physics students invented the optical reading devise for the compact disc.  He was not working for grades.

Having said that, I am biased. My kids could get As without much effort so we always emphasized "Did you work hard" "Did you learn something?" and we weren't impressed with the As. They are all really cool, hard working adults now.


----------



## chris_log (7 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> Unless I misunderstood you



Ahhhhhhhh. Gotcha. I wasn't sure if it was a joke or you were being serious (were you?). 

Credentialism can be defined as "a negative term used to describe a primary reliance on credentials for purposes of conferring jobs or social status". In other words, it refers to people getting hired for jobs or positions based solely on what pieces of paper hang on their walls. 

Don't worry, you're in the clear in my books (not that it matters).


----------



## Michael OLeary (7 Apr 2009)

From the Mail on line:

'Dyslexic children simply struggle to read': Expert claims tens of thousands are being falsely diagnosed



> Tens of thousands of pupils are being falsely diagnosed with dyslexia *because parents and schools failed to teach them to read properly, according to a leading academic.*
> 
> Professor Joe Elliott, of Durham University, said parents whose children have trouble with reading often push for the dyslexic 'label' simply to secure extra help for them.
> 
> ...



More at link.

Note the assigning of responsibility to parents and teachers.  Much of this thread has focussed on the students and teachers, rather than the role of parents in preparing their children for school, and life in general.


----------



## ex-Sup (7 Apr 2009)

Piper said:
			
		

> Don't worry, you're in the clear in my books (not that it matters).


Good, because my papers are still in the folders that they gave me at graduation in *1996*.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (8 Apr 2009)

I've seen lots of people with nothing but Grade 10 and a PLQ instruct and teach alot better than some teachers with diplomas and degrees.

A diploma or degree makes you no more a teacher than a license makes you a Formula One driver.


----------



## Greymatters (8 Apr 2009)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> ... Dyslexic children simply struggle to read': Expert claims tens of thousands are being falsely diagnosed...
> 
> ... Note the assigning of responsibility to parents and teachers.  Much of this thread has focussed on the students and teachers, rather than the role of parents in preparing their children for school, and life in general.



The same was said of rising ADD/ADHD number in kids over a decade ago - Ive read of subsequent studies reported that too many kids were being given drugs to counter this condition when the real problem was a lack of parents teaching their kids what acceptable social behaviour was and/or too much sugar in the kids' diet...


----------



## Michael OLeary (8 Apr 2009)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> The same was said of rising ADD/ADHD number in kids over a decade ago - Ive read of subsequent studies reported that too many kids were being given drugs to counter this condition when the real problem was a lack of parents teaching their kids what acceptable social behaviour was and/or too much sugar in the kids' diet...



Well, once you drug the most disruptive kid in the class, the teacher can always point to the next one as "the most disruptive kid in class."  Where does it end.

And too many parents are too willing to accept that "solution."


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (8 Apr 2009)

Yup, and then a lot of those "soluted" end up in jail as Ritalin snorters......[extremely additive]


----------



## KingKikapu (8 Apr 2009)

Could I just have a little clarification?



			
				Another Mom said:
			
		

> One of their  physics students invented the optical reading devise for the compact disc.  He was not working for grades.


Was this for his project in his undergrad, or did he do this after his formal (BSc, MSc (maybe), and PHd) training?  I'm assuming the latter, but who knows.



For what it's worth, I never studied at a liberal arts type school, but we also had to do a year long research thesis that was defended and marked.


----------



## ballz (8 Apr 2009)

First off let me say that I'm glad George and ex-Sup weighed in on this because I think we've found the common ground that will allow this discussion to be productive. I think Piper and myself came across each other in a way that made us sound like we completely disagreed with each other and I don't think that's the case.



			
				Piper said:
			
		

> I must say that many people (myself included) are often too quick to discount liberal arts education.



I'll admit that I could, with more life experience, find myself guilty of this, but at the current time, I'm not sure I give "liberal arts" any less credit than it deserves. With that said, I'll go continue on.



			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> Just as people aren't "born teachers", nor are others "born leaders", an education and a certificate on their wall does not necessarily make them "teachers" or "leaders".  Unfortunately, our society has progressed digressed to the point that one needs a piece of paper hanging on their "I love me wall" to justify their hiring



This is perhaps the most accurate way to sum up what it is I'm advocating with my uber long posts.



			
				ex-Sup said:
			
		

> Ballz, I appreciate your comments and you do raise some valid points. Yes, I will agree with you that having a B.Ed does not make one a “teacher.” *Most teachers will tell you, whether they were in the 4/5 year concurrent program (like me) or the 1 year program, that teacher's college is a joke. *



I'm not sure how relevant my next comment is going to be, but I just want to say that, with regards to the specific Social Studies teacher I was talking about, anytime her ability was questioned (and it was, by me especially, in a private setting) her only defense was "I have 2 degrees in 5 years," and had I been naive enough she certainly would have let me believe she did 8 years of learning in 5 years as opposed to what it really meant. But anyway, this is all to support my statement that an education degree is not a high enough standard, and I don't think you would disagree with me. Like you said, "I shudder to think what would happen if people became doctors simply based on their marks," and this is all I'm advocating. A teacher shouldn't be considered fit to teach just based on formal qualifications.



			
				ex-Sup said:
			
		

> Come again? No offence Ballz, but you have no qualifications! You may have experience as a student, but no knowledge. You are ENTITLED to an opinion, but not qualified. Let’s make that clear.



Experience is a qualification. I'm done high school and in university right now. In getting my high school diploma, I was probably taught by 60+ different people in two provinces, and so far in university I've had 15 different profs. I don't think if you had this discussion with your classroom (I'm sure you might never do that for professional reasons, understood), you would discredit your students' input (and I am not accusing you of not taking mine seriously. I think we're on the same page from what I can see.). Consider also that I'm the product of the system right now, and I'm one of the people the original article is talking about.



			
				ex-Sup said:
			
		

> As far as I’m concerned, maybe the system is a bit flawed, but it gets sorted out in a hurry.



This is the only thing I think you've said that I would disagree with. I've never seen or heard of a teacher leaving a school unless it was under their own terms. I have never seen a bad teacher "fired," and in fact I've seen things that would give a school a damn good excuse to get rid of somebody if they wanted to, and they still didn't do it, even though they should have been happy to have that excuse. Unfortunately, I think the job is too in demand to allow this, so the standards continue to lower.



			
				ex-Sup said:
			
		

> A perfect example is the assumption that very smart people make great teachers. I’ve already mentioned that you to need to be fairly intelligent to become a teacher, but brains doesn’t necessarily translate into good pedagogy. My Gr.10 math teacher was a brilliant math and physics teacher; some of my peers thought he was great because he was so knowledgeable. I thought he was a mediocre teacher because he couldn’t understand why math dummies like me didn’t get the material. So what becomes the benchmark? How do we decide who gets in and who doesn’t? Maybe there should be an interview component, just like med school (I shudder to think what would happen if people became doctors simply based on their marks).



Cheers to that. The problem I have is that you said right after this "I can't see any changes coming down the pipe," and that is unfortunate in my opinion.


----------



## ballz (8 Apr 2009)

Another Mom said:
			
		

> My reply:
> The school I was talking about is not an "artsy fartsy" school but one  in which each undergrad (Including chemistry and physics students) does an independent research project  of which their oral defence is their final.  Many fine research projects and  inventions have come from that school and you would be darn lucky to have a doctor or acct that came from there.   One of their  physics students invented the optical reading devise for the compact disc.  He was not working for grades.
> 
> Having said that, I am biased. My kids could get As without much effort so we always emphasized "Did you work hard" "Did you learn something?" and we weren't impressed with the As. They are all really cool, hard working adults now.



I am not saying anything about "working for grades," but, regardless, I'm not going to hire a mathematician or engineer from a school like that. In math, physics, engineering, etc. there is a right answer and a wrong answer, and that allows you to "grade" them.


----------



## Another Mom (8 Apr 2009)

Hi King... He completed the project post PhD. I had the pleasure of hearing him speak about how his line of thinking developed from a young undergrad to inventor and how his disparate experiences lead to novel thinking.   He was speaking to the incoming freshman class as an alum. My point was that the particular college I referenced was not "artsy-fartsy", implying a lack of rigour, as someone suggested.


----------



## armchair_throwaway (8 Apr 2009)

10 Winning Science Fair Projects That Will Make You Feel Dumb

I think there's still hope for this generation, despite the flawed system.


----------



## mediocre1 (8 Apr 2009)

Kyle Burrows said:
			
		

> I'd really like for you to explain this.  As far as I and some others can tell, you're being anti-canadian.  Based on your previous posting history - this is a conclusion I am not hesitant to draw.
> 
> Consider this an official request.  Failure to clarify the true intent of your post will result in your future here becoming very bleak.
> 
> ...



Sir it is one way of saying that Canadians are very law-abiding hence, I should behave. The truth of the matter,, sir, is that I was into vices worth condemning because of peer group influence. That is all I can say. Thank you for your very kind consideration.


----------



## Michael OLeary (8 Apr 2009)

lucia_engel said:
			
		

> 10 Winning Science Fair Projects That Will Make You Feel Dumb
> 
> I think there's still hope for this generation, despite the flawed system.



There's always hope.  The question is if a critical mass of students will achieve the levels needed to run all of our institutions.  This is against a falling demographic birthrate in the developed world.

Compare those isolated examples of achivement to this statistic:



> Halo 3 launched in the fall of 2007 ...  of total playtime.




Compound that with every other MMORG, plus home video game units, etc., that are probably draining time and energy from an unknown number of students who might otherwise be achieving more scholastically and preparing themselves for greater things.  I'm not saying video gaming is making kids dumb, I am saying they are increasingly diverting time, energy and intellectual capacity to activities that don't directly support further societal development or sustainment.


----------



## ex-Sup (8 Apr 2009)

ballz said:
			
		

> Experience is a qualification.


Ballz, the key flaw in your argument is that you’re assuming that because you been through the system, you know the system. Well, with all due respect, you are now as qualified as millions of other Canadians. So what? There are millions of educated people here in Ontario (pop of 11+ mil, lets say 9+mil); there are 120,000 teachers. So even if it’s split 50/50, I’m one of 60,000. Do you see how the stats change things a bit? Also, remember that your “experience” is one-dimensional; you’ve only seen part of the educational system.
Don’t take this the wrong way, I’m trying to be constructive here, but at times your insistence on having “qualifications” smacks of the same entitled attitude the article speaks of. This is not to suggest your opinion isn’t valid (all student opinions are valid), but the amount of weight it carries is limited because it is one-sided. For whatever reason, you feel that your educational experience was less than satisfactory. Well, some people might feel the same, but there are many others who feel the exact opposite. Often whether we “like” someone and their teaching style come down to personal preference and personality. I find that students tend to dislike teachers because of a personality conflict or an aversion to that teacher’s instruction style. From reading what you have to say and how you say it, you’re coming across as an egotistical, “I know better” student. I saying this not to be confrontational, but to point out that while you can comment, you have never taught, so your criticisms lack validity.
Here’s an example of what I’m talking about: you spoke of a particular Social Studies teacher who did a poor job of teaching. Have you ever taught in a classroom? Are you a teacher? The answer is no, therefore you have no idea was it’s like to teach. Teaching isn’t an easy job; standing in front of a class, not only trying to instruct them, but also manage the classroom isn’t easy. It can be downright terrifying. I can remember being scared sh#tless at times. You are worried about what the students will think, what their parents will say and you're under scrutiny from administration. Yes, maybe you haven’t seen a teacher get fired, but I’ve seen new teachers not get their contracts renewed, or languishing as a substitute because they failed to make the grade. Last year I taught Gr.12 history for the first time (Modern Western History). Even with 10 years in the classroom, I was terrified at times. There is a lot of fear and apprehension that comes with doing something new, even if you’ve done it for a long time. The last thing you want to do is look foolish, or come across as not knowing your stuff. It didn’t help that I had not studied this material since I was in first year university (92-93). I'm now doing it for the 3rd time, but some of those feelings still linger.
So after all that, it all boils down to, for me anyway, that people can comment, can you cannot full understand or know if you’re not doing it. While I appreciate your comments Ballz, I will temper what you say with the fact that your “experience” is limited to the desk, not the blackboard.


----------



## ballz (8 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> From reading what you have to say and how you say it, you’re coming across as an egotistical, “I know better” student.



Bravo, I wouldn't argue with that.



			
				ex-Sup said:
			
		

> While I appreciate your comments Ballz, I will temper what you say with the fact that your “experience” is limited to the desk, not the blackboard.



Of course you would, I already said, let it hold whatever weight you feel it's worth.

Just for the record, I don't think I had a bad education experience. My experience was fine, in some cases extraordinary, and what parts weren't, I certainly can't blame the teacher (although some can, and those are the ones I'm speaking for). I only had one personality conflict and it wasn't with the said SS teacher. My views are probably more objective and less biased than they come across, I guess I should work on that.


----------



## ex-Sup (8 Apr 2009)

ballz said:
			
		

> Bravo, I wouldn't argue with that.
> Of course you would, I already said, let it hold whatever weight you feel it's worth.
> Just for the record, I don't think I had a bad education experience. My experience was fine, in some cases extraordinary, and what parts weren't, I certainly can't blame the teacher (although some can, and those are the ones I'm speaking for). I only had one personality conflict and it wasn't with the said SS teacher. My views are probably more objective and less biased than they come across, I guess I should work on that.


Ballz, I hope I didn't come across too blunt. We as teachers need criticism too; if we aren't told that we need to get better, then how do we improve? As I mentioned, I do value the opinions of my students (and people like yourself), but there are also other things I need to weight them against. There are improvements that need to be made; every person/profession needs to strive for excellence.
Your candor and maturity says a lot.


----------



## ballz (8 Apr 2009)

Come across as too blunt? There's no such thing. I wasn't being a smart @$$, I really wouldn't argue with what you said.

I think I agree with you more than you think and I mean that.


----------



## firm_believer (9 Apr 2009)

For what it's worth civilian-wise, I'm in a Law & Security program, and heard that students in both Uni. and College who started last September have been some of the laziest yet...I wouldn't doubt it, either. I've noticed that the teachers either do a great job in class, or are pretty much useless and just read power points. Heck - I can stay home and do that myself. 

...Don't even get me started on the waste of $ on textbooks we don't even end up using...


----------



## ex-Sup (9 Apr 2009)

Yesterday we had some visiting British teachers drop by our school and a couple came to my class (they missed my A game lesson about Canada's growing independence during the 20/30's unfortunately  ). They're here to learn about how we do things here in Canada. I got into a conversation with Chris and Dave about how today's students are less inclined to be independent learners. They told me that in Britain there's a huge problem with students wanting to be "spoon fed." I nearly burst out laughing and replied that it's amazing how issues like that transcend borders and oceans. I mentioned how I'd heard about this article published this week about university students being immature, lazy and feeling entitled   . It's still making me laugh as I write this.
http://www.chroniclejournal.com/stories.php?id=177681


----------



## c_canuk (9 Apr 2009)

I've found that if the teacher has a passion for the subject and/or feels it's a treat to teach it to you, the material is easy to understand I can absorb it quickly without much effort.

If the teacher is just slogging through the material it's not much fun, and it's a struggle to get through it, unless it's a passion of mine.

If you have a passion for something you really get interested in all the hidden nooks and crannies of a subject and an understanding of these can really help understand the whole, showing these to students can be fun and helps them make those "OH NOW I GET IT!" break throughs.

All my favorite teachers taught their passions and it felt like they were letting us in on a secret world of amazing things. I almost failed grade 10 chemisty, and I hated every minute of it - The teacher was monotone on par with Ben Stien in Ferris Buellers Day off, and stuck to formulas and exersizes. In Grade 11 Chemisty I went in expecting to hate it and struggle to understand it... my teacher was a retired T Bird pilot who had a passion for anything science related and was a hell of a character, through him the world of chemistry opened up to me and I enjoyed that class more than most others. Same material, different presentation.


----------



## Another Mom (10 Apr 2009)

Ex-sup: It transcends more than borders, it also transcends time:  In the  Republic, Plato  attributed this complaint to  Socrates  in "The  Republic", (as per  US  Library of Congress)


----------



## Greymatters (11 Apr 2009)

That sounds interesting - what exactly did he say?


----------



## Michael OLeary (11 Apr 2009)

> "The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for
> authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place
> of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their
> households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They
> ...



ATTRIBUTION: Attributed to SOCRATES by Plato, according to William L.
Patty and Louise S. Johnson, Personality and Adjustment, p. 277
(1953)."


*Note "attributed", not necessarily proven.*


----------



## KingKikapu (11 Apr 2009)

Which pretty much summarizes my thoughts on this article:  same old, same old.


----------



## Greymatters (11 Apr 2009)

Quote
"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for
authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place
of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their
households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They
contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties
at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers."

That's amazing - I didnt realize they had the Internet back then!   :blotto:

More seriously, such a statement certainly requires a re-evaluation of our perceptions of the current generations' behaviour...


----------



## SupersonicMax (11 Apr 2009)

I personally think nothing have changed.  It's the same happening again, and people making the comments have matured and do not realize it was just that way when they were younger.  Same kind of thing as when people say "In my time, it was 10X harder than today"


----------



## ex-Sup (11 Apr 2009)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> I personally think nothing have changed.  It's the same happening again, and people making the comments have matured and do not realize it was just that way when they were younger.  Same kind of thing as when people say "In my time, it was 10X harder than today"


No, I have to argue with that somewhat. I remember going to school with my share of slackers (unfortunately myself on occasion) and kids with bad attitudes. It's different today; maybe it has a lot to do with attitude. 
Here's an example: when I was in school and you handed in garbage, there was no surprise when you got a garbage mark. There are some kids today that are truly shocked when they get their mark and they'll argue with you about it. Duh? As my colleagues often discuss, some want top marks, with little or no effort. I honestly don't remembering myself or anyone I knew being like that. Procrastinating, a little laziness, but definitely not downright apathetic.


----------



## logairoff (11 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> No, I have to argue with that somewhat. I remember going to school with my share of slackers (unfortunately myself on occasion) and kids with bad attitudes. *It's different today*; maybe it has a lot to do with attitude.
> Here's an example: when I was in school and you handed in garbage, there was no surprise when you got a garbage mark. *There are some kids * today that are truly shocked when they get their mark and they'll argue with you about it. Duh? As my colleagues often discuss, *some want top marks*, with little or no effort. I honestly don't remembering myself or anyone I knew being like that. Procrastinating, a little laziness, but definitely not *downright apathetic.*


Do you see the error you are making? You say some are like this and some are like that and then you make a huge leap according to your own experiences you've had in school in painting todays generation with a huge brush as apathetic. I'm honestly very shocked that you keep making this error in your posts esbecially since someone in this thread has already called you on it.


----------



## Michael OLeary (11 Apr 2009)

I'm not sure that more kids today are applying themselves less, but let's bring this back around to the initial point of this thread. In my generation kids tried to stay below the radar when they were choosing to be under-achievers. Today, some seem to want all the attention and rewards due their more diligent peers in spite of being under-achievers. Perhaps it's just the whiny minority skewing the results, but the waves they are making stand out against the societal background noise.

There's also the factor that repetition in news media and online appearances tends to make anything appear larger than it is in reality.  That, however, doesn't mean an identified issue doesn't exist, only that the representation of scale may be wrong.


----------



## Signalman150 (11 Apr 2009)

Logairoff, don't be quite so shocked; and, since ex-Sup actually works on the education side of things, you might want to cut him a bit of slack.  Unless you've taught professionally, he likely has some practical experience with this issue you don't.

I teach as well, tho' I don't have ex-Sups 'time in'. Perhaps what he is saying (and ex-Sup, feel free to correct me) is something I mentioned in an earlier post.  It is NOT that the kids today are 'hard-wired' to be lazy etc. so much that our system of education as devolved to the point where there is no requirement for them to learn. Current educational systems, both in grade school and post-secondary have decreased their requirements and expectations to the point where students don't have to--and therefore often don't--put in as much effort as their predecessors. 

The program I teach has a 50% pass mark! This has been mandated to a great degree by society generally in its "everyone gets a ribbon" mentality. But society's mandate has been incorporated into legislation. My program did NOT have a 50% pass mark a few years ago, but provincial legislation has changed that, just as provincial legislation has decided that kids that can't DO math will still pass math. This in not opinion; I have experienced this first hand teaching post secondary education.

And, true to what M O'Leary just alluded to, there is no need for students to be bashful about not applying yourself, because students in their high school experience know that all that is required is an appropriate amount of whining, or getting their parents involved to get their marks bumped up. High school teachers are under fire by parents who want their children to get good marks regardless of effort. Those same teachers are more likely to cave because it is VERY unlikely they will get support from their superiors--right from principals on up to the Education Minister.


----------



## ex-Sup (11 Apr 2009)

logairoff said:
			
		

> Do you see the error you are making? You say some are like this and some are like that and then you make a huge leap according to your own experiences you've had in school in painting todays generation with a huge brush as apathetic. I'm honestly very shocked that you keep making this error in your posts esbecially since someone in this thread has already called you on it.


Well it seems to me that your putting your own spin on what I'm saying. And no, if you read my response to that "called out" post, there might have been some confusion with the wording (which I thought was fine), but there was no contradiction.
My response stated that there were lazy, under-achieving kids back in my time, but there is a different attitude today. The same type of student today feels that they deserve to be rewarded despite their lack of effort. I think Mike said it best in response. I have never generalized; if I say something like there is apathy in today's youth, I always clarify my statements with "some." I can understand if I made a blanket statement and left it that, but I always explain and back up what I say. The fact (yes, fact, because I see it everyday) of the matter is that there are some issues with today's young people. Not all, as there are some that are the antithesis of the stereotype. However, even they can display the aforementioned characteristics. That is the reality of today's education system and it's very frustrating. Despite your insinuations (please correct me if I err), I'm not out there to punish, belittle or make my students' lives difficult. I became a teacher because I love the job; I enjoy working with young people and I want them to be successful in and out of the classroom. 
Blunt isn't my preferred style, but frankly, from what I've read, you have some sort of axe to grind and there is a definite bias in your writing ie. many "bad" teachers out there. Everything I've written comes from my many years of experience in the profession; if there is an issue with what I have to say, clearly it is yours. And while we're at it, if we're "calling out" people, maybe a filled-in profile would validate what you have to say. I'm not hiding behind anything!
**editted for a spelling/grammar


----------



## ex-Sup (11 Apr 2009)

Signalman150 said:
			
		

> Logairoff, don't be quite so shocked; and, since ex-Sup actually works on the education side of things, you might want to cut him a bit of slack.  Unless you've taught professionally, he likely has some practical experience with this issue you don't.


Signalman, thanks for the back up. You make some great points. Unfortunately my back gets up over some of these issues.
I like you're comment about the 50% idea; it has become our societal menality that 50% is good enough in school to get by. As was pointed out to me at some PD I once attended, 50% doesn't cut it in society. Could you imagine only knowing 50% of the driving requirements? 50% of what you teach kids? 50% of the material from basic, or what you need to know in Afghanistan? Kinda scary when you think of it that way. Definitely food for thought.
**BTW, if I haven't said it before, I don't make policy, politicians do. Just in case I might be confusing people or contradicting myself again :


----------



## Another Mom (11 Apr 2009)

Let's not forget  though, that there is vastly more to be learned nowaday than  there was even 25 years ago.  The subject of my friend's graduate thesis in 1976 was in my daughter's high school science textbook.  Statistics has become crazy hard with the advent of computers.   As there will ever be, some kids are slackers, some work hard.  I still have great faith in the youth of today; they just go a little weird for awhile. Most of them get back on track.  I like the Chinese saying "The wildest colts make the best horses." 

As per grades: 50% or 70% or 100% is arbitrary. The test is designed easy or  hard based on what the expected normal curve will be. If you get 10% of the Saturday NY Times Crossword correct, you are a genius. If you only get 10% right on  (easier) Mondays, you are well, not so bright. You haven't suddenly lost language ability by Saturday. or become smarter each Monday if you get 100% of that puzzle correct.


----------



## ex-Sup (12 Apr 2009)

Another Mom said:
			
		

> As per grades: 50% or 70% or 100% is arbitrary. The test is designed easy or  hard based on what the expected normal curve will be.


Well, yes and no.
I guess my point is that a student's grade normally reflects mastery of the subject material. 50% is not acceptable in many instances ie. the example In used with driving. In real life, we would keep repeating a task until we got 100%. This is assuming that the "bar" for your task is immovable and your time variable is flexible. Unfortunately, in the education business, time is the immovable factor; thus it is the bar that gets moved. Therefore students are moving on without complete mastery, which is an issue down the road. It is convoluted and complicated problem which there are not many easy answers (and another completely separate issue).


----------



## Another Mom (12 Apr 2009)

ex-sup: The reverse is also true: Kids that are ready to move on have to mark time until the rest of the class is ready, sometimes leading to behavior problems because they are bored.  As per grades. I think the 100% mark just means the test was not hard enough. In school  the bright kids get lazy if they can get 100% without much work and so they get cynical. There is no such thing as complete mastery. Even 100% on a driving test might mean the person took the test on a day without traffic in perfect conditions. Doesn't mean they can drive in snow or bad traffic on the highway or when  tire blows. 100% breeds complacency and false  confidence. It is good to know what we don't know.  (I would guess that even 100% on a test for a skill used in Afghanistan does not mean there is no room for talking about improvement or exceptional cases when a higher skill level would be required.)  It is a complicated situation.  Sometimes "A" students in a class with more brilliant students get a B or C, because the teacher cannot give out too many As.  That has it's own problems, too. I still think it is better to be challenged than move to a school where the grades are easier. (And Univ admissions know about these individual schools and this problem anyway.) And I still think that in an ideal world, grades would not count as much as more thorough feedback.   But we have to have education for the masses with wide variations in ability.  My hat off to you for a difficult role.  And we have not even talked about inadequate support for kids with special needs, esp "invisible" needs.


----------



## ex-Sup (20 Apr 2009)

This was sent by one of my colleagues to the entire staff. From Saturday's Globe.

We pretend to teach 'em, they pretend to learn


> But why should we be shocked at this low-effort, high-reward mentality? Take a look at what official education policy has done to secondary schools, and weep.
> 
> Universities typically point the finger at high schools for turning out lousy graduates. But they're pointing in the wrong direction. As one assistant high-school principal explained on Cross-Country Checkup, the CBC's national phone-in show, last Sunday, "We get our marching orders and our mandate from the provincial government. We are judged by our completion and graduation rates. That's what governs us, not what universities want."
> In order to boost their high-school graduation rates, many provinces have mandated a no-fail approach. Nowhere is this policy more entrenched than Ontario, where schools are under intense pressure to get their numbers up. "Our hands are tied," said another caller, an Ottawa high-school teacher. "The government does not allow you now to give zeroes for work not done. If you give a kid 10 assignments and he does three, you can't give him a zero for the other ones. The government stance is that this is a behavioural problem, and you need to give them another chance to hand it in. If a student cheats on a major exam, you can't give them zero. The government doesn't tell you what to do the second time he cheats."



http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090417.wcowent18/BNStory/specialComment/

Hmmmmmmmm...


----------



## Lil_T (20 Apr 2009)

Oh wow.  That is SO ridiculous.  These policymakers deserve a swift kick in the wang.


----------



## ex-Sup (20 Apr 2009)

Lil_T said:
			
		

> These policymakers deserve a swift kick in the wang.


 :rofl: Can I quote you on that?

Seriously though, the whole late marks/zeros issue is probably one of the biggest hot-button issues in high schools today. Most teachers feel that they are being handcuffed by policy and are being prevented from teaching important "life" lessons ie. you need to meet deadlines or else! Most teachers are at a loss in terms of what to do, and it tends to generate huge discussions when it comes up at workshops and PD sessions. I know for myself it is source of immense frustration, especially since the kids know how to work the system (and that they’ve always been pushed along, because they can’t fail). For example, my next class is my Gr.10 Applied History. They are nice kids, but they’re brutal at handing things in on time. I just did their mid-terms marks last week and I was shaking my head at the amount of assignments some kids are missing. I have to hound them, give them new copies of the assignment, put up charts to show them what they’re missing and then hound them yet again. If I don’t do this, most of them would fail (and the powers that be wouldn’t like that). However, in the end (what the article doesn’t say), is that they WILL get zeros. We are only supposed to assess them on what they do, but if they don’t meet an expectation (ie. handing in the required work), they can’t get a grade for it. The official line is “that zeros should be used with extreme prejudice, and only after all other avenues have been exhausted.” They are strongly suggesting “no,” but leave it up to “teacher discretion.”
The current policy is under review, with a new document expected in September. I have had an opportunity to give my input as a dept head at my school and everyone is hoping to see some changes happen. The current working document is simply a collection of material from a variety of sources, and the goal is to create a unified K-12 policy. It can be found here (late/zeroes on p.43):
http://www.ocup.org/resources/documents/EDU_GS_binder_010708_BMv2.pdf


----------



## Lil_T (21 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> :rofl: Can I quote you on that?



Yes.  ;D

As a parent I am SO frustrated by these stupid policies.  My 13 year old is in grade 7 right now - there are courses where he is "just passing" which to me, means he's failing.  He rarely does his homework.  Even more rarely brings a book home.  Screws the pooch in class all the time.  There is only so much I can do - frankly I am past the point of wanting to help him since he has no desire to help himself.  He's a smart kid and has a great capacity to learn.  He just chooses not to.  I've gone so far as to ask his teachers to fail him and they just tell me they can't do it.  I fear for his future.  How is he going to be able to hold a job if he can't expend a little effort?  How will he wade through all the crap that life dishes out if he never learns how to deal with criticism or failure?  He'll never be able to fill out a job application - his handwriting is abysmal.  Not just the cursive but simple printing too.  He should have failed 2 or 3 grades ago.  

When I addressed these issues with his teachers (UCDSB & HRSB) they blew me off.  Acted like my concerns weren't valid and even went so far as to say that "cursive writing isn't important anymore, it's ok though, he knows how to read and type".  WTF?   I don't want my son's education to atrophy more than it already has, and I am freaked about the idea of my youngest starting school with such a bleak outlook as it is right now.  Something's got to give.  I would homeschool them both but I lack the time and patience to be able to pull that off with my sanity intact.

I feel I should start writing letters to my MPP and MP.  UGH.


----------



## Kat Stevens (21 Apr 2009)

I took a look at the marking guide for an assignment my Gr 11 daughter brought home.  15 bonus marks for completing the assignment on time.  WTF!!??  Whatever happened to failing for late assignments?


----------



## Michael OLeary (21 Apr 2009)

As my son went from school district to school district, and province to province, with each posting, I saw a wide range of schools and teachers.  He started school in New Brunswick, and we home schooled him for his second year after he actually lost ground on literacy skills we had developed with him before his first year. (And that was in an era of _"you want to home school, ok, good luck .... curriculum, no we don't release that to anyone."_)  Later, in an Ontario school, I met a teacher who sadly told me I was the only parent to visit on parent-teacher night, and the only one she didn't need to see.  I've argued the impotence of "whole language" with teachers in three provinces, usually getting agreement and shrugs that they couldn't do anything about it.  In Nova Scotia, I argued against a local property tax levy for a school trying to set up a computer lab with donated equipment because they had no plan for instruction, maintenance or development; yet trustees thought this was a credible 'way ahead'. The absence of consistency in expectation, or learning goals, for the students was demoralizing at best and insanely frustrating at times.  I always knew the teachers were are trapped by the system as the student, but where does it end?


----------



## Michael OLeary (21 Apr 2009)

In related news :

*Accepting rejection*
High-flying Harvard students get tips on how to rebound from the inevitable 'thanks but no thanks'

Article link.



> CAMBRIDGE - They have managed to get into one of the world's most selective colleges. Opportunity is knocking at their door.
> 
> But at some point in their life, though perhaps later than most, Harvard students will face the stinging slap the rest of the world feels regularly: rejection.
> 
> ...



More at link.


----------



## PMedMoe (21 Apr 2009)

Pretty bad when a university has to offer a seminar about handling rejection.  Something _most_ of us have experienced throughout our lives.  :


----------



## JBoyd (21 Apr 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Pretty bad when a university has to offer a seminar about handling rejection.  Something _most_ of us have experienced throughout our lives.  :



Usually by Grade 8 or 9, when trying to ask someone to the winter dance . Seriously though... how do harvard students not experience rejection before they enter post-secondary institutions?


----------



## ex-Sup (21 Apr 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Pretty bad when a university has to offer a seminar about handling rejection.  Something _most_ of us have experienced throughout our lives.  :


That's what happens when the "experts" in our society determine that things like failing are too detrimental to their egos, etc. Just like the parent who went ballistic on me for kicking his kid off the football team; I was going to scar him for the rest of his life. The first words out of his mouth were "he has a disability!" (ADD). Well, we have plenty of kids around here that have ADD and they're not getting in trouble EVERY day. As well, they're not a pain in the ass at practice ie. I can't do the drill because my ankles hurt...well tie up your flippin' shoes for Chr#@t's sake!
Somedays I wonder if I'll make it another 19 years :brickwall:


----------



## Gunnar (21 Apr 2009)

> how do harvard students not experience rejection before they enter post-secondary institutions?



Wonder if Obama has the course?  It might be useful to POTUS.


----------



## Greymatters (22 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> That's what happens when the "experts" in our society determine that things like failing are too detrimental to their egos, etc. Just like the parent who went ballistic on me for kicking his kid off the football team; I was going to scar him for the rest of his life. The first words out of his mouth were "he has a disability!" (ADD). Well, we have plenty of kids around here that have ADD and they're not getting in trouble EVERY day. As well, they're not a pain in the *** at practice ie. I can't do the drill because my ankles hurt...well tie up your flippin' shoes for Chr#@t's sake!
> Somedays I wonder if I'll make it another 19 years :brickwall:



Well, any parent would be upset if their kid got kicked off, most people need to be able to walk away from a situation with their head held high (regardless of whether they deserve to or not)...


----------



## ex-Sup (22 Apr 2009)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> Well, any parent would be upset if their kid got kicked off, most people need to be able to walk away from a situation with their head held high (regardless of whether they deserve to or not)...


Greymatters,
I'm a bit confused by the comment...not sure where you're coming from.
You're right though, a parent would be upset, but at who? My first reaction  as a parent is to question my child as to why they were kicked off and see what they have to say (this was how I was brought up). It's not that I wouldn't believe my own kid, but there is always more to the story. If I did call for clarification, I wouldn't immediately tee off and start making excuses ie. he has a disability! I know from my own experiences (and those that I work with), coaches/teachers/etc. don't have an axe to grind. I do this because I love to do it, and I'm not out there to pick on students/athletes (despite what people may think); I have better things to do with my time. Going to the point of removing a student from a team is something that is done with extreme prejudice and after every other avenue has been exhausted (in 10 years of coaching, this is the only time it has happened). In this particular situation, the student gave me no other option and basically made his own bed. For a month and a half he got into trouble in the classroom almost everyday and causing nothing but problems on the field. My coaches were at their wits end and I was tired of repeatedly warning him. I gave him tons of opportunities to redeem himself but in the end his demise was of his own doing. I hated doing it, but I had no regrets; the team is bigger than one player.
As a side note, this particular student is now in Gr.12 and still a pain in the ass. One of my colleagues teaches him next door to my office when I am on my prep time; we've actually tried to count the number of times he gets yelled at in a period for disrupting the class. And apparently, his parents are still defending him and making excuses. As I've said before, the apple doesn't fall far...


----------



## Greymatters (23 Apr 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> I'm a bit confused by the comment...not sure where you're coming from.



I would agree with everything you said there...


----------



## George Wallace (23 Apr 2009)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> ex-Sup said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You gave this answer to a quote that one could interpret as you agreeing that ex-Sup "is confused".

Clarity.    >


----------



## ex-Sup (23 Apr 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I would agree with everything you said there...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hey, my head might be spinning right now (no, I'm not possessed), but I don't think I'm confused  
After re-reading Greymatters post a few times I think I know what he's getting at.


----------



## George Wallace (23 Apr 2009)

I know.  However, it was a good example of how things could be misconstrued.


----------



## Greymatters (23 Apr 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> You gave this answer to a quote that one could interpret as you agreeing that ex-Sup "is confused".
> 
> Clarity.    >



Ouch!  Good point - I meant I agreed with his response (everything after his statement of being confused)...


----------



## ex-Sup (23 Apr 2009)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> Ouch!  Good point - I meant I agreed with his response (everything after his statement of being confused)...


It good to know I'm not completely losing it (for the time being anyway ;D)


----------



## kratz (27 Apr 2009)

The Ottawa Citizen  published an item today on Caroline Orchard's online petition  opposing the provincial policy allowing students multiple opportunities for missed deadlines and academic dishonesty. While this petition  is for Ottawa area at the moment, the story mentions, she is looking at expanding it for other cities in Canada.


If students are not expected to submit work in on time and with honesty in school, how can they be expected to do so in university?


----------



## ex-Sup (27 Apr 2009)

kratz said:
			
		

> While this petition  is for Ottawa area at the moment, the story mentions, she is looking at expanding it for other cities in Canada.


Hmmmm...interesting. While I totally agree with the petition, I doubt it will get anywhere. The province is currently revising the entire document covering assessment and evaluation (http://www.ocup.org/resources/documents/EDU_GS_binder_010708_BMv2.pdf already mentioned in a previous post), I have a feeling that they already have mind what they want to do. What that is however, who knows. As an aside, I did find out last week that it's implementation has been pushed back to Sept 2010.


----------



## Signalman150 (13 May 2009)

Thought some of the posters for this particular thread wouldf be interested in this article fm the Edmonton Journal last Monday. Reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act.


'No-zero' policy gives students a do-over
Deadlines in the adult world often just as flexible: supporters
By Sarah O'Donnell, The Edmonton JournalMay 11, 2009


Zero is becoming the toughest mark for students to earn in a growing number of Edmonton-area schools.

Many schools have adopted a "no-zero" policy when it comes to assignments and tests, giving students multiple opportunities to hand in work past deadline or to redo failing assignments or tests.

It is part of a national trend proponents say will help ensure more students make it through the school system, learn course material and succeed. Critics argue it fails to prepare students for the real world.

In the Edmonton Public school district, many schools, particularly junior and senior highs, have operated under no-zero policies for several years.

While the no-zero approach is not an official district-wide policy, Edmonton Public's director of teaching and learning support services said it is a topic principals and teachers talk about regularly.

"It's a philosophy about not giving up on kids," Corrie Ziegler said. "We will do everything we can before we give any child a zero. We want to give them every opportunity."

Jasper Place High School, which at 2,400 students is one of Edmonton's largest, operates under a "reluctant zero" approach.

"We're not saying no zeros equals no work," principal Jean Stiles said. "We're saying we're not going to let a student off the hook from learning the material."

Jasper Place's reluctant zero policy means a student who misses a deadline can still hand in an assignment. Students who simply refuse to hand in assignments by the end of the term can still earn a failing grade, but it may be described as "unable to assess."

Students need extensions or second chances for many reasons, Stiles said. Some are so busy with extracurricular activities that their schedule makes some homework deadlines tricky. Others have to balance studies with family issues or a part-time job.

And sometimes, a student just has trouble with a subject and needs extra time and help to learn the material. In the past, Stiles said, many of those students would stop coming to school if they fell behind and felt it was impossible to catch up.

"Life gets in the way sometimes," Stiles said. "We're saying we want to make accurate decisions about student achievement. We can't do that if we don't have evidence to support it."

Although many Alberta educators have enthusiastically embraced the no-zero philosophy, some teachers and parents question the concept.

In Ontario, a two-year-old provincewide policy requires teachers to give students multiple chances to turn in assignments and even to resubmit work if they are caught cheating. An Ottawa math teacher has launched an online petition to have the policy reversed.

Caroline Orchard, a teacher of 34 years, told the Ottawa Citizen she believes the no-zero policy prevents some students from learning skills such as time management and the importance of meeting deadlines.

Some British Columbia teachers also complained at their annual B.C. Teachers' Federation in March that such policies undermine a teacher's professional autonomy and "dumb down" public education.

In Alberta, there are no provincewide policies related to how students are assessed throughout the year. Instead, Alberta Education spokeswoman Kathy Telfer said, the province's main concern is whether a student meets a series of prescribed targets by the end of the year.

Alberta Teachers' Association president Frank Bruseker said teachers who have talked to him question whether such school policies really help students.

"If the policy is no-zero, *then how does it really help the student*?" Bruseker said.* "The notion is one of consequence."*

More at this link:

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/News/zero+policy+gives+students+over/1583025/story.html

As I've posted previously on this thread, I've seen first-hand the results of this ill-conceived notion.  Students entering post-secondary education having "passed" Math 30 (academic math, or--as they like to call it--Math Pure) who can't calculate perimeter, area, or volume. The "no student left behind" rationale is turning into "no student fit for the outside world".


----------



## ex-Sup (13 May 2009)

Signalman150 said:
			
		

> Many schools have adopted a "no-zero" policy when it comes to assignments and tests, giving students multiple opportunities to hand in work past deadline or to redo failing assignments or tests.


Hey, I've heard this before...oh ya  :
Frick, it's spreading like the plague. Well, at least it won't just be Ontario graduating these pylons fine, upstanding citizens (or children of God... Catholic school version ).


----------



## Lil_T (13 May 2009)

:facepalm:  

What say we go back about 26 years in the education system huh?

Remember the good ol' days when there were consequences to being lazy and not doing the work?  

ugh!


----------



## Journeyman (14 May 2009)

Lil_T said:
			
		

> Remember the good ol' days when there were consequences to being lazy and not doing the work?



Yep, my Dad dumped me off at the Recruiters. 

Mind you, I then discovered Cpls and MCpls who......uh, "discouraged" such behaviour.  ;D


----------



## Antoine (14 May 2009)

Those kids are going to hit a thick wall during their first year if they are studying in sciences at UBC.


----------



## Spanky (14 May 2009)

Wow, I don't know how I missed this thread.
The whole issue of zeros for missing or late is indeed a hot button issue.  I'm presently on a board committee trying to rework our assessment and evaluation policy for our grade 7 and 8 students.  We are in a holding pattern until the ministry completes their work, hopefully in September 2010.  One of the problems, I'm facing is that I have to help inservice the other teachers when the policy is complete.  It's going to be tough trying sell the "no zero" policy if, in fact, it remains.
Just playing devil's advocate, so please be gentle, but....
What is the purpose of assessing or evaluating a piece of work?  Is it to see if the student has learned the material or to assess work habits?  If a student can demonstrate mastery with one assignment why should they be given a lower mark, indicating a lack of mastery, if others are missing?
On the Ontario report card for elementary school there is a section that reports on learning skills (work habits etc).  All of the good teachers I know spend more time on this section of the report than any other.  It could be argued that this section of the report should be given greater emphasis by everyone else as well.  
Learning skills should be a contributing factor in determining promotion or graduation.


----------



## ex-Sup (14 May 2009)

Spanky said:
			
		

> We are in a holding pattern until the ministry completes their work, hopefully in September 2010.


I love how everything gets pushed back; it was supposed to be out this Sept.
Just got a forwarded email from Ben Levin, who is the Deputy Minister of Education, responding to the whole media criticism of no zeros, late assignments, etc. I only skimmed through it quickly, but I was going to post the little introduction (lest I get in poop for revealing something "confidential"). But alas, the document is secured, therefore no copy function. When I get chance to read through it thoroughly, I'll give you the scoop.


----------



## Antoine (14 May 2009)

Time is not a concept but a physical parameter as much as distance, mass and energy.

We have all watches, clocks and so on, because we are surrounded by deadline issues, even our own life has a final deadline. It will be wonderfull if society will tell me, Hey don't bother with deadlines, we are going to give you a second and a third chance to achieve the project, to take care of the patient, to submit your application, or to pay your bills  

Our economical system is based on competition, and the bottom line is time. You have to find a new idea or solve a problem before other, and after thinking fast, you need to act fast and move on. We are involved in a long Marathon where in many careers, there is no second place. I don't necessary agree with this system, but for many, competition (and against time mainly) is the rule.

I don't know for high school, but in general at the university level, students are often marked on how much they learn per unit of time. It is the leaning curve in function of time, the SPEED. Again, I don't say it is the good way to do things, but in many universities, time constraint is the challenge that new students will face.

Finally, time is the only physical data that you will never recover, you can not go back, you can't put time in a bank, invest it and use it later on, I'll say that time worth more than money, but that may be true when you get older and you have less time head.

But, hey that is my  :2c:, and my point is that if you want to prepare kids for university, well they have to take seriously deadline and to know how to prioritize and organize their stuff to get there in time.


----------



## KingKikapu (15 May 2009)

I think we should also keep in mind that not everyone goes to university (nor should they have to), so our system isn't entirely tailored for post secondary education.  Granted, first year uni can be a bit of a trial by fire, but by 4 years you can become a pretty powerful researcher.  That will serve them well in the future (directly or indirectly).

The one thing I would change is the complete ignorance of many high school academic advisors.  My transition to post secondary would have gone a lot smoother had they known what in the blue blazes was good preparatory material for my major.  In that respect though, I have a feeling private school will always be better.  Of course the very thought of paying more for private school vs. university boggles my mind.

meph.


----------



## Antoine (16 May 2009)

I agree with you, but I still think that the school system should help kids to learn sooner than later that a deadline is a deadline. Even when they are 100% busy, to learn how to organize their time and activities to meet the expectations. Of course, parents also have to enforce it. University or not, the speed at which you can learn and apply your knowledge and life experiences to solve a daily life problem or a work challenge is one of the keys to success; and it can be learned early in childhood.

For the zero policy, I usually don't give a zero unless the homework I am marking is completely out of the expectations that I clearly indicated to them, or handed really late without a fair explanation. However, marking, and the student's fear to get a bad mark, is one of the critical tool a prof has in hand to punish (the stick for donkey) or to reward (the carrot for donkey) the student.

Talking about private versus public school is a new thread on its own !

I would be interested to hear from a couple of senior profs if students of today are less mature than in the past.


----------



## ex-Sup (22 Jun 2009)

Here's the latest:
Canadians worried about education system: poll

OTTAWA -- As young people prepare to don caps and gowns this month and take the stage to grab their diplomas, Canadians confess a certain skepticism about the value of an education in this country. Nearly half of the Canadians polled in a recent Harris-Decima survey said they feel Canada's educational system does not adequately prepare young people for work in the modern economy.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090621/education_canada_090621/20090621?hub=Canada

I just finished marking my Gr.10 Applied history exams; I have to counter that society doesn't adequately prepare students for my classroom. Nice kids, but by far the laziest, unmotivated bunch I've ever had. Worst marks too...I won't even mention the class average for the exam, it makes me want to pull my hair out (if I had any). 19 more years? If this is it, I'm going to lose my mind.


----------



## PMedMoe (5 Jul 2009)

Digging at old wounds here.  I read this article in yesterday's Ottawa Citizen.  Here it is from the original publisher, The Telegraph (U.K.):

*We must allow children the chance to fail
Life skills are as important as exams and IQ, says Yvonne Roberts.*
*Article Link*

Sonny Grainger, aged 12, is described as a "one-boy wave of terror". He has been expelled from three schools and has tormented the lives of his neighbours. To his mother, however, Sonny's problem is not discipline; she says Sonny is suffering from Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD), which causes him to be "hostile to authority figures".

ODD is said to affect up to 16 per cent of children. The "treatment" includes anger management and the teaching of social skills. But some argue that the real problem is that these youngsters have never been taught how to think of others or how to make sense of their own emotions. If Sonny continues to treat his neighbourhood as a war zone, then by his teens he will undoubtedly become one of the growing army of young people not in employment, education or training – the "Neets" – who already number one million. 

The search for solutions to the problem of what is fast becoming a lost generation is creating some strange alliances. Last week, two opposing politicians agreed that a new form of National Service was needed. Frank Field, the Labour MP, advocated a compulsory six-month stint of service: a commando course in citizenship. Tim Loughton, the shadow minister for children and young people, offered a less drastic solution, suggesting a voluntary three-week session that would inculcate "self-respect, achievement and respect for others".

Loughton points out that a high proportion of teenagers say that their lives "lack purpose"; a number of international studies concur that the UK's young people are the most likely in industrial Europe to have a poor sense of wellbeing. And the recession is going to make things worse for young people across the academic spectrum. With 40,000 new graduates predicted to have a degree but no immediate career, a form of short-term civic service looks like treatment for a pimple when a plague of boils has broken out.

Of course, there are large numbers of young adults who are giving something back, finding jobs and living normal lives. But what is lacking in many other cases, and what many schools fail to prioritise, is the acquisition of grit, self-discipline and a sense of self-awareness.

Evidence from around the world shows that these skills contribute as much to success
at work and in life as IQ and academic qualifications. Yet a growing number of children find it difficult to manage their own emotions, or show empathy and understanding. They appear unable to exercise self-discipline or delay gratification. They cannot communicate effectively or work collaboratively. All these skills are necessary in life, and in a globalised job market. So why are they so difficult to acquire? 

A friend's son may provide a clue. He is 18, privately educated, and has flunked his exams. He is musically talented, but expects to acquire fame without effort. He believes he is special because his parents – lovingly, mistakenly – have told him so, in a middle-class corruption of the cult of celebrity. As some parents erase every difficulty, their children never enter the school of hard knocks. As the psychologist Prof Martin Seligman, author of The Optimistic Child, points out, "Children need to fail… If we leap in to bolster self-esteem to soften the blows… we make it harder for them to achieve mastery."

But the problems of the cosseted middle classes pale in comparison to the children struggling with poverty and deprivation. Often prematurely branded as failures by the education system, many of these children lack the life skills that were once acquired from stable families or apprenticeships.

James Heckman, the American economist and Nobel laureate, has shown that, in some cases, well-developed social and emotional capabilities – the kind of "character education" taught by public schools for centuries – are more important than IQ.
A recent American review of 207 programmes teaching these qualities showed an 11 per cent improvement in achievement tests, and a 10 per cent decrease in misbehaviour, depression and anxiety. Too often in Britain
we fail to tell children this inspirational story: they might not be the brightest, but they can still be the best.

What we need, then, is an end to the one-size-fits-all model in state schools, and to move to a system that encourages children of every level of intellectual ability to make the most of their assets. Some schools have already broken free, and others should be allowed to follow – my own group, the Young Foundation, supports a number of projects to bring together the best of vocational and academic education with social and emotional development.

An education system fit for the 21st century would be diverse. Its aim should not just be academic success, but the creation of a good citizen. It would also be one very positive way in which we could reboot social mobility and revive the civic sphere – as well as giving children like Sonny a springboard to a better future. 

Comments can be seen at link

Oppositional Defiance Disorder??  Give me a freakin' break!  :  Article makes some excellent points, though and most of the comments are worth reading.


----------



## ex-Sup (5 Jul 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Oppositional Defiance Disorder??  Give me a freakin' break!  :


Boy, can I tell you some stories!
Seems like everyone is diagnosed as something today : I have issues with lazy kids; can I get an IEP for that?


----------



## Kat Stevens (5 Jul 2009)

Think ODD doesn't exist? Spend an afternoon with my oldest, then you'll need a break.   : back atcha.


----------



## PMedMoe (5 Jul 2009)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> Think ODD doesn't exist? Spend an afternoon with my oldest, then you'll need a break.



Sorry, I gave up babysitting a long time ago.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Jul 2009)

The problem with many authority challenged people is that they are used to authority caving in to their demands which just reinforces their behavior the next time. Doesn't matter the age. It's always learned behavior, at least in most cases.

What the majority of them need is to be taken down a few pegs with a good old fashioned shit kicking. In the case of minors a trip to the woodshed on a regular basis wouldn't hurt.

All we have to do is get the touchy feely, new wave, left leaning meddlers to mind their friggin' business when our behavior modification is being practiced.

My  :2c:


----------



## JBoyd (4 Aug 2009)

*Alumna sues college because she hasn't found a job*
*Article Link*

A recent college graduate is suing her alma mater for $72,000 -- the full cost of her tuition and then some -- because she cannot find a job.

Trina Thompson, 27, of the Bronx, graduated from New York's Monroe College in April with a bachelor of business administration degree in information technology.

On July 24, she filed suit against the college in Bronx Supreme Court, alleging that Monroe's "Office of Career Advancement did not help me with a full-time job placement. I am also suing them because of the stress I have been going through."

The college responded that it offers job-search support to all its students.

In her complaint, Thompson says she seeks $70,000 in reimbursement for her tuition and $2,000 to compensate for the stress of her three-month job search.

As Thompson sees it, any reasonable employer would pounce on an applicant with her academic credentials, which include a 2.7 grade-point average and a solid attendance record. But Monroe's career-services department has put forth insufficient effort to help her secure employment, she claims.

"They're supposed to say, 'I got this student, her attendance is good, her GPA is all right -- can you interview this person?' They're not doing that," she said.

More on link

If this isn't a sense of entitlement then I don't know what is... someone needs to inform her we are in a recession.

Here is a link with a retort to this story which includes some interesting comments *Suing Her College Because She Can't Find Work?! Allow Me to Retort!*


----------



## SARgirl (4 Aug 2009)

JBoyd said:
			
		

> *Alumna sues college because she hasn't found a job*
> *Article Link*



Good Grief!!!  This girl is not using her head; she really needs to re-think life and how things work on planet earth.


----------



## PMedMoe (4 Aug 2009)

Three months?  Wow.     She's probably applying for jobs way above her training level.

A 2.7 GPA, not exactly something to write home about.  Brings to mind a comment from Resumania (see Bad spelling = No job thread):

"EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENTS: Maintained a 2.0 GPA." 
We can't "C" why you highlighted this fact.


----------



## ex-Sup (4 Aug 2009)

Wonderful! Do I now need to keep counsel on retainer?
Oh wait, they don't pay to come to high school. Better sue the go'vt  :

On a side note, based on some conversations at work, we are starting to see this pop up in the teaching world. Expecting to get a job, get the courses they want to teach, other people's resources...you get the point.


----------



## Greymatters (4 Aug 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> A 2.7 GPA, not exactly something to write home about.



I was thinking the same - you can follow the code of "C's get degrees" all you want, but it doesnt help you get a job in a tight market when employers are picking the best available...


----------



## PMedMoe (4 Aug 2009)

Just out of curiosity (and not really wanting to work), I googled Monroe College as they are one of those (too) often advertised on TV.  Here's the link for the Bachelor Degree Program for IT.



> "They're supposed to say, 'I got this student, her attendance is good, her GPA is all right -- can you interview this person?' They're not doing that," she said.



No, Trina, according to their website:



> Every student at Monroe College has a Career Advisor, who provides one-on-one assistance with career decision-making, resume and letter writing,  and job search strategies.  The Office of Career Advancement *helps* with career assessment, resume writing, job search and strategy, employer recruitment and placement, interviewing skills, and other job search guidance.



Besides, even if you get the interview, it's not a guarantee to getting hired.


----------



## dustinm (4 Aug 2009)

I haven't read the 10 pages of this thread (I promise I will, hopefully the power doesn't go out during this storm before I finish ;D), but has anyone considered the fact that more and more jobs require a High School diploma, or a College degree, or a Graduate degree, than did before?

Perhaps the quality of the education is lessened because the requirements are lessened because the needs have *not* lessened but the eligible pupil list has?


----------



## Roy Harding (4 Aug 2009)

Neo Cortex said:
			
		

> I haven't read the 10 pages of this thread (I promise I will, hopefully the power doesn't go out during this storm before I finish ;D), but has anyone considered the fact that more and more jobs require a High School diploma, or a College degree, or a Graduate degree, than did before?
> 
> Perhaps the quality of the education is lessened because the requirements are lessened because the needs have *not* lessened but the eligible pupil list has?



I don't think I'm following you here.

Are you saying that elitism is less prevalent because there are more elites?


----------



## dustinm (4 Aug 2009)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> I don't think I'm following you here.
> 
> Are you saying that elitism is less prevalent because there are more elites?



Sorry, I'll try and rephrase.

If 20 years ago, you only needed a High School diploma to be a Prison Guard, and there were 100,000 HSD holders, that means 100,000 eligible people for that position. 

If, arbitrarily, to "keep up with the times" they suddenly require a 4-year degree, and there are only 20,000 4-year degree holders, you've just cut the eligible population by 80%.

Now, if the demand for Prison Guards doesn't go down, but the amount of people available to fill them _does_, you may push people through that level of education faster or with lower standards in order to keep up the pool of available applicants.

While it might not work for an isolated career, if there's a society-wide trend towards requiring a certain level of education we might see a society-wide decline in the quality of those obtaining it, for the reasons I stated above.


----------



## Roy Harding (4 Aug 2009)

OK - I think I've got the gist.

What you're saying (and please correct me if I'm wrong), basically - is that an undergrad degree is worth what a high school diploma used to be worth.  Because of societal pressures regarding educational levels - those_ required_ levels have been increased, at the same time the _actual worth_ of those levels has been decreased.

I just read that over - and it's not as crystal clear as I'd like it to be.  Forgive me - long day, now drawing to a close.


----------



## Greymatters (4 Aug 2009)

Neo Cortex said:
			
		

> I haven't read the 10 pages of this thread (I promise I will, hopefully the power doesn't go out during this storm before I finish ;D), but has anyone considered the fact that more and more jobs require a High School diploma, or a College degree, or a Graduate degree, than did before?



This is true and pretty much has been true for the last 30 years, due to the increasing level of technology being used at organizations.  Its difficult to assess personal  experience on a case-by-case basis, and very time consuming, so HR processes emphasize credentials (usually based on the belief that a person with X level of education has X level of technological awareness, competence and experience).  

Another important reason for this is that more and more government departments and private organizations are undergoing HR 'risk mitigation' evaluations - job positions are evaluated to see what education, credentials, and qualifications a person should have in order to occupy that position, and if a person in that position doesnt have the required level, an organization is open to legal prosecution for having 'unqualified' persons in that position. 

There are other reasons as well, but those are two big ones...


----------



## dustinm (4 Aug 2009)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> OK - I think I've got the gist.
> 
> What you're saying (and please correct me if I'm wrong), basically - is that an undergrad degree is worth what a high school diploma used to be worth.  Because of societal pressures regarding educational levels - those_ required_ levels have been increased, at the same time the _actual worth_ of those levels has been decreased.
> 
> I just read that over - and it's not as crystal clear as I'd like it to be.  Forgive me - long day, now drawing to a close.



Yeah, you've got it right  Sorry, it's been a bit of a long day for me too!


----------



## Greymatters (4 Aug 2009)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> What you're saying (and please correct me if I'm wrong), basically - is that an undergrad degree is worth what a high school diploma used to be worth.  Because of societal pressures regarding educational levels - those_ required_ levels have been increased, at the same time the _actual worth_ of those levels has been decreased.



That would also be true...


----------



## George Wallace (4 Aug 2009)

So?  Would that make a Grade 12, Senior Matriculation Deploma from a Saskatchewan HS dated 1974 of more value/weight than a Bachelor of Economics, BA, Bachelor of PoliSci of 2009?  Is this to say that a 1974 HS Deploma from Saskatchewan was awarded to a more highly educated person than that of a person holding a current 2009 University Degree?


----------



## leroi (4 Aug 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> So?  Would that make a Grade 12, Senior Matriculation Deploma from a Saskatchewan HS dated 1974 of more value/weight than a Bachelor of Economics, BA, Bachelor of PoliSci of 2009?  Is this to say that a 1974 HS Deploma from Saskatchewan was awarded to a more highly educated person than that of a person holding a current 2009 University Degree?



This is my take on what is meant:

I'm quoting a Sociology professor-statistician (sp?) here, and according to her, the two things you compare Mr. Wallace would be of equal value but variable over time: "in today's world an undergraduate degree is valued, is a social expectation, in the same way a grade 12 high school diploma was valued 30 years ago."  The professor was using it in the context of warning first year students that without pairing up an undergraduate degree with a specialization/profession/trade, an undergraduate degree is not that valuable. She professed this bit of wisdom as a warning to entering students to choose a career path wisely and to point out that a university degree does not necessarily mean success or intelligence. 

Anyway, I may be wrong but this is how I understood Neo Cortex and Mr. Harding and Greymatters.


----------



## dustinm (4 Aug 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> So?  Would that make a Grade 12, Senior Matriculation Deploma from a Saskatchewan HS dated 1974 of more value/weight than a Bachelor of Economics, BA, Bachelor of PoliSci of 2009?  Is this to say that a 1974 HS Deploma from Saskatchewan was awarded to a more highly educated person than that of a person holding a current 2009 University Degree?



The idea wasn't necessarily that it was _worth_ more, but more that it's easier to obtain now because it's more expected that a person will have one. 

As society shifts to requiring higher degrees, the standards will shift in order to accommodate the increased demand on the institutions from people who might not be as prepared for the education, but who have to obtain it anyway because their current credentials are of less use in a modern[izing] world.


----------



## George Wallace (5 Aug 2009)

Neo Cortex said:
			
		

> The idea wasn't necessarily that it was _worth_ more, but more that it's easier to obtain now because it's more expected that a person will have one.



Now, I see it differently.  If a person had to work hard for something, and was better educated in the process, then I figure that what that person achieved is worth more than something that another person gained by a much easier route.  If the value of a Diploma or Degree is devalued, it would be like the Deutsche Mark in 1939 that wasn't worth what a Deutsche Mark from 1920 was.  

Dumbing down the Education System gives the end result of Degrees and Diplomas that are worth less than what lesser Degrees or Diplomas were worth at an earlier time.  In essence, a High School Diploma of 1959 may be of more worth than a BA in PoliSc in 2009.  The 1959 student may have been a lot brighter than the modern University Grad.





			
				Neo Cortex said:
			
		

> As society shifts to requiring higher degrees, the standards will shift in order to accommodate the increased demand on the institutions from people who might not be as prepared for the education, but who have to obtain it anyway because their current credentials are of less use in a modern[izing] world.



There have always been Institutions whose reputations of providing a "higher quality" education than others.  You can look at the Yale, MIT, Oxford, Harvard, Sorbonne, and other such universities of the past whose graduates held higher status than those of other universities.  At the same time there were universities who provided lesser calibre of graduates: University of California, Berkley for instance.  Yes they may have offered same named Degrees, but they did not hold the same value/weight/credibility.


----------



## Greymatters (5 Aug 2009)

Of note, this is not true of all industries aross Canada.  There are still many areas of work where experience and skills count for a lot more than education, i.e. manufacturing industries...


----------



## Engineer79 (5 Aug 2009)

Just my 2 cents. When I started first year I had a hard time keeping up with my colleagues, mostly because they were top international students – these students learned first year material in grade 10 and some in grade 11. Their program is very rigorous, especially compared to Canadian high schools. Which got me thinking, what did we learn in high school here? Not much! We really need to be stepping it up a notch rather than stepping it down (as we did with OAC/grade 13). In some regards, I am glad they removed grade 13 because we wouldn’t have learned much more that we would have with a 4 year high school program. 

With that being said, once second year started, those of us who went to a Canadian high school had a much easier time than international students (mind you, almost 30% of students dropped out by this point). Never the less, it showed me another aspect of the Canadian learning environment – the way we are taught to learn here in Canada ensures that we have the ability to grasp the foundation of any material with a firm understanding. International students, however, have a hard time doing just that.


----------



## ruckmarch (5 Aug 2009)

Doesn't stop 'some of them' shagging the students though eh? I guess when it comes to that area of anatomy 101, exceptions are made?

Honestly though.....I can see their point in a way, students nowadays don't know how good they have it compared to the pre-world wide web era, where you actually had to go to the library and work out maths using your head.


----------



## mariomike (5 Aug 2009)

ruckmarch said:
			
		

> Doesn't stop 'some of them' shagging the students though eh? I guess when it comes to that area of anatomy 101, exceptions are made?



I keep reading about them. I guess I went to the wrong school.


----------



## PMedMoe (10 Aug 2009)

Here's an article that seems to tie right in with this topic.
*Teens buying good grades from private summer schools*

Among teenagers it's considered a no-brainer: scoring a coveted A grade these days can be as simple as handing over a wad of cash to a wisely-chosen private summer school. 

As Ontario high school students face mounting pressure to pull in the high marks needed to get into an A-list university or college, it appears increasing numbers are cracking open their pocketbooks instead of their textbooks. 

The trend - known as "buying a credit" - is ringing alarm bells for both public-system educators and officials at the Ministry of Education, who feel students engaging in the practice are unfairly winning scholarships and select spots in post-secondary schools and then heading off to study unprepared. 

"There was only seven people in the class, the teachers focus on you, and basically, there was no way I could do bad," said Sean Donoahue, 17, who paid $2,000 for a 20-day course in Grade 12 English. 

"That's what sold me, was that I couldn't get a bad mark in summer school. There was no way I'd get below an 80." 

Ross, who attended a different Toronto-based private school, purchased a package of six credits at $1,200 a pop and boosted his average up to the low-90s. He was accepted to every university he applied to. 

It's a grade-factory. That's exactly what it is, that's the only reason the school exists. There's nothing more to the school," said the 20-year-old, who asked that only his middle name be used to avoid having his diploma disputed. 

"If you just sort of showed up and did what you had to do, you were guaranteed something of an 80 or an 85. If you put in any effort whatsoever, you'd get exceptionally high marks - in the 90s." 

Other students informally polled outside several non-descript private schools along the Yonge Street subway line in Toronto's north end said the practice was common knowledge. Some laughed bitterly about their "idiot" friends who were "spoon-fed" by teachers at even pricier schools. 

More on link

Truly sad.   :


----------



## Neill McKay (10 Aug 2009)

I can buy that a summer school with very small classes would tend to result in higher marks, simply because the teacher/student ratio is so much higher.  But this quote really cracked me up:



> "There *was* only seven people in the class, the teachers focus on you, and basically, there was no way I could do *bad*," said Sean Donoahue, 17, who paid $2,000 for a 20-day course in Grade 12 English.



$2000 wasted, based on the quality of this lad's grammar.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Aug 2009)

So what's the problem? Someone is having trouble. They pay for what amounts to a private tutor. They increase their education, on their own dime and time. As long as the marks can be substantiated, who cares? Good on them for wanting to better themselves.

No where in the article does it say they just paid for the mark. They said things like showing up and doing what you had to (studying? homework? :) resulted in a good mark. More effort (more studying? more homework? :) amounted to a higher mark.

Perhaps, the real problem is, the Min of Ed is upset because these types of facilities are shining the light on the useless 'nobody fails, noboby's an idiot' system they are perpetuating.


----------



## PMedMoe (10 Aug 2009)

No, it doesn't explicitly say they are paying for marks, but improving marks by large percentages seems to be the norm.



> "We have students who will have a history in math of getting 20 per cent lower than what they end up achieving in a math course in one of these schools," said Joan Timmings, who just ended her term as president of the Peel District School Board's Guidance Heads Association. "They'll be getting something like 60s in math or English, and they'll end up getting 80s or 90s in that (other) school."





> In one case, a student whose grades ranged between 35 and 70 achieved 90 and 92 at the private school.
> 
> Two other students, one who scored 50 in physics and another who scored 22 in a different math course, took those same classes for a fee and each earned a 90.





> "It's not summer school. I've been to summer school. That's the point," said Eddie Mircea, 16, heading into math class.
> 
> He said the teachers hand him pre-made formula sheets for tests, never check homework and don't give students assignments each week as they would in the other system.
> 
> "You go to it pretty much because it's easier than school. It's much easier than school - that's the point."



Maybe they are just learning more with a lower student-to-teacher ratio, but going from a 22 to a 90?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Aug 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> No, it doesn't explicitly say they are paying for marks, but improving marks by large percentages seems to be the norm.
> 
> Maybe they are just learning more with a lower student-to-teacher ratio, but going from a 22 to a 90?



And maybe the person had a problem, but the 'one on one' worked. It happens all the time, and a lot more than the current education system wants to admit. They'd actually have to work and apply themselves rather than get the kids doped with Ridalin. 

I see this as nothing more than some (lazy?) educators trying to protect the lousy job they do. That, and a lazy press trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill, when no real news exists, and making it instead of reporting it.

just my  :2c: and personal opinion. It's just conjecture.


----------



## PMedMoe (10 Aug 2009)

recceguy said:
			
		

> just my  :2c: and personal opinion. It's just conjecture.



I respect that.  I just wonder if these same students would have made such good marks in actual summer school.  If they need "one on one", I hope the parents are willing to pay for private tutors all through university,too.


----------



## dustinm (10 Aug 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> I respect that.  I just wonder if these same students would have made such good marks in actual summer school.  If they need "one on one", I hope the parents are willing to pay for private tutors all through university,too.



Once you've established the knowledge though, do you really need the one-on-one tutoring? If they genuinely gained the mastery of the knowledge I don't care how much it cost them, though I see what you're saying.

I got a 45% in one day-school class, took a similar (though considered not as challenging) summer school class of the same grade level and subject and managed an 80%, simply because the methods of the instructor were different. 

The Teacher:Student ratio was like the kind you'd find in a day-school but the teacher was simply better suited to my learning style. Perhaps some of the improvement in these students is a combination of more time spent, a change-of-instructor, and the knowledge that if they fail they've just cost their parents $2,000?


----------



## Neill McKay (11 Aug 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> No, it doesn't explicitly say they are paying for marks, but improving marks by large percentages seems to be the norm.
> 
> Maybe they are just learning more with a lower student-to-teacher ratio, but going from a 22 to a 90?



A course is usually a lot easier the second time around, though!

I would expect a student to improve his or her mark in this situation for a few reasons:

- smaller classes, which are almost universally better learning environments;
- the kick in the backside that came from failing the course in the first place, as a motivator;
- the fact that it's costing someone money this time -- the student's or the parent's ("I'm paying a thousand dollars for this, so you'd damn well better pull your socks up this time young man!"); and
- getting the same material again, with a different teacher who has a slightly different perspective, can make a huge difference.


----------



## Spanky (11 Aug 2009)

N. McKay said:
			
		

> A course is usually a lot easier the second time around, though!
> 
> I would expect a student to improve his or her mark in this situation for a few reasons:
> 
> ...



All of these reasons are valid.  In combination, it's not inconceivable that marks can climb that high.  That being said, I've taught a number of students at the elementary level that came to us from a couple of local private schools.  We could not believe how inflated the marks were.  Kids were coming from there with straight "A"s and getting "C"s and low "B"s from us.  I guess they had to keep the customer happy. :

It would be interesting to see how these summer school students would fare on a standard "exit" exam should one be available.


----------



## ex-Sup (11 Aug 2009)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I see this as nothing more than some (lazy?) educators trying to protect the lousy job they do.
> It's just conjecture.


Hmmmm, should I bother responding to that? We'll just leave it at conjecture.

Here's the crux of the issue as my teacher's eye sees it. The competition for marks and certain programs these days is quite fierce. In some cases, especially with marks and their relationship to scholarships, we're talking about a lot of cash (thousands of dollars). The local university here (Lakehead) is giving free rides for 95+ averages. Not all kids taking summer school are doing it because they failed; some do it to boost their marks. The problem is that we have a few that can afford the big price tag to be in a class of 7 where they get more one on one time getting an advantage over those who cannot.


			
				Spanky said:
			
		

> In combination, it's not inconceivable that marks can climb that high.



When I read the article I would agree with Spanky here, but as I enter my 12th year in the business, experience tells me that it is very rare. Kids who are generally a B or C student do not magically jump 20 or 30 percent. Factors such as the teacher, the environment, etc can affect a student’s mark, but not to that extreme. In the end I would suspect that many of these “honour” students will get weeded out in university (unfortunately after they’ve received scholarships and taken up another admission spot). Stats tell us that approximately 25% of all high school students go to university; I would like to see some stats on how many of those complete their programs. I remember a number of people dropping out.


----------



## Neill McKay (11 Aug 2009)

Spanky said:
			
		

> It would be interesting to see how these summer school students would fare on a standard "exit" exam should one be available.



Definitely.  I don't think we can ignore the effect that a lack of accountability combined with an incentive to be able to claim amazing turnaround of past students could have on the practices of a private school.  One single check like that would clear up the uncertainty pretty quickly.


----------



## SupersonicMax (11 Aug 2009)

There are Standard Exams in Quebec.


----------



## gcclarke (12 Aug 2009)

What was the cause of the original bad grade? That's the real question that needs to be answered if we're to determine whether such a spike in grades is reasonable or not. If the answer is that the material was simply too difficult for the student, then yes, there is likely some malfeasance going on. But frankly, I think that for the vast majority of these cases, the reason the student did poorly in the first place was simply because during the year they were lazy and didn't study.

Then, once their parents find out how poorly they did, and send them off to a 1 on 1 Math Boot Camp, instilling the fear of the wrath of god in the kid unless they do well, the student will then avail themselves of the opportunity to study, full time. It's not like they have much choice in the matter. 

Personally, I have also pulled such "miraculous" recoveries, albeit during University vice high school. In my 2nd year, I failed my Thermodynamics course. I failed because my attendance was spotty, I didn't do much of the homework, and did not study much. The 2nd time around, I did study, and did all of the assigned problems with a study partner, and actually went to all of my classes. I then managed to get an A. And this was without any special intervention such as a full time 1 on 1 tutor. 

It's perfectly reasonable to expect that a student who just didn't put in the effort the first time around is perfectly capable of performing quite well when they are forced to put in the effort.


----------



## dustinm (12 Aug 2009)

gcclarke said:
			
		

> It's perfectly reasonable to expect that a student who just didn't put in the effort the first time around is perfectly capable of performing quite well when they are forced to put in the effort.



While slightly off-topic, I had a teacher in 6th Grade who had a nasty way of turning _everything_ into a negative. Case in point, after a particularly bad test on some subject where something like 60% of the class had failed (luckily I was in the minority), we were given the weekend to study the material before a retest.

Writing a different test on the same material, nobody scored less than a 70%. And this was taken as a bad thing, since it meant those who failed the first time around didn't study, so we were subjected to aa second chewing out about why we all passed :


----------



## gcclarke (12 Aug 2009)

Neo Cortex said:
			
		

> While slightly off-topic, I had a teacher in 6th Grade who had a nasty way of turning _everything_ into a negative. Case in point, after a particularly bad test on some subject where something like 60% of the class had failed (luckily I was in the minority), we were given the weekend to study the material before a retest.
> 
> Writing a different test on the same material, nobody scored less than a 70%. And this was taken as a bad thing, since it meant those who failed the first time around didn't study, so we were subjected to aa second chewing out about why we all passed :



Whenever something like that happens, it is the fault of the teacher. Individual failures are up to the individual. Group failures, however, only have one common link. Either the test was much too difficult, or the teaching was inadequate, or some combination thereof.

I had a drafting course where the final exam was worth quite a bit. I remember walking out of the exam thinking that, in the unlikely event that I received full marks on every question which I was able to attempt, I still would not have been able to finish off the course with anything more than a 40%. Of course, the same thing happened to everyone else in the course, and after they curved the marks to high hell, I ended up with a B or a B-. 

Needless to say, I'm glad that I've never had a position where I needed to do any drafting.


----------



## kratz (12 Aug 2009)

With a new year gearing up, I continue to follow this thread. Let us know how it goes with the current classes.


----------



## George Wallace (12 Aug 2009)

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act

B.C. university introduces grade worse than F  (Link in title)

12/08/2009 7:57:11 PM
*
It used to be that the worst grade you could receive in school was an F, and that was bad enough.*


Darcy Wintonyk 

But B.C.'s Simon Fraser University is taking punishment to a whole new level, introducing a grade of FD -- meaning failure with dishonesty -- the worst possible grade a student can receive. 

Dr. Rob Gordon, director of criminology at SFU and acting chair of the senate committee on academic integrity, says the new grading is intended to curtail cheating using the internet. 

"What used to be a lot of cheating in libraries has changed quite significantly," he told ctvbc.ca. 

"We now have to be concerned about cheating during exams with high-tech devices and the inappropriate use of internet sources and downloading, including online companies offering services to students that promote academic dishonesty." 

University department chairs can impose the FD grade if they feel the incident warrants a severe penalty, or if the student has landed themselves in academic hot water in the past. 

"They only use this grade in particularly egregious cases of dishonestly or in cases when they've committed acts of dishonesty several times and haven't learned from their lesson," Gordon said. 

The mark, which has yet to be used in its introductory semester, will stay on the student's transcripts for two years after graduation. 

"It's more than a fail, it's a failure with a particular reason that is publicly announced that may well be seen by potential employers." 

Some students say it's unfair to carry that stigma into the working world. 

"Two years loss of your life that is a bit too far," Olid Amid said. 

But although some consider the new grading heavy handed, others say the punishment is just in a time where internet cheating is increasing at Canadian post-secondary institutions. 

"A student would seriously need to re-evaluate their intentions at university and what they are hoping to get out of it," University of Alberta student Patrice Strate said. 

"It makes it a lot easier for those of us who don't cheat to get good grades and to not worry about the people who are cheating," student John Aubrey said. 

The University of Alberta uses a similar system where cheaters are given an F8 or F9 grade, which is reduced to an F after three years.  

"In our case we give the students a chance to redeem themselves," Dean of Students Frank Robinson said. 

"[In] three years they can graduate and have a clean record and get on with life."


----------



## ex-Sup (12 Aug 2009)

gcclarke said:
			
		

> Whenever something like that happens, it is the fault of the teacher. Individual failures are up to the individual. Group failures, however, only have one common link. Either the test was much too difficult, or the teaching was inadequate, or some combination thereof.


Unfortunately I'd have to disagree with you here.
Now I'm not claiming to be perfect here, but I had classes completely bomb tests ie. class average of 45%. The material has not changed (it's history), the evaluation (test) is pretty much the same (minor tweeks) and my presentation methods haven't been significantly altered (once again some minor changes). So when one class bombs a test that hasn't presented a problem in the past, I'd argue it's the kids. Now granted this happened with an applied class, and some of these kids are notorious for giving two sh@ts about academics.

Now I tend to my worst critic. I immediately start wondering what I did wrong, and how I could have done things differently. When I go through the above details I then realize that I’ve done my best to teach these students what is required. They are the ones who did not hand in the assignment, or study/complete the test review, etc. In 12 years I’ve realized that the bar must remain the same, otherwise you invite the creation an environment of mediocrity. I know some of my colleagues will move the bar, but I refuse to do that. I will make some allowance for kids who are struggling, but if I end up with a class of C’s, D’s and F’s because of my standards, so be it.

I guess the reverse situation also happens. I’ve had academic classes where the average for a test is 85% or better, and then I start to wonder if the test was too easy (or maybe I’m too good of a teacher  ). But once again it comes down to meeting expectations. Obviously most of the kids studied and they knew the material (my tests tend to be pretty comprehensive) and communicated it in the proper fashion.

Anyway, if this situation exists, then as I stated the onus falls to the student, not the teacher (in my experienced observation).


----------



## ex-Sup (12 Aug 2009)

kratz said:
			
		

> With a new year gearing up, I continue to follow this thread. Let us know how it goes with the current classes.


Holding my breath!


----------



## mariomike (13 Aug 2009)

I don't know how true it is, but someone told me that some teachers - and perhaps other instructors - now prefer to mark tests with green rather than red ink. It gives the students a more positive feeling about their work. Although an F is still an F.


----------



## GAP (13 Aug 2009)

B.C. university introduces grade worse than F
Updated: Wed Aug. 12 2009 19:01:13 Darcy Wintonyk, ctvbc.ca
Article Link

It used to be that the worst grade you could receive in school was an F, and that was bad enough. 

But B.C.'s Simon Fraser University is taking punishment to a whole new level, introducing a grade of FD -- meaning failure with dishonesty -- the worst possible grade a student can receive. 

Dr. Rob Gordon, director of criminology at SFU and acting chair of the senate committee on academic integrity, says the new grading is intended to curtail cheating using the internet. 

"What used to be a lot of cheating in libraries has changed quite significantly," he told ctvbc.ca. 

"We now have to be concerned about cheating during exams with high-tech devices and the inappropriate use of internet sources and downloading, including online companies offering services to students that promote academic dishonesty." 

University department chairs can impose the FD grade if they feel the incident warrants a severe penalty, or if the student has landed themselves in academic hot water in the past. 

"They only use this grade in particularly egregious cases of dishonestly or in cases when they've committed acts of dishonesty several times and haven't learned from their lesson," Gordon said. 

The mark, which has yet to be used in its introductory semester, will stay on the student's transcripts for two years after graduation. 
More on link


----------



## PMedMoe (13 Aug 2009)

FD the worst grade you can get?  Instead of inventing a new grade, why not just expel the student for cheating.   :


----------



## PMedMoe (13 Aug 2009)

mariomike said:
			
		

> I don't know how true it is, but someone told me that some teachers - and perhaps other instructors - now prefer to mark tests with green rather than red ink. It gives the students a more positive feeling about their work. Although an F is still an F.



"Hey Mom, I failed a test today, but it's okay because the teacher used green ink!"

Good grief, what next?  Psych counselling after little Johnny or Janey doesn't do well on a test?   :


----------



## Spanky (13 Aug 2009)

mariomike said:
			
		

> I don't know how true it is, but someone told me that some teachers - and perhaps other instructors - now prefer to mark tests with green rather than red ink. It gives the students a more positive feeling about their work. Although an F is still an F.


The thinking is that the green stands out less than the red.  If a student gets a piece of work returned with a ton of red marks all over it, he/she will see that and not the actual errors.  It's very rare to see anything other than red being used however.  meh, I just use whatever is closest.


----------



## ex-Sup (13 Aug 2009)

mariomike said:
			
		

> now prefer to mark tests with green rather than red ink.


F@ck that! Gimme red!

Actually I use whatever I have on hand. I prefer gel pens to mark (especially for essays) and they usually come in multi-packs-blue, red, pink (yes, pink), etc. I think that the idea of green rather than red comes from some people's ideas not to hurt anyone's feeling. I call it the kindler, gentler approach (tongue in cheek of course). For example I coach football, and when people tell me that in the past they did this or that for conditioning or punishment, I tell them that things have changed. "This is the kindler, gentler football!" Wouldn't want to make anyone work too hard or make them feel bad.
Is there a kindler, gentler CF?


----------



## George Wallace (13 Aug 2009)

Then again, everywhere I have worked in the CF, Green was reserved for the Comd.  Perhaps this should equate to their mark being handed down "from the hands of God".      ;D


----------



## MARS (13 Aug 2009)

Reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from CBC.ca

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2009/08/11/ottawa-090811-private-school-marks-ontario-wynne.html
----------------------
Private school grades to be flagged in Ont.


Ontario will start requiring high school credits and grades received from private schools to be flagged on student transcripts with the letter "P" starting this fall.

Education Minister Kathleen Wynne confirmed Tuesday that the move was in response to public concerns that some private schools were providing "easy marks" for a fee. Such fees can run up to $2,000 for a three-week summer Grade 12 English course.

Wynne said guidance councillors have long expressed concerns that up until now, there has been no way to track where students received their credits.

Wynne added that the province will start keeping a closer eye on private schools by:

Boosting the frequency of provincial inspections. 
Monitoring schools that are underperforming. 
Reinstating a requirement that private schools submit a notice containing details of student safety and achievement that will be posted online. 
"We're trying to bring more transparency to this," Wynne said, adding that only a small minority of schools are at risk of not meeting provincial standards.

The government is also studying how to define a school and distinguish schools from tutoring services through criteria such as classroom hours.

There are 315 private schools in Ontario that offer credits toward an Ontario Secondary School Diploma, and must have passed inspection by the Ministry of Education in order to do so. However, the inspection does not deal with health, equipment, safety practices, or staffing issues.
-------------------------------------


----------



## CountDC (13 Aug 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> Is there a kindler, gentler CF?



Yes.


----------



## CountDC (13 Aug 2009)

MARS said:
			
		

> Reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from CBC.ca
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2009/08/11/ottawa-090811-private-school-marks-ontario-wynne.html
> ----------------------
> ...



Guess it was too hard for the highly educated councillors to ask "So , what school did you attend?" and then confirm it.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (13 Aug 2009)

MARS said:
			
		

> Reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from CBC.ca
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2009/08/11/ottawa-090811-private-school-marks-ontario-wynne.html
> ----------------------
> ...



Typical Bantario response to a problem. Instead of doing the legwork on the front end and instituting measure to hold people accountable, they emplace one of their touchy feely bogus plans to appease the vocal minority. How about just having a province wide curriculum and exams. One set of standards, one set of testing, one set of application of the rules. ALL schools public, private and separate have to teach the exact same stuff and write the exact same exam. The only thing that should be left to the school is the delivery. It'll be up to them whether it's delivered with a fire hose or quietly in the flower garden out back accompanied by the requisite harp music. Either way, the standard will have to be met.


----------



## gcclarke (13 Aug 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> Unfortunately I'd have to disagree with you here.
> Now I'm not claiming to be perfect here, but I had classes completely bomb tests ie. class average of 45%. The material has not changed (it's history), the evaluation (test) is pretty much the same (minor tweeks) and my presentation methods haven't been significantly altered (once again some minor changes). So when one class bombs a test that hasn't presented a problem in the past, I'd argue it's the kids. Now granted this happened with an applied class, and some of these kids are notorious for giving two sh@ts about academics.



Ok, mea culpa. My previous statement only stands when the class in question is composted of individuals who are making an effort, at least mostly. Had the same thing happened in your academic class, where presumably the majority of your students are both rather intelligent and are motivated to do well, then I would lay most of the blame on you. But it didn't, so you're fine in my books.

This type of situation seems to pop up much more frequently in a post-secondary setting. Professors getting stuck teaching classes that they'd rather not teach, as it detracts from their research time, can easily go bad.


----------



## PMedMoe (13 Aug 2009)

I had a math teacher in high school whose classes had a 70% failure rate.  Of course, it wasn't his fault.  He was gone the next year.  I went from a 37% one year to a 74% the next year.  Same school, same material, different teacher.


----------



## mariomike (13 Aug 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> "Hey Mom, I failed a test today, but it's okay because the teacher used green ink!"
> Good grief, what next?  Psych counselling after little Johnny or Janey doesn't do well on a test?   :



"Marking in red ink banned in case it upsets schoolchildren":
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/3964683/Marking-in-red-ink-banned-in-case-it-upsets-schoolchildren.html

"Teachers who mark work in red pen could be inflicting psychological damage on their students, according to new guidelines":
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3705070/Marking-in-red-pen-can-damage-students.html


----------



## CountDC (13 Aug 2009)

ok recce go the back of the class for being too smart.

Sometimes you have to look beyond the teachers at the administrator/principal.  My own experience with my son at his school was that the problem actually originated with the principal.  unfortunately I didn't find this out until he was there for a few years.  The school was supposed to have a no bullying policy but every time he was bullied they blamed him and his lack of ability to get along with the other kids. His problem was that he did what he was told by the principal in her welcome to school speech - "if some one picks on you, hits you or calls you names tell the teacher or me" He did, only thing happened was the kid picked on him more for squealing and the other kids joined in. He then decided to defend himself, hit back and they tried triple punishing him - not allow to participate in gym that day, no recess the next day and have to stay after school. The other kid that was trying to bully him got one punishment - no gym. Her mentality was that he was the worst in the case because he hit back. Makes sense to me - we have a no bullying policy we will not enforce but if you defend yourself we will nail you to the wall. There were other cases along the same and she always blamed the person getting bullied and made excuses for the one doing the bullying.

When she left the school the new principal was a hard liner on the policy and things changed drastically at the school.  Didn't take long for the parents of the kids bullying to deal with their kids - he automatically gave one day suspension the first time, 3 day second. These people did not want their kids at home.  He even called D9, stated he had read my sons file and talked to some staff.  He apologized for the unfair treatment and ensured her it would not happen anymore. Last I heard the school was a much better place, some teachers were "transferred", some that were "poor" performers in the parents eyes blossomed into real good teachers and kids actually looked forward to going to school (except for the bullies). 

Sometimes the problem is the leader.


----------



## kratz (13 Aug 2009)

I instruct first aid on a regular monthly basis, but I am not a school teacher or professor. When I am working with new instructors, I have to mention to them to mark in a colour other than red. The reasoning is the student's reaction to seeing too much red on their test. In practice I use the first marker I find, but then I do not carry too many red markers. 

When I joined as an 841, I was informed green ink was for financial forms. A number of years later, we had one officer who was notorious for always signing anything in green ink.


----------



## Roy Harding (13 Aug 2009)

kratz said:
			
		

> I instruct first aid on a regular monthly basis, but I am not a school teacher or professor. When I am working with new instructors, I have to mention to them to mark in a colour other than red. The reasoning is the student's reaction to seeing too much red on their test. In practice I use the first marker I find, but then I do not carry too many red markers.
> 
> When I joined as an 841, I was informed_ green ink was for financial forms_. A number of years later, we had one officer who was notorious for always signing anything in green ink.



(Emphasis added).

Green ink is for auditor's annotations.  Sheesh - even us 8_3_1's knew that!


----------



## ex-Sup (13 Aug 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> I had a math teacher in high school whose classes had a 70% failure rate.  Of course, it wasn't his fault.  He was gone the next year.  I went from a 37% one year to a 74% the next year.  Same school, same material, different teacher.


There are always exceptions. Just like the rest of society, there are good and bad in the teaching profession. I'd like to think I fall into the former category.


----------



## PMedMoe (13 Aug 2009)

ex-Sup said:
			
		

> There are always exceptions. Just like the rest of society, there are good and bad in the teaching profession. I'd like to think I fall into the former category.



I'm sure you do.  Actually, he was the only bad teacher I had.  He knew the work, he just couldn't teach it.  I think his first love was physics so probably didn't like teaching regular math.  When he left, he went back to university, not to teach.


----------



## ex-Sup (13 Aug 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> He knew the work, he just couldn't teach it.  I think his first love was physics so probably didn't like teaching regular math.


I had a math teacher like that. Brilliant man, likeable, some of my peers loved him, but he was too smart. He couldn't understand that some people (like me) cannot comprehend algebra. I guess that's why I try to explain things is the simpliest form I can and try to relate it to real life. I know there's not too many complicated things in history, but there are things that come up with regard to politics, money, technology, etc. Hopefully it works...if ratemyteacher.com is any indication I'm okay. I even get through to the potheads!


----------



## kratz (21 Sep 2009)

I laughed when I read this headline at CTV.ca. This is something that we have been discussing for awhile now.



> Students not prepared for university, says survey
> Updated Mon. Sep. 21 2009 6:36 AM ET
> 
> The Canadian Press
> ...


----------



## Antoine (22 Sep 2009)

Student: So when do I start the lab?
Me: What is written on your schedule that you are holding in your hand?
Student: Next Friday.
Me: Thus, it is next Friday.

Me lecturing: 
We are expecting you to come prepared for the lab, prepared means that you have read your lab book, did your homework and have an idea about the experiment your are going to perform. We will be happy to help you and answer your questions but we will not doing the lab for you neither your homework. If you don't like it, please, don't loose your time and money, it is still time to withdraw from the course.

Students: 
Nothing, I can hear a fly flying!, some are sleeping, some are counting the number of cracks on the wall, and others are looking at me as I was a monster, could be my french look or accent !

Then they have questions for me, they didn't listen to me, neither read their lab book about check-in day!

Yes, each year is the same, but sometime, I feel it is getting worst. Must be me starting to be an old grumpy man.

However, by being positive and encouraging them, their confidence build up and I can see a huge improvement at the end of the term, so there is hope, always!


----------



## kratz (16 Feb 2011)

I know this thread is dated, but today's CTV.ca report of a teacher in the USA, suspended for comments in her BLOG, calling out her students for being "disengaged, lazy whiners". I knew we had discussed similar sentiments in this thread and felt this would be the appropriate place to post.



> "My students are out of control," Munroe, who has taught 10th, 11th and 12th grades, wrote in one post. "They are rude, disengaged, lazy whiners. They curse, discuss drugs, talk back, argue for grades, complain about everything, fancy themselves entitled to whatever they desire, and are just generally annoying."
> 
> And in another post, Munroe -- who is more than eight months pregnant -- quotes from the musical "Bye Bye Birdie": "Kids! They are disobedient, disrespectful oafs. Noisy, crazy, sloppy, lazy LOAFERS."
> 
> ...



more at link


----------



## Container (16 Feb 2011)

kratz said:
			
		

> I know this thread is dated, but today's CTV.ca report of a teacher in the USA, suspended for comments in her BLOG, calling out her students for being "disengaged, lazy whiners". I knew we had discussed similar sentiments in this thread and felt this would be the appropriate place to post.
> 
> 
> more at link



While I understand concerns about what shes saying. It kinda underlines her reason for saying it when she gets suspended by the "hurt feelings brigade". The things I have seen done to school teachers by students make these sentiments the low end of the spectrum. Its an example of the inmates running the asylum.

Im not particularly fond of most teachers I come in to contact with- indifferent is a better way to put it. Police and teachers have a strange relationship in my experience. But my god have they got my sympathy. And the ones that are actually pushing back get shown the door pretty quick.


----------



## kratz (1 Jun 2012)

This is a recourring theme as well. What motivation is there for students to do any work if they can not fail?

Shared from CBC Edmonton




> Edmonton teacher suspended for giving 0s
> 
> CBC News
> Posted: May 31, 2012 10:22 AM MT   Last Updated: May 31, 2012 8:27 PM MT
> ...



More story at link


----------



## Danjanou (1 Jun 2012)

> .... her students for being "disengaged, lazy whiners".




....Oops thought I was in the recruiting threads for a minute. 8)


----------



## ttlbmg (1 Jun 2012)

I am a teacher, and while I do understand where the "no zero" policy came from, it makes little sense to me. I taught at the grades 7-12 level, and many students that didn't "feel" like doing an assignment knew that they could skip their homework, and it had little to no effect on their grade. For many students, they knew that there was little consequence to their lack of effort in school. However, the idea behind it, I believe, is that a student's mark should be performance based only, and not reflective of their behaviour. 

I am not sure that the "no zero" policy really helps the student, or simply coddles the student more. I have found in my teaching experience that many kids today do feel this sense of entitlement, and that they believe that the goal of a teacher is to entertain them, rather than educate them. I'm sure the repercussions of this are being felt at the post secondary level. I think that in a few years, the pendulum will start to swing back the other way in terms of education; it seems it always does.


----------



## Dkeh (1 Jun 2012)

I think the No 0 policy is fundamentally flawed. School is designed to teach students the skills they need in real life- what happens if you don't hand in a work report, because you didn't feel like doing it? Your boss will fire your ass. 

Cause and effect is one of the primary driving factors in a persons life- "If I work really hard, I will be rewarded", Vs. "If I don't do any of my work, there are no repercussions. Why should I put in any effort?"


----------



## kratz (1 Jun 2012)

Has anyone made the mistake of reading the comments after the story? CBC has posted some of the student reaction to the report:




> Student reaction to suspension
> 
> "He shouldn't even be teaching anymore. If he wants to hand out zeros, he should be doing some other job — not a teacher."
> 
> ...



This is the workforce of the next generation, who will be caring for the retired Baby Boomers.
"You ae lucky I simply showed up for work, now pay me."   :


----------



## Journeyman (1 Jun 2012)

While the logic may not be outstanding, at least those comments are literate.   :nod:


----------



## PuckChaser (1 Jun 2012)

He should give them 1 point. That way, its not a zero.


----------



## ttlbmg (1 Jun 2012)

You are not allowed to do that either. It becomes quite obvious when the student has numerous marks of 1, but not a single INC or NHI. What surprised me in the article, was that parents may not be aware of this policy. That comment makes me want to write a list of questions for my child's teacher, and add, "what is your current assessment policy?" to it. 

Although, that's the question I would like to pose. If a student is completing a course (ex. math) does giving him or her a zero because they did not complete an assignment assess what they know or do not know, or does it only assess behaviour? And, to follow that, should teachers be assessing student behaviour and including that in their grades?


----------



## Strike (1 Jun 2012)

ttlbmg said:
			
		

> You are not allowed to do that either. It becomes quite obvious when the student has numerous marks of 1, but not a single INC or NHI. What surprised me in the article, was that parents may not be aware of this policy. That comment makes me want to write a list of questions for my child's teacher, and add, "what is your current assessment policy?" to it.
> 
> Although, that's the question I would like to pose. If a student is completing a course (ex. math) does giving him or her a zero because they did not complete an assignment assess what they know or do not know, or does it only assess behaviour? And, to follow that, should teachers be assessing student behaviour and including that in their grades?



Assessing a mark of zero does not equate to assessing behaviour.  It says that, in the specific subject at hand that we are studying (let's say graphing in the larger picture of calculus) you have not handed anything in so I cannot properly assess HOW you are doing, so you get a zero.  In the one assignment on Pythagorean theory, you may have received 80%, but the whole course is not based on that topic, so I can't give you that grade for the course.


----------



## PuckChaser (1 Jun 2012)

The policy also says the teacher should be assessing ability: Well, the student didn't hand anything in, therefore their ability to complete said subject is 0. Next, we'll have the students that got a 50% on an assignment they didn't hand in complaining that the mark was too low because the teacher doesn't like them.  :


----------



## Danjanou (1 Jun 2012)

Strike said:
			
		

> Assessing a mark of zero does not equate to assessing behaviour.  It says that, in the specific subject at hand that we are studying (let's say graphing in the larger picture of calculus) you have not handed anything in so I cannot properly assess HOW you are doing, so you get a zero.  In the one assignment on Pythagorean theory, you may have received 80%, but the whole course is not based on that topic, so I can't give you that grade for the course.



There you go again trying to apply logic and common sense to the Noth American Education System, silly rabbit.  8)



			
				Journeyman said:
			
		

> While the logic may not be outstanding, at least those comments are literate.   :nod:



Yeah that should turn things around. :



			
				kratz said:
			
		

> Has anyone made the mistake of reading the comments after the story? CBC has posted some of the student reaction to the report:
> 
> This is the workforce of the next generation, who will be caring for the retired Baby Boomers.
> "You ae lucky I simply showed up for work, now pay me."   :



Hmm sounds like time for plan B, drink myself to an early grave. 8)


----------



## Journeyman (1 Jun 2012)

Danjanou said:
			
		

> > While the logic may not be outstanding, at least those comments are literate.
> 
> 
> Yeah that should turn things around. :


Hey, baby steps.

With some of the incoherent, run-on babble in the Recruting threads, I often can't determine if there _is_ a point or a question, let alone try to understand. Those kids are on the right path at least.


----------



## The Bread Guy (1 Jun 2012)

Silly question - re:  this bit from the story:


> The thinking behind the policy is that failing to complete assignments is a behavioural issue and marks should reflect ability, not behaviour.


How do you measure _ability_ in a way that doesn't involve SOME type of behaviour?  Even according to Bloom's Taxonomy, the student has to DO something to show they know something:


> .... *Knowledge*: Recall data or information.
> 
> Examples: Recite a policy. Quote prices from memory to a customer. Knows the safety rules.
> 
> ...


If someone needs alternate ways of being tested, I'd be surprised if they wouldn't be provided if requested.  

If alternate means are available, and they're not accessed, too bad, so sad.


----------



## ttlbmg (1 Jun 2012)

Strike said:
			
		

> Assessing a mark of zero does not equate to assessing behaviour.  It says that, in the specific subject at hand that we are studying (let's say graphing in the larger picture of calculus) you have not handed anything in so I cannot properly assess HOW you are doing, so you get a zero.  In the one assignment on Pythagorean theory, you may have received 80%, but the whole course is not based on that topic, so I can't give you that grade for the course.



The logic of not applying a zero to that is saying that because you have not handed anything in, I can't tell what you know, so therefore, I don't know if you know nothing (as a zero applies) or if you know the entire concept and CHOSE not to hand something in. (because then the zero is more reflective of the behaviour, or at least that is the idea) I am not saying that I agree or disagree with it, I am simply stating the policy. In the article, the teacher states that teachers have to look the assessments handed in, compiled with the exams they administered, and, using their PROFESSIONAL judgment, create a student mark. Some teachers look at a large number of incomplete or not turned in assignments and, without putting a zero in that slot, reduce a student's mark, explaining that they can not say that just because "Billy" knows Pythagorean theory, doesn't mean he knows complex trigonometry. (let's say from that 80% down to a 65%) Some teachers let the mark stand as is. What is the correct mark? What way best tells us what that kid can do?


----------



## ModlrMike (1 Jun 2012)

I think the teacher in question had a relatively fair approach in giving the delinquent students another chance to hand in the work. Some would say he was too lenient. If we want to call this a behavioral issue, then learning that bad behavior results in bad outcomes is an appropriate part of fixing the problem. This is no more complex than "don't do all the work, don't get all the marks". 

In the real world, real outcomes are affected. If I don't do all the work, someone dies. These are the future doctors, nurses, engineers, aircraft mechanics, drivers etc that will be responsible for our lives at some point. I would rather they understand the value of timely and diligent study long before they get to the post secondary level.


----------



## KanD (1 Jun 2012)

I have been a teaching assistant (TA) at a university for a year now. When I asked a few Professors (now in their senior) why students that do not perform are being allowed to move onto second and third year subjects, their answers were:

1. Universities are (apparently) required to allow for students to develop their emotional intelligence and personal writing styles;
2. Students will be failed and evaluated with stricter 'academic rigor' once they reach third/fourth year subjects;
3. (related to the second point) Certain universities are more interested in operating as a business by enforcing lax grading standards during the first years (this might be related to the fact that, more often that not,  part-time/junior/adjunct staff teach at that level) and whipping students into shape during the last year before graduation. The students that fail final year courses are thus kept in the system longer, requiring them to pay tuition for longer periods of time (in the end, students are the primary client); and 
4. (also related to the second point) International students now occupy a significant amount of seats available within universities. Since they pay a lot more than domestic students (using my program as an example, I pay $7158, an international student will pay $25,242), universities can generate more income by accepting international students and subjecting them to the same questionable grading standards. The difference with international students, they are allowed a finite amount of tries at passing before they are removed from the university.

Points 3 & 4 will never be acknowledged by any university administration, you need to experience it first hand.
IMHO, something needs to be done. At the moment, the students are running the show and are not allowing for the teaching/learning process to occur. They want to be spoofed the essential information, and only what they need in order to make it in the job market. On the other hand, my first employer said to me 'Our first task here is to make you 'unlearn' the majority of the crap you were taught at school'. 

On another note, would any of you have any advice to give to a TA in my position that has to deal with whinny students after failing them? I spend more time going over my formal complaints than I do on my own work.


----------



## Nostix (1 Jun 2012)

I'm going to be honest, and say that I didn't do a fair amount of my homework in school. 

I did the amount of work that I required to learn the material. If a certain assignment helped me understand the material, I did it. If an assignment was a waste of my time, I didn't. I never complained about it though. I always factored the reality of getting a zero into my decision.

I always enjoyed classes where a teacher would let us choose to have a 100% weight on exams, and a 0% weight on assignments. Plenty of my friends were the opposite, and loved assignments. They could pass a course they didn't understand by sheer force of effort. Take an assignment home and spend six hours on a thirty minute question, pass the class.

I guess all I learned in school is that the entire system is a crap-shoot. I don't even think anyone really has any idea what we're actually trying to achieve any more. 

Maybe I'm just immature and entitled, who knows.


----------



## gcclarke (4 Jun 2012)

Personally, I rarely did nightly or weekly homework assignments in high school. Naturally, the big essays and reports all got done. But I wouldn't be bothered with busy-work. 

But, I sure as hell did so knowing that I would get a zero on that work as a result. As that type of work was typically only worth about 5%, it didn't have all that much impact on my ability to still get rather good marks.


----------



## PMedMoe (11 Jun 2012)

'You're not special,' high school teacher tells graduating students

Forget carpe diem. This high school commencement address was more like carpe downer.

Or so it seemed, at first.

"None of you is special. You are not special. You are not exceptional," English teacher David McCullough Jr. told graduating students as he began his commencement address at Wellesley High School in Wellesley, Mass. 

Instead, McCullough continued, "You've been pampered, cosseted, doted upon, helmeted, bubble-wrapped. ... You've been nudged, cajoled, wheedled and implored. 

"Absolutely, smiles ignite when you walk into a room, and hundreds gasp with delight at your every tweet. Why, maybe you've even had your picture in the [local paper]! And now you've conquered high school....

"But do not get the idea you're anything special. Because you're not."

Those are bold statements to make, when one is speaking to 300 or so students and the parents that raised them.

A video of the address, delivered June 1, shows a small group of what appear to be students and faculty by turns laughing or looking quizzical in reaction to McCullough's words. Chuckles and applause can be heard from the audience.

But the crowd went silent as McCullough continued: 

"If everyone is special, then no one is. If everyone gets a trophy, trophies become meaningless.

More (and video) at link

Thumbs up to this guy.   :nod:


----------



## Journeyman (11 Jun 2012)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> 'You're not special,' high school teacher tells graduating students


I assume he's already been fired and the school is being sued.   :


----------



## medicineman (11 Jun 2012)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I assume he's already been fired and the school is being sued.   :



He probably already gave half of them zeroes for grades and was on his way out the door anyway...this way he can finish batting 1.000.

MM


----------



## ttlbmg (13 Jun 2012)

I found this article this morning; there is another teacher at Ross Shep facing discipline over giving out zeroes.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2012/06/12/edmonton-no-zero-second-teacher-facing-discipline.html

I also found this article rather interesting. It is about a student that is gathering support for Lyndon Dorval, the first teacher suspended over the no zero policy. 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2012/06/11/edmonton-student-petition-dorval-no-zero.html


----------



## m2austin (13 Jun 2012)

When I was marking papers at university I noticed that a large number of first year students lacked the understanding of how to create a proper argumentative essay. To remedy this, I gave them a few lessons at the beginning of tutorials on essay structure and noticed an improvement on the second essays submitted.

A few weeks after marking the first papers, I ran into my old high-school teacher walking his dog. I explained to him my findings and he explained the difficulties of failing students in courses and blamed the system for wanting to have such a high completion rate.

University education, despite what some may think, is a privilege and not a right. I made this point very clear before students started writing their papers and I explained that we have no obligation to pass students who do not meet sufficient grading criteria.

As for using Wikipedia - I encouraged them to read the articles pertaining to their papers but that they would need to chase the sources of the Wikipedia page and do further research to anticipate counter-arguments. Out of 50 students, I only had two who cited Wikipedia directly. In the second term of university, there were none.

I'm curious if there is a longitudinal survey of professor perception of maturity (like the one originally cited in this thread) but for 1st, 2nd, ... 4th year students. I would argue that while students may come to university immature and possibly unable to structure an essay, they very quickly learn or are forced to leave after academic probation. If there were a study like this, I'm sure you would find professors speaking well of their 4th year students as the program allowed for the progression of diligent and responsible individuals.


----------



## George Wallace (13 Jun 2012)

M2A


As a Moderator on this site, I often have to visit posts that some others may not pay attention to due to their various interests.  I have formed an unscientific survey of my own in this manner and have witnessed quite often the lack of proper English communication skills, perhaps more the lack of respect of the English language skills, of many posters professing to be university graduates, or soon to be graduates.  Even when we stress, over and over, the proper use of spelling, capitalization, sentence structure, etc. some of these personalities still flaunt the rules.  Their inability to comprehend that we are trying to help them become successful in their endeavours to create a successful career in the CF where highly precise communication skill are required and lack of such skills could have life and death consequences escapes them.  In the end, I have witnessed and come to the conclusion that some of our institutions of higher learning are not worth the ratings that McLeans magazine may give them annually.  I have seen many posts from supposed university graduates that indicate that they are functionally illiterate.  One well known institution in the area of College and Spadina comes to mind.

This is not new.  Surveys of university graduates in the 1970's were indicating similar statistics.  The numbers of functionally illiterate graduates have remained constant.


----------



## m2austin (13 Jun 2012)

Mr Wallace,

I may also add that I've had the privilege of reading a few first edition manuscripts of books authored by professors and can attest to numerous grammatical and spelling errors. The cleaning up of this may be done by the editor and publishing team, or by the research assistant if tasked with the job.

I think it may be difficult to accurately quantify the degeneration of writing skills over time at the university level as there is no standardized test to my knowledge that would produce any identifiable data. 

I don't think Macleans is a good source for university ranking and neither did anyone at my university until they started being listed as #1 in most undergraduate categories. <a href="http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2007/04/02/samarasekera">Some professors</a> have taken a stand against its ranking methodology with a number of universities refusing to participate.


----------



## daftandbarmy (13 Jun 2012)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> M2A
> 
> 
> As a Moderator on this site, I often have to visit posts that some others may not pay attention to due to their various interests.  I have formed an unscientific survey of my own in this manner and have witnessed quite often the lack of proper English communication skills, perhaps more the lack of respect of the English language skills, of many posters professing to be university graduates, or soon to be graduates.  Even when we stress, over and over, the proper use of spelling, capitalization, sentence structure, etc. some of these personalities still flaunt the rules.  Their inability to comprehend that we are trying to help them become successful in their endeavours to create a successful career in the CF where highly precise communication skill are required and lack of such skills could have life and death consequences escapes them.  In the end, I have witnessed and come to the conclusion that some of our institutions of higher learning are not worth the ratings that McLeans magazine may give them annually.  I have seen many posts from supposed university graduates that indicate that they are functionally illiterate.  One well known institution in the area of College and Spadina comes to mind.
> ...



 Please don't mess with the status quo. They need to hire consultants like me to help them!


----------



## ttlbmg (13 Jun 2012)

After reading this, I couldn't help but see the relevance to this thread. 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2012/06/13/edmonton-provincial-achievement-tests.html


----------



## KanD (13 Jun 2012)

Somewhat related. Worth a read.

_What Americans Keep Ignoring About Finland's School Success_
Source: The Atlantic (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/12/what-americans-keep-ignoring-about-finlands-school-success/250564/)


----------



## CougarKing (1 Sep 2016)

Related:  Kind of ironic that some of this generation eventually end up on the other side of the drive-thru window if their degree in ____ can't get them the job they expected, and they need to pay back those student loans.

Business Insider



> *Millennials' hatred of 'dealing with people' is a major threat to fast-food workers*
> 
> Hayley Peterson Aug 29, 2016, 11:41 PM ET
> 
> ...


----------



## Michael OLeary (1 Sep 2016)

So, the generation among which are some of the most vocal that claim there are no jobs for them, are literally the generation that is leading the charge on undermining the job opportunities they could pursue. It's not just the fast food industry, it's the same commitment to online banking and ATM vice talking to a teller, or using a self-checkout at the grocery store or wherever else they are installed, and online shopping for anything and everything. Each decision to not engage with an employee anywhere is a message to that industry that they don't need as many employees.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (1 Sep 2016)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> So, the generation among which are some of the most vocal that claim there are no jobs for them, are literally the generation that is leading the charge on undermining the job opportunities they could pursue. It's not just the fast food industry, it's the same commitment to online banking and ATM vice talking to a teller, or using a self-checkout at the grocery store or wherever else they are installed, and online shopping for anything and everything. Each decision to not engage with an employee anywhere is a message to that industry that they don't need as many employees.



To be fair those aren't the jobs anyone wants. No one wants to make a career out of fast food or any minimum wage job for that matter. If your working for 12$ a hour, your making roughly 24k a year. That is a pretty crappy standard of living by any means. The jobs people want available are the ones that were exported with the free trade agreements or lost due to advances in technology. The $20+ a hour jobs that required highschool or less which decrease in number daily.

Look at the erosion of the middle class to see some of the problems being faced by the average Canadian, which the younger generations are particularly affected by (as since there is less higher paying jobs available, it is significantly more of a competition to get one, driving us to get higher and higher levels of education and training to try and beat out everyone else). A number which is very telling is that in the last decade the number of low wage jobs has increased from 22% to 33% of the jobs available in Ontario. If you personally are not willing to settle for a minimum wage job why should anyone else?

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/chrystia-freeland-the-erosion-of-middle-class-jobs-and-incomes-in-canada-is-finally-being-exposed


----------



## Michael OLeary (1 Sep 2016)

Eaglelord17 said:
			
		

> To be fair those aren't the jobs anyone wants. No one wants to make a career out of fast food or any minimum wage job for that matter. If your working for 12$ a hour, your making roughly 24k a year. That is a pretty crappy standard of living by any means.



But those were the jobs that previous generations used to offset the costs of education, where they learned time management, new levels of personal responsibility, and how to perform in a workplace hierarchy. They were never career building opportunities, but they were development opportunities that helped people build skill-sets and resumes before they moved on to the careers they sought.


----------



## cupper (2 Sep 2016)

To be fair, it's not a phenomenon limited to Millennials. I suspect that if they looked at other cohorts they would find similar results. Gen X tends to choose drive thru over eating in a fast food restaurant, usually because of time constraints. Same for the ATM's and online banking. And as for the self checkout two words WAL MART.

I suspect it's more about time and schedules and less about not wanting interaction.

When was the last time you actually went inside a fast food joint and sat down to eat. Usually I go in because the line in the drive thru is backed up, and no one at the counter. When was the last time you went in to a bank to deposit or withdraw money. For me it's only when I need to do something I can't do online or at the ATM. Self checkouts are a mixed bag, and more than likely because to only two manned checkouts are backed up and I only have a few items. I still do the manned line if I have a full cart.

Oddly enough Walmart pulled the self checkouts out of the local store here because the system was not great, and was constantly screwing up. The one on the other side of the city had them installed several years later and work much better. But when was the last time you've been in a Walmart and there have been more than 3 or 4 manned checkouts open?


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Sep 2016)

It's like a weird discussion I had recently with some 'fair wage' types who were concerned about raw logs being exported to China.

I asked them 'do you really want your kids to leave school at Grade 10 to go work in a sawmill?' 

Most of them being entitled academics they, of course, did not.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (2 Sep 2016)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> But those were the jobs that previous generations used to offset the costs of education, where they learned time management, new levels of personal responsibility, and how to perform in a workplace hierarchy. They were never career building opportunities, but they were development opportunities that helped people build skill-sets and resumes before they moved on to the careers they sought.



True enough that is how it worked in the past, that being said, those jobs are starting to become the only option available for a fair bit of people.


----------



## c_canuk (2 Sep 2016)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> It's like a weird discussion I had recently with some 'fair wage' types who were concerned about raw logs being exported to China.
> 
> I asked them 'do you really want your kids to leave school at Grade 10 to go work in a sawmill?'
> 
> Most of them being entitled academics they, of course, did not.



There is some point to that, but the counter point is that they buy our logs at a 10% markup, turn them to finished goods and charge 1000% markup when they sell the products back to us.

The question is, could we make them here ourselves for similar pricing and have more good paying jobs here.

Sure on paper working at a saw mill or furniture factory doesn't seem as glamorous as being a VP, but 95% of university grads are just going to spend their careers sitting in a wheelie chair in a cube farm somewhere anyway.

Having been relegated to the wheelie chair/cube farm I'm longing for something more field oriented where the job ends when I step over the threshold and leave with the satisfaction that I've gotten a good day's work done.

Bureaucracy never ends and victories/accomplishments within it are nebulous at best.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (2 Sep 2016)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> It's like a weird discussion I had recently with some 'fair wage' types who were concerned about raw logs being exported to China.
> 
> I asked them 'do you really want your kids to leave school at Grade 10 to go work in a sawmill?'
> 
> Most of them being entitled academics they, of course, did not.



The people in Prince Rupert would be happy to be able to add value to those raw logs, sadly due to both unions and management, those jobs aren't there. Now they are just happy some get employed marshaling the raw logs to the ship.


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Sep 2016)

c_canuk said:
			
		

> ... The question is, could we make them here ourselves for similar pricing and have more good paying jobs here ...


The other part of that question is how many Canadians are willing to pay a premium for made-in-Canada product that would secure more well-paid jobs here?


----------



## cupper (2 Sep 2016)

One other point to consider is that China is manufacturing to a global market, where as production here in Canada would be much more limited.

Even if you removed the labor cost advantage that China has, you can't beat their advantage in volume of production and size of market.


----------



## Brad Sallows (2 Sep 2016)

Stuff - raw logs, freshly-caught seafood, agricultural produce, etc, etc - which is shipped overseas for processing and returned for sale here as "finished" goods generally undergoes its long journey because the net cost is cheaper than whatever would be required to do the finishing here.  That problem has to be solved at the source, not by whining about raw log exports with no quantitative grasp of what is going on.  Fix the cost of production here, and you may keep the jobs here.

Not every job has to be a "living wage" job.  I suppose that with half-a-dozen or so different min/low wage job experiences on my resume, I was better prepared for my first "real job" interview than someone with none.  (Having no debt was a separate advantage.)


----------



## childs56 (3 Sep 2016)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> Stuff - raw logs, freshly-caught seafood, agricultural produce, etc, etc - which is shipped overseas for processing and returned for sale here as "finished" goods generally undergoes its long journey because the net cost is cheaper than whatever would be required to do the finishing here.  That problem has to be solved at the source, not by whining about raw log exports with no quantitative grasp of what is going on.  Fix the cost of production here, and you may keep the jobs here.
> 
> Not every job has to be a "living wage" job.  I suppose that with half-a-dozen or so different min/low wage job experiences on my resume, I was better prepared for my first "real job" interview than someone with none.  (Having no debt was a separate advantage.)



I am not sure what your talking about in regards to raw log exports or even seafood. 
 Because we export raw logs over seas to Asia so the can mill them up to their specs and requirements for local use. A few mills on the coast have found a niche market in finished wood products to sell the Asia, but the problem is the consistency of the demand and amount of different cuts needed to make the overall sale possible on a large enough scale to make it feasible for Asia to buy milled wood from us. 

I have yet to see milled lumber from Asia on the shelf at my local hardware store. I usually see West Fraser, or Weyerhaeuser printed on the label

As for sea food, most of the seafood we export to Asia is used for consumption over there. Where what they ship us is usually farmed over there and of a lower quality then the wild product here. Again based on volumes and cost. They pay more for our raw product of seafood from here then they do for their local seafood. But we pay more for their seafood ten they would. Based on scales of economy they win. 

The cost of production here is not the biggest issue when it comes down to why we buy most consumer products from overseas.  It comes down to excessive requirements for 40%+ profits required by companies now a days to pay off high dividends and higher then normal bonuses an salarys of Upper management.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (3 Sep 2016)

The question you need to ask yourself is did the average cost of goods go down when these free trade agreements came into place? If the answer is no then we can easily afford to make it here in Canada. Someone is making a lot of money off it, but the savings aren't being passed off to the consumer. 

For example, did anyone notice the price of cars drop when they moved some of the plants to Mexico? Logically if the lies we were told on free trade were correct, the price should have gone down. Instead they have remained the same, why because someone is making a killing selling us these cars as the profit margin is so much larger now.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Sep 2016)

Stuff shipped overseas for finishing and consumption there isn't the same issue as stuff shipped overseas for finishing and back here again for consumption.  But the same criterion applies: the net cost of finishing and getting it to market.  Commercial enterprises will tend to seek the lowest costs, no matter how odd the route from raw material to retail shelf might look.

Stuff not subject to tariffs or other artificial trade adjustments to its cost should not be expected to become cheaper - if there are no costs to be reduced, there is no reason to move production.  You'd first have to partition the list of goods into those affected by changes mandated by a trade agreement, and those unaffected.  Then you could examine to see whether any prices changed.

Nevertheless, the better way to approach the issue is not to ask whether prices in general or particular went down, but whether consumption went up.


----------



## ueo (24 Sep 2016)

Or maybe the Canadian labour market is so glutted with degrees in olde English lit and its like because many parental units have drunk the "must have a degree" cool aid to the detriment of those students who do not like nor can fathom the esoterics of higher education but excel at special stuff like carpentry, mechanics etc. Maybe if students were streamed in high school into tech or academic streams (as was the case in Ontario for many years) then those with arts degrees would have a shot at the academic world leaving all the other well paying jobs to us techies. Just a thought.


----------



## daftandbarmy (24 Sep 2016)

Clint nails it, of course:

“ everybody's getting tired of political correctness, kissing up. That's the kiss-ass generation we're in right now. We're really in a pussy generation. Everybody's walking on eggshells. 

http://www.esquire.com/entertainment/a46893/double-trouble-clint-and-scott-eastwood/


----------



## kratz (20 Sep 2018)

Reference: CBC.ca

With the school year firmly begun, it's no surprise to read these types of news reports:



> When your 'A' becomes a 'C' — Ontario university downgrades marks from some high schools
> Students from Grimsby Secondary School saw their marks downgraded by 27.1 per cent
> Conrad Collaco · CBC News · Posted: Sep 18, 2018 12:54 PM ET | Last Updated: 4 hours ago
> 
> ...



More  at Link


----------



## YZT580 (20 Sep 2018)

What else did they expect when they cancelled grade 13.  All it produced was a younger group of first year students.  We took the final maturing year of school and made it into a daycare for 3 and 4 year olds.  Now we have 16 and 17 year old young people out on their own for the first time in many cases.


----------



## RocketRichard (20 Sep 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> What else did they expect when they cancelled grade 13.  All it produced was a younger group of first year students.  We took the final maturing year of school and made it into a daycare for 3 and 4 year olds.  Now we have 16 and 17 year old young people out on their own for the first time in many cases.


Uh. Unfounded. Ontario was the only province with grade 13. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dimsum (20 Sep 2018)

RomeoJuliet said:
			
		

> Uh. Unfounded. Ontario was the only province with grade 13.



Agreed.  The only benefit I remembered was that most people (not me b/c I was a late-year baby) could legally drink during Frosh week.


----------



## Journeyman (20 Sep 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> What else did they expect when they cancelled grade 13.


Posting only as someone who: a) has never been good at math;  and b) joined the military without the 'benefits" of Ontario Gr 13 (or even close, actually)…..

For your post to be rational, Grimsby Secondary School graduates would have to see their marks jump by 27.1% between Gr. 12 and 13, while Southern Ontario Collegiate would routinely need a similar 25.9% jump.  I can't imagine that happening.

For lacking maturity, sure, the article mentions: 


> ...in secondary school you had guidance counselors, school administrators or the classroom teacher would give you a call or talk to you in the hallway and tell you to buckle down and pull your socks up. At university or college if you decide to skip classes or not submit an assignment you don't have that support. You're on your own


But that's not what is being discussed;  the article pretty much says Waterloo is calling BS -- believing that some schools inflate students' marks. I'm sure other universities believe that too, just not saying it.


----------



## YZT580 (20 Sep 2018)

In Sask. the starting age for K is 5 which translates to a graduating age of 17 to 18 from grade 12.  In Ont. it is 4 which gives us the 16 and 17 grouping.  It isn't the loss of grade 13 as much as it is the earlier starting age that screws things up.


----------



## dapaterson (20 Sep 2018)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Agreed.  The only benefit I remembered was that most people (not me b/c I was a late-year baby) could legally drink during Frosh week.



Unlike Quebec, where the legal drinking age is just a suggestion.


----------



## larry Strong (21 Sep 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Unlike Quebec, where the legal drinking age is just a suggestion.



And don't forget the hours...well about 40 years ago when I was a kid.....7 days a week in Hull till 3 in the morning....compared to Ottawa across the river......loved the sweet Quebec girls when Disco ruled.....  


Cheers
Larry


----------



## dimsum (21 Sep 2018)

Larry Strong said:
			
		

> loved the sweet Quebec girls when Disco ruled.....



No need for a specific timeframe  :nod:


----------



## YZT580 (21 Sep 2018)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> No need for a specific timeframe  :nod:


 every Ontario lad's first french: un grand cinquante s'il vous plait.


----------



## Strike (21 Sep 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> In Sask. the starting age for K is 5 which translates to a graduating age of 17 to 18 from grade 12.  In Ont. it is 4 which gives us the 16 and 17 grouping.  It isn't the loss of grade 13 as much as it is the earlier starting age that screws things up.



ou forget that in Ontario we have JK and SK, so the ages balance out.


----------



## Pusser (21 Sep 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> What else did they expect when they cancelled grade 13.  All it produced was a younger group of first year students.  We took the final maturing year of school and made it into a daycare for 3 and 4 year olds.  Now we have 16 and 17 year old young people out on their own for the first time in many cases.



This practice is nothing new and well predates the stopping of Grade 13.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Sep 2018)

Never had Grade 13 in BC. the real issue is the slow degradation of teaching material, my daughter learned almost zero geography in school. Her high school is teaching stuff that is basically grade 6-7 stuff. Keeping her from getting bored in school is the challenge as she is ahead in every class.


----------



## RocketRichard (21 Sep 2018)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Never had Grade 13 in BC. the real issue is the slow degradation of teaching material, my daughter learned almost zero geography in school. Her high school is teaching stuff that is basically grade 6-7 stuff. Keeping her from getting bored in school is the challenge as she is ahead in every class.


Does her high school offer IB or AP?  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Colin Parkinson (22 Sep 2018)

RomeoJuliet said:
			
		

> Does her high school offer IB or AP?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



She had to choose between Digital Media or IB, she wanted both, but she really wanted Digital Media. We just found out that the private school my wife works at offers free tuition for teaching staff kids. We just advised our oldest of that, but we will see what she thinks about that by June next year. Very likely we will put our oldest through it, because they have a serious no drug policy, unlike my oldest high school which seems to have a fair bit of drugs and thefts.


----------



## RocketRichard (22 Sep 2018)

Colin P said:
			
		

> She had to choose between Digital Media or IB, she wanted both, but she really wanted Digital Media. We just found out that the private school my wife works at offers free tuition for teaching staff kids. We just advised our oldest of that, but we will see what she thinks about that by June next year. Very likely we will put our oldest through it, because they have a serious no drug policy, unlike my oldest high school which seems to have a fair bit of drugs and thefts.


Aye. Usually if a kid does full IB they will find more than enough academic rigour and challenge. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## sandyson (22 Sep 2018)

On the other hand, when I first went to university, faculty lectured in as many subjects as their field qualified them and the college required. They didn't have a union saying only three and only within a specified time range.  Each coached a sport or activity e.g. Rugby or The Debating Society.  They managed to publish and participated actively in the Faculty Club. They were in genteel poverty and some had only a bachelor's degree.  Doctorates were rare and acquired in senior years.  So, an argument could be made that today's professors are somewhat over entitled.

I would remind the professor that (at least in Quebec) university students are required to pass the English (or French) proficiency test before they graduate not as a qualification for entry.  If students don't meet the professors criteria for entry, then why is the university accepting them in the first place?  Perhaps money?


Students have always lacked maturity, except for you and I of course, and recruits these days have it far too easy.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (22 Sep 2018)

RomeoJuliet said:
			
		

> Aye. Usually if a kid does full IB they will find more than enough academic rigour and challenge.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



We wanted her to go IB, but she made a convincing argument at the time for her choice. she is self motivated and smart. My youngest is also smart but has quite the personalty and wants what she wants, as long as she make right choices she be ok, but if she starts down the wrong road we will have trouble. for her, cadets and then likely RMC. She likes the military structure.


----------



## kratz (22 Sep 2018)

[quote author=Sandyson]
On the other hand, when I first went to university, faculty lectured on stones. They didn't have a union saying groot.  Each coached a sport or activity e.g. Hunting or The Stoner Society.  They managed to pound it out and participated actively in the Faculty Club. They were in genteel poverty and so only a bachelor's degree.  Doctorates were rare and acquired in senior years.  So, an argument could be made that today's professors *are* over entitled.[/quote]


----------



## daftandbarmy (23 Sep 2018)

Colin P said:
			
		

> We wanted her to go IB, but she made a convincing argument at the time for her choice. she is self motivated and smart. My youngest is also smart but has quite the personalty and wants what she wants, as long as she make right choices she be ok, but if she starts down the wrong road we will have trouble. for her, cadets and then likely RMC. She likes the military structure.



Check out scholarship programs for the local private schools, like Mulgrave https://www.mulgrave.com/admissions/entrance-scholarships.

They're really keen on getting local kids in if they're smart, and you can go see them anytime I think vs. having to wait until the start of the school year.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (23 Sep 2018)

My wife taught a bit at Mulgrave, you better not be just a bit rich to go there. meanwhile a little humour on the subject of downgrading school achievement https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=71&v=Zh3Yz3PiXZw


----------



## dimsum (24 Sep 2018)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Check out scholarship programs for the local private schools, like Mulgrave https://www.mulgrave.com/admissions/entrance-scholarships.
> 
> They're really keen on getting local kids in if they're smart, and you can go see them anytime I think vs. having to wait until the start of the school year.



God damn.  I clicked on the link and immediately thought I'd have to change to a shirt and tie in front of my laptop.


----------



## daftandbarmy (24 Sep 2018)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> God damn.  I clicked on the link and immediately thought I'd have to change to a shirt and tie in front of my laptop.



I thought you Blue Jobs always wore a tie and long scarf


----------

