Better options in education – Winnipeg Free Press

It started with Grade 12 tests (Hit the books: NDP flip-flops, reinstates Grade 12 exams; March 11).

The cancellation of these tests was always going to result in some critical rebuke from the regular suspects appearing in the media, and perhaps a letter or two.

So explaining that the flop was in response to public sentiment is weak.

Consider the gas tax holiday, which has seen far worse in terms of frequency, credibility and substantive criticism.

Yet it remains in place even though it also clashes with party beliefs (eg, the environment; focus on needs such as those who can’t afford a car) and arguably doesn’t withstand socio-economic analysis.

It shows that this government is capable of sticking to policy even if questionable and under fire. Yet, not in the case of Grade 12 tests.

The test cancellation came with a multi-year plan to reimagine and retool provincial assessment programming. Obviously, it lacked grounding and internal (government) support. The rapid flop certainly left no time for meaningful consultation, research, analysis and determination. On this shaky ground with unknown influences, expect more changes.

Next came the early years class size cap.

Class size research advises that the cost of learning achieving improvements through smaller class sizes is so high that other ways to invest more in learning should be considered first. There seems to be no interest in or awareness of the funding, physical infrastructure and human resources needed for any notable impact.

Mandating schools to publish class sizes is, moreover, an unsophisticated and unbecoming way for this government to pound out implementation rather than working with school leaders to see it through. It will invite judgments about school quality that are invalid. It may also result in compromises, such as larger class sizes at other grades and the reallocation of or reduction in other educational resources and programming, as school leaders scramble desks, teachers and educational assistants to be able to post compliant numbers.

The class-size directive appears to be, then, at the will of forces more concerned with public perception than effective programming. It lacks the backbone to support itself. It will fail other than as window dressing.

Now we have the cellphone bans. One approach might have been to inquire about what the phenomenon of cellphones tells us about the brain and learning. Then, with educators, stakeholder organizations and experts, determine how to capitalize on this while promoting literacy with information and communication technology.

Imagine, for example, having students develop behavioral guidelines and then monitoring, assessing and reporting on their own progress. Having students take responsibility for their own learning and development in this way is well established as a powerful motivator.

Or, concede to social media engineers, both in terms of how to engage young people and to the influence they have, and expel cellphones from class for causing a disturbance. This evasive solution for a complex issue will prove inadequate and need revision in short order.

From the outside, then, there is a pattern of political decision-making related to complex educational matters that is lacking the groundwork that such matters require. They slant towards expedience with a touch of popular appeal, squeaky wheel appeasement and possibly other influences and agendas unknown.

Though a harsh assessment, these three initiatives do not approach the likes of the baffling Bill 64 and the pernicious “parental rights” ploy, both of which have been well and often exposed in these pages for what they were.

Nevertheless, better is within reach of this government’s more sober, inclusive and hopeful vision of and purpose for public education. And so it’s worth some trouble now, before this government gets more comfortable with power, to rattle the bars for better.

“Better” means more and deliberate consultation with educational partners when developing policies with broad, direction-setting impact.

It recognizes and respects expertise. It puts politics in a back seat.

Developing and implementing policy that will pass the test of time means resisting the allure of more immediate, fleeting and ultimately unfulfilling gratification.

Much will be learned this school year.

Ken Clark writes from Winnipeg. Most of his 28 years in education focused on student assessment policy and large-scale assessment.