I Am In The Current ~ The stream is digital.

I am an advocate for properly funded and sound public education. I advocate in person and electronically in the current on my blog.

Last night at my local-staff meeting I continued last week’s discussion regarding teacher advocacy. The reason for-which I brought forward a discussion item on our agenda (under the STF and STA meeting time) was to create much needed conversation within our staff. My hope was that conversations would then take place out to the public. The Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation states in this page that:

The Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation, its local associations and each of its over 12,000 members have a responsibility to provide their informed views on crucial education issues to political decision-makers across Saskatchewan.

In my opinion, teachers are very passionate about their profession and the value of properly funded public education. This in-spite of the general public’s consensus that quality or proper funding of public education is neither a major concern nor a topic to be discussed even during major federal and provincial elections. Teachers work hard everyday of the year. It seems that teachers aren’t overly vocal about relevant issues affecting public education. Once they leave work, the issues stay there- in the classroom.

According to the STF:

Ideally, political advocacy goes on all the time. While there are certain times of particular focus–such as during collective bargaining or during a provincial election campaign–teacher influence and voice in the debate about critical education matters needs to happen continually, both provincially and locally. (source)

I love debate. I love discussion. I often get called on having too much shop-talk. When I meet people I advocate incessantly for the cause of quality public education. Sometimes people can hardly believe to which extent I am vocal about specific issues that are either beneficial or detrimental to the education of young people.

At last night’s staff meeting there were three major discussion points.

1. This article and the resolution that was carried by the STA at Tuesday’s Assembly.
   Highlights of this article are:
   The Saskatchewan Party wants to lower several minimum working ages lowered. In some jobs, children of 14 years could work up to 30 hours per week.
2. A colleague brought up this article where the Saskatchewan government is going to change the grant formula. In the article my school division’s (Saskatoon Public School Division) letter to the provincial government is quoted :
   

   In the letter, the Saskatoon public division estimates a 4.04 per cent increase in property taxes to make up the shortfall while the Greater Saskatoon Catholic division estimates a 3.15 per cent increase. The numbers don’t account for any increase in program costs.

3. And finaly, what the Saskatchewan government says about student achievement.

As I understand, the provincial government wants to see the newest magic trick- doing more (higher student achievements) with less (money to support educational programs). I can’t wait to see this new magic trick! Realistically this cannot happen. Programs will have to be cut if these changes in the grant formula happen as described by the government. Teachers are working to improve student outcomes. How can we expect a continuous improvement when budgets are continuously cut?

Here’s one thing with which I am struggling. I understand that Brad Wall and the Saskatchewan Party see this period of growth as problematic because there is a shortage of labor. However, if students of 14 years of age are working 30 hours per week, when are they students? Don’t get me wrong, I worked in high school. It was a nice experience. It gave me a reason why my homework wasn’t completed and gave me pocket money so that I was less dependent on my parents. Because I worked, I learned a few skills and was able to prove myself as a young developing person. This being said, I have serious doubts that working pumping gas or delivering cargo, even if this experience was at the age of 16, ever gave me an advantage over another candidate for a job. What gives me my advantage is French, my grades (that were negatively impacted by my work schedule), and what I learned in school.

In my opinion, the problem is that our society has several jobs that pay-poorly and have no benefits. No mother or father could ever support their family while working at this job, however we still need people to fill these positions. I feel the answer is not taking students and placing them in these positions for up to 30 hours per week. Students need time to learn independently, be physically active, become engaged in their local communities, and rest. Pumping gas for minimum wage for 30 hours a week should not be a major priority for high-school students. I feel strongly that the “age of busy” (John Abbott) where only productivity and production is detrimental to all human health and life on the planet. A child working near full-time status is a step backwards, not forwards.

I am glad our local-school teaching staff took the appropriate amount of time to discuss these issues. I hope that they all go forward and have conversations with many members of the public regarding the health of properly funded education in Saskatchewan. The types of trends in public education discussed in this post must not continue.

I wish to close this post with this idea: Umbutu? The traditional greeting used when people of different tribes come together in Africa. Literally it means, “How goes it with the children?” When will we, in Saskatchewan, start asking each other this question?

On December 9th, 2008, The Saskatoon Teachers’ Associationheld an assembly meeting to review and vote on the resolutions that had been submitted from our local. Depending on the vote result, they could be sent forward to the Saskatchewan Teachers’ Federation to be reviewed at Spring Council 2009.

Most resolutions were sent forward on behalf of the STA Executive, however, a few were on the behalf of a specific teacher from our local association. One specific resolution sent forward by one individual was approved by the STA Assembly. This is not the first time the STA Assembly has reviewed this resolution and I had voted against it at Council twice in previous years. This resolution once again has been sent forward by the STA and, I suspect, will be defeated at Council on the basis that the resolution asks for an increase in coverage for a specific plan that cannot shoulder any additional costs. In my opinion this is where resolutions become futile. In Regina, the RPSTA brought forward resolutions addressed substitute teacher coverage under health and dental plans. Everybody was in favor of supporting this colleagues but not willing to shoulder the cost to the plan. Councillors must respect their fiduciary responsibility and vote in the best interests of all members. Both the substitute teachers’ coverage and this individual member’s resolution will be defeated because councillors must be fiduciarily responsible which supersedes their desire to be inclusive of all members and their best possible treatment.

This year the STA Assembly reviewed 6 resolutions that were approved by the STA Executive. All 6 spoke specifically to the percentage of men who are employed as teachers in Saskatchewan. They requested added statements to policy, changes to belief statements, removing wording, amendments, and reviews specifically addressing the percentage of men in the teaching profession. A member of the STA Executive (who’s name I missed) stood before the Assembly and spoke in favor of the first resolution explaining why it was necessary to add a statement that addressed gender equality.

Afterwards, another member of the Executive stood and spoke to all 6 resolutions. She indicated that if a process or policy needs to be reviewed, then order a review. Address the problem in all aspects with a specific resolution. She spoke against resolutions 20-24 and in favor of resolution 25 which reads: “BE IT RESOLVED THAT the STF review all policy statements mentto deal with gender equality so as to address the disproportionally low percentage of male teachers with the teaching profession in Saskatchewan”.  I agreed with the second member of the Executive. The first 5 resolutions were redundant and only the last was necessary to arrive at the desired outcome.

After all the voting resolutions 20-23 were defeated and resolutions 24 and 25 were passed. Resolution 24 read: “BE IT RESOLVED THAT the STF amend Governance: Staffing Policy 4.10.2 to read “When appointments are to be made to the STF Administrative Staff, the selection committee shall be representative of the diversity of teachers within the STF”.

These resolutions regarding gender equity are important but in my opinion they are not getting at the real problem. There are underlying causes to the lack of men entering the teaching profession. Some factors I believe to be significant include:

1. Universities are significantly below enrollment in the Faculty of Education.
2. Teachers who have studied for a minimum of 4 years at a university, enter the job force if not at the lowest pay, the bottom.
3. The work-load and work-life of a teacher is not alluring and may deter men from entering the teaching profession (or women if you consider the low enrollments in the Faculty of Education in universities).

The rate of men entering the profession has been a topic of conversation at Council for a number of years. Gender representation (and let’s not forget ethnic/cultural representation) and responsible role-models to which students identify personally are crutial in schools.

In my opinion, all the issues presented in this post need to be addressed not just the gender equity issues to ensure that the best are working with our students in classrooms fostering life-long learners.