I have no problem with some of the concerns you raise. I have no problem with you thinking that “falls within the widely held expectations” is too vague. I have no problem with you thinking that public schools lack consequences for poor behaviour or poor academic skills. I have no problem with you being upset that our students score poorly on a particular test. All of those are valid concerns. I am not saying that I necessarily agree with everything you say, but I will not say you are wrong to raise concerns.
Having said that, my big - BIG - problem is that we put too much emphasis on the Fraser Institute rankings that are based on pretty much one factor and do not take into consideration any of the root causes that may result in those scores. I just don’t believe it is all that helpful to rank schools on that basis.
I have no problem with some of the concerns you raise. I have no problem with you thinking that “falls within the widely held expectations” is too vague. I have no problem with you thinking that public schools lack consequences for poor behaviour or poor academic skills. I have no problem with you being upset that our students score poorly on a particular test. All of those are valid concerns. I am not saying that I necessarily agree with everything you say, but I will not say you are wrong to raise concerns.
Having said that, my big - BIG - problem is that we put too much emphasis on the Fraser Institute rankings that are based on pretty much one factor and do not take into consideration any of the root causes that may result in those scores. I just don’t believe it is all that helpful to rank schools on that basis.
That’s all I have been trying to say.[/quote]
I get what you are saying, and it is fair comment. But when you say we put too much emphasis on the rankings, I think the opponents spend more time and energy fuming over it than the proponents spend praising it.
I have no problem with some of the concerns you raise. I have no problem with you thinking that “falls within the widely held expectations” is too vague. I have no problem with you thinking that public schools lack consequences for poor behaviour or poor academic skills. I have no problem with you being upset that our students score poorly on a particular test. All of those are valid concerns. I am not saying that I necessarily agree with everything you say, but I will not say you are wrong to raise concerns.
Having said that, my big - BIG - problem is that we put too much emphasis on the Fraser Institute rankings that are based on pretty much one factor and do not take into consideration any of the root causes that may result in those scores. I just don’t believe it is all that helpful to rank schools on that basis.
That’s all I have been trying to say.[/quote]
I get what you are saying, and it is fair comment. But when you say we put too much emphasis on the rankings, I think the opponents spend more time and energy fuming over it than the proponents spend praising it.[/quote]
I agree with this.
Teachers should just focus on the test, and ignore the rankings if they bother them so much. Perhaps preparing their students more for the FSA will in return bring better results and improve their rankings.
My understanding is that teachers are AGAINST this test and run open ad campaigns condemning it and urging parents to not let their kids write it (ridiculous!).
Teachers need to stop pushing their own political agenda in regards to this test. Most parents support it, so should teachers IMO.
There is an underlying reason why we rank low. Tho its something not going to mention. The scores are based on averages aren’t they?? But I’m also not basing our low ranking totally on this.
how well a school does is associated with family income… most of the schools near the bottom of the list have relatively low family incomes. If you read the report, this is recognized. The ranking shows how well/poorly a school did compared to what would be predicted with the average family income in the neighbourhood, as well as just the overall ranking.
[quote=“bthedog”]
That being said, there is no denying that Annunciation has the best scholastic environment (and that doesn’t mean just teachers, cause I am not saying the teachers at Annunciation are smarter or better at their jobs than their district counterparts), that fosters positivity. [/quote]
ie: fewer natives, poor people, people with learning disorders
Anybody who wants to know why Fraser Institute’s ranking of BC elementary schools is a full of crock should watch “Teacher’s Challenge: Seven Days in a Struggling School”.
Despite Roosevelt Elementary’s unsavory reputation, some of Rupert’s brightest also came from that school.[/quote]
You don’t get the whole thing either. Nobody said every kid that goes there is stupid, or the teachers are bad, or whatever. It just illustrates that something is wrong and maybe somebody ought to look into fixing it.
My kids have gone to different schools around the province. One scored in the top third, and two in the bottom third. I didn’t feel better than anyone else from the better scoring school, or any worse from the bottom feeder. Hell, maybe my kids were dragging them down. It is just a legitimate measurement to see where everyone is at comparatively.
How’s does it even illustrates the problem with schools when all it shows is rank? Mark Kelley’s short documentary proves how ridiculous Fraser Institute’s reports are.
LOL. What’s the point of defending the annual report then?
The numbers and ranking reflect a problem. Since there hasn’t been much change in the numbers over the years we can assume that no changes have been made or that the changes have not been effective. So what should we do?
There is poverty and learning disabled in the other 3 schools that Annunciation does not have but I don’t think that is the sole cause of the discrepancy in numbers either.
DWhite keeps making the point that we have to look at context. How about we look at content too?
Does Annunciation have anything to offer? Do they teach the same curriculum the same way? What does their emphasis on reading, writing and numeracy look like compared to the other schools? Would other schools be willing to try something that Annunciation does differently? Usually, it has been my experience, people resist change. They will find absolutely every reason not to try something first before they give in. There’s an opportunity here to make a change.
Anybody who wants to know why Fraser Institute’s ranking of BC elementary schools is a full of crock should watch “Teacher’s Challenge: Seven Days in a Struggling School”.
Unfortunately, I couldn’t find the clip on YouTube.
Despite Roosevelt Elementary’s unsavory reputation, some of Rupert’s brightest also came from that school.[/quote]
Your link wants me to pay $179 to hear what Mark Kelly has to say. The Fraser Institute tells me that’s a bad deal.
If the reason Roosevelt scores so bad is because of a higher ratio of kids with disabilities, then so what? That is the reason, and it is valid. Why do we need to pretend this isn’t so?
I agree that it seems ridiculous to “rank” schools but I do read the Fraser report when it comes out and I think it’s useful in that it starts discussion about our schools. Especially the public schools, the schools we all have an interest in. The report shows us that Prince Rupert and other northern areas have much lower results year after year. I think it’s important to reflect on why that might be. Obviously the issue goes far beyond individual teachers and students. I too believe there are other ways at looking at how well schools are doing, but I rarely encounter a student who enjoys school all that much, especially as they get older. Many children and adults are pretty hostile towards the idea of “school”. I’m no expert but I speak from the same experience I’m sure all of you have - that of having attended public school in BC myself and now having children of my own in the system. One observation I make is that people who become teachers are almost always people who did well in school as students, and come from well-organized, middle class families (not always obviously, but much of the time). I truly believe that our system would benefit from having a much wider range of teachers. We need teachers who DIDN’t do all that well at school… as well as other changes to the system… just a few random thoughts…
With any form of testing, judging, observation or evaluation it is near inescapable to avoid ranking. It happens with inanimate objects as in consumer items such as viscosity in motors oils at temperature and it occurs during human performances such as music recitals. When we see results that conform with our expectations we nod sagely and are generally accepting but when things do not go accordingly we search for experimental deficiencies. Evaluation has had a significant relationship with education and it’s likely to remain, in some form.
The next point is not intended to bring derision upon teachers in their efforts to educate children. However, you did suggest that it might be better to have a wider range of teacher types or personalities. That the system include ones that didn’t do that well in school. You have a good point here but perhaps one part you hadn’t thought about.
Of all university majors which one do you think is the least rigorous? The easiest to complete?
These five are ranked the hardest - chemistry, mathematics, economics, psychology, biology - the first being the most challenging.
The easiest five are - education, languages, English, music, religion - the first being the easiest. There is no less challenging major available at university than the education (elementary) degree.
There are real efforts at the university level to bring academic rigor to the education degree program. Once this happens Canada may have student achievement results that, well, rival Finland.
Lastly, Annunciation is a private school that conducts an applicant interview process. Students are screened and selected according to specific criteria, creating if you like, a uniform, cohesive student body. You can view the application and Student Handbook (pdf) online. A simple search will provide you with the desired result. The public school system is an open-door process. Any and all students within a defined catchment area are permitted to attend. Private and public schools should be viewed as apples and oranges during comparison. Taxonomic similar in family but dissimilar in genus and species.
After much thought: a solution – more administration! Sure it may seem ridiculous but think. The only group not considered a problem in this discussion is administrators – teachers, students, parents, unions, the Fraser Institute, FSA’s and public schools have all taken their share of heat.
More administration – it’s the private enterprise way! Cut back services to students, cut teacher salaries, cut lunch programs and after school activities to pay if we must! But paying more to more administrators and consultants will improve their motivation and result in even greater educational gains!
Each school should have, at the very least, a principal, a vice-principal, a principal of academics, a principal of behavior, and an on-call consultant to share with another school. Sure, it is my belief we allocate more funds to administration than almost any other District in the province but clearly we need more administrators! (Clearly if we can get this to work we could franchise the idea!) More leadership! More vision!
Or we could stop with the blame and politics and start a genuine dialogue about what our children need to succeed in life (ignore the testing and ranking for now) and talk about how we make it happen? Any ideas?
PS: if my first idea works I own the franchise rights and may invite some of you over to roll in the royalties!
[quote=“chien22”]After much thought: a solution – more administration! Sure it may seem ridiculous but think. The only group not considered a problem in this discussion is administrators – teachers, students, parents, unions, the Fraser Institute, FSA’s and public schools have all taken their share of heat.
More administration – it’s the private enterprise way! Cut back services to students, cut teacher salaries, cut lunch programs and after school activities to pay if we must! But paying more to more administrators and consultants will improve their motivation and result in even greater educational gains!
Each school should have, at the very least, a principal, a vice-principal, a principal of academics, a principal of behavior, and an on-call consultant to share with another school. Sure, it is my belief we allocate more funds to administration than almost any other District in the province but clearly we need more administrators! (Clearly if we can get this to work we could franchise the idea!) More leadership! More vision!
Or we could stop with the blame and politics and start a genuine dialogue about what our children need to succeed in life (ignore the testing and ranking for now) and talk about how we make it happen? Any ideas?
PS: if my first idea works I own the franchise rights and may invite some of you over to roll in the royalties![/quote]
hahahaha
"After much thought…" “…my first idea…”
Seriously funny chien22 but oddly enough perfectly on point. ‘Start a genuine dialogue’, is the playbook diversionary favorite.