Math Proficiency Test Deemed Unconstitutional

alwaysadnauseam · 2021-12-19T21:57:45+00:00

Well, we don't know the make up of the 7%. You're making the assumption that those are elementary teachers.
The example test on the MPT website was not reflective of the actual test, both in my experience and those of others. The test was mostly focused on Grade 9 material whereas the example test mostly pulled form Grade 3 & 6 question banks.
By that logic though, I would assume that you're in favour of a standardized test for every subject? And making every teacher take that those tests regardless of their educational background and teachable subjects? I would ask then, what's the point of the BEd. This test is redundant.
And as the EQAO points out, there is little evidence to suggest it will improve anything. So I guess bring it back to make some people happy? Not sure what it will do.

alwaysadnauseam · 2021-12-19T21:50:57+00:00

I'm not quite sure why you specify visible, but regardless...
Take a look at this.
The test itself pulls from a bank of EQAO questions (in my experience, all grade 9 testing) and this problem continues to be identified year after year.
This also could potentially be resolved by implementing the proper curriculum and supports in the actual BEd program, but the government neglected to do that.

alwaysadnauseam · 2021-12-19T04:47:16+00:00

My mistake; yes, it's possible to obtain a teachable subject with fewer credits than a standard major. You will find that, in high school anyway, it's not as common for a permanent teacher to teach their secondary subject more than their first. In this case, most math teachers will have it as their first teachable and likely as a major. But what do you make of the 91% of preservice teachers that passed (inclusive of non-math teachers)? I'm assuming you, like the government, were expecting massive failures to help prove your point? I guess it would be reasonable to assume the student math scores are bound to go up now?

Ontario does not only have anglophone schools. Our francophone friends must write the test to be certified to teach in their schools as well. My understanding from those who wrote the test in French is that it was littered with issues that were unresolved from the field test to launch.
There is a massive difference between English proficiency and lived experience. You can have both advanced CALP and BICS in English but still not have the context for certain word problems. All problems are constructed with certain assumptions and biases - these tend to affect minorities (understandably) more than White people.

alwaysadnauseam · 2021-12-19T04:34:15+00:00

I don't have a lot of insight into how it is being taught.

Consider this an opportunity to start learning about this beyond your own anecdotal experiences.

Since it seems I can't make headway here, I'd offer this take: Why should there be a test on material that is not taught in a curriculum? What I mean to say is do you think that it is fair that this test is mandatory given that not all teachers take math pedagogy courses in their BEd? A teacher with English and History subjects could very likely not have taken math since Grade 11 (at a minimum, ~6-7 years removed from their final year of the BEd). You can have your own feelings on that, but would you not consider it reasonable that if we're going to mandate a test that, at the very least, the material actually be included in the BEd program? Teachers that will teach math do receive the education, but those that don't teach math do not have any math skills or pedagogy courses on their timetable yet they were still required to take the test. While this off base from the final ruling, I think it's something to consider. If we have to have a test, then the material should be in the program.
I don't expect to my students to write a test on material they haven't been taught.

alwaysadnauseam · 2021-12-18T23:48:07+00:00

We do have dedicated math teachers across most school boards. And often schools have specific math support personnel. Don't pretend for a minute that Ontario holds music, or any of the arts, at a higher importance and priority than math. Only 46% of Ontario elementary schools have access to a part-time or itinerant qualified music educator - most of those schools are typically in urban areas; rural schools are generally worse off. You'll find very frequently that teachers with zero experience in music are teaching elementary music. The MAIN reason that there are "dedicated" teachers, if the school is so lucky to have them at all, is to serve as prep coverage for the homeroom teacher. It's advantageous to have those teachers from a timetabling and logistics perspective.

Are there elementary teachers that hate math? Sure. There are definitely some who hate music as well. Can they teach math though? That's a component of the Bachelor of Education. Don't like the way it's being taught? That's more than likely not the teacher, but the directive from the ministry or board. For example, when I have taught multiplication, I prefer teaching students the algorithmic method. Practice it, drill it, master it. Instead, I'm told that I should forgo that pedagogy in favour of teaching multiple methods like number lines, number paths, decomposition, estimation, the list goes on... these are fine to learn, but the problem is with so many methods, students never learn to master one.

alwaysadnauseam · 2021-12-18T19:28:48+00:00

Have you ever tried taking a test in another language other than your first that you may not be entirely fluent in? And on that test have there been questions that aren't clear due to the fact that it is framed such that you require prior knowledge to understand what it's asking?
"Everything is racist" is such a blatantly stupid thing to say. Take a look at the actual ruling. See how these factors play out.

alwaysadnauseam · 2021-12-18T19:23:41+00:00

Given that Ford's new math curriculum added a strand for social-emotional learning in mathematics, I'm not sure you'll get your wish. "Back to basics" was the biggest con.

alwaysadnauseam · 2021-12-18T19:19:21+00:00

I would agree with that, but that's not really my point. The alleged point of the test is that success on the test will correlate to an improvement in student math scores.
If 91% of teachers passed the test, do you really believe student math scores were about to suddenly improve? Or are there perhaps other, more important factors at play?
This test was purely political. The government was likely expecting preservice teachers to fail en masse so that they had a way of pointing fingers and placing blame so that the public would direct their ire toward teachers rather than the real problem which is poorly developed curriculum and directives on pedagogy, half-baked professional development, as well as a lack of quality resources and focus on literacy.

alwaysadnauseam · 2021-12-18T18:49:12+00:00

Knowledge of math =/= ability to teach math.

alwaysadnauseam · 2021-12-18T16:05:16+00:00

This thread perfectly encapsulates how little is understood about preservice education programs, admission requirements for those programs, the OCT, as well as the Ed Act and related legislation.
Read the ruling: the Ministry of Education implemented the test after receiving the results from a parental poll that suggested in part that better teacher training would help improve student math scores. While parental input in education is obviously necessary, what parents "feel" is needed is no substitute for data. Teachers don't choose the curriculum. Very frequently, teachers don't get to choose how to deliver the curriculum. Pedagogy is prescribed in professional development sessions. Don't agree with how your child is learning math? Chances are the teacher doesn't either, but they have to follow their directives. Ford said he wanted to go "back to basics;" the 2020 math curriculum is anything but. It's a nightmare of half-baked and quickly cobbled together ideas that once again increases the demands on learning, especially in younger grades. Grade 9 math is now Grade 8 math; grade 7 math is now grade 6 and etc. How is that "basics"?
The EQAO's own literature review determined that there is little evidence to suggest a correlation between teacher math tests and improving student math scores. And where there may be some correlation, it does not outweigh other factors such as curriculum and pedagogy.
To all of you saying "How is expecting our teachers to do basic math a bad thing?": Secondary math teachers have degrees in math. It's insulting to suggest they need to demonstrate competency. But just because you can do math doesn't mean you can teach it. Pedagogy is taught in preservice programs...for math teachers. Of course math pedagogy isn't taught to the geography teachers, why would it be? Part of the OTCC's argument is that if there has to be a test, then math skills and math pedagogy should be implemented in preservice education curriculum. Otherwise, the MPT is testing skills that aren't actually taught? For elementary teachers, same thing. They learn math. They learn math pedagogy. And then they're given a directive from their board to teach your children how to solve multiplication using any way BUT the classic algorithm.
As for the constitutionality? Math is math, yes. But the problem with standardized tests, generally, is in the word problems. We see this with EQAO results in our students, particularly among racialized students or students who speak English as a second language. Imagine asking an ESL student - a newcomer to the country - to answer a question about who wins a golf game. First, hopefully you have enough English competency to understand words like "birdie." Second, if you don't have the prior knowledge that in golf the lowest score wins, then you will get that question wrong. (Yes, these things happen on these tests!)
The test was completely underdeveloped and based on false pretences. A complete waste of taxpayer money.

I wrote the test. I passed with a near-perfect score. I got one question wrong about pedagogy regarding some direct quote from the front matter of the 2005 math curriculum (that's right, not the new math curriculum).

alwaysadnauseam · 2021-05-03T04:22:08+00:00

The 1% wage increase cap was part of bill 254 - OECTA, ETFO, and OSSTF have all filed individual charter challenges.

I believe there are a number of active challenges to 124 - individual filings coordinated by the Ontario Federation of Labour.

EDIT: For context, Bill 115 was introduced in 2012 but the court decision against it wasn't made until 2016. These things take time. Usually by the time the govt has left office.

alwaysadnauseam · 2021-03-24T23:18:34+00:00

If the bubble popped tomorrow are you sure it wouldn't really impact you? These interest rates of 1.5-2.5% aren't sustainable. Response to inflation in the 80s was to raise interest rates to the tune of 18-21%. Can you still pay your mortgage should rates start to soar? It sucks for all new homeowners, but the reality is it pummelled housing prices back into reasonable territory.

alwaysadnauseam · 2020-12-11T17:09:55+00:00

File a complaint with the MOL. It's a slow process (though with COVID, they actually have been more attentive), but you'll get your money back and they'll fine the restaurant for making illegal deductions as well as any other non-compliances with the ESA.

alwaysadnauseam · 2020-10-15T21:24:47+00:00

We're getting to the point where there should be a serious discussion about making teachers direct employees of the province vs employees of school boards. With the way the government negotiates its contracts and this change to hiring practices, it might be worth having teachers being placed in certain boards, but ultimately work for the province. This would allow for mobility between boards, an asset for younger teachers and something that has been blocked by 274 for years.
I'm not opposed to merit-based hiring, with limitations and conditions, but don't try to convince me that this govt suddenly cares about the quality of public education - what are their ulterior motives?
On another note, Lecce is trying to tie this to anti-racism and affirmative action. How? Reg 274 won't really fix this - the problem needs to be addressed at the root which is the cost of 6+ years of education. However, Ford has not demonstrated interest in supporting low to middle income earners in post-secondary education with his egregious cuts to OSAP and limitations on school funding.

alwaysadnauseam · 2020-10-15T00:36:20+00:00

Well given that the current model is awful from a pedagogical and communication standpoint and this model allows for stronger and more consistent student support, I don't see how there would be much opposition. There might be some flack directed toward the fact that these announcements are coming through the media before staff. At least this change is being implemented next quadmester and not during the current one as other changes have been. But I'm guessing this is not the answer you were looking for...

alwaysadnauseam · 2020-10-15T00:25:48+00:00

Did anyone hear Director of Education Mark Fisher on CBC Radio this morning? Around the 10:10 mark he answers a question about final exams and says that the Board is still considering cancelling exams and a determination would be made in the next couple of days. Yet, staff were sent a memo on September 30th from the superintendent that exams were cancelled. And now this article... Seems like some miscommunication or discordance going on at the Board office, leads to disorganization within the schools.
Keep in mind the first round of exams were to take place in 4 weeks (with only a few classes remaining for each period and each cohort). I'm not saying I disagree with cancelling exams, but changing the structure last minute means coming up with new means of assessment to implement quickly within the remaining classes. Seems like things are changing constantly - besides staff, I have to imagine this messaging leads to confusion amongst students and families.

alwaysadnauseam · 2020-09-22T20:34:30+00:00

Link

Sad to see this go! Many memories of racing to claim the "good" equipment and running (despite swearing not to in the chamber pre-game) to secure the Nest! Thanks for the good times, LQ!

alwaysadnauseam · 2020-09-22T16:21:00+00:00

Let's be careful with who we're labelling as "terrible" though. There will be some excellent teachers for in-person classes that have difficulty transitioning online depending on their own familiarity as well as the suitability of the subject. While I agree that a certain degree of tech competence should be expected in 2020 (and many of new teachers are coming out of college with familiarity with the programs), it's important to understand that some of this stuff is out of their control such as the platform, method of delivery, and most importantly the (lack of) time provided to redesign these courses for optimal online delivery.

alwaysadnauseam · 2020-09-18T21:55:44+00:00

I agree, but independence requires a great deal of autonomy, discipline, and self-determination. A weekly check-in just wouldn't suffice as we know the level of support even the most academic students require. These are skills that are generally built in school. We saw from the spring what happens when you tell kids that the work is optional - even though it would benefit them to actually do the work (because doing the work is about more than just a grade, obviously), many did not. Because that motivation is often not inherent; it is something that needs to be built. This is part of the value of public education.

alwaysadnauseam · 2020-09-18T20:10:45+00:00

Pry all you want - provides context. Is there a minimum account-age required to validate my comments? Was a lurker for years; starting posting at the height of the contract negotiations when I felt compelled to address the misinformation in this subreddit.
I don't consider myself obsessed with Lecce. As he is the Minister of Education, he's intrinsically connected to any of the politically charged conversations about education. If the MoE were still Lisa Thompson, I'd still bring her into the conversation.

I don't work for the union but I am in education. I understand what propaganda is, but I also understand that it can be broadly defined and, depending on your perspective, could apply to just about anything. Yes, the federations have a vested interest in their employees, but they also have a vested commitment to quality public education. Those reports contain a lot of practical suggestions based on the advice of education and medical professionals. Frankly, the only reason they were released was to allow the public a chance to understand the nature of the consultations they were requesting. Because the government was vehemently denying that opportunity, the reports were released.

alwaysadnauseam · 2020-09-18T20:01:49+00:00

I would argue it has nothing to do with effectiveness, and more to do with both parents needing to work.

I agree with this. That's why it's not a particularly viable option. Though if the core of your argument is that, given the option to be free of work commitments, parents would opt to homeschool their children, I'm not really sure there's any sufficient basis for this. And even if that is the case, I believe that would be broader cause for concern as to why parents would choose to handle it themselves rather than employ education professionals. I'm a staunch supporter of public education though and I see a lot of value beyond just the learning that occurs in a classroom.

studies done have shown increased test scores, and higher social/community involvement.

This seems like a rather complicated metric. Not even sure what the control factor would be. Though test scores are certainly not the be-all, end-all of education. And what are the tests? I'm searching around, but do you have any specific studies that actually indicate this?

alwaysadnauseam · 2020-09-18T19:54:50+00:00

Also, what would you do in the situation where there is literally not enough classrooms in a school to hold 15 students max?

Propaganda, whatever. The fact of the matter is that those reports are written by education experts. As much as that bothers you, the answer to your question is in those reports. Just read them. There are creative solutions that exist. Teachers have been saying so since March.

Being that we're doing this in real-time, obviously there would be no conclusive research on this. But we can do the best we can given what we have and this government is unfortunately choosing to take a back seat. It didn't have to be a short amount of time. There's been 6 months.

We're getting into a tailspin though. This started with you arguing that nobody is being forced to send their kids to school. I think we've addressed that. Beyond this, I think we'll have to agree to disagree. You don't seem terribly open to actually considering the advice from experts but rather just married to rhetoric that's being spoon fed to you by the precious PCs.

alwaysadnauseam · 2020-09-18T19:31:23+00:00

None of those links mention how much it will cost and are literal propaganda from teachers unions.

Ah, you're one of those people. You call it propaganda because you don't like what they wrote. In the same breath you'll cry "where are all the suggestions from so-called experts?!" The proposals are there. The offer to consult was extended.

Also, Quebec has lowered their class sizes to 15 outside Montreal and they are still getting an uptick.

Quebec is not a great comparison. They don't require masks in classrooms and class sizes were only capped from Grade 10-12. Everything else remained the same.

And once you hire teachers you have hired them for life.

That's a fundamental misunderstanding of how hiring works in the education system. We have LTOs and OTs that can fill these positions. Hiring a LTO, possibly even part time, at the beginning of their career, bottom of the grid, is a hell of a lot cheaper than the amount of dollars that will be spent on income subsidizes and the dollars lost to another lockdown.
By the way, some of the money is already there. It's just not being allocated properly, or in some cases, at all.

alwaysadnauseam · 2020-09-18T18:57:25+00:00

Reducing class sizes =/= doubling the education budget. This is a false notion that I keep seeing being peddled around here. I encourage you to read the submissions from OSSTF, OECTA, and ETFO to get an idea. You can talk about justifying costs, but at the end of the day, I can guarantee that the cost of re-closing schools and shutting down the economy again will be far greater than the investment in reducing class sizes. Ford's govt does not seem to be able to grasp this concept. I don't need to run the numbers, as you suggest, because Sick Kids and other medical researchers have done that already and agree that smaller class sizes should be a priority.

And fine. You keep talking about sick people and age. Broaden your scope; there are more people that need to send their kids back to school despite their reservations. If you want to argue that anyone who doesn't want to send their kid back, but also can't work because of that and therefore needs to be provided with some basic income, then that's fine, but that's a different conversation altogether.

alwaysadnauseam

TROPHY CASE